Manitoba Hansard — 11 June 1975 (Sitting 121, 30th Legislature, 2nd Session)

30-2-121

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable Peter Fox Vol. XXll No.121 10:00a .m., Wednesday, June 11th, 1975. Second Session, 30th Legislature. Printed by R. S. Evans - Queen's Printer for Province of Manitoba

Electoral Division Name Political Address Postal Affiliation Code ARTHUR J. Douglas Watt P.C. Reston, Man. ROM 1XO ASSINIBOIA Steve Patrick Lib. 10 Red Roblin Pl., Winnipeg R3J 3L8 BIRTLE-RUSSELL Harry E. Graham P.C. Binscarth, Man. ROJ OGO BRANDON EAST Hon. Leonard S. Evans NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 BRANDON WEST Edward McGill P.C. 2228 Princess Ave., Brandon R7B OH9 BURROWS Hon. Ben Hanuschak NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 CHARLESWOOD Arthur Moug P.C. 29 Willow Ridge Rd., Winnipeg R3R 1L5 CHURCHILL Les Osland NDP 66 Radisson Blvd., Churchill ROB OEO CRESCENTWOOD Vacant DAUPHIN Hon.

Peter Burtniak NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 ELMWOOD Hon. Russell J. Doern NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 EMERSON Steve Derewianchuk NDP Vita, Manitoba ROA 2KO FLIN FLON Thomas Barrow NDP Cranberry Portage, Man. ROB OHO FORT GARRY L.R. (Bud) Sherman P.C. 86 Niagara St., Winnipeg R3N OT9 FORT ROUGE Lloyd Axworthy Lib. 132 Osborne St. S., Winnipeg R3L 1Y5 GIMLI John C. Gottfried NDP 44 - 3rd Ave .. Gimli, Man. ROC 1BO GLADSTONE James R. Ferguson P.C. Gladstone, Man. ROJ OTO INKSTER Hon. Sidney Green, O.C. NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 KILDONAN Hon.

Peter Fox NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 LAC DU BONNET Hon. Sam Uskiw NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 LAKESIDE Harry J. Enns P.C. Woodlands, Man. ROC 3HO LA VERENDRYE Bob Banman P.C. Steinbach, Man. ROA 2AO LOGAN William Jenkins NDP 1294 Erin St., Winnipeg R3E 2S6 MINNEDOSA David Blake P.C. I Minnedosa, Man. ROJ 1EO MORRIS Warner H. Jorgenson P.C. I Morris, Man. ROG 1KO ' OSBORNE Hon. Ian Turnbull NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 PEMBINA George Henderson P.C. Manitou, Man. ROG 1GO POINT DOUGLAS Donald Malinowski NDP 23 Coralberry Ave., Winnipeg R2V 2P2 PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE Gordon E.

Johnston Lib. 26-120 - 6th St., S.E., Portage la Prairie, Man. R1N 1E8 RADISSON Harry Shafransky NDP 4 Maplehurst Rd., Winnipeg R2J 1W8 RHINELAND Arnold Brown P.C. Winkler, Man. ROG 2XO RIEL Donald W. Craik P.C. 3 River Lane, Winnipeg R2M 3Y8 RIVER HEIGHTS Sidney Spivak, O.C. P.C. Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 ROBLIN J. Wally McKenzie P.C. Inglis, Man. ROJ OXO ROCK LAKE Henry J. Einarson P.C. Glenboro, Man. ROK OXO ROSSMERE Hon. Ed. Schreyer NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 RUPERTSLAND Hon. Harvey Bostrom NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 ST. BONIFACE Hon. L.L.

Desjardins NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 ST. GEORGE Hon. Bill Uruski NDP 10th fir., 330 Portage Ave., Wpg. R3C OC4 ST. JAMES George Minaker P.C. 318 Ronald St., Winnipeg R3J 3J8 ST. JOHNS Saul Cherniack, O.C. NDP 333 St. Johns Ave., Winnipeg R2W 1H2 ST. MATTHEWS Wally Johannson NDP 418 Home St., Winnipeg R3G 1X4 ST. VITAL D.J. Walding NDP 26 Hemlock Place, Winnipeg R2H 1 L7 STE. ROSE A.R. (Pete) Adam NDP Ste. Rose du Lac, Man. ROL 1SO SELKIRK Hon. Howard Pawley NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 SEVEN OAKS Hon. Saul A.

Miller NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 SOUR IS KILLARNEY Earl McKellar P.C. Nesbitt, Man. ROK 1PO SPRINGFIELD Hon. Rene E. Toupin NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 STURGEON CREEK J. Frank Johnston P.C. 310 Overdale St., Winnipeg R3J 2G3 SWAN RIVER James H. Bilton P.C. Swan River, Man. ROL 1ZO THE PAS Hon. Ron McBryde NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 THOMPSON Ken Dillen NDP 84 Pintail Cres., Thompson R8N 1A6 TRANSCO NA Hon. Russell Paulley NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 VIRDEN Morris McGregor P.C. Kenton, Man. ROM OZO WELLINGTON Philip M.

Petursson NDP 681 Banning St., Winnipeg R3G 2G3 WINNIPEG CENTRE Hon. J.R. (Bud) Boyce NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C OV8 WOLSELEY Vacant

3723 THE LEG ISLA TIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 10:00 o'clock, Wednesday, June 11, 1975 Opening Prayer by Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions; Reading and Receiving Petitions; Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees. The Honourable Member for Logan. REPORT BY STANDING COMMITTEE - LA W AMENDMENTS MR. WILLIAM JENKINS (L ogan): Mr . Speaker, I beg to present the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Law Amend ments . MR. CL ERK: Your committee met on Tuesday, June 10, 1975, and heard representation on Bills as follows: Bill No . 48 - The District Health and Social Services Act F.

Lloyd Lenton - Social Planning Council of Winnipeg H. A. Crewson - Manitoba Health Organizations Bill No. 58 -

An Act to amend The Public Schools Act E. J. Martens - Manitoba Association of School Trustees . Your Committee has considered Bill: No . 47 -

An Act to amend The Social Allowances Act, And has agreed to report the same without amendment . Your Committee has also considered Bills : No . 43 -

An Act to amend The Health Services Insurance Act . No . 48 - The District Health and Social Services Act. No . 52 - The Dental Health Services Act. No. 53 - The Dental Health Workers Act. And has agreed to report the same with certain amendments . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Logan . MR. JENKINS: Mr . Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Thompson 1 that the Report of the Committee be receiv ed . MOTION presented and carried . MR . SPEAKER: Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports; Notices of Motion; Introduction of Bills; Questions .

The Honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs . ORAL QUESTIONS HON. IAN TURNBU LL (Minister of Consumer, Corporate and Internal Services) (Osborne): Mr . Speaker, the other day the Member for Assiniboia asked me a question about the Public Utility Board increases in gas rates and he wanted to know whether they were interim increases or whether they would cover the situation for the rest of 1975.

I can advise him that as a result of board ord ers No . lOG and 106 that the increases ordered as a result of those two orders will apply to the end of 1975, if of course the National Energy Board does not grant any further increases in gas rates that the Greater Winnipeg Gas Company will have to pay. MR. SPEAK ER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. DONA LD W. CRAIK ( Riel): Mr . Speaker, it's really a follow-up of a question yes terday to the First Minister regarding the bank loan from the Swiss Bank and I wonder if you could confirm the persistent radio reports that the bank loan is completed . MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. EDWARD SCHREYER (Premier) (Rossmere): Yes, Mr . Speaker, I can confirm that the loan agreement has been entered into - 100 million Swiss Francs at 8-1/8 percent pay able annually the 16th June, starting this June, and for the next five years . MR. CRAIK: How many dollars does it wo rk out to? MR. SCHREYER: I don't have my currency conversion table, Mr . Speaker; in the crudest of ways it would be about $33 million Canadian . MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day . The Honourable House Leader .

3724 June 11, 1975 ORDERS OF THE DAY - GOVERNMENT BILLS HON. SIDNEY GREEN, Q .C. (Minister of Mines, Resources and Environmental Manage ment) (lnkster): Mr. Speaker, perhaps we could go to Bill No. 46. MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 46, proposed by the Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. (stand) MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I wish to move into Committee of the Whole House to con sider third reading of the Manitoba Telephone Act. I move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Industry and Commerce, that Mr.

Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole to consider the following Bill: Bill No. 41. MOTION presented and the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole with the Honourable Member for Logan in the Chair. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE BILL NO. 41 - MONEY S FOR CAPI'rAL _PURPOSES OF M. T. S. MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman, I just wonder if you'll give the Minister a minute; he went to get his material. ' MR . SCHREYER: Mr. Chairman, it's perhaps a little unorthodox but by leave I'd just like to refine for the Member for Riel the conversion to Canadian dollars.

I said it would be very crudely about 33 million; it's 40 million - 40 million seven hundred thousand. MR. CRAIK: I wonder while we 're on this unorthodox point whether he could indicate - I gather the loan is in Swiss francs and payable in Swiss francs? MR . SCHREYER: That is right although there is an incidental, not sought after, but there is an incidental and unavoidable degree of speculation in the sense that between now and next Tuesday a decision has to be taken as to whether to take it at today's or next Monday's conversion rate which fluctuates daily. I believe that's being worked on today. MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. ls it the will of the committee to consider the bill? Bill No. 41,

An Act to amend the Manitoba Telephone Act and to authorize the expenditures of money for capital purposes for the Mani toba Telephone System and authorize the borrowing of the same. Clause 1-passed; 2-passed; 3-passed; 4(1)-passed ?- -(lnterjection)--The Honourable Member for Souris-Killarney. MR. EARL McKELLAR (Souris-K illarney): I was interested in the debate that took place on this particular bill and the purchase of computers. The Minister mentioned at that time that a number of the computers that they presently have are on lease or rental or some system of that.

Now I'm just wondering what the government - when they borrow this $10 million to go into the computer field, have they got manpower at the present time in the Telephon e System to handle these new computers they're going to purchase? Are they going to lease them or who's going to maintain this computer system that they're going to set up here? This is very important. If the computers don't operate any better than the student aid computers last sum mer that looked after student aid1well I sympathize with the Telephone System, because my goodness1 that was a nightmare.

I hope the Minister of Education is listening, because every day either the computer was broke down or something and the students had to wait six months to find out whether they were turned down. It was always the computers' fault. Now are you hiring suffi cient trained staff in the computer field to operate, maintain these computer s, and are they going to be placed all in Winnipeg or are they going to be placed like in Brandon, Northern Manitoba, where are these computers going to be placed? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporat e Affairs. MR. TURNBULL: Mr.

Speaker, the question with regard to staff for the operation, and I assume the maintenance of the computers, will be on board when the utility is established and operating. At the present time the Manitoba Government computer centre and the other centres that are now in operation do have staff to carry out both the program functions and the actual operations of the computer main frames. If you are speaking about maintenance, the maintenance agreements that normally are entered into on lease arrangements will be, I assume, continued.

If the purchase of equip ment occurs then I would assume that the Telephone System would carry out its maintenance function in the manner that has always been carried out when computers are bought. I can get further information on this particular point for the member but I don't think that there is cause for concern here. There is certainly staff to carry on the operation and if staff are

June 11 , 1975 3725 BILL 41 (MR. TURNBULL cont'd) ..... required for maintenance apart from the manufacturer's staff then of course that will have to be provided. MR. McKELLAR: Mr. Chairm an, just another question. I was just wondering , are you going to build a new building to house all the computers that are involved with the operations of the Manitoba Telephone Syst em, and if you do build it where are you going to build it? MR. TURNBULL: Mr. Chairman , the exact location of the computer building has not been determined at the moment. That would be somewhat pr esumptuous until of course the bill is passed.

But I assume that the location of the computer building, when and if it is under taken, will be in the City of Winnipeg. The point here of course is to locate computer power within the province and terminals in other parts of the province so that the people in those areas can get access to computer power. The location ,as I say , is one that will have to be dis cussed and a location arrived at on the basis of what seems most feasible and practical for this particular operation.

Computer facilities do need secondary sources of hydro electricity , stand-by resources of that kind and various security measures, that type of thing. So I would think that the Computer Centre would be located in Winnipeg . Where in Winnipeg is as yet an open question. MR . CHAIRMAN : The Honourable Member for Swan River. MR. JAMES H. BILTON (Swan River): On the same question , I wonder if I might ask the Minister whether or not this $10 million includes the cost of the building that you 're discussing at the moment? MR. CHAI R�VlAN: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs. MR. TURNBU LL: Mr.

Chairman , a lot of the money that is mentioned in the bill is not new money. A lot of the 10 million will in fact just be picked up from other appropriations, and one of the amounts that will be picked up from other appropriations is the amount of money that will be, in the future, expended on a building. That building would have had to have been constructed in any case because the existing Government Computer Centre location in the Norquay Building is getting overcrowded and it will become more and more overcrowded as time goes on.

So a new building was going to have to be built and that building - originally there were moneys set aside in the appropriations of the Public Works Department , and all that's happened here is the money has been taken from that appropriation and put into the bill and struck from Public Works. That's the kind of switch that is occurring here, and as I say, the 10 million is cer tainly not all new money . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Souris-Killarney. MR 0 McKELLAR: One final question. I wonder if you can indicate - the Minister - in what constituency this might be built ? MR. TURNBULL: Mr.

Chairman, I hope that the member is not implying that it would be built in my constituency, because it will not be built there, unless, of course , Osborne proves to be the most feasible place to locate it. MR. CHAIRMAN: . . . 4( 1). The Honourable Member for St . James. MR. GEORGE MINAKER (St. James): Mr. Chairman , through you to the Minister. I was wondering if the Minister could advise - in his remarks in presenting the bill he indicated it would be run as a separate entity, this particular department.

I now ask him that should this department run at a loss in the first few years, how and where will they get the funds from - will it come from the Telephone System's revenues and as such be indirectly subsidized by the telephone users of Manitoba? Could he answer this question? MR. CHAI RMAN: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs. MR o TURNBULL: Mr, Chairman , the bill does specific ally provide for the separation of the computer utility from the telephone system's function as a telephone service.

And the reason for that is to avoid any possibi lity of transference of funds from the telephone opera tion to the computer operation and vice versa . I have to emphasize, because the member did seem to imply that this is a departmental function, it is not envisaged as a departmental func tion. It is going to be located within the Manitoba Telephone System. And the separat ion is contained in the bill and when we get to that

section we could discuss it in perhaps more detail . But I don't expect that there will be losses incurred as a re sult of this centralization. And the reason for that really is quite simple. That in the initial stages of the operation of the com puter utility, all that it will be doing is bringing together the present government in-house computer business. And the Computer Centre at the moment does not lose money. In fact , as

3726 June 11, 1975 BILL 41 (MR. TURNBULL cont'd) •...• I explained in my opening remarks, the Computer Centre of the government now operates on the basis of a nil vote. That nil vote is achieved of course through a chargeback from the various line departments to the Management Committee of Cabinet. The new computer utility in its initial stages will be doing that computer business for the government and consequently I cannot anticipate that there will be any loss in the initial stages of this operation.

And as it develops, of course - as the computer utility develops, becomes stronger, develops expertise, etc. , then I would think that they would be in a strong position to be self-sust aining and to set off any possible deficits that they might incur. But there again I do not anticipate that deficit, even when they get into the private sec tor, will be realized. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for St. James. MR . MINA KER: Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister. Can the Minister advise if there will be a Provin cial Sales Tax charge on the computer services that will be sold to other businesses? MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs. MR. TURNBULL: Mr. Chairman, within the government service, of course, there will be no charge, I do not think, of sales tax to the government's line departments. The sales tax charge to private companies that purchase the service, that is a question that I would have to seek an answer for in the Revenue Tax Act. I can't give him an answer to that particular question at the moment.

I can tell him though that the Telephone System does pay sales tax on certain equipment that it purchases and1in fact, the government computer centre now does not pay - apart from sales taxes, does not pay certain taxes that the utility as it's envisaged here might have to pay. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member from St. James. MR. MINAKER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister.

Could the Minister advise will there be a different rate for users of telephone lines if they utilize the Telephone's Computer Centre, say they have the terminal set up in their particular factory or office and they utilize the telephone computer versus using a private computer system, would there be different rates? Does he visualize the Telephone System utilizing its services to encourage the government use of computers?

In other words, will there be two sets of rates, one where a terminal is tied to the computer centre that's owned by the government, versus a terminal that would be tied to a private computer centre? This is on the cost of the lines that would be utilized by the two firms. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs. MR. TURNBULL: Mr. Chairman, I'm looking for staff in the gallery, which I don't see at the moment, to give me more detail on this particular question. The telephone line rates, that is the rates charged for telephone ;of course are approved by the Public Utilities Board.

Consequently I would not envisage, because of the structure of the new computer utility, that the Public Utilities Board would allow the kind of rate structure that the Member for St. James envisages. Another approach to the argument, of course, would be that com puter lines might well be dedicated lines, and dedicated lines, even now for telephone service, have a special charge. So that on both counts I would think that what he envisages is not likely to be the case. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for St. James. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister.

I think it's an important question because at one time, I don't know whether it's a fact now today, but at one time the Manitoba Hydro used to have varying rates for customers that would take on electric heat. I think maybe that may have changed, I don't know, but it was my understanding that they could vary these rates in order to get a user to put in electric heat

whereas the gas utility, the Greater Winnipeg Gas Companies, could not vary their gas rate from customer to customer. So that the principle had been applied before by a Crown agency, you might say exempt to the Public Utility Board. This is why I'm raising the question now, whether or not this type of approach might be utilized by the Crown agency, the telephone systems, to encourage or to try and become more competitive in the computer service field by varying the rates for the line charges depending on whether the terminal was tied to the government-owned computer or the privately-owned one.

June 11, 1975 3727 INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR . CHAIRMAN: Before the Minister answers , I wonder if I could draw the attention of the honourable mem bers to the gallery where we have 28 students of the River Heights Junior High, Grade VII stand ing, under the direction of Mr. Kupchak. This sc hool is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for River Heights, Leader of the Opposition. On behalf of all the honourable members , I bid you welcome this morning . BILL 41 Cont'd MR . CHAIRMA N: Clause (4)(1) -passed. (4)(2)-passed . (5)(1) -passed . (5)(2) ... The Honourable Member for St. James. MR.

MIN AKER: Mr. Chairman, Section (5)(1) , I wonder if the Minister could elaborate on this particular

section . Does that mean that the fact that (4)(1) has been authorized for $10 million that by approving Section (5)(1) that we are then approving an additional $10 mil lion that could be raised by the government on behalf of the telephones , so that we 're looking at a total of $20 million? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister for Consumer Affairs. MR. TURNBULL: Mr . Chairman, there is a procedural point here. I wonder if the member would mind if we got .. . well , I can deal with it now.

I was going to suggest that we pass the clauses relative to the borrowing and then I can deal with all the questions at once . If that would be acceptable to him , I would prefer to proceed that way. If not - he's not nodding affirmative to that - if not, I can say to him that this is not the case. There is to be one amount of $10 million set aside to be raised in the various ways set out in the bill and there's certainly not to be any duplication or any twice raising of the $10 million. It's one $10 million amount. MR. CHAIRMA N: The Honourable Member for St. James. MR. MINAKER: Then, Mr.

Chairman, through you to the Minister , next year if an additional $5 million or $10 million would be required , it would come through the capital estimates that would be requested in the House? Is this the way, if any additional moneys above and beyond the $10 million figure is required , they would come through in capital supply bill? MR . CHAIRMA N: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs . MR. TURNBULL: Yes, Mr . Speaker. That would be the way that we would have to handle this. MR. CHAIRMAN: (5)(2)-passed. (6)-passed. (7)(a)-passed. (b)-passed . (7)-passed. (8)-passed . (9)-passed . Pr eamble passed.

Title pass ed . The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs. MR. TURNBULL: Mr. Chairman, may I thank members for , I assume, allowing this bill to pass. I think it will be a step forward in the provision of this kind of service to rural and remote areas of the province. I also think that there is every likelihood that it can be used as a nucleus to attract people experienced in this new technology.

I know members like to see this kind of measure discussed in a separate bill where moneys are being allocated for entrance into this kind of operation and this bill, of course, meets with that requirement of theirs , and I thank them for their contribution. MR . CHAIRMAN : Pr eamble passed. Title passed . Bill be reported. MR. WARN ER JORGENSON (Morris) : On division. MR. CHAIRMA N: On division. Committee rise and report. Call in the Speaker . Mr . Speaker, the Committee of the Whole has conside red Bill 41 , recommends it to the House ,and asks leave to sit again. IN SESSION MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Logan. MR . WlLLlAM JENKINS (Logan) : Mr . Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Flin Flon, that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried.

3728 June 11, 1975 BILL NO. 41 - THIRD READING MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. BILL 41 was read a·thii'd time and passed (on division). MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, will you call Bill No. 28 please? BILL NO. 28 -

AN ACT TO AMEND THE EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS ACT MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 28. The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR . L. R. (BUD) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 28, in principle, is legislation that we on this side of the House agree with because of the benefits that it contains for individual workers and employees in the Province of Manitoba, so we accept the direction in which the legislation points.

It's necessary, I think though, sir, to raise a warning flag or a warning question or two as we embark on this reduced regulation work week, should the legislation pass, and I want to pose one or two questions and considerations for the attention of the Minister . At the same time, I take this opportunity to thank the Minister for permitting me and us some time and some indulgence in our examination of the bill. The main concern that I have, Mr.

Speaker, and that my colleagues have, is that the bill, while on the surface promising benefits and advantages for workers, really pays very little heed to the requirements of some special category industries, and I think in the Province of Manitoba we cannot afford to ignore the problems of specific special category industries that bring with them specific and much needed benefits to our economy. And the case in point here, sir, is the needle trades, the garment industry.

It's a fact of Manitoba life that the garment industry provides to our economy and to our people much of our prosperity, much of our employment. It provides much of the cash flow that exists in our marketplaces.

The statistical report of the other day which was of interest, I'm sure, to all members of the House pointing out that Manito ba's garment industry now accounts for 20 percent of Canada's export trade in the garment field; is one that represents an important consideration when we 're looking at legislation of this kind, sir, because it's in the area of interprovincially competitive industries that we will feel the most impact of legislation of this kind. And the garment industry, the needle trades, is a highly competitive industry in the interprovincial sense.

There are three primary needle trade centers in Canada - Montreal, Toronto, and Winnipeg - not necessarily in that order. As a consequence, we're dealing with three specific provinces - Quebec, Ontario, and Manitoba. And here we have an interprovincially competitive industry of one of the highest competitive orders and we need some special consideration, some special categorization and some special pleading, I suggest, for our industry in that com petitive position. And I'm concerned that with legislation of this kind, that that special con sideration is not present.

The Province of Ontario, I believe, prescribes special legislation for the needle trades. The Minister of Labour could correct me on this - he's shaking his head, so that indicates to me that my suggestion is incorrect. I'm under the impression that in the Province of Ontario industries can establish their own hours provided they have the approval of the Minister. In this case the Minister of Labour is nodding his head, so I may be back on the right track here, sir.

And that being the case, in dustries like the garment industry or any special category industry of that kind, can have its hours modified or adjusted with the approval of the Employ ment Standards Division, or the Employment Standards Bureau, and with the approval of the Minister, and thus put itself into a position which is competitively advantageous to it in inter provincial terms. I believe that the needle trade, the garment industry in Ontario has taken substantial advantage of that provision in the Ontario legislation.

And I would ask the Minister whether such consideration is available for industries of this kind here in Manitoba; whether our special category industries of this kind, which do provide so much in the way of employ ment, which do provide so much in the way of cash flow and which do provide so much in the way of revenue both on an export and a domestic basis, can not be provided with special con sideration of this kind to ensure that they don't suffer competitively with industries in their field in other provinces.

We face the prospect, and I'm not challenging it, we face the prospect and we have the Minister 1 s own word for it, of an increase in the not too distant future in the minimum wage. Looking at this legislation we are directly imposing here a move or a measure that will have the effect of increasing wage costs in Manitoba industry by 10 percent. If the minimum wage is increased by, let us say 10 percent - and that's a hypothesis, but if I pose it we can perhaps

June 11, 1975 3729 BILL 28 (MR. SHERMAN cont'd) . . . . . elicit some indica tion from the Minister of his intentions in this regard - if the minimum wage should be increased by 10 perc ent, then what you're looking at here for industry in Manitoba , Mr. Speaker, is a 20 percent increase in wage costs this year , not counting the impact and effect of inflation. That is a pretty heavy burden for indus tries in a provinc e like Manitoba to bear in competitive terms vis-a-vis the rest of Canada.

Combine those two, the effect of this legislation and the effects of a suggested and forecaste d increase in the minimum wage, and you have that kind of additio nal wage cost, that kind of addi tional operational cost, that kind of additi onal economic burden, facing industries in Manitoba which, all of us would agree I think , are at some competitive di sadvantage with respect to the rest of Canada, notwithstanding conside rations of this kind.

Taken across the board , regard les s of what happens in the area of minimum wages and the area of regular prescr ibed hours of work, many of our industries operate at a competitive di sadvantage because of geographic location, freight rates , market availabilities and the like. So I would just, in reviewing this bill at this stage and attempting to expedite it for movement through the second reading stage, pose those questions and those conside rations to the Minis ter for his thoughtful attention. I think that some special pleading for industries of this kind is neces sary in Manitoba.

We have to protect what we have here that is of value, of job producing and revenue producing value and merit . Anct while legislation of this kind has a popular and populous appeal, it tends in some way s to be idealistic and to be a little too theoretical in my view , Mr. Speaker. It tend s in some ways to overlook the real and harsh consid erations of the economy and of the marke tplace itself.

I hope the Mini ster will have some comments on this particular aspect of the legislation and I hope that the legislation itself will be either modified or applied in such a way as to ensure that industries of this kind in Manitoba are not forc ed into a disa dvantageous competi tive position. With those words, Mr.

Speaker, I thank the Minist er for the time he's given us to conside r this legislation and I repeat that the principle, on the level of the working man and working woman , is one to which I'm sure all Manitobans can subscrib e, but let us not forget the problems of the employer , particularly in special category industries. Let us make some provision to protect his operation . MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Cr eek. MR. J. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Cre ek): Mr . Speaker , I move seconded by the Member for Roblin, that debate be adjourned. MOTION prese nted and carrie d. MR. SPEAKER: Call Bill 44?

HON. RUSSELL PAULLEY (Minister of Labour) (Transcona): 37. BILL NO. 37 - DISCLOS URE OF INTERESTS MR. SPEAKER: Bill No . 37 proposed by the First Minis ter. The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. GORDON E. JOHNST ON (Portage la Prairie): Mr . Speaker , I think it's appropriate at this time that the Libe ral members gave an indication of how they felt about Bill 37, and I might say at the outset that we support the principle of the bill although we are rather critical of the content and the lack of content of the bill .

I might say that there has been a blunder or an error made by some members of this House, and I suppose the Chairman of the Statutory Rules and Orders Committee should take some of the blame but also the members of the committee should have taken it upon themselves to remind him that there should be a Committee Report before the House. After all1this sub ject matter was discus sed in a committee which the chairman was the Honourable Member for Wellington.

I can't recall all the membersh ip now but the Member for Swan River, myse lf, the Member for Fort Rouge, among others , were on the committee, and I think we had two meetings. The First Minister I don't think was on the committee. The First Minist er took

part in the meetings but he was not a member of the committee. So I think that we are some how remiss collectively that we don't have that report before us before the legislation is brought to the House based on the report of the committee . That if I can recall , I think after the final committee meeting a statement was made by way of letter by the Member for Lakeside wherein he said that it would be the Conservative position to oppose the legislation on the grounds that it did not adequately deal with conflict of intere st . And in

part I support him but

3730 June 11 , 1975 BILL 37 (MR. G. JOHNSTON cont'd) . . . . . really, but really I must say that a start has to be made somewhere. Legislation has to be brought in and it can be amended even if it's not completely adequate. But, Mr. Speaker, had we had some type of legislation in the past few years, I'm sure that some of the incidents that I will remind you of may not have happened. I don't say they would not have happened but the parties involved might have reconsidered some of their actions.

And I just refer to two or three weeks ago when a senior official in the City of Winnipeg was required to resign because of an apparent conflict of interest relating to his work in development for the City of Win nipeg. Now had there been guidelines at that time applicable in the municipal field, particularly in the larger cities, it's possible that that situation may not have arisen, because the particular official would have been cognizant of the fact that he had been forewarned previously and there was guidelines enshrined in legislation that he would have to be accountable to.

And since there was none, the situation occurred. I remind honourable members that there has been controversy, both last year and this year,with respect to one of the Directors of the Communities Development Fund, in having a direct connection with a business that was obtaining loan moneys from the fund.

Had there been conflict of interest legislation and applicable, I presume, to members of boards and commissions which is mentioned in the legislation, this person would have known very well that he was going to be in conflict with some of the laws of the province and he probably would have conducted himself in a different manner. I say "probably", we will never know. But at least the law would have been in place and the guidelines, if any, would have been there and every senior official in the province would have had a warni ng and knowledge of that law.

To go further back, if we had had similar type of legislation at the time that CFI was being developed, I'm sure that the Managing Director of the Manitoba Development Fund, Mr. Grose, the moment that he entertained and negotiated a contract for pos sible future employment with the CFI Complex, he would have clearly saw his duty to report to his superiors that he was negotiating for a position with that firm, namely another situation of conflict of interest, and perhaps there might have been a different outcome completely to the CFI matter. I say these are all probabilities; we do not know.

If a person is going to be dishonest, he'll find ways and means to do it. But if a person finds himself in a situation where greed overrules his judgment or temptation is there, or an honest error in judgment is made, at least in the three cases that I've just enumerated, there is a possibility that some of these officials would have had second thoughts and would have not only been guided by their con science, but would have been guided by the law, which were really terms of their employment.

As far as members in the House go, in my past 13 years experience, I know of no one, and I'm very proud to say, that I know of no member in this House that has used a position, as either a Cabinet Minister or an MLA, or a member of a board or a commission, to find out something that he would use for the benefit of himself or his friends. I feel very proud of that fact, that this House has not had any breath of scandal or any controversy whatsoever in that regard.

However, after having said that, I say again that I believe that with the huge amounts of moneys that the provincial administration is handling now, with the type of work that is becoming very close to year round, with the many dealings with various boards and groups in our work, that I see nothing wrong with someone who runs for office having to give a little on the matter of his personal privacy. We all know that members have to give a great deal of their privacy because they are public figures.

So we 're talking riow about another type of privacy that may have to be partly revealed and I for one, and we in the Liberal group, feel that this is a small price to pay, really. So really we support the concept of the bill but I'm inclined to take the suggestion of the Premier that the bill be sent for further refinement and study back to the committee. Because there are, in our opinion, many things wrong. And if I could give a few examples: The way the bill is presently written, the only people who can go to the Speaker and see the information on each member is the Leader of a party or his designate.

This means that any one of these people could go and I presume xerox all 57 financial histories and take them away, because if he's allowed access to them he can pretty well make records and copies. So really, who are we kidding? We 're not confining the information to members of this House because that information once it goes out of the office it can go anywhere and all over Manitoba. I'm talking about now the worst that could happen. And this is the worst that could happen,

June 11, 1975 3731 BILL 37 (MR" G. JOHNSTON cont'd) . . . . . that the information can become public through devious means . So we say well let the public have access to it . Let the public have access to it, because if someone is determined enough they can find the information anyways, through their own ML A or through their party affiliation or however. So we say, let the record be there for the public to see, but in order to discourage frivolous uses we suggest that a re gister be kept so that it is known who is seeking information on who.

And I would even go further than that and say whoever has been investigated , they would receive a notification that so and so has looked at their record . Now, all sorts of situations can arise here. A frivolous accusation can be made. After it has been dealt with by committee and then the House, it could well be that the member is completely exonerated but the very fact that an accusation was made is very hard on the character of the member. And it could happen near an election or it could happen in a heat of a debate even.

All that has to happen is a member to rise in his place and make the charge and the machinery must then go to work . The Speaker is required to read the charge and then by a vote of the House it's referred to a committee; the committee can take all sorts of time because they have to take the place of a judge rea lly . They can take a half a year or a week to decide. In the meantime the cloud remains over the member's head.

We suggest that whoever makes the accusation, he is the accuser, that he should have to post a bond - a $1 , OOO or $500 or some substantial amount, so that if the accuser has made a fri volous accusation then he should be reminded of that and it's not something that's taken lightly. We say, also, that all cities of Manitoba sh ould be included in this legislation . We all know that at the municipal level is where land rezoning occurs, where variances in building codes are sometimes made, where land development takes place and so on.

So if it's good for us, if it's good for us - and I agree with the Member for Souris-La nsdowne, when he said that a backbencher or a member of the Opposition has very .. . well he has no opportunity whatso ever to know anything that no one else knows. So I say that if it's going to be applied to us, then it should apply to others who are in situations where possible conflicts of interests could arise. So I say very strongly that it should apply to the cities of Manitoba. We did discuss in our caucus whether or not it should apply to towns or villages.

This could be looked at, but in view of the fact in the smaller communities where everyone knows pr etty well what everyone else's affairs are, or approximately are, the need is not the same, and where you have a settled community of a village of 300 people where they've known one another all their lives pretty well and there's very little interchange or moving in and out of strangers, they know themselves, and I would suggest for that reason to leave them out of it. It's only a suggestion, but we do feel stron gly that the cities of the province should be included in this legislation.

I think I gave an example on a very recent case in the City of Winnipeg. With respect to the including of the senior civil servants and members of boards and commission s, we agree with that. We are somewhat concerned that the sole judge if any wrongdoing has been found is the Cabinet . I know they're honourable men and I would not reflect upon their judgments unless I had some real cause to do so, but I could give a hypothe tical case that would give cause for some concern.

Suppose some career civil servant has been found in violation of the law as it applied to him and after all the steps were taken it was then up to the Executive Council to decide whether the person should be demoted - I don't know whether a fine is in the legislation - but demoted, suspended, or fired, I believe is, and it would only be human nature for the Cabinet to be a little kinder if it was a person that they had appointed,

whereas if it was someone who had been there before their time and they're really not that concerned about that person's career, we 're liable to have two sorts of judgments which could never be pro ved1but human nature, being what it is, there's an inclination to be kind to your friends and tough on your enemies or tough on those that we do not know . So we would suggest that the final arbiter in this case would be the Civil Service Commission, not the Cabinet who may have feelings for or against or otherwise to the person that they're called upon to judge.

I think also that any member of this House would feel very very queasy, if that's a word, about having to pass judgment on another member . It would bother me, I know that. I wouldn't like to do it. I wouldn't like to be a member of the Cabinet that had to fire or make the decision whether to fire, demote or suspend indefinitely someone. I wouldn't like to make that decision at all. I would sooner that decision was made by someone

3732 June 11, 1975 BILL 37 (MR. G. JOHNSTON cont'd) •.... who had perhaps more training and more experience and no political bias whatsoever. I just wouldn't feel comfortable if I was a member of the Cabinet and had to rule on some senior civil servant who may have barely broken the law, flagrantly broken it, or somewhere in between. I just wouldn't like to make a judgment on a man's career or a woman's career. So, Mr.

Speaker, I think we've indicated our position that in principle we think the legis lation is due, but we think the guidelines should be more developed so that our senior civil servants know where they stand in given situations. We feel that cities should be included, and we feel that for further refinement, that this should be studied for another year by committee. I might make an aside and say that the way the legislation reads now, the three Liberal mem bers could be investigated every day of the year, I guess, but we would have no right whatso ever under the legislation to look at anybody else's.

Myself, I wouldn't like to look up anybody else's record-that would bother me. But I suppose if the occasion arose where it had to be done, one would do it. After having said that, Mr. Speaker, we feel that the intent of the bill is good. The bill isn't refined enough, it hasn't foresaw enough situations and needs a great deal further work. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Wellington. MR. PHILIP PETURSSON (Wellington): Mr.

Speaker, reference has been made to the fact, both yesterday and again today, that there was no report brought in from the meetings of the Committee of Statutory Regulations and I, being Chairman, am probably considerably at fault. The Honourable Member for Portage is taking some of the blame and indicating prob ably that other members of the committee may also share in it. I don't know exactly where the blame lies, but I am prepared to assume the responsibility and make apologies to the House for oversight and neglect. There were two meetings held - one on November 5, and one on January 8.

The proceed ings were recorded and the recotding has been transcribed and _,so far as I know, copies of the proceedings have been sent out to all the members. So they have them in their hands to read, to study, to criticize, or to praise - I don't know which. At the first meeting the subject mat ter presented was, in a sense, new to most of the members. They realized what was involved to a certain degree but there was a considerable amount of discussion and exchange of views and there seemed to be a general consensus somewhat along the line that the Member for Portage la Prairie has indicated.

There is one quote, I think, that reflects the thinking of most of the members of the committee, where one member said, "I would like to indicate to the Premier that I think he is correct in the assumption that he made earlier in his comments that in this particular mat ter there will be a great deal of consensus on the part of all members of the House, certainly from our group," this mem ber said, "to arrive at workable legislation. I say that without having had the opportunity of caucussing with our group but I think it's a matter that you sensed correctly, that that is the feeling of the House.

" Do you want me to name the member? I don't think he would mind. It's the Honourable Member for Lakeside. I'm quoting words tran scribed in the record of the meeting held last November 5, and I'm doing it not in criticism but in praise. And that, I think, was at that time the general feeling of the meeting. There was some change in the position, some questions that had arisen in the minds of members at the second meeting, but no large scale or resounding adverse opinions being expressed. There were more questions than anything else. A MEMBER: Who were the membersof that committee? MR.

PETURSSON: Now, you've got me. I don't remember who all the members were but if we go through the record ... it's on the record, yes, it's on the record. The members are named one at a time in the . . . if you read it through, you 1ll probably get the names of all of them because each one did make a contribution to the •.• I'm getting the .•. This is like raising your hand to heaven and having something put into it. The members of the committee are Messrs. Evans, Hanuschak, Toupin - Honourable Messr s. , I have to remember that; we have to recognize the men who are higher up.

Then the lower echelons are Bilton, Boyce, Johnston, Portage la Prairie, Jorgenson, Malinowski, Moug, Osland, myself, and Chairman. Mr. Chairman, that's all I want to say at this time. I'm simply recognizing a short coming on my

part in not having made enquiries or seen to it that the report was made. But all that we would have had to report was that we had discussion and qu estions asked, questions

June 11 , 1975 3733 BILL 37 (MR. PETURSSON cont'd) ..... answered and did, at the second meeting, go over the draft form of the proposed legislation which has been somewhat changed in the redrafting as it was presented in the form of the bill. So, if I'm going to be strung up and quartered, then so be it . Thank you very much . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Mr . Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Virden, that debate be adjourned . MOTION presented and carried . BILL NO. 44 - THE PLA NNING ACT MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 44. The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR.

HARRY J" ENNS (Lakeside): Mr . Speaker, yesterday at 5: 20 I was attempting to make some comments on this bill which I attempted to make this morning . I say in passing, Mr . Speaker, I don't as a rule make an issue of it but there is some disappointment on the part of members of the Opposition that should be noted, the singular lack of attention that the treas ury bench gives to its bills . It's a bill, a major bill before the session, Bill 44,that we 're dealing with now . The Minister re sponsible is not in his seat .

Indeed, all too often, all too often, the number of government members in their seats bar ely ra nks with the number of people in the press gallery, members of the fourth estate . I'm well aware, Mr. Speaker, that other duties and re sponsibilities of office from time to time keep Ministers occupied in other pursuits, but, Mr. Speaker, the kind of attendance that the government has pr ovided in this session particularly, you know, shouldbe noted, Mr. Speaker, should be pointed out for the public record . In this instance, we're dealing with important matters, but that's just in passing, Mr . Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, my comments on the bill are thus - and they come from a kind of a general feeling that I think has been expressed now on several bills by members of the Opposition which, you know, I think accurately reflect the attitude of the Opposition towards some of the bills being presented, this one in particular. We 're saying to the government, we 're saying to the government that, you know, we can recognize very often the need for this kind of legis lation . We recognize, Mr .

Speaker, that with, you know, increased government involvement, increased government funding programs that it would be L-responsible on the part of the oppo sition to indicate that there wouldn't be, and there wouldn't have to be further extension of government involvement in these programs, to some degree government control of the funding of these programs, so the question really comes down to what degree is local control, local authority eroded in the process? Then we go one step further, Mr.

Speaker, and I think, you know, the honourable mem bers opposite will have recognized this, that what we're probably saying to them, that some of this legislation - and I'm re ferring specifically to the same kind of legislation that we dealt with having to do with the health services districts, this planning bill before us - is that we real ly think it's probably pr etty good legislation; it would probably be excellent legislation in our hands, we don't quite trust it in your hands . I think that, Mr.

Speaker, is not an unfair reflection of some of the things that have been said to the members of the government from this side, whether it's my leader speaking, whether it's other people saying. I'm attempting to reason ably accurately, reaso nably accu rately reflect, you know, the kind of comments that have been made on this bill and on other bills of this nature. Mr . Speaker, it would then seem to be fair to examine why is the Opposition taking this attitude? You know, Mr.

Speaker, it is usually good advice - advice given them by the Member for Morris - that it's a good position at all times for the Opposition to oppose all things proposed by a government. That's a traditional position that most oppo sitions could do well to follow, despite the fact that that seems sometimes to be contrary to what the public expects of an Opposition. I'm inclined to agree with the Member for Morris, in most instances we would be safe to do that, but it doesn't always satisfy us individually in the House .

We see the needs and the areas of re sponsibility where government have to act and therefore we have to sometimes acknowledge necessity for certain pieces of legislation and make our comments about it . Mr . Speaker, the areas of particular concern dealing with Bill 44 revolve around the kind of authority, the kind of control that the Provincial Government, senior government, is

3734 Jun e 11, 1975 BILL 44 (MR . ENNS cont 'd) ..... taking upon itself . It revolves around sections of the Act , Mr.

Speaker - and we 're speaking on second rea ding about principle and philo sophy of the bi ll , I won't be referring specifically to sections of the Act - but it refers specific to sections of the Act like 19 which sets out the members hip of the board or with Sect ion 15 which indicat es how members of a board can be removed , can be repl aced , it 's in this area of concern in the bill, that concern how the bill has been expres sed , to what extent the government will use its heavy hand , to what extent big brother will be dictating to the municipali ti es, to the school boards, to rural Manito ba, to our towns and village s, the fu ture nature of the planning for their develop ment .

Mr . Speak er , why do we in the Opposi tion then have this he sitancy to grant to this government those power s, that authority that I' ve just admitted are probably not all that bad and probably neces sary , and if we were on the other side would very likely be introducing, in similar fashion, at this particular ti me. Mr . Speaker, there are of course reasons 1and some of the reasons I wo uld like to docu ment , I' d like to refer to . In doing so , Mr . Speak er, I will be speaking about some other matters not specifically germane to the bill , but I want to ass ure you, Mr .

Speaker , prior to you getting nervous and edging up to the edge of your seat and ruling me out of order , that it will be done so strictly for the purposes of demonstrating the point I' m trying to make which deals very specifically with the bill and not in any way to bring irrel evant matters into the discussion that would not be proper at sec ond re ading of Bill 44. Mr . Speaker , I believe that we have a right to look at certain back ground documents that have been made availa ble to us as to properly determine the attitude of this governm ent when it deals with these matters.

I read from two spec ific sourc es of material , one of cour se the unabridged ver sion of the Guidelines of the Seventies, more properly known as the NDP Manifesto for Manito ba, when it dea ls, in this case on another matter , but specifically with rural Manit oba , and a direct quote from that report states: "Because the Boards of Directors will be composed . . . 11 - in thi s case we 're talking about the setting up of municipal Cro wn corporations or the hope of setting up munici pal Cr own corporatio ns, but this is the importa nt note: "Because the Boards of Directors will be composed of local elected represe ntati ve s, the institu tions will, to some extent, re flect the politi cal preference of the areas they serve .

Thus , if a local council that tended towards conservatism and retrenchm ent were replaced by a more activist body , this would be mirrored in changes in social and economic structures of the communi ty ." You put that together with the document that my leader just read on another bill dealing with the He alth Services Act , this particular paragr aph coming from the White Pa per on He alth Servic es, when it giv es us an insig ht as to when this government and ho� this governm ent is prepared to deal with matters in a democra tic way .

"The deve lopment , and I quote, "of a democra tic structure is not a sentimental objective but the very guaran tee that ref orm will have bite to it and will create the indispensable economizi ng for ce. But the corollary of this is an int egral of tutelage in which the compo sition of the embryonic boards is subjected to and even determined by close provincial review and which care is taken to develop their ex pertise and capaci ty . Once solidly established their compo sition can safely be left to the principle of democ ratic election.

But if the boards are created instantly and given full authority , they are unlikely to be eit her competent or democratic" - and I add, do the things the government want s them to do . Mr . Speak er, with that kind of background - and these are not light paper s, this comes from an official Whit e Paper produced by the government having to do with He alth Serv ic es - with that kind of a background , Mr .

Speak er , it is not unfair at all for the Opposi tio n to examine very closely the kind of attitude this government would take towards the greater over all development as envisaged in the Pla nning Act before us , Bill 44. Mr . Speak er, they have indicated to us , both in written form and by action in this Hou se, that they are quit e prepared to exert that tutelage period , that heavy hand of big brother , not to allow that local autonomy, that local authority to be expr es sed in a way that that area want s it to be, because that area may tend to conserva tism , may tend to retrenchm ent . Mr .

Speak er , we can go away from the written word which one might say is just some planner 's concept of a position to be taken : we have the actual performance of this government in this Chamber , in just very rec ent time s. We had a situati on, already referred to by the Honourable Member

June 11, 1975 373 5 BILL 44 (MR. ENNS cont'd) . . . . . for Morris . Mr .

Speaker , I can recall making a speech at that time saying that, you know , what surprised me was that - and I do not wish to take anything away from the importance of hog production in this province - but nonetheless in light of the kind of involvement that the government has, will have in the future planning of development in the Provinc e of Manitoba, whether in this bill , whether it's in the Health Servic es Act, then certainly the kind of government involvement in that Act, one re ally must re-e xamine the posi tion that was stated and taken by this government when a duly elected person to an agricultural commodity board - one of those elected persons , I imagine that this bill envisages - might serve on the board, might serve on the membership of a board.

The only difficulty , sir , in this instance that person chose not to concur or agree with the policies of the government . What was the government's reaction, sir? Unexplainable. The force of the government was brought down on this person , he was asked to resign, for no other reason , Mr . Speaker , other than the fact that he disagr eed with government policy . Mr . Speaker , it wasn't left there. The Minis ter responsible stood up in this Chamber and suggested that the entire board would be wiped out if the board didn't abide with his wishe s and with his will. Mr .

Speaker , those words ar e etched forever in my memory. I don't have to refer to Hansar d, they are there. Furthermore, what is also there is that the Minister is saying that he'll go along with democracy as long as the right people are elected . Mr . Speaker , I have yet to have heard a more offensive phrase spoken by a government spokesman in this Chamber. He will go along with a degree of local participation, local author ity, as long as the right people get elected. Mr . Speaker , nobody on that side objected to that.

The Minister of Mines and Natural Resource s did not object to the fact that somebody representing him, speaking for him, talked about the necessity of electing the right people or else we'll not have democracy. Or else we'll not have local participation . The First Minister of this province was prepared to have somebody speak for him and say that we'll have local participation , we'll let local planning boards, hog boards, agricultural commodity boards exist as long as the right people get elected . Mr . Speaker , I think that that was one of the more offensive things that have ever been said in this House .

We've said many offensive things to each other from time to time in this House, but fundamentally in terms of believing what we, I think, would like to acknowledge all of us believe in, that we are represe ntatives of the people that have se nt us to the Chamber , that our duties and re sponsibilities are to reflect those views of those persons that sent us her e - not necessarily always to impose our will , our doctrine, our philosophy, on them - when we find it demonstr ated in such a manner , then we have cause for concern about the planning authorities , the authority that we grant to this particular government, to this particu lar government .

Mr. Speaker , let me give you even a more current example. Let me give you even a more current example. Mr . Speaker , we have a situation right now where this government is willfully bent on taking a particular action, and in this instance it involves the construction of a large dairy complex .

They are doing this at this particular time because they do not trust, they do not want to wait until the people involved , namely the people that should be making the decision, the Milk Mark eting Board, until it becomes a democrat ized institution, until it becomes an elected group of people, because they then no longer have that control on them. The Manitoba Milk Marketing Board is going to be duly democrat ized , the Minister of Agri culture has indica ted to us; the Manitoba Milk Mar keting Board is going to eventually properly repr esent the wishes of the milk producers in the Province of Manitoba .

But, Mr . Speaker , perhaps one of the major undertakings by this industry , by this group of Manitobans, the decisions that will affect them , will affect the whole industry , is being made now, is being made now prior to the time when the will of the producers can be properly repr esented. It's being done now while that board consists of solely politically appointed persons . 1 It's being made now in the face of the unanimous decision on the, part of the milk producers duly elected association's re jection of the proposal , of which the government has a resolution now . Why are they rejecting the re solution?

They have alre ady been informed or indicated that they will have to pay for this plant. I suppose some of the speeches made in this Chamber that the general taxpayer was going to have to pick up most of the load has even caused the government to back away from that initial position. My understanding now is X number of cents per hun dr edweight of milk will have to be dedicate d to the construction of this plant .

3736 June 11, 1975 BI LL 44 (MR . ENNS cont '

d) Mr . Speak er , this is perhaps out of order to this extent that I' m getting int o detail , but the point that I' m trying to make is that a group of Manitobans is going to be levied a tax to do a certain thing which they have indicated they don't want done . But this board , this government , because they have the authority and the pow er , and not unlike the kind of authority and power granted in Bill 44, through their appointed people rather than their elected people, can put the wis hes , the will of the government ahead of the people most immediately involv ed . Mr .

Speaker , what kind of confidenc e, what kind of confide nce do we then have in the apparent safeguards that are built into this bill ? What kind of confidence do the rural munici paliti es, the urban municipali tie s, the school board s, have in the apparent provisions made in this Act for their involvem ent in the planning proc esses of this pro vinc e?

What kind of ass ur ances does anybody in Manitoba have that ..• you know , if the provinc e is prepared , the government is prepared to ride roughshod over the express ed wishes of, in thi s case , the dairy produ cers; in the case of yesterye ar , or a few years ago , of the hog produ cers, to impose their will then , Mr. Speaker , these fears or the suggestions made by individual members on this side of the House with re spect to this bill are more than justif ied . Mr .

Spea ker, it is not therefore also a hypocritical posi tion on the part of the opposition to take when we say that in es sence we find a great deal in the bill that we support . It is not a hypocritical po sition to say , Mr . Speak er , that very likely a bill of this nature would have been in troduced by us if we were governm ent today . It 's in the way and the ma nner of carryi ng out the provisions of the bill , and one's philosophical bent, that concerns us . Now , Mr . Speak er, let me give you another example of the differ ences between us . You know , Mr .

Speaker , in the past administration , the administration that I was part of, we under went perhaps - and it is related in the area of planning and certainly in this case , in the field of education when we intr oduced the Unitary Schoo ls Division system it was a position that the governm ent was dedicated to . We were every bit as dedicated to it . The former Minis ters of Education , Dr . George John son and Mr . Stewart Mc Lean , were every bit as dedicated to the bringing int o Manitoba the updating of the school system in the Province of Manito ba .

As a government we were commi tted to it every bi t as much as the Mini ster of Agriculture is com mitted to building the Cr ocus Food Pl ant at Selkirk . But how did we handle it , sir ? We went out - in fact we held meetings and we held elec tions. Mr. Speaker , I see the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Reso urces smili ng. He's smili ng. I' m not really a great believer of governm ent by plebisci te . But , Mr .

Speaker , the fact of the matter is that under the administr ation of our group , under the administration of our group ins ofar as a major change - and it was a major change, it caused a great deal of diffi culties for many peopl e, for many individual politician s, a major rationalization of the educa tional system which very often disr upted the set patterns of rural life - introduced bus sing to rural school children . Mr .

Spea ker, we felt that that kind of a major planning change - sir , just to get you back in your seat a little bit , I'm talking about planning - to get that kind of a major planning change introduc ed , des pite the kind of authority maybe that we had , and , Mr . Speak er, we had authority because in other instanc es we used that authority . In the Inter lake because we were involved in a multi-million dollar development program involving the Federal Government where the educational component was a major factor of it .

Yes, we trampled on democracy in the Interlake , and we assi gned them to being five ... the school divisio ns , the school divisions by order -in-c ouncil . Now , Mr . Spea ker, all I' m saying is, there is this di fference of course between us . You know, the members opposite often have said we approached it in a laissez -faire manner . We haven' t got a pre-set doctrine approach to the subject matter . We don't plan continuously greater and greater public involvement and central ized control .

You know , and to that extent , the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resourc es critic izes the Honourable Member for Rock Lake that this bi ll is not a big socialist plot, and wasn't dr eamt up in the dark base ments of our houses or somewh er e. Now I can rationalize that position . You know, I believe that my friend s oppo site they think about their polit ics probably a lot more than I do, and they're socia li sts.

So whe n I see three of them having cof fee d'.>wnstairs in the caf eteria, you know , I' m not stretching my imagination too much that down there in the baseme nt of this buildi ng, in the very bowels of our democracy, are being hatched the evil tentac les of so cialism that will one day rout out that br eath of free air that we have , you know .

June 11, 1975 3737 BILL 44 (MR . ENNS cont '

d) So, Mr . Speak er, you know, in like manner , in like manne r, I say that the Honourable Minister for Mines and Res ources is far too hard on my friend , the Member for Rock Lake . But , Mr .

Spea ker , I have attempted to poi nt out that the attitude that this government has dis played in several specific instan ces , we're given the choic e, we're given the choice to allow , to allow for the local group, local region, whether it 's a commodity board for an agricul tural product , or any other kind of local area, where the provisio n of the Act , there where these kind of local expr es sions of opinion can and should be pos sible to be made, this government has shown a dispo sitio n to wield a very very heavy hand on them . When they speak about tutela ge , Mr .

Speak er , an interval of tutelage is required before any such boards are liable to become competent or democra tic , we have reaso ns - and we have specific exampl es of boa rds, and individual members of such boar ds, that were subject to that tutelage - and , Mr . Speak er , that tutelage bore a pr etty heavy clo ut, that bore a pretty heavy clout . I mean , the one perso n I refer to , it was certainly heavy enough to cause him to leave the board and leave the province and no longer produce hogs in this pro vin ce. What was his sin, Mr . Speak er ?

His sin was that he did it in a very open - and maybe with not a great deal of fi nesse, but then farm ers are not always noted for a grea t deal of fi nesse - he opposed the Minister of Agricult ure . He opposed some of the things that were happening on the Hog Board . He wanted to know for what price we're selling pork to Japan , as a Director of the Board, and couldn't get the answer s. Now, Mr .

Spea ker , why then if in some of the far more delicate and sensi tive areas of overall plannin g, planning decisions that will have to be made, the kind of planning decisions that will be made pos sible by Bill 44, why then would this governm ent choose then to all of a sudden not wish to impose it s will indirectly if it happens to be contrary to the local reside nts involved , if it happens not to agree with a pre -determ ined policy position on the part of an individual Minister res ponsible for the administration of this Act , or a pre- dis posed position that the governm ent as a whole may have with respect to pl anning for a particular region ?

Mr . Speak er , I have no particular objection to the government's introducing the kind of legis lation - in fact , I believe it would probably simplify things a little easier if they would not make that attempt at window -dressing, if they would not pretty up bills such as Bill 44 with all kinds of provisions that give the indication and ind eed , in the right hand s, would in fact be quite effective for a great deal of local input , a great deal of local control , a great deal of local contribution to the planning that is neces sary . But, Mr .

Speak er, I don 't bel ieve this govern ment has any intention of allowing for that local input . I' ve cited several examples which , you know, fade into insig nificance in terms of the overall importance in the province where they have not allo-Ned it . You k_now , they can' t allow the dairy produc ers of this prov ince a voice in a major undertaking in their in du stry . They can't put off six months, eighteen mon'.:hs, U-. 'ltil that board is a duly elected board and can ma ke and speak for their represe ntati ves . A qu estion should well be rai sed, why isn't the board an elected baard :Jy na N? Mr .

Speak er, when �he Act provi des, when the Act provides for how ind•vidual members of this planning board can be replaced and removed as it does in Secti o;1 15 , Page 11 of the Act , Mr. Speaicer , we have be en sho·Nn hcrN individual memb·ers of board;3 o:i any make -up can 'Je repla r.:ed, a;1d .Jan b·3 re m·o vcd, and ::an be how1ded o.1t of office by this govern .. -n enL Not for any speci fic wrongdoi ng, not fo:c any specific tran.sgressi on o:i their oath of offic e, but simply because they chose to oppo se the government 's will . Mr .

Speaker , we are supposed to pa ss into these kind s of people the power and the authority that 's vested in this Act . We ll , Mr . Spea ker , the Honourable Minister of Mines and Re sourc es shows his dis approval of my comments. I must ind icate, you know, to my friend the Honourable Mini ster of Mines and Natural Resources that it bothered me, and it bothers me to this day, the level of tolerance that he showed towards what I believe that he had some feeling for , some under standing for , and some strong beliefs in .

But I repeat he was prepared to let somebody speak for him in outlining his concept s, and the governm ent's concep ts, to what extent local demo cracy can operate and what parameters it has around it . He was pre pared to si t in his seat, as was the Fi rs t Minis ter, and have a spokesman stand up in this Chamber and say that we 'll have democracy as long as the rig ht people are elected . Mr . Speake r, it 's that kind of an attitude that with the pa ssi ng of ti me, with every pa ss ing sess ion, that will bring to my con stituent s, to the br oader co nstituents in the Province of

373 8 June 11 , 1975 BI LL 44 (MR. ENNS cont 'd) . . . • • Manito ba, the true colours of this administration . It will not be the capability of their debates, it will not be the skill and astuteness of the Mi nister of Mines and Natural Re sources in questio ning people at some Land Use hearin gs, and maybe scoring Br ownie point s, it 's that age old thing that happens to so many government s, and it 's going to happen to this governm ent, and it 's happening ri ght now, is that by their actions they'll be known and by their actions they 'll be defeate d. Mr .

Speak er, they misjudge, they misjudge very sig nificantly the tenor of the people of Manitoba if they feel that those kind s of actions , individual and maybe insi gnificant by themselves but collect ively aren't having a rolling effect throughout the Province of Manito ba, and , Mr . Speaker , a snowballing effect throughout the Pr ovince of Ma nito ba. Mr .

Speak er , while it might have been a fair criticism , it mig ht have been a fair criticism earlier on to suggest that the Oppositio n was helpi ng this snowballing effect with wild and exaggerated statements, with scare tactic s, with scare tactic s the actions taken by the governm ent as they become clearer and more definable make it easier for us to make those statement s, make those claims with validity and with cr edibility , and one that is being understood . Mr.

Speak er, the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources indicated yes terday that this bill had rece ived all kinds of prior discus sions . I' m well awar e, si r, that the whole question of planning has been in a constant state of discus sions with munic ipali tie s, with plann er s, with departm ental peop le , but this bill , like so many of their bill s, once the bill has been produ ced , bears in many instanc es little resem blance to what those discussions were all about .

Furtherm ore , the questio n is, to what extent have those persons that have expr es sed in teres t in the bill , the municipaliti es, both urban and rural , school boards and others, have had a chance to look and fam iliarize them selves with draf t copies of this bill , with intent of this bill ? It would appear , sir , from the re action that is now slowly coming in that that is not the case . And, Mr . Speak er , let me also indicate that per haps the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources giv es us too much cre dit .

He suggested ye sterday that we cl utched at Bill 44 as a last ditch stand to raise a great deal of emotional impact against the gover nment , and that he saw that as a legitimate political tactic . Well , Mr . Speak er , I must confe ss that that 's not been the case . We have been the rec ipients . We have done our job in terms of sending the bill out to people that we know are in teres ted , as we do with any other bill , but there is no mastermi nding of municipal objections to the bill . Th ey 're doing it all on their own .

There is no masterm inding of school boards 1objections to the bill , they 're doing it all on their own . Mr . Speaker , we feel that this bill , perhaps even more so than the bill that has already been suggested mig ht be held up for inter -sess ionary . fu rther study and ref inem ent, could well be given the same trea tment . Mr . Speak er , we have, among other thi ngs , a group still set up , hasn't reported to this Hou se, that 's in search of a land policy in Manito ba .

Now the very es sence of the major portion of the planning bill before us has to do with land use , has to do with control of the urban sprawl ; what do we do in rural Manitoba in terms of planning out the proper use of our available land ? Ce rtainly if you read the whe reases which set up this committee in search of a land policy in Manito ba, you know , it could well be suggested that the two should go in tandem , that we re ally can't plan our developm ent in the province accurately unle ss we have come to grips with developing a land policy and a land use pol icy . I don't know , Mr.

Speaker, whether we're putting the horse in front of the cart or the cart in front of the hor se , I' m not prepared to say that , but I am saying to the honourable members of the governm ent that it wo uld probably make good sense to take a harder look at this particu lar bill, and if not, then, sir , to at least be prepared to consider in some way the concer ns , the objections that have been voiced , the kind of bla tant fear that has been expre ssed by mem bers of the opposition about the authori ties vested in the governm ents, particularly insofar as it relates to the member ship of board s, powers and authority of the government with the removal and replacing of members of the board .

If they were prepared to look at ways and means of strengthening the local posi tion vis-a-vis the overall planning of their fu ture develop ment at committee stage of this bill, then, Mr . Speaker , I must confe ss to you , and the honourable members of the governm ent , that we would simply be hard-pr essed not to take a very hard look at the bill from th e point of view of wish ing or wanting to support it . But, si r, the cavalier attitude this governm ent has shown towards local authority and local control, where it has existed otherwi se , duly exis ted, in a legitimate form , leads us to

June 11, 197 5 3739 BI LL 44 (MR . ENNS cont'd) .•... take the po sitio n that we 've taken today on the bill , that it 's the kind of authority asked for by this governm ent, by these peop le, that we are most reluc tant to give . The Minister snort s, "these people ", and sir , he should because that is an offensive phr ase too - just about as offensive as when somebody said for him that he will only let the right people vote, he 'll only have democracy if the rig ht people get elected . That , Mr . Speake r, I' ll not allow this governm ent to fo rget .

I' ll not allow the people of Manitoba to forget come the next election . INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR . SP EAKE R: Before we proceed, I should like to direct the attention of the honour able members to the gallery where we have 30 students, Grade 7 and 8 standin g, of the Rosenort School under the dir ection of Mr . Hiebert . This school is in the consti tuency of the Honourable Member for Morr is . BI LL 44 Cont'd MR " SP EAK ER: The Honourable Minister of Labour .- -(In terjectio n) -- The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose . MR . A. R. (Pete) ADAM (Ste .

Rose) : Would the honourable member entertain a question on his remarks ? He mentions how undemocratic the Milk Board is at the prese nt time because it is not elected and is appoin ted . Co uld he advise when he was a member of the previous ad mi ni stration and they set up the Hog Ma rketing Co mmission, were those members appo inted by the government or were they elected by the produ cers ? MR . SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Lakesi de . MR . ENNS: We ll, Mr . Speak er , glad to answer that question on two counts. Firstly, not a single hog producer had to deal with Hog Board . It was a volunt ary board .

He must underst and that . Secondly , we were bound by re solution of this Hou se, by re solution of this House that within a period of ti me, if any change was to be made, to mak e it compulsory that there should be a vote held among the produ cers . This government then took over , they made it compul sory, and there was no vote held . There was no vote held .

One of the reasons why the reso lution was introduc ed , and one of the reasons why the re solution was introduced by your First Minister at that ti me , sitting in opposition, sitting in oppo sitio n , they gave us permis sion to set up the volunt ary Hog Marketing Board on the basis that within a specified period of time there should be a refer endum held among the hog pr oducer s as to whether to make that into a compulsory Hog Mark eting Board . But again , it 's a funny attitude that this governm ent dis pla ys . When they 're in opposition, they want votes on everything .

You know , the beef pro ducers of this provi nce , they wanted a 10 or 15 cent checkoff to promote their own beef indus try. This government then insisted there had to be a vote becuuse they were opposed to it . In fact , they went out and actively worked in opposition to it . The Milk Co ntrol Board - they want a plan , but the Milk Co ntrol Board can't have a vote on it . Any more stupid questio ns ? MR . SP EAKER : The Honourable Minist er of Labour . MR . PAU LLEY: Mr . Speaker , pos sibly I should not take

part in this debate because of the fact that the Honourable Member for Lakeside supports the bi ll almost in tot ality , and has indicated to us that if his Party were in power , the chances are that they would be introducing similar legislation , and then, and then he goes on to chastise the governm ent for introducing such a bill, and suggests that possi bly there hasn 't been sufficient involvem ent with municipal councils and municipali ties in consultation with this bill . I' ve never heard in my 22 years in this House such hogwash as I listened to this morning by the Honourable Member for Lakeside .

And [ appreciate the honourable member doesn't like socialis ts . MR . ENNS: No , I don't like socialis ts . MR " PA ULL EY: He doesn't like socia li sts - and really , Mr . Speak er , I d:m't like fascis ts . And I sometim es question whether some of the members of the Ass embly in debate lose sight of the fact that there are differe nces between socialists and fasci sts . He ar my honourable friend this morning iri discus sing Bill 44 - with side re ferenc es now and again to the bill itself - other as I' m saying, while we support the bill , or I support the bill, but I don't support the governm ent .

Well, of course , I' m democra tic enough to realize and appr eciate

374 0 Jun e 11, 1975 BI LL 44 (MR . PAU LLEY cont 'd) .•.•. the fac t that the honourable me mber does not support this government . But the major ity of the people of Manitoba do1 including, including many municipal people . MR 0 F. JOHNST ON: No, not for this bill . MR . PA UL LEY : Not for this bill . Now my goodness gracio us , Mr . Speaker , of all the poppycock, that utterance of the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Cr eek must be the most poppycockish remark that I' ve heard thi s year . MR . F. JO HNST ON: It 's a rural bill . MR . PAUL LEY : He talks that we haven't got support for this bill .

I say to my honour able friend that when I became a member of this House in 1953, we had a report of the then Li beral Pa rty administrative appointment of a commissi on to look into the matter dealing with municipalities and a re -division of Manitoba or recomme ndations thereof - and one of the most important statements contained in that report of the Royal Co mmiss ion of 1952 was the need for proper planning at the municipal level in the Province of Manito ba .

Fol lowing that , we 've had half a dozen differ ent Royal Co mmis sions or commissi ons looking into the que stion of planning in the Province of Manito ba . It 's not until this governm ent , with this bill , produced a differ ent approach taking into acc ount the needs and desires of all municipaliti es , not rural alone , that we 've had this bill . . . . . . continued on next page

June 11, 1975 374 1 BILL 44 (MR. PAULLEY cont'

d) My honourable friend, the Member for Lakeside, has said that it is the dLity of the op po sition to opp ose. Of course that is historic ally so, but it 's also the duty in my opinion, Mr . Speaker, for the oppos ition to oppose on the basic of some sound principle , and I haven't heard any of that from the members opposite who have taken p3.rt in this debate. They see and hear an oppor tunity to politicalize and to try and condemn this governme nt for prod ctcing som ething constru ctive for the citizens and the mw1icipalities of the Provi nce of Manitoba.

I d)n 't know where the Honourable Member for Lakeside seeks his inf orma tion. I wond er how much real detailed considera tion the member has given to the content of the bill. All throughout the bill, as I read and unders tand the bill, there are provisions for majori ty involvement, even on the Pla nning Board itself, of one repre sentative of government and )ne from each of the munic palities that will be in the di strict to be set up to consider planning. Is not that democr atic ?

Merely because of the fact that there are other clauses in there dealing that when a local council lor is no longer on a local council, he no longer sits on the board; dealing there when certa in circ umstances might occur that by Order -in-Council the board ,�an. be changed ? Is that not democr acy in action ? Are Ne, who happen to be on the Treasury Benches or members of the Ca binet, re sponsible to our electors as we are responsible in thi s House ? I don 't object, Mr.

Speak er, to the Honourable Member for Lakesid2 being le ss than flattering to myself as a member of the Treasury Bench; that is his prer ogati ve, and I do not deny it. But when my honourable friend attacks the government for a bill that he s:�ppor ts, then I almost come to the conclusion that I must attack his mentality.

How can a man in any conscience at all have the gall - as I would .�all it - to say that the only thing wrong with the Act is that it 's being forwarded by this government inst ead )f that bunch over there, who had the oppor tunity for 10 years in office to bring out of an area of chaos the lack of pla nning in the municipalities and across the whole of the Province of Manitoba and d:id little or nothing about it except set up one or two commissi ons that did recommend, p.3.rticularl y insofar as Metro Winnip eg, some asi nine recomme nda tion s.

But that was all right, because they were the government of the day. And it was wro ng for those of us who were in Opposition at that time to tell the governm ent accordingly. Well we did tell the government, Mr. S[Jeaker , of that day accor dingly. And then we went out to the hustings and told :he people of Manitoba accord ingly , and the net re sult was a transfer from one side to the other of the Cons ervative Party, and ·)Ur party came over here. We 're attempting to do something in the area of planning.

I fra nkly will admit that there may be some areas contained within the bill that may be objectionable to some of the munic ipal people, may be objectio'!able in some slight way to th e members of the Opposition. But one of the processes that we have in our democr acy - or that we pride ourselves on, Mr. Speaker - is the oppor tunity of people to be heard. As an ex-municipal person, I can appreciate the fact that after second re,1ding of thifl bill , it will go into the committee stage where the people can be heard. Simply ...

Pard: m ? -- (Interj ection) -- Well, my honourable friend ·;he Member for Portage la Prairie refers to one o' clock in the morning. I d, n 't recall having sat that long, this yea r at least. But I do re call, I do re call, Mr. Spea ker, wh ll e in opposition, this House with the democra ts in power - you know, the democr ats , na mely , the Con servatives - that we sat on bills until 3: 00, 3: 30 in the morning.

And my honourable frie!1d for Portage la Prairie, I'm sure will recall, that even the then Lea d8r of the New Democra tic party found it desira ble and 8.eces sary to don a nightc a:J, but he wasn 't asleep . He was aware of what the government of that day were attempting to do, and they failed ,' they failed miser ably. They failed misera bly in ·�overnment just as they'r e failing misera bly in Opposition.

How in heave!11S name can the former Deputy Leader of the party stand .ip in this House and say, we support the bill - or he supports the bill in general, but beca use this governme nt is intr odu'.)ing something worthw hile, he's going to oppose it: What nonse nse. One of the statements made by my honourable frie nd the Member for Lalrnside, the Act is not all that bad, but it questions the power given to the pre sent government. What 's the alternati ve, Mr. So·=aker , to power being given to a democratica lly elected go7e rnment , other than a fascist type .of government - which I reject !

I d·)n 't kno w if that was what my honourable friend was suggesting that we should have, but cert ainly by inference as contrary to his concept of we being sociali sts , of his concept of the rights and ·)bligations under government, certainly

37 42 June 11, 1975 BILL 44 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd) .. .. . do not jibe with mi ne. My honourable fr iend sai d that the du ty of opposit ion is to oppo se. But som etimes even indi viduals in opposition ar e pla ced in pe culiar situations. Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that hold s true of my honourab le fr iend the Mem ber for Lakesid e . What an awkward po sition for the pr evious Deputy Lead er of the Offici al Op position, to be place d in a pos ition where he agr ees with som ething but he' s in a pe culi ar situation an d he has to get up and in ge neral oppose for the sake of opposing.

Now ma ybe this is the re ason that the honourab le mem ber is no longer the Dep uty Leader of the Oppo sit ion, because he was just trying to lead himself, I thimk, and som e of his coll eag ues up a garden pa th. But the ga rd e n pa th, Mr. Sp.3aker, I wo uld sugg est, I wou ld suggest that the garden pa th contai.ned thistles and hawthorne barb s by the millions. And in the final analysis, what the honourab le memb er stat ed, I think, ind ica tes his lac k of the true con cep t of a demo crac y. A moment ago, Mr.

S9eaker, referenc e was ma de to sp eed -up and the quest ion of late si ttings by my hono urable fr iend , the Member for Portage la Prair ie. I wo nder if he re ca lls that on Friday, the 24 th of May in 1938 at 9: 30 a. m. in the morn ing, after the comm ittee had me t w1til about 3 or 4 o' cl ock in the morn ing, the then Attorney-General, the Honourabl e Sterli ng Lyon, repor ting fr om the Stand ing Comm ittee on Law Amendmen ts, named out 37 bills. At 9: 30 - were repor ted from the comm ittee at 9: 30 in the morn ing. after we had sa t un til ab out 3 o' clock that sam e mor ning. Is this dem ocrac y?

Is this what my honoura ble memb er is sugg est ing, my frien d from Portage? I'm su re that he' s no t. And here aga in, Mr. Speake r - wh ile my honour able friend oppo site was bellow ing, I never int erjected on ce. I never interjec ted whil e the Honoura ble Member for La'rn:3id e was sp ea king . -- (lnter jection) - Yo u are sorry . Yo u should be , because your interjec tions ar e indicative of the irre sp onsible at titude of the Oppos ition to constr uctive leg isla tion. --(Interjection) -- Yes , it ma y be slaps on the wrist s, Mr. Speaker .

Maybe the slap could be direct ed elsewhe r e and a li ttle more firmly, in orde r to educat e my honourab le fri end in the true demo cratic pr ocesses, ra ther than the inclina tion of my honoura ble friend, which appe ar e d to be more fascist in nature than we ar e used to her e in this Assem bly. As we re ad the bill, Mr.

Spea ker, the Plan ning Bill, I mad e refer ence to a comm iss io:i., I beli eve, that was head ed by the former, the late Deputy Minist er of Municipal Affairs, Murray Fisher - heade d th is comm issi on, wh ich was mad e up of repr esent a tives of the then Campb ell adm inistra tion and repr esent at ives of the Union of Ma nitoba Muni cipal ities to con sider all as pe cts de alin g with mu nicipal affair s, incl ud ing the important ma tter of plann ing wi thin mun icipalit ies, the sam e as this Act dv es. What happened ? No thing of any con crete nature.

There were suggestions of re orga nization on a di strict basis of many of the muni cipal ities in the Province of Manit oba unde r a Liberal Go·1ernment at tha t par ticular time. That takes us ba ck to 195 3. Now 1975, the first concr ete sugges tions ma de on a de mo cratic basis of chan gi ng th3 Plan ning Act of the pr ovince, wh ich will be done, and it will be d)ne in con sul ta tion with muni cipal pe opl e. And then foll owing that, we had anot her lo ok, as I indi cated a moment or two ago, of the change of the make-u p in Metropolitan Winnipeg, government planni ng there was also very impo r tant.

Who heade d that comm ission? A former Minist e:r o� the Crown, Bob Srnelli e, a Minister of the Conser va tive Cro wn. Now if you don't ca ll that po li tical izing comm iss ions and app ointm en ts, by Ji mi ny Christma s, I suppose tha t I' ve been in here all these year s with my eyes shut. And so it goes on and )n and on. I say to my honou r able fr iend and my honourable friend s oppo site, go ver nmen t has its re sp onsibilities and its d<.l ties and its obliga tions. One of them as containe d within the provi sions of this Act, Mr.

Speake r , I suggest is to bring a li ttle orde r out of chaos insofar as pl ann ing wit hin muni cipa lit ies is concer ned. When I was Mayor of my li ttle communi ty of Trans cona, that was one of the pr oblems we had at that time. There was no uniform ity. There was no re al co-opera tion be tween the mu nic ipalit ies wi thin the pr ovin ce. This bill gives an oppo r tunity for the es tabl ishing of &s tricts with democ rat ic repr esentatives of the elec ted pe opl e to ge t together to plan for the pr ese nt, and also to make pr ovis ions for the futur e .

Sure, som e of my fr iends oppo site, as I say, may ha ve som e objections to this content. I haven' t heard any of my lo cal counci ll ors com e d•J N!l to see me to object either to the pr incipl e of plann ing or to the conce p t of this bill. I say that if we 're go ing to be de mocrat ic, let us allow the peo pl e to be heard through this bill going to second read ing. Let the Cons ervatives oppose pr ogr ess. They'v e been do ing it his torica lly ever since there was a Conse rva tive Party in the Province of Manitoba. And the

June 11, 1975 3743 BILL 44 (M R. PAULLEY cont'd) .... Ho llourable Member for Lakeside with his introdu.ction of garbage, I think gives an indica tion of what I am saying is so correct, because we 've been so used to gar)::>age from that side of the House since 1969 that it 's become the 01:·d·er of the d'l y for the Cons ervative Pa rty in Manitob a. They 'll oppose anything that is constructi ve, without offering anything constructive to take the place.

I've yet to hear on this lo ng debate that has taken place on this bill, I've yet to hear one constructive propos ition from the Co:is ervative Opposi tion . -- (Interj ection) -- You'r e going to give it to us. Right. My honourable fri e!1d [rom Portage la Prairie says he's going to talk constructively, Mr. Spea ker , and I welc. '.lme that, beca use in all of the debates that I've heard so far from members of the Co :i serva tive Party, it 's been destructive, but we support the contents of the bill. What a po siti on for a once re sponsible pa rty in Manitoba to take.

And I say once, not only advised ly , b:it because it's so so true. The Honourable Member for Lakeside referred to our White Paper on the Guid elin es of the Seventies as a government docume!1t. Well, Mr. S9eak er , even in my archives today , I have gathering dust many guidelines for the fu ture that came out of the pens of the suppor ters or the resea rch people of the Conse rvative Party. Grea t plans for the development of Manitob a.

Books this high, of recommenda tions mad·e to the Co nservative Party when they wer e in power and it was wi ndow d:.-ess ing then, just as I suggest that what we heard from the Member from Lakeside was windo w dres sing today. The diffe� ·ence being howe ver, Mr. Spea ker, we are attempting to d•J something constructive about it. There are provisions in this Act, I suggest, for full consultation with the municipali ties. And the re's something else in this Act that I note.

That the Act itself will only come into effect on procla mation , in order to give time for the municipalities and for those who are going to be concerned .vith the res earch into the operation. to give them time and an oppor tunity to set their houses in order, so that order may be the factor rather than the type of guff that we've pr e7iousl y obtained from the Conserva tive govern ment. I say to my honourable friends opposite - sure, we're not perfect in our legislation, there 's no question or doubt about it. Th:i.t ' s why bills are intro duced.

That's why they go into committee for considera tion, and to hear people. Not until three or four o' clock in the morning - it might happen yet, we don't know when we're going to get into here, but it hasn 't happe ned. The latest hour I ever sat, howe ver , I must confe ss, was when we were go·1e rn ment and we sat until 7 o' clock in the morning before the Ho ,.ise was dis solved prior to the last election. I remember that well. I didn't have my nightca p with me or else I'd have put it on, even though I was a member of government. The fact of the matter though, Mr.

Speak er , is that here we have a bill that gives to the municipalities - it gives to the people of Ma'litoba an opportunity of putting house in order. And ';here we have a government - or at least a party who at one time was the government , who says we like the bi ll - or their former de puty leader says, we like the bill, we like every thing about it; or, pra ctica lly spea king, everything about it, but we don't like the fact that you of the New Democra tic Part y government are introd .icing the same in this As sembly. They had their chanc e, they failed .

The electorate of Ma".litoba had their chance, and they put this go7ernment in the seat of government - and we are attempting to be constru:!ti ve, and not dest ructi ve. And no mu".licipa lity , I am convi nced, Mr. Spea ker , will suffer as a re sult of the application of the contents of Bill 44. So I sugge st to my hono:irable friend from Lakeside that he takes a look at the bill, stops wi nd•)W dres sing, takes a look at the provisions in the bill - an.d he will find, as I find when I look into the co".lt ents , demo·�racy in actio".l, not fascism. MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie.

MR . GORDON JOHNST ON : Well, Mr. Speaker, I rea lly had;1 't intended to spea '< 0'.1 this bill until I rec eived some communica tio:i from some administra tors wh-:i would be concerned with trying to make the legisla tion work. So I bega n to take an interest, and I listened with inter est, particularly today to the speech from the Memb er for Lakeside and 1;hen the speech from the Honourable Minister of Labour.

And while we have spe lled ·:rnt the fascist and the socialist posit ion on the bill, I d-:in 't know, I still did� 1 't get that mu.�h as to how either one of them expected to have the bill work in the manner in which, I suppo se, the dra fters hop•3 it will work. But let me say at the outset, Mr. Spea ker , that this bill, I g0i ess, is o:ie of the more important ones of the sessi on, a!l d it 's very surprisi ng that the Mi nister who introdU'.:ed

3744 June 11, 1975 BILL 44 (MR. G. JOHNSTON cont 'd) ..... the bill could n 't arrange his busines s, that he should be here to hear the comments ... --(I nterj ection) -- Well, yes we did. -- (Interje ction) -- No , I di dn't, this is my first opportunity. But I suggest to you that a bill of this importa nce, the Minister should be in attendance all the way through, to take note of what is said, so that he can give the answers when he cl oses debate. Well , I know I'm angering the House Leader, but that's fine with me.

I'm stating what I think, that it is an. impor tant bill and the Minister should 7Je in his se at to guid2 it through the House. The Hans ard is a week late. He's not going to 'mow what was said by members on this side, or even on the opposite side. MR. GR EEN: Mr. Spea lzer, on a matter of privilege. MR. SPEAKE R: The Honourable Minister state his matter of privilege. MR. GR EEN : la m now going to require honourable members to spea k when the Mi nister is in his chair, and not permit adjournments. This bill was adj ourned [or 20 days, and the Minister was here.

Now you just see ... that 's what 's going to happen. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. GORDON JOHNSTON : Well, I think the Minister of Labour wouldn 't exactl y app re ciate that comm ent. That's not socialism, that's dictatorship. MR. GR EEN: No. MR. GOR DON JOHNST ON : It is. But I say, Mr. Speaker, in addressi ng myself to the bill, that for many years now I'm sure governments of different political stripes in this Hom.e have really been concerned about dJing som ething about the s!n aller local governments in the provi nce.

In spe aking to the Member for Sou ris-La nsd•J wne, he tells me that his municip ality is, I believe he said four townsh ip s. MR . McK ELLAR : No, six. MR . GORDON JOHN STON : Six townships. So that 's an average of about a little over 200 square miles. Well, with the modern communica tions we have now - better hi ghwa ys, better communica tions and so on - the small munici palities are not serving the purpo se that they c:· ce did, keeping local governme nt cl ose to the people and so on.

So I'm suggesting- that if it can be shown that it is mor e advantageous to the taxpay ers an a dollars and cents ba sis to go into some form of regional government, then government has the responsi bility to look at it , to prepare a plan, take it out to the people affect ed, let them examine it, and then let them have some sort of a refere nd -.im to see if this is better and would they like it. This bill, Mr. Spea ker - I think it was mentioned by the Member for Fort Ro'J.ge - is a planners bill, it 's not a people 's bill at all.

It's been developed 'Jy plann ers, it 's being pushed down, and it will affect the lives of people if it 's implemEnted in its prese nt form. And I'm sure that many of the councillor s who have had general discussions with members of the govern ment about the proposals. will be quite concerned when they see how they 're going to have to work to implement the bill. And I'm talking about the co-opera tion betwee::J. the Planning Board and the municipaliti es. I thir.k that they will find that there's going to be a great deal of dif ficulti es.

There'll be found, if the bill goe s through in its present form, there 's going to be a clash between di fferent acts of this government. And I would like to point out som e of the areas where there is concern by people who will be re quir ed to work with this legis lation. We note in the bill that the Minister may make grants to any organiz atiocis engaged .in or constituted for the purpo se of ca rrying out programs of participa tion and ;:ilanning. The Ministe1 in his expla nation of the Act has stated that grants will be available to municipalities who adopt pla nning schemes under the :Jew bill.

The concern seen at the prese nt time, of any form of a grant on an ongoing basis by the provi ncial government to institute municipal programs 1 has the end res ult of escala ting the municipal portion over the years , while the provin cial govern ment grants rema ins rea sonably static. We've seen a number of these progra ms, prim arily in :Jducation, where the grant system has fallen well behind the esca lating costs of the program, with the resu lt that the cost to the mu:1icipality has esca lated far beyond that share of the provincial government.

Is it the intention of the provincial government to assist the municipalities in their at tempts at pla nni ng ? And if so, it app ears that this is the intention of the g•Jvernment. Any system of grants should be la id out in writing, so that it can be referred to in the futur e, and the intentions of the provincial government be laid before the municipalities af fected. The problems of the education type can be looked at, and with an overview what was intended by the government in the first place. Now the criteria for obtaining these grants should also be

June 11, 1975 3745 BILL 44 (MR. GORDON JOHNST ON cont'd) ..... either as a percentage figure or a d·Jllar figure, a:id how it re lates to the size and scop3 of both the planning sch3mes - the number of municipalities involved , and the size, the population and the assessme nt of the municipalities C0".13erned. It must be borne in mind :;hat in the Minned osa area. four municipalities co•Jld constitute a plan ning di strict. It would be smalhr in size, population and asses sment than, say, the R. M. of Portage, or the City of Portage or the City of Brand,on.

The methods of fund"ing the planning di stricts also give cause for concern. There appears to ':le various sections as to how the planning di stricts will be i'nanced , of which S•3ctio".l 15, sub-se ction 1, is one.

And it states that the Ord·er-in-Council will prescribe the proportion in which the fu"ld s are to be contributed to the dist ricts by the mu·1icipalities and by the govern ment to meet the expenses of the di strict board - shall be shared by the municipalities on the basis of equalized asses sments, subject to financial assis tance rec eived :rom the provincial government on the Minister 's terms, or however the Minister may determin e. We see no place in the Act where the planning district has authority to levy moneys against a municipality. And this may be a technical error, I don 't know.

And that,in fact, it is the intention of the government that the planning di stricts be given authority to levy on a municipality. However, if this is so, there appears to be no limitations on the levying on the municipality for the purposes of the planning distri ct's board. And we can make several points here. The Act provides for the employment of some staff and probably for the payment of other expenses of the planning di strict. And while the method of sharing the expense s laid <0ut in the Act, the Minister may prescribe the portions in which the funds could be contributed under

Section 15. The authority to levy and :he limitations are open to question. If there is authority in Bill 44 for levying on municipalities , it shnld be most clear as to whether there is a limitation to this levying in the same fashion as other bills. For example, the Watersheds Act and the Mw1b�pal Act. If a maximum is prescribed :in the regulations or the Act as to the limit, it should be most clear whether the Minister has the authority whether to exceed the amounts laid out in either the Act or the regulations.

This statement is made in light of the fact that the Municipal Act limits municipalities to 35 mills - in effect, this has become redundant im; smuch as the Minister authorizes all expenditures, whether they're over the limi tation or otherwise. Another 11oint. With respect to capital expenditures and the method of raising moneys to accommodate them,

Section 23 gives some cause for concern. The general powm·s of the board allow it to acquJre prop·:irty as it considers advisable, keeping in mind

Section 35, that the acquisition may be by gift, purchase or expropriation; and may be sold , leased :ir other wise disposed of when no longer required. Now, another

section auth::>rizes expenditure •)f the funds for a'.'ly of the purposes of the board. And ·:hese powers raise the question as to whether a planning district can o':iligate a municipality or a group of municipalities in the planning di strict for the capital expenditures beyond the ability of the dis trict, or the municipality1to handle. Or , alternatively, whether land holdings could be purchased and a•Jq•.iired in one municipality and paid [or by the gro'.lp.

If it is not p:lid ·Jy the group of mu'1icip:ilities , it necess arily follows that the debt will then belong to the specific municipality in which the proper ty is acquired. And this in fact would give an addltional, non-municipal b:mrd the authority to create a debt on a municip:ility by a body apart from the elected coun3i.l. This could further be aggravated by the fact that one member of the board Df the planning d:�strict shall be a person employed by the government.

And this perso'.'l could be a voting member with no responsibili ty to the municipality. 7he po.vers given to the Planning District Board are sufficiently broad that they come into dire ct conflict with the powers given to the councils , and .vith no revis ion in the Municipal Act to take the powers away.

Amo'.lg the authoritiea are the establishment - and this is of a di strict planning bo:ucl - among the authorities are the establishment of transporta tio'1 syst ems, utility system s, re creational facilities, which could include arenas and recr eational complexes, and ·:i'.lilding and maintaining of housing systems; the administ ratio'1 and ·;he enforcement of zoning by-laws and b'.lilding by-laws, where the board is re sponsible for the adminis tration and the enforcement of a building by-la w p:issed by a cou1cil. And this is in direct conflict with the way things are done no.v in the mu,'1icipalities.

So, all I'm saying, Mr . Sp8 a1rnr, is that the planners haven 't taken into account the clash Jf authorities :.rnder the Mu'1icipal Act and under this Act. And it's going to make it extr emely difficult to work. And I said ::iefore,

3746 June 11, 1975 BILL 44 (MR. GORDON JOHNST ON cont'r ) ..... if the government has the idea that they would like to bring about some form of regiona l government, then I think it should be done with some consultation, with a view to holding a vote sometime or somed 1 y after it has been discussed, on the forming of larger regional units in the Province of Manitoba.

Beca use this inter twining of two bodies dealing with one level of government, in my opinion, just won 't work - and it will cause a lot of confusion, a lot of delay, and eventually the government will have to fac e up to the fact that they can't use two la ws and two bodies to goveril and work with one group of people. MR. SP EA KER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRA IK : Mr. Spea �rnr, I wanted to say just a few words on this bill. I haven 't spoken on it up to this point, but I've been . . . MR. GR EEN: Mr.

Spea ker, does the honourable member wish to d·J it now or does he wish to call it 12 :30 .' If you'r e only going to be a few minutes ... MR . CRA IK: I'll only be a few minu tes, Mr. S9 'a'rnr. I don 't wish to hold .i.p the vote on it. I think we should dea l with the thing now; most of the topics have been covered. But first of all , I want to say that it 's difficult to vote again st a pla nning bill, particularly since, in principle, we recognize the need for it.

Pnd p'lrticularly for some of us who have been in volve d, and saw that ori ginally the Cons ervatiue Part y brought in the principle of metrop ol itan government, mainly to bring about pla nning in the urbax1 area of Winnipeg - arid the Metro polita n government, after it was establ ished, mad·� that its pri nci pal thrust.

And apart from the conflict that existed :in the perso nalities between the Ci ty of Winnipeg and Metro, the municipalities welcom2d the planning capability that Metro brought - and the school boards welcom·Jd the pla'1ning that was brought about by Metro BJ that they co•J.l d do their future pro je ctions - a'1d by and large, people lived ".Jy it. And the extension of a planning capa bility to the rural areas 01: Mani toba is desi rable as well. Tu a certain extent, that alre ady exists. You have a number of mu:1icipaliti es that are alrea dy working together with the planning authority.

But the problem is that the Planning Act bef ore us is, as it 's been stated _. is a plan ners ' bill and ;10t a P·cople 's bill - and the nature of municipal government in the rural areas of Manitoba is quite dif fere nt than it is in the urban area.

And the Boundaries Commis sio'1 which add resse d Fse lf principa lly v, - as referred to by the Minister of Mines and Natural Resource' 3 - dedicated and directed itself more to ra tionalizing the boandiries from the p·:>int of view of regional educational structures. -- (Interj ection) -- Well , their principal work was in the area of de signing boundaries to suit changes in the edcicational structure -and in the development of regio nal voc ational schools came into it as well, but their main thrust was princip ally in the field Jf ed1.\Cation.

And the things that had to be d·"alt with there are dif ferent than th'.:>se in municipal government. The probl ems dealt with in ed.i.cation were the p·rnblems of exposing, being able to expose the stude:it population to suffi cient latitude of teaching capi bility, and there was a driving force to see that then that the regional system came in. But under municip;i.l government, there is a difference. You know, the rationaliz ation there applied are economies of scale for equipment and perso nnel and so on, but they 're entir el y dif ferent than the forces that brought about regiona liza tion for education.

And I don 't think that there 's nearly as much justification for regionaliz ation of mu..nicipalities as there was for ed· .i.�a tion. In fact, I think that you'll find that if you take the time to study - I know the pla nners love it - but soon as you start develop ing a larger geogra phical structure, you take away the input of the elected people, and there's no way that you don 't.

You can la y out these things from the point of view of theory, but I've had to work with bodies in other provi nces, and I can tell you that when you get a group of pla nners together , they 'll manipulate a group of elected people all the way to the railroad station -beca use the elected people come dow1, they 'l l sit do1¥n and they'l l decide cer tain things and they'l l present cer tain point'3 of view, but they go back home the next diy and they <fon 't come back for a month or two wee !<s, and in between .the p·eople that are there full time take over.

I thin� you have to build in sa feguards to make sure that you have checks and bala nces, a'ld those aren't in that bill. The checks and bala nces are the most impor tant thin g. You have to retain that to make sure that your planning and your people represe ntation re main in eq'J.al sort of a position. Now when you make it bigger, when you make your regions bigger and you

June 11, 1975 3747 BILL 44 (MR. CRAIK cont'd) .... d•) away with yo'.lr sma llee co·.rncils, that's one step ';o.vards losing some of that input on the people's side. But when you also .vrite a bill that gives you a pyramid structure of power from the Minister d•Jwn through, that's the second ste1J. And you add the two together , and then yo'.l'vc got a problem of it being too rich on the one side of the equation, and that's whit we find is the difficulty with the bill. It's not balaciced. So it's b.:i.d enough in that resp ect, that with some difficulty, we c;m 't s11pp:irt it.

And it's no!: beca•.ise we d:in 't want placining; we think that planning is necessary and that to a :::ertain extent planning is working already in the province. Bu� we think the bill , as has be en stated here, is a planners ' bill and 10t a people's bill - and that a good d2al of inpuL, more th.:m what has bec•n done so far , is required ·oefore this sho'.lld get put into �aw. Mr. S9eaker, I thin'--:. there is a couple more comments , so I will yield to the floor. MR. SPEAKER: The haur being 12 :30, the Ho·.Ise is now adjo• .irned a'.ld s';ands adiouriled 1111til 2:3 0 this afteri1.'.lJn.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	30-2-121
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	30th 2nd hansardpdf 121.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	fedbacc78928807b0f565d9eafb219d3860150d2

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