LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Wednesday, June 17, 1992
The
House met at 10 a.m.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent Sections)
CULTURE, HERITAGE AND CITIZENSHIP
* (1030)
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Jack Penner): Good morning. Will the
Committee of Supply please come to order.
The
committee will be resuming consideration of the Estimates of the Department of
Culture, Heritage and Citizenship. When
the committee last sat, it had been considering item 4. Citizenship (a)
Immigration Policy and Planning: (1)
Salaries, $367,800.
Ms.
Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): It is timely that we have
these Estimates just as the federal government has brought in this new bill,
which I understand is a very lengthy bill, and I am quite concerned that it is
being brought in, I think it is about a week before the federal government
wants to close down their session. I am wondering if the minister would share
my concern about that, and if she has any other information about the situation
where this bill is seeming to be rammed through the Parliament.
Hon.
Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Officials at the officials' level have met and
discussed some of the intent of the legislation, federal‑provincial, but
in fact at the ministerial level we have never been consulted by the federal
government. I have not had any
consultation with the federal minister at all on the legislation. It is just what officials have heard through
their dialogue. I would suspect that
there are a lot of unanswered questions as a result of the legislation being
introduced. I would have difficulty
believing that it would pass through Parliament within a week.
Ms.
Cerilli: The minister is saying that she does not
believe that it is going to pass, and I am surprised to hear that she has not
been consulted. Would she be requesting
that that consultation take place?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: As a result of officials knowing that this legislation
was going to be introduced, I have requested a consultative process with the
federal minister. I believe it is important
that we have that dialogue at the ministerial level before I can give full
support to a piece of federal legislation.
Ms.
Cerilli: How long did the officials in the department
know that this legislation was coming in?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed by officials that discussion at the
officials level was‑‑this sounds a little convoluted‑‑discussion
at that level was not official discussion, and it was not in advance of the
legislation being drafted. So it was
drafted by the federal government without consultation at the officials
level. Any of the discussion around the legislation
has been informal.
* (1035)
Ms.
Cerilli: Have the two levels of government not been in
contact around the agreement that is going to be drafted? It just seems ridiculous to me that this
legislation has come in at the last minute without full consultation, at least
at the levels at the department. There
has been concern expressed that the kind of consultation that is going on in
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I do share those concerns, as a matter of fact. I think it was over a year ago that at First
Ministers' meeting across the country, there was a communique that was issued
that indicated that we should be‑‑and we have never had any formal
federal‑provincial ministers' meeting responsible for Citizenship or
Immigration, Multiculturalism.
The
First Ministers, in their communique, did indicate that it would be a very
positive step to have dialogue and consultation with other provinces and with
the federal government. To date, that
has not happened. I have written to the
federal minister also and expressed my desire to have that kind of national
forum to discuss issues surrounding immigration and citizenship, but we have
not had a response that would indicate that anything positive might happen in
the near future.
So
those are concerns, and I think it is a concern that has been expressed by all
the Premiers across the country.
Ms.
Cerilli: What kind of meetings have been taking place between
the federal government and the province with respect to agreements on
immigration services and programs‑‑and to have this kind of
legislation come in without us knowing it.
Point of Order
Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): On
a point of order, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, this committee is sitting with
the unanimous consent of the House. I am
here to inform you that consent has been withdrawn, so the committee cannot sit
any longer, I believe.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I am sorry, I am not clear
on what the member said. Would you
repeat what you said, please?
Mr.
Alcock: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am
sorry. I will make it a little clearer.
I
just was informed that the committee was sitting, and I understood that had
been clarified.
Yesterday,
when the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) indicated that there would be a
committee sitting this morning, he said it was on the condition that there was
unanimous consent of the committees to sit, and there is not‑‑
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I am afraid the member
does not have a point of order.
The
consensus yesterday, in the House, when the decision was made, clearly
indicated that the committees would sit last night and would again sit this
morning.
Mr.
Alcock: Indeed, that is true. But if one reviews the statement that the
Finance minister put on the record and we clarified it in the House, it was
that it would only sit as long as there was unanimous consent of the members of
the committee to sit.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I am not going to get
into a debate with the member for Osborne, but there was unanimous consent in
the House yesterday when the decision was made.
So the ruling stands. This
committee will continue sitting.
Mr.
Alcock: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I would
ask you to reconsider that, and I will have to challenge your ruling, if that
is indeed the‑‑
* (1040)
Ms.
Cerilli: The member for Osborne was not here last
night at eleven o'clock. We were meeting
up until eleven o'clock last night, as was agreed in the House yesterday, and
the agreement was to recess until 10:30.
The member for
I
would hate to think that the member for Osborne is interrupting this committee
to meet his own political needs.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Thank you very much. The committee will continue sitting and will
continue to hear representation from both parties.
Mr.
Alcock: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I believe I
have challenged that ruling.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Would it be advisable
before I hear the challenge to recess for five minutes and to get some
clarification from the House leaders as to what their discussion was this
morning? I understand that there were meetings
this morning, and I would like to have some information from the House leaders
on that information.
Mr.
Alcock: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think that
would be an excellent resolution to this situation. I would just suggest that we recess until the
call of the Chair to give you an opportunity to speak to the House leaders.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Is that the will of the
committee, that we will recess till the call of the Chair?
Ms.
Cerilli: I would just say that we cannot make any
decision about what is going to happen to this committee until I consult with
my House leader. I do not think we
should call it an official recess unless‑‑the Chair is
yourself? I just do not want us to see
that this committee is interrupted.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I would ask the indulgence
of the committee that we recess for a period of five minutes, that I can
consult with our House leader to see what the consensus was of this morning's
meetings. If that is the will of the
committee, I would ask for that five‑minute recess.
An
Honourable Member: Agreed.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Agreed. Thank you.
* * *
The
committee took recess at 10:44 a.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 10:49 a.m.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Will the committee please
come to order.
Item
4. Citizenship (a) Immigration Policy and Planning: (1) Salaries $367,800.
Ms.
Cerilli: We were trying to get some clarification about
the negotiations that have been ongoing between the province and the federal
government regarding an immigration agreement and how those negotiations could
have missed out on including the current changes that have come before
Parliament, changes to immigration. So I
would like some clarification on that.
What has been going on with these negotiations?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, as I indicated
last evening, the process for negotiation of an immigration agreement started
when my department took over responsibility for Citizenship, over a year
ago. At that point in time,
* (1050)
We
determined that it was in Manitobans' best interests for us to have a bilateral
agreement. Of course, one of the reasons
is that the numbers of immigrants who have been coming to
We
started discussions. They were going
along fairly smoothly at the officials' level on trying to establish that agreement. It has been put into a bit of a hiatus
through the constitutional talks, and I do not know whether the member for Radisson
has had an opportunity to peruse the rolling draft on the immigration side of
things, but indeed there has been fair progress.
No
agreement as yet, and there is no agreement in any area, but if I might just
read from the rolling draft: It has been
proposed that a new provision should be added to the Constitution committing
the Government of Canada to negotiate agreements with the provinces, relating
to immigration. The Constitution should specify
that such agreements have the force of law and can only be altered by
resolutions of Parliament and the Legislature concerning or by using an
amendment procedure set out in the agreement itself. The Constitution should oblige the federal government
to negotiate and conclude within a reasonable time an immigration agreement at
the request of any province. A province negotiating
an agreement should be accorded equality of treatment in relation to any other
province which has already concluded an agreement, taking into account the
different needs and circumstances of the province.
That
is where it is at at the constitutional talks.
As I indicated, there has not been agreement specifically on anything, but
this certainly would be one area that we would be extremely supportive. We want an immigration agreement, a bilateral
agreement. We want to be able to have
some control over immigrants coming to our province and expediting that
process.
Ms.
Cerilli: We are mixing a lot of issues together here. The minister raises the issue then that her
government is in support of devolution of immigration to the provinces
completely to have immigration the responsibility of the province.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: No, we do not want complete devolution. We want an agreement with the federal
government where we will have a guarantee that we will receive our fair share
of immigrants that come to
Ms.
Cerilli: Up until the time that the Constitution is
agreed to, we cannot expect to see any other movement on this issue between the
federal government and the province?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I do not believe that we will have an
agreement with the federal government before the constitutional talks are completed. I would be quite surprised. As I indicated, we have been for a little
over a year now in active negotiations with the federal government. There are other provinces that have been negotiating
for much longer periods of time and do not have agreements.
It
is a process that has to be followed, and I would not expect that tomorrow we
would have an agreement. I think with the
new legislation that has been introduced, the federal government has indicated
some willingness to move on agreements more expeditiously, but I could not be
guaranteed. I do not think anyone can
indicate at this point in time whether, before the constitutional talks are
completed, the federal government will go ahead. They are not moving nearly as quickly as provinces
would like to see.
* (1055)
Ms.
Cerilli: I wonder if we could get some more detail
about what issues there had been progress on, more details about what progress
had been made with the federal government in relation to the agreement.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, as a result of
the constitutional talks, it seems that the federal government is looking more
proactively at immigration agreements.
But one of the things that has been discussed and agreed to is language training,
ESL language training. Through the
Canada‑Manitoba Labour Force Agreement, I think we have a process that
through consultation with the community‑‑and we have the community completely
involved. We have had a consultation
process with federal officials, provincial officials and the community to develop
a made‑in‑Manitoba ESL language training agreement that we hope to
have completed by the end of December of this year.
Ms.
Cerilli: With respect to language training in the
agreements that were made, would the federal government still have authority to
designate where money for language training would go under such an agreement?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that is one of
the things that is under discussion in the negotiations, as we try to work
through the process with the federal government and the community that will be
affected and involved.
Ms.
Cerilli: Is the minister concerned or has she tried to
deal with this issue of the provinces being at different stages with these
agreements, especially when we see the kind of legislation that the federal
government is proposing? Can we not have
a situation where all the provinces will have agreements developed simultaneously,
so that we are not going to be in a situation for however many years, similar
to what we are in now, but it could be worse if other provinces have agreements
and
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I believe that many provinces have been
working for three or five years trying to develop a bilateral agreement. They
are not any further ahead in the process than we are today, and we have only
been involved for the last year, year and a half.
We
have been pushing as provinces to try to have that kind of accommodation. The federal government has not been terribly responsive
to this date. As I said with the
constitutional talks and some sense that the federal government might be
wanting to move more aggressively, I would like to think that we could, all provinces
at the same time, be a part of bilateral agreements and that we would not be
any further behind anyone else.
Ms.
Cerilli: Does that seem to be a reasonable position
that should be put forward with the constitutional talks on the section dealing
with immigration, that we do not want to have a situation in the country where
some provinces are going to have agreements and others are not? Would she pass that on to the members of her
cabinet who are dealing with the Constitution, to consider that as being an
amendment or to include that as part of the section dealing with immigration?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we have been talking
to other provinces. There seems to be a
sense, in some instances‑‑I know
One
of the comments that I will re‑read into the record is‑‑and I
will preface this comment by saying that there is not an agreement yet‑‑that
a province negotiating an agreement should be accorded equality of treatment in
relation to any other province which has already concluded an agreement, taking
into account the different needs and circumstances of the province.
* (1100)
I
do not know whether you would see agreements signed with each province on the
same day, but I think that, as we move toward those agreements, we believe that
all provinces should be treated fairly and equitably.
Ms.
Cerilli: I want to move over again to the federal government's
bill that is being introduced, and I would like to ask the minister to explain
the comments that she made as covered in the newspaper today. We know that sometimes the paper can be selective
in what they include and what they exclude.
So I wonder if there is anything that she would like to add to the support
that she has given to the bill.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, yes, of course
the comments that are in the paper are comments that are not fully
explained. As I indicated yesterday, we
believe that at first glance looking at the legislation that in fact there are some
good things that will come out of the new piece of legislation, mainly that we
will be able to move forward a little more quickly and effectively on an
immigration agreement that does give
I
also indicated there was one area where we did have concern and that was in the
different streams of immigrants coming, that the first stream included
immigrant investors, and business and entrepreneurial immigrants were in the
third stream. My concern with that was,
does that mean that because you have money that you can buy your way into
There
will be other issues that will come forward, and I will be seeking
clarification from the federal government on all the issues that we do have
concern with.
So
that was a comment that I did make yesterday.
I think overall there are some positive things in the legislation that might
lead us more quickly to developing an agreement and moving in the direction we
want to see taken.
Ms. Cerilli: I
am encouraged by the minister's last statements, and I am wondering if that is
the government's policy then that there will be some equality between the
ability for tradespeople and professionals to gain access equal to the ability
of independent investors. Is that the
government's policy that there would be equality of accessibility between those
two classes?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think what
has happened in the Citizenship Division over the last year or so with the
report of the working group on immigrant credentials and our desire to ensure,
or try to anyway, move forward and ensure that those immigrants who are coming
to
Ms.
Cerilli: I appreciate the program initiative that is
going on in the division with regard to accreditation, but the issue I am
raising is if there will be equality of access between professional trades'
categories of immigrants, as well as those in the investor stream. That is the question I am asking.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: That was the issue that I raised yesterday in
my comments about the federal legislation.
I have some real concerns, and I would like an explanation from the
federal government on indeed what is exactly going to happen through the process
and through the streams that they have set up in legislation. Those are questions that we will be seeking clarification
on from the federal government, because it is a concern that I have raised as
an issue.
Ms.
Cerilli: Well, concerns and policy are quite
different. This is an issue that is quite important and the minister has alluded
to it. The question I am asking is: Is it the government policy and would that be
included in an agreement so that it would be policy in
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, we do believe in equality of
access. That would be a government
policy. But I will tell you that, if
there is a federal law that does not allow for that equality of access, we can
have that kind of a policy here in the province of
Ms.
Cerilli: That brings in even more concern about some
of the contents of this bill being brought in before the constitutional agreement,
before the agreement is made by the federal government and the province.
When
the minister was making comments earlier, she suggested, I think, that this
bill would help in creating agreements.
Could she expand on that? How
would this bill help in developing agreements between the province and the
federal government?
(Mr.
Bob Rose, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: The intent, I guess, of the legislation is to
streamline the process. As they define
the streamlining of the process, that, in fact, will make it easier for
provinces to negotiate based on that streamlined process. We believe, if that kind of process is in
place, it will be easier in fact to get an agreement.
Ms.
Cerilli: Could I ask the minister to just explain that
again for me, please?
* (1110)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: What is included in the legislation is that there
will be a streamlined process whereby there will be different streams, and
there will be‑‑Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am just going to
get from officials the three different streams to read into the record so that
we are all clear on what the intent of the legislation is.
The
three streams that are proposed through the legislation are: Stream 1 would be processed on demand and
without limit and would consist of redefined family classes, spouses, finances
and dependent children, asylum seekers who are found to be refugees by the
immigration refugee appeal board, asylum seekers who are landed in
There
are no limits on the numbers in Stream 1 who can come into the province, or
into the country.
Ms.
Cerilli: Never mind getting more clear. I am getting more confused. What is Stream 1?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Stream 1 is family class immigrants and those
who are coming to
Ms.
Cerilli: What are the other streams?
(Mr.
Jack Penner, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Stream 2 are government‑assisted and
privately sponsored refugees, parents and grandparents, special humanitarian
admissions, arranged employment, foreign domestics and self‑employed
applicant refugees. They would be
processed on a first‑come, first‑serve basis, subject to limits
that are set out in an annual plan.
Ms.
Cerilli: Are there other classifications?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Stream 3 is independent immigrants, designated
occupations, siblings and nondependent children and entrepreneurs.
Ms.
Cerilli: There seems to be a lot of overlap in these different
categories, the similarity between entrepreneurs and self‑employed and
investors. It seems that there is access
in all three categories.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Okay, for clarification, immigrant investors are
the ones who have money and invest money.
Self‑employed applicants might be someone with credentials, a
plumber, for example. Entrepreneurs are
people who come wanting to set up a business, but they would not have the money
available or the resources available that an immigrant investor would have, so they
are three different types of immigrants.
Ms.
Cerilli: Given those categories, can the minister
clarify which ones would be subject to the fingerprinting and the designated
residency?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, those who would
be subject to fingerprinting would be those refugee claimants who arrived
without papers. If I could just add to
that, in 1991 about 6,500 people arrived in
Ms.
Cerilli: So those who are without papers only.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, and those are those without complete documents.
Ms.
Cerilli: So all the other categories, including the government‑sponsored
refugees, would not be subject to that procedure.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: That is absolutely correct. It should, in fact, make the process for
those who have legitimate papers who are coming to
Ms.
Cerilli: How about the designated residency? How does that work?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not quite
understand what designated residency‑‑I guess you are talking designated
locations. If in fact they agree to come
to
Ms.
Cerilli: Well, I am trying to get a clearer picture of
which of the different classifications of immigrants would be subject to having
a designated location that they are requested to live in. That is the first part of the question. Maybe we can deal with that first.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, those are
people where we have identified a shortage of qualified people to fill designated
jobs in
Ms.
Cerilli: Well, I am trying to get an idea of how this
would work, and if it would be people who are guaranteed that in the communities
they are designated to, that they will have employment there. Is that the only circumstance under which people
are required to reside and work in a certain area?
* (1120)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Absolutely.
You would not designate someone to go to
Ms.
Cerilli: So that is not going to apply to any of the
other classifications that we have reviewed this morning.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: What is not going to apply?
Ms.
Cerilli: The designated residency is not going to
apply to any of the other classifications or streams.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: No.
Ms.
Cerilli: Carrying on with this same line of
questioning, what are the occupations that have been designated so far? I have Employment and Immigration, June 1,
1992, Designated Occupation List for Prospective Immigrants, and it only lists occupational
therapist, physiotherapist and radio therapy technician. Is that all of the ones that have been
identified?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am informed that
in order to have a designated occupation in Manitoba presently, you have to
have a shortage of 10 positions or more in any one occupation. So it was correctly stated that it is occupational
therapists, physiotherapists and radio therapy technologists. Those are the designated occupations
presently.
We
have been informed that with a new agreement we could lessen that number. I can give some indication of other occupations
where there are shortages but there are less than 10 vacant positions. Those are:
chefs and cooks, instructors and training officers, general managers and
other senior officials, administrators in teaching and related fields,
librarians and archivists, university teachers, fine arts teachers, knitting occupations,
air pilot navigators and flight engineers, ministers of religion, translators
and interpreters, supervisors, food and beverage preparation and related
occupations. There is a fairly lengthy
list, but presently under agreement with the federal government, only those
designated occupations where there are more than 10 vacancies can be approved
for the designated list.
Ms.
Cerilli: I would appreciate if I could have a copy of
that list at some point.
I
would like to get some clarification of what regions of the province those
occupations are in.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is not on
the paper that I would be prepared to provide, but we could attempt to find
that and break it down‑‑get that kind of information.
Ms.
Cerilli: Generally, how many of these positions would
be outside of the city?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Very few of them would be from outside of
Ms.
Cerilli: How is this information collected? I see that this information is printed by
Employment and Immigration Canada. How is
this whole process of identifying labour market shortages carried out?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed in the past that it has only
been negotiated at the officials' level, federally‑provincially, but as a
result of the Canada‑Manitoba Labour Force Agreement, there will be a
process put in place where there will be more extensive consultation with the
labour force, with the labour market, with federal and provincial officials to
determine more accurately what the shortages are.
Ms.
Cerilli: I guess I will stay on the same issue. With respect to the legislation that is being
brought in, how is it going to change how this process works? How does it work right now with newcomers who
are under this program, who are designated as part of an occupation? How is their residency dealt with? What kind
of agreements are made?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Presently, you cannot determine designated occupations
and where they might go. Under this, we
will be able to say we need a physician in Thompson. We will recruit to fill that physician
position in Thompson from abroad, and that will be designated.
Ms.
Cerilli: But currently there is a program in place
where designated occupations are being filled?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, but not
by location.
Ms.
Cerilli: I notice also from the paper that
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There are very, very few settling outside of
Ms. Cerilli: I
thought she was going to add some more information.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We had in 1991, 5,132 settle in
Ms.
Cerilli: Can I get those numbers again?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: 5,132 in
Ms.
Cerilli: I know that we have made some agreement to
break at 11:30, so I guess I will‑‑
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): As soon as the hour is
11:30, I will adjourn the committee.
Ms. Cerilli: I,
then, will just ask for some numbers of the kind of split in those people who
have come between the different classifications. I know that last year we were way down in refugees
and that was a concern. Has that been
changed this year?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the family class
area we have had an increase of 6 percent.
In the refugee area we have had a decrease of 5 percent, and in the
independent class a decrease of 1 percent.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): The hour being 11:30 p.m.,
I understand that through negotiations with the House leaders that this section
of the Committee of Supply will adjourn.
Committee
rise.
NATURAL RESOURCES
* (1010)
Madam
Chairperson (Louise Dacquay): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order. The Committee of Supply is
dealing with the Estimates for the Department of Natural Resources. Does the honourable Minister of Natural Resources
(Mr. Enns) have an opening statement?
Hon.
Harry Enns (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Chairperson, I do
not have a formal statement for the House and for the members, but I would like
to give just briefly a few highlights of the year and the anticipated year in
the Department of Natural Resources.
Honourable
members will, of course, note that there have been some changes to the senior
administration of the department, and when staff enters the Chamber, I will be
introducing them.
We
have in the department some particular focuses of attention that I would like
to draw members' attention to. I note my
critic from the official opposition, particularly as a fellow Interlaker, is
all too well aware of the ongoing concern the department has with respect to
the illegal taking of game, the poaching of game, so that there will be in the
regional services additional emphasis placed on enhancing the efforts of the
department to crack down on illegal poaching throughout the province. We hope to have some further initiatives as
the year goes on, but the establishment of a special enhanced enforcement unit
is in place and is operating. It will be
reinforced later on in the year.
In
the area of Forestry‑‑if I can go through the Estimates just
briefly, well, let me go kind of on the heading‑‑members will share
with the department and with all of us the satisfaction that the province is
much greener this year, so we are looking at some more normal and hopefully
below normal year in terms of forest fire activities. We have been blessed with additional
moisture; the province is greened up. At
the moment right now we are in the position where we can help out our neighbouring
With
respect to the Water Management program, I am doing the best we can with the
relatively small capital budget that we have to finish off some of the
undertakings that we have in this branch, notably in the completion of the Aux
Marais Drain in the southern part of the province; some work on the Swan River
Drain in the northeast part of the Interlake.
I
appreciate that my friends up in the Arborg area, Riverton area, are hopeful
that they will see further commencement of the
With
respect to Parks and Natural Areas, honourable members are aware that the
department will be busy this summer. I
am pleased to inform honourable members that I have the privilege this year, by
way of rotation, it is my turn to be the chairman or co‑chairman of the
National Parks conference which will be held this year in August in
As
previously announced, we are gearing up and preparing for an extensive round of
public hearings that will be taking place here in the city of
Having
in mind the commitment by this government to the Endangered Spaces Program that
commits us to setting aside certain lands from further development, and
specifically further resource extraction, it certainly will focus on the issues
that have come forward in this last year with such recommendations that came
out of the Clean Environment Commission report with respect to continued
logging in certain of our provincial parks. It will look at our ongoing
management of our wildlife management areas, which I will remind the honourable
members that we have some seven and a half million acres so designated
throughout the province.
So
I expect to have a full summer and fall involving the administration of parks,
and future changes to that administration, with the goal being that we provide
and have the opportunity for public discussion, public participation in developing
a new parks act for the
The
Lands Branch of the department, as honourable members know, has been
successfully relocated in the community of Neepawa. That is a branch consisting of some 30‑odd
members who have, from all indications, successfully made the transition from
Indeed,
I hope that the level of service, the turnaround of servicing applications and
dealing with the various issues that this branch faces, all of the
The
Forestry Branch has its own particular challenges, not the least of them being
that we face and have been notified during the earlier part of the year of a
downsizing in the amount of seedlings that will be required by two of our major
customers, if I can put it in those terms.
Our arrangements with the Repap people, for instance, and with the
Abitibi‑Price people are very much part of the conditions of our contract
and of our forestry management agreement with these people.
Under
these agreements, they are required to maintain a certain level of reforestation
in seedling plantings. Also under their
contract, however, as conditions prevail, they can change those from time to
time. They have notified, for instance,
the branch that they will be requiring some two and a half million to three
million seedlings less than the previous year.
That, of course, impacts on operations of this branch like our
nurseries, both at Hadashville and up at The Pas. That will, no doubt, catch the honourable
members' attention as they go through the Estimates.
* (1020)
Our
Fisheries Branch is operating as it has in the past. We have had some moderate successes in
rehabilitating some of the fisheries that were in trouble, notably the
Winnipegosis fishery which members will recall.
The right management decision was made some years ago by the previous
administration, I might add, to close the Winnipegosis fishery completely for a
period of years to enable it to rehabilitate itself. From initial reports of last year's season,
that seems to have been the right management decision. While we have some ongoing resource problems
there, such as the conflict that commercial fishermen feel that some species of
wildlife like the cormorant are bringing to bear on that particular lake;
nonetheless, the reported harvest as indicated by the Freshwater Fish Marketing
Corporation indicates that the fisheries on that particular lake were better
than expected.
Regrettably,
our main fisheries, the overall fisheries series is being plagued with poor
prices. It is a condition that primary
producers face whether it is grain farmers or, in this case, commercial
fishermen. The most serious is the
continued, depressed prices in the whitefish fisheries which has made that fishery
less attractive to, particularly, the
Growing
interest and of continuing interest, of course, is our sports and angling
fisheries. Honourable members ought to be
aware that in excess of 130,000 Manitobans buy fishing licences. That is a very
substantial number of our population who enjoy the recreational values of
fishing on any one of our number of lakes.
This
keeps our people busy in various restocking programs. The department is under
pressure, particularly from such areas such as the southwestern part of the
province, where lakes like the Pelican, the Rock,
The
Wildlife Branch, I have already kind of alluded to, we have, as a major thrust
of the branch, a very serious effort of trying to come to grips in a more
effective manner with the question of poaching.
I must report to the honourable members that the general state and health
of wildlife in the
We
have an abundance of white‑tailed deer; we have an overabundance of
beaver. I anticipate that some of these populations
are going to, in the future, cause growing difficulties for the branch. The branch, the department, is not in the
business and has not been in the business of active control measures of
maintaining or reducing harvests and maintaining populations at acceptable
levels. So in some instances, particularly
in the instance of the beaver population, where my biologists indicate that on
average,
Certainly
some of the municipalities living adjacent to some of our parklands, while
defying beaver habitat, are paying for these populations in blocked culverts,
diking and flooded land situations. The
department is under pressure to provide a more adequate beaver control program
in conjunction with the municipalities to assist them in recovering some of the
costs involved.
I
as a Resource minister would have preferred that my friends in the animal
rights movement would see the folly of their course of action, having had some
measure of success in generally promoting the antifur lobbies and so
forth. That is helping to create the
situation.
The
department now faces a situation that individual municipalities, local
governments, in their desperation to deal with some of the problems are
reverting to placing bounties, for instance, on beaver tails. This means that these beavers are being shot
or killed indiscriminately in the summertime, when there is little or no value
to the pelt, to the fur. I suspect that
members of the general public, as they come upon rotting beaver carcasses, will
start turning their attention to the department and asking the minister to do
something about it, to stop this indiscriminate killing of beaver.
I
have no easy solutions to it. The
balanced answer to that is to allow, as has been the practice for many years, a
sensible harvest of beaver, at the time that they ought to be harvested, in the
wintertime, and to enable, particularly in so many instances, our native
brothers and sisters, our Metis brothers and sisters, who in the main make up
many of the people who have engaged in trapping, to continue that access to
this resource as a way of supplementing their income. However, I invite honourable members'
thoughts on these subjects.
Among
the most exciting developments, generally speaking, in wildlife and natural
resource initiatives is, of course, the North American Waterfowl Management
Plan. This is a major undertaking, a 15‑year
program calling on expenditures of upwards of $8 million, $9 million per annum,
in the efforts to protect and restore and enhance, principally, the waterfowl
habitat of the southwestern part of the province, but other major marshes, such
as the
This
is a major program involving a host of agencies. That is one of the most encouraging things
that has been happening, to see the Department of Agriculture working side by
side with the Department of Natural Resources.
It was not always the case to see farmers and agricultural people
understanding the value of wildlife habitat and the restoration and the
maintenance of the internationally renowned pothole country: Minnedosa,
The
program is specifically geared to bring back duck populations to what they were
10 or 15 years ago. The program has,
though, all kinds of ancillary benefits.
In the setting aside of land under various programs, all species of
wildlife will benefit. As well, the
general landscape will benefit in terms of reducing the soil erosion of
vulnerable soils.
The
programs consist of a host of programs, as I have indicated. The Canadian Wildlife Service is involved;
the Ducks Unlimited people are involved; Forestry Branch, Forestry Canada is
involved. We have an active program
where the federal government will pay a farmer up to $54 an acre if he sets
aside marginal agricultural land and puts it into some form of habitat restoration,
including permanent cover of grass and/or trees.
* (1030)
We
have four offices working in that area, out of the communities of
I
signed the agreement two years ago. It
is now fully operational. The offices
are staffed, people are in the field and we are acquiring land. My officials can report to you how many
actual acres of land have been acquired in its first full years of operation.
This
is a Canada‑wide program. It is,
of course, every bit as large as the provinces of
The
leverage of dollars spent, I indicated to you that in
The
Department of Mapping and Surveys carries on its function of providing this
valuable service not only to ourselves but to a host of additional government
departments and for the private sector as well.
You will note I have the item line for the Sustainable Development Co‑ordination
Unit. It is a unit, as members will
appreciate, that is separate and apart but the salary figures are housed in my
department.
Madam
Chairperson, with those few comments, I invite the honourable members' scrutiny
of the departmental Estimates. Thank you.
Madam
Chairperson: Does the critic for the official opposition wish
to make an opening statement?
Mr.
Clif Evans (Interlake): I would like to make just a very few comments
in accordance to time and the amount of time allotted to us for Natural
Resources Estimates this time around with all the other Estimates perhaps
extending themselves rather long‑term. As for some of the comments by the
minister, I am rather pleased to hear some of the programs and enhancement of
wildlife and of our natural resources throughout the
The
minister's department has, in fact, as we saw last year, taken a tremendous
slice of the funding and a tremendous slice in jobs that we saw were lost in
Natural Resources, and we are still wondering how much effect these job losses
of the last budget and with some of the job losses that we see with this
budget, some 30‑odd positions through different reasoning being cut
again.
What
I notice and what I find rather difficult to understand at times, and we
discussed this in Estimates last year, the fact that managerial and upper
management salaries and the salaries in themselves, even though the minister's
budget has not increased or decreased to a substantial amount, have risen for
some of these positions upwards of three‑quarters of a million dollars, and
I have difficulty with that. We talked
about it last year and it is something we will talk about with this budget,
that at a time of restraint, at a time that everyone is asked, because of the
position of finances in this province, that we all do our share, and it seems
again, as last year, that the minister's department has again received a
substantial amount of increases in salaries throughout the top level.
Of
course, he mentioned the fact that the senior administration has changed, and
what I have noticed through Orders‑in‑Council‑‑and what
I would appreciate, while I am on that, is a detailed breakdown in the form
that we have in the Estimates of the exact positions, the placements of the
different senior changes that the minister has indicated. If I could get that so I could have that for
my file, I would appreciate that.
I
am anxious to hear the changes in administration that he has indicated, why
they were changed, what benefit he feels there will be for that. Where has some of the management that was in certain
departments been moved? Is it just a
departmental move change? Is it
something that the minister has been planning for a while?
I
do have to indicate that I am also very pleased with the fact that the province
is green this year. Being out in my constituency
on Sunday and Monday out in northeast around the Ashern‑Moosehorn area,
where of course in '89 we were devastated with fire, it is quite a change and
it is a nice change. I hope that we do
not foresee any dry weather that will change that, that will have to put us on
the alert as we have in the last couple of years, even last year. This year in talking with Natural Resources
people in my area, they are very pleased with the way things are going with
forest fires and the watching of them.
I
am on the one hand disappointed but on the other hand understanding, if that
may be the term, as far as the
I
questioned the minister last year on it, and he told me that he would look into
it for this year. I was anticipating some
work being done, some parts of the project that would be addressed this
year. He mentions that he is going to
address it next year. I will again ask
some specific questions on that. I just
want to remind the minister that projects such as
You
know, when you have the finances in place from one side, in co‑operation
from one side of the project, I feel that the minister should make a very, very
sincere effort to put this project and others as Washow Bay in priority for
next budget and perhaps even allocate some funding and assistance if possible
for this year to keep the project so that it does not sit in the closet too
long and tend to gather moss on it and not be something that we can deal with.
* (1040)
The
National Parks conference, I am pleased to hear, and through the minister's
correspondence, that the conference will be held here. I think it will be very enhancing. I hope to be able to attend as much of the
conference or the meetings that we will have here as possible. The minister's invitation to attend regional
meetings and such will be attended by myself.
I
am anxious to see what the minister will have to tell us during Estimates as to
the conversion of the
Madam
Chairperson, there are some concerns in regard to the fisheries that I
have. Again, I will not take too much
time here, I will be asking certain questions on it. There have been issues raised just lately
that I would really appreciate, when I do question the minister, some up‑front
answers on it. There have been
indications of different areas requesting the minister's department for
fisheries, for hatcheries.
There
has been no movement on it, none that I have been made aware of or been told
that there is any movement on it. I understand
that the prices of the whitefish market have dropped substantially. In my area, it makes it very difficult for
these commercial fishermen to operate when you have such a low request, a low
marketable value of a fish and in turn not received the money that perhaps the
whitefish would be worth so that the fishermen could operate at a, I guess,
livable profit.
In
closing, Madam Chairperson, I would just like to say that the minister's
department, Natural Resources, is one that I feel, this is perhaps more on a
personal view, that it is very, very important to the tourism and to the well‑being
of our province. Tourism and Natural Resources, parks, water, forestry seem to
go hand in hand. The fishing, the hunting,
everything seems to go hand in hand with tourism.
I
would like to put on record, to address the minister that he not forget the
fact that the people in different areas of this province, and the people who
come to Manitoba to visit and go to the parks and go to the different sites and
that, he has to remember, and I hope he does remember and I hope he does act on
this and not respond to the same situation that occurred in the '91‑92
budget and partly in the '92‑93 budget, that he prioritize for the next
budget, and prioritize now the importance of maintaining our parks, our
services, our beaches, to continue to work on that so that we do not have a
province that has lost its resources and its beauty as far as attracting
tourism throughout Manitoba.
I
know that my colleague from the Liberal Party wants to make some comments, and
also there are questions and comments from some of my colleagues for the
minister. I know that, again, we do not
have much time, but I would just like to thank you for the opportunity to make
opening statements.
Madam
Chairperson: Does the critic for the second opposition party
wish to make an opening statement?
Mr.
Paul Edwards (St. James): Yes, Madam Chairperson. It is a pleasure again to be in the Estimates
for the Department of Natural Resources.
I appreciate the opening comments of the minister. He reviewed in some detail the highlights of
the year in the department's various branches.
We intend, of course, to go through them in some greater detail.
Time
is short, as is often the case with this department, and that is unfortunate,
but we want to reserve as much time as possible to go through those Estimates
in great detail so I do not intend to make a lengthy opening statement. What I do intend to apprise the minister of
is the focus of some of my key areas of concern.
I
do have concern about the declining role of this department in real terms, in
terms of government financing, as compared to its critical role I believe it
plays in the provincial scheme. I join
with the comments of the critic for the New Democratic Party with respect to
the importance of this department. I
think that goes without saying. I know
the minister feels the same way, but I think the actions of the government are
often behind their spoken commitments.
Forestry
is a key issue, has been in the past year, and will continue to be. I intend to spend some considerable length of
time discussing, not just the urban forestry problems of Dutch elm disease, but
also the larger problem, that of forestry generally in the province of
Generally,
in other areas, there will be questions.
There is no need, at this point, to focus in on them. Gaming, wildlife management is another key
concern. I am very pleased to hear that
the minister puts forward the position that our stocks are in good shape, that
there is not a concern in those areas.
We have received concerns from various Manitobans over the course of the
past year, and we will be raising those specific to certain areas of the
province and certain types of game hunting.
But his indication that overall stocks are in good shape is a positive reflection‑‑if
it is, in fact, correct‑‑on the strategies that have been employed
by the department.
I
am concerned that, overall, the staffing level of the front‑line workers
is not being kept at a level that can adequately enforce all of our
regulations. We can sit here in this
Chamber and promulgate laws and Orders‑in‑Council. They sound wonderful, and we can all agree on
them. If the people on the front line
are not able to enforce them, it really does not mean a lot.
So,
like the Department of the Environment, this is a department that has a twofold
role. One is to develop strategies and
to be a leader on the issue of policies regarding our development and
enhancement of natural resources. But,
the other key role of this department is, it is a department of enforcement. So that is an important aspect, the key
aspect, I would say, in terms of what Manitobans expect of this department.
I
do not intend to go into any greater detail at this point, and I look forward
to going through, line by line, this rather large department. In terms of the number of appropriations, we do
have a lot of work to do in a relatively short period of time. Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
Madam
Chairperson: I would remind all members of the committee that
we will defer passing item 1.(a) until all other items have been passed. At this time, I would request that the
minister's staff please enter the Chamber.
Mr.
Clif Evans: Madam Chairperson, for the few minutes that staff
is coming in, can we break for five minutes?
Madam
Chairperson: Is it the will of the committee to have a five‑minute
recess?
Some
Honourable Members: Five minutes.
Madam
Chairperson: The committee will take a five‑minute
recess and will reconvene at 10:55 a.m.
* * *
The
committee took recess at 10:50 a.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 10:56 a.m.
Madam
Chairperson: The committee will come to order. We are on page 124 in the Estimates
book. 1. Administration and Finance, (b)
Executive Support: (1) Salaries $267,400‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $87,800.
Mr.
Clif Evans: Madam Chairperson, I would just appreciate, before
we continue, and I must apologize for being a little tardy. There is an introduction of the minister's
staff?
Mr.
Enns: I apologize to the honourable members. Allow me to introduce staff who are with me
on this occasion. I would like to
introduce our new deputy minister in the Department of Natural Resources, Mr.
Umendra Mital, sitting immediately to my left; also, in his position as
assistant deputy minister to the department, Mr. Harvey Boyle. Harvey Boyle has been our regional services
director and he continues focusing his attention on the delivery of service
within the department; and our chief financial administrative officer, Bill
Podolsky, who among other things looks after things that I know are near and
dear to the heart of the honourable member for the Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans). He is also a board member of the Gull Harbour
Resort on
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(b)(2) Other Expenditures $87,800‑‑pass.
2.(c)
Venture Manitoba Tours Ltd.
Mr.
Clif Evans: Madam Chairperson, just a few questions on Venture
Tours. I know we had the opportunity
just a few weeks ago to discuss the budget, in committee, of Venture Tours. During
that committee, I had asked for and was promised some details on the income and
expenses for the previous three years and was assured that I would receive
those as soon as possible. I am wondering why I have not received them. Can they be made available to me as soon as
possible?
Mr.
Enns: I am advised, Madam Chairperson, that there
is no difficulty in providing that information to the member. He will have it in his hands sometime
tomorrow, if that is satisfactory.
Mr.
Clif Evans: Yes.
Also with that, I had asked‑‑we discussed the insurance on
Venture Tours, I think‑‑so I hope that that will be included also
so I can get them.
Also,
if I may, Madam Chairperson, we had discussed, not at length perhaps, but the
minister had made some indications that he was going to make perhaps some
presentations to cabinet and Treasury in regards to the financial situation and
the financing of Gull Harbour Resort.
Has the minister, in fact, done any consultation with cabinet on this?
Mr.
Enns: The honourable member would not really want me
to tell tales out of cabinet that, by and large, is confidential business at
cabinet. But I certainly do not mind
just elaborating a little bit. The
member is reasonably acquainted with the operation of Gull Harbour Resort. The resort has, I think, with some
satisfaction and with some pride, undergone some very major renovations in the
last little while.
* (1100)
The
honourable member and I both had the privilege of personally inspecting and
viewing some of these changes to what used to be referred to as the old wing of
the facility. I was pleased to have the
support of cabinet and Treasury Board to enable those capital improvements to
the facility to be undertaken, I might say, at an accelerated pace than was originally
planned. But the work was coming in‑‑acceptable
bids and tenders‑‑and we were persuaded to advance the schedule of
the renovations faster than we had initially discussed within the department.
The
question that I think the honourable member alludes to is one of the ongoing
debt load that is carried by the facility, and that is a matter of concern to
the management and the board of directors of Venture Tours. It is raised fairly frequently with me as
reporting minister. I, in turn, have
raised it within government from time to time.
It is an issue, primarily, that lies in the hands of the Department of
Finance, the Finance minister (Mr. Manness), as to how that debt is to be
continued to be serviced at the current time.
This
is an ongoing concern of the management at Gull Harbour, that if that debt
could be absorbed by the province or written down, then they have made
presentations to me that they would be in a better position to generate the
kind of capital funds from time to time that the resort will require on an
ongoing basis without having to come to government as they had to in this last instance
for these renovation funds. In other
words, they are saying to government that if you help us with the write‑down
of that long‑standing debt, which amounts to a substantial amount of money,
in the range of $100,000‑‑closer to $200,000‑‑the debt
is $2.4 million, and the cost of servicing would be somewhat in excess of
$100,000.
That,
of course, comes off their bottom line, affects their statement. The position of the board from time to time
is simply that if this obligation could be removed from Venture Tours, then they
would be in a better position to generate the capital funds required from time
to time to update the facility within their own operating structure. I cannot report any progress on those discussions,
and to date there has been no financial change to the operations of
Mr.
Clif Evans: I just wanted a question on that. I can appreciate the minister's position
right now on that. I certainly would
like to see some progress made with the financing with the whole
development. I feel with the competition
that has been developed around the area it has been more difficult to attract
the business to that area, but I think that with the developments that have
taken place, with the renovations‑‑and I too want to go on record,
Madam Chairperson, to say that the job done was very, very well done.
Now
I feel
I
made mention at committee that I feel that the board and the management must do
whatever they can to enhance Gull Harbour on a 12‑month basis not on a
four‑month basis. The resources
are there for that. I feel that the
minister and Venture Tours board must take that now that we have the facility
upgraded, as the minister has indicated, to enhance that 12‑month
position.
There
are many, many ways that we can do that, and I feel that, hopefully, the
minister and Venture Tours will push for that and support the board so that
they have the opportunity to enhance.
Just
one question‑‑[interjection! We are living here in the '90s and if
the honourable member for
Madam
Chairperson, the day‑to‑day business and handling of expenses and
bills and that, has the minister or the board considered centralizing the
financing and all the bills that are being paid, everything? Can the minister indicate to me whether there
is a chance of centralizing that in one institution?
Mr.
Enns: I am not quite sure what the member is alluding to. I might also say that, and I appreciate the
shortness of time that we have, we had the affairs of Venture Tours before the
committee of the House earlier, and at that particular time the managers of
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(c) Venture Manitoba Tours Ltd. $75,000‑‑pass.
1.(d)
Financial Services: (1) Salaries
$967,000‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $214,400‑‑pass.
1.(e)
Human Resource Management: (1) Salaries $982,500‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $153,500‑‑pass.
1.(f)
System Co‑ordination: (1) Salaries
$187,900‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $36,100‑‑pass.
1.(g)
Administrative Services: (1) Salaries
$793,900. Shall the item pass?
Mr.
Clif Evans: Madam Chairperson, one question on this line,
under Activity Identification, if I may:
"Consult and negotiate with Indian bands and other resource users
to develop acceptable forms of co‑management and protection of natural
resources."
I
understand that the minister has in the past indicated that his department is
in fact working with the Indian bands to the resources and to the co‑management. Can I ask the minister just how that is
working, where it is working, where it is not working and is there co‑operation?
Mr.
Enns: This area of activity is certainly one of the
more challenging ones for the department, yet at the same time, extremely
important. I have cited in the past some
what we consider to be notable successes.
Certainly the ones that stand out are the successful arrangement and the
reduction of the wood bison by the Waterhen Band and Chief Harvey Nepinak from
the Waterhen Band, a very successful program.
It is now being carried out for well into its 12th and 13th year.
Wood
bison are actually, you might find this difficult to believe, but they are
being released into the wild, reintroduced to the
* (1110)
Then
other ones are the major program that has been in effect for some years with
The Pas Indian Band. It is a moose‑management
agreement. We have found our successes
to be more readily achieved if we go at a specific area and at a specific
resource. If it is moose or bison, it is
more difficult when we talk about enlarged areas and rightfully. It is not just with the aboriginal, the
Status Indian band that we are dealing with, there are other people in the
area, Metis communities living in the area, non‑native, white community
people living in the area. The
difficulties that we have in those kind of areas is best exemplified in the
Swan River area where we have an Elk Management Board operating but not really
all that successful in terms of bringing together the different communities
within that area to jointly sit down with the department.
The
department is prepared to share a great deal of the management responsibilities
in terms of harvest, in terms of seasons, in terms of general practice in that
area. That is what co‑management
is all about. It is an ongoing challenge
for the department, and we have several senior people, Mr. Bob Clarkson, in
particular, Mr. Ross Thompson engaged in that program.
Currently
we have under discussion with the
Without
at least trying, that sometimes is in jeopardy.
The member is well aware of what I speak of. If indiscriminate poaching of wildlife is
allowed to continue in some areas, we cannot assure residents of
Mr.
Clif Evans: Madam Chairperson, just on specifics, the minister
has mentioned certain bands that his department has dealt with, and I am
wondering whether there is any consultation or negotiation or co‑management
with the bands within the Interlake. Has
there been consultation with them? Is
there some sort of working agreement with the eight reserves within the Interlake?
Mr.
Enns: At the moment, Madam Chairperson, while we
have received different proposals, I cannot report to the House and to the member
any specific ongoing discussions at the moment with any of our Interlake
bands. The initiative has to come as
much from the band as from the department.
It takes two to tango, kind of thing.
Mr.
Clif Evans: Madam Chairperson, as the minister states, it
takes two to tango when it comes to co‑operation and consultation. However, the three‑day meeting that the
Fisher River, Peguis and Jackhead Reserves had initiated just last month, and
had invited the minister and his staff to attend, I think that, to me‑‑and
I was able to attend‑‑is an indication that there is some
willingness to co‑operate, and I would appreciate the minister perhaps
following up on that and dealing with the matter.
Mr.
Enns: I am aware of the conference or the gathering
that the member refers to, and I am pleased to advise him that we had upwards
of 30 members of departmental staff involved and taking part in those meetings.
It
was not my intention, quite frankly, to be part of those meetings. These matters are moved forward, first of
all, with just a general understanding of a willingness to move forward in these
directions, consultation with staff.
When it comes to the ministerial level, it becomes quickly kind of a
head‑on‑head with the various chiefs either demanding certain
situations to take place, and that is not how we develop a co‑management
agreement.
Generally,
it takes a year and more of clear understanding, and staff work to single out
the areas where, in fact, comanagement can work.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(g) Administrative Services: (1) Salaries $793,900.
Mr.
Edwards: On May 27 of this year, the minister issued a
press release entitled Land and Water Strategy Consultations Announced, and
public consultations were to be held and a workbook was produced. One of the indications in that press release
was that the minister said, draft policy issues would include cottage development,
mining and logging and hydro activity and various other harvesting activities
as they relate to natural and cultural areas.
What
role and what discussions are envisaged with Manitoba Hydro with respect to
hydro activity generally in the
Mr.
Enns: The department would have reasons to discuss specifically
with Manitoba Hydro such issues where a designation, under the proposed
Endangered Spaces Program or inclusion in a parks system or other natural land
strategies would have a bearing on it.
For
instance, it is my pleasure to report to the honourable member that our parks
director is currently, or very shortly, on his way to
To
do that, considerable consultation had to take place with Manitoba Hydro‑‑the
member asked specifically of Manitoba Hydro‑‑to get an
understanding from Manitoba Hydro that they indeed do not have hydro interests
or are prepared to relinquish future hydro interests prior to that nomination,
prior to that designation being able to be put in place.
The
same kind of consultations had to be taken place with the Department of Energy
and Mines to get, if you like, a sign‑off that, having looked at the
region from a mineral point of view, they are prepared to relinquish future
development rights along that quarter of land involved in the designation, so
it can in fact be so designated as a heritage river. It is my hope that this will be done in the
next few weeks, because also, I hope, that I will be able to risk my very life
and liberty and future in canoeing that same river, should we be able to get
out of this House in time.
* (1120)
Mr.
Edwards: Well, the minister did the same thing when he
swam in the
What
this press release is talking about is a policy framework for the future, and
what it specifically says is that the policy issues which will be dealt with
will include hydro activity and the relationship presumably between Hydro and
the department on development of future projects.
Specifically,
I would like to know what consultation has taken place thus far with Manitoba
Hydro on the implications of the Conawapa project on the land and water
resources of Manitobans.
Mr.
Enns: I can report to you that a good number of the disciplines
involved in my department have had ongoing‑‑going back two or three
years‑‑involvement with respect to the Conawapa project.
I
know that Fisheries people from the Department of Fisheries have been engaged
in inventorying and, first of all, appreciating what the fish stocks are that
would be affected by the Conawapa project.
Similarly, I would think that, perhaps, the services of even diverse
departments like surveying maps of the branch were involved. Manitoba Hydro is represented at the working
group responsible for this strategy that the honourable member refers to, as we
bring that forward for general discussion to the public this fall.
Specifically,
that is about‑‑inasmuch as the land requirements for the Conawapa
project is nil, is negligible. Agencies like Parks are not involved, inasmuch
as forestry is being jeopardized by the impoundment of water for the Conawapa project,
again it is nil, so forestry is involved.
The only discipline from my department that has been actively involved with
the Conawapa project from a resource‑based point of view has been our
Fisheries people.
Mr.
Edwards: Will department officials, those same
officials who have been working on the fisheries and other aspects, assessing the
impact to the Conawapa project, will they be free to present at the
environmental impact assessment hearings held by the joint review panel as the
federal Fisheries officials were free to do so and, in fact, did appear in
front of the scoping hearings?
Mr.
Enns: With some certainty, that all resource data
would be made available to the joint panel, that a DNR, that is, the Department
of Natural Resources position and encompassing whatever data that we have. Certainly, as I have indicated, the data,
specifically the Fisheries data, would be very much made available to the
proposed joint environmental hearings.
Mr.
Edwards: I am sure the minister is aware that
information only comes forward to the panel through a presenter, through a presentation. Will the department then be making a
presentation to present that material to the panel?
Mr.
Enns: On the mechanics, I simply want to indicate
that the department will co‑operate on whatever decisions or requests arise
from the joint environmental panel.
Mr.
Edwards: Well, a panel does not normally request intervention
and representation. My question is: Will the minister be following the lead of
the federal Department of Fisheries, advising his employees, his staff that
they are free to speak and give their opinions as experts in the field on these
issues, fisheries, other issues that impact on the natural resources of this
province? Environmental panel‑‑I
would assume that they would be free to do that and that they would be advised of
such as his federal counterpart recently did.
Mr.
Enns: Madam Chairperson, it is generally not my
practice to follow. I try to lead, and I
will conduct and instruct the Department of Natural Resources to co‑operate
in any manner prescribed by the environmental panel. Certainly, we are in anticipation of being
called upon, being involved, are in the process of preparing ourselves for
departmental activity and participation in these hearings.
Mr.
Edwards: Are employees of the department free to
participate in those panel discussions as independent citizens of
Mr.
Enns: Madam Chairperson, without wishing to engage
here, because I know my honourable friend with his legal training and background
probably has me at a disadvantage at this moment, the department employees are
certainly very much free and very active in proposing the position that the
department will be putting forward.
Mr.
Edwards: That was not my question. I do not think it requires any legal training
to understand the question and respond to it.
The minister is an employer. He
employs a large number of people who are experts and have certain views, not as
employees of the department, but as individual citizens of
Mr.
Enns: I would think that any citizen, at any time,
is free to express their views in whatever manner they choose to do so. I am
attempting not to circumvent the honourable member's questions, but to also say
that, obviously, as there is in so many instances when it is a resource question,
different disciplines, highly professional, trained positions are brought to
bear on a particular problem.
It
is not at all unusual to have divergent points of view expressed, but the
department has a responsibility to put forward the best possible position that
is gleaned from the expertise that the different professional people employed
in any given branch of the department can bring forward, and that then becomes the
departmental position. That certainly
will be the departmental position that would be put forward on any given issue.
Mr.
Edwards: I have another question, but I want to just conclude
this section by indicating that I take his answer to be that the government
anticipates they will be called upon to be involved and take a position, and
they will formulate a position based on the best data they have available as
they have done with every other project, whether it be Abitibi‑Price or
Repap, whether it be Oak Hammock Marsh, whatever the situation, that they are
experts and advise the government and also take positions. So that is the first thing. I also take his answer to mean that, as
individual citizens, experts within the department will be free without
impunity to exercise their rights as citizens and take positions in front of
the panel as citizens expert in the field.
Mr.
Enns: The honourable member accurately indicates
what I have been trying to tell him.
Mr.
Edwards: Madam Chairperson, one of the other
indications in the press release I referred to earlier is that there would be public
consultation and that it would take place in the ensuing months, and that one
of the issues to be discussed would be the recommendations for updating and
revising the parklands act, which of course relates to forestry, the recent
decision of the CEC with respect to forest use on parklands.
My
question is, are these public workshops, these public hearings, are these the
same as the public consultation that the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings)
spoke of recently on the issue of forestry and parks generally?
* (1130)
Mr.
Enns: Yes, these are the same hearings that the
Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cummings) discussed.
Mr.
Edwards: Will those workshops be occurring at various locations
in the province? Has any schedule been
set for them, and if not, when does the minister anticipate that schedule would
be made public?
Mr.
Enns: The member will understand that active
planning and work is being done internally in the department to bring about these
public workshops and informational hearings.
It is our intention that they will be commenced sometime this fall,
perhaps mid‑September.
The
active list of places and numbers of meetings is currently being worked upon,
but I can indicate to the honourable member that we are planning extensive
hearings throughout the province, numbering perhaps some 18 or 20 in all,
certainly including the city of Winnipeg, but also special places such as Churchill
where the member is aware there is hope that we can move towards the
establishment of Manitoba's second national park, places like the Swan River
Valley where conflicts of resource allocation are critical, both from a parks
point of view and from a forestry point of view, as well of course as such places
as in the Whiteshell and in around the Pine Falls area. So we are talking about
the direct answer.
The
dates have not been decided upon. We are
in the process of renting meeting places and halls, which have to be done in advance,
for mid‑September through October in about 20 locations in
Mr.
Edwards: Madam Chairperson, I understand from others
in the Chamber that there is a general willingness to see the committee rise at
this point.
Madam
Chairperson: Is that the will of the committee?
Committee
rise. Call in the Speaker.
IN SESSION
Madam
Deputy Speaker (Louise Dacquay): Order, please. The hour being after 10 p.m., this House is
adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. (Wednesday).