LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday, December 12,
1991
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING PETITIONS
Mr. Speaker: I have
been advised by the honourable member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) that the
honourable member would not like to proceed with Presenting Petitions at this
time and would like his name stricken from the Routine Proceedings. Is it agreed, unanimous consent to have the
honourable member's name withdrawn?
Agreed? Agreed.
TABLING OF REPORTS
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and
Transportation): Mr.
Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for the Department of Highways
and Transportation for the year 1990‑91.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation):
Mr.
Speaker, I have a statement for the House and I have copies for members.
Mr. Speaker, I have a statement on a matter of major concern to
the
Last Friday, December 6, the federal government's National
Transportation Agency notified the
The basis for the order as we understand it is a jurisdictional
issue. The NTA apparently believes our
air services should be under their jurisdiction. What that would mean is that we would have to
operate under the rules which would severely limit our ability to provide
emergency services. More specifically,
we could only land at nine of the 35 community airstrips that we now
service. We responded to the NTA order
by requesting clarification, and the order was suspended briefly until Monday,
when it was reimposed.
Since that time, I have corresponded twice with the federal
minister responsible, the Honourable Jean Corbeil, and spoke to him by phone
yesterday afternoon. I asked Mr. Corbeil
to intervene to lift the NTA order until we could sit down at the table and
discuss the federal position. He
declined to do so unless we agreed to apply for an NTA licence which, as I
said, would severely limit our operations.
I want to advise the House as I have advised Mr. Corbeil that
the government of
*
(1335)
What seems to be involved is a jurisdictional ambition or
perhaps stubbornness of one of our federal agencies. We are hoping to be in court on Friday to ask
that the federal order be withdrawn. In
the interim, we cannot risk patients' lives by complying with what we believe
to be a totally unacceptable position by the NTA. Our medi‑vac service has currently
transferred about 700 patients a year on emergency flights or an average of
close to two a day. That service must
continue. I will advise the House of
further developments as they occur. I
have also tabled copies of my two letters to the federal minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I want to indicate from the
beginning that we feel this is a matter that should have the support of all
parties in this House. The air ambulance
service is the life line of many northern communities. I know if it was not in place and if there
had not been developments and improvements in the last number of years to make
it a dedicated air ambulance service, that the bottom line is clear. People would die in the communities. It is as simple as that. That is how serious this matter is.
We may differ in terms of interpretation, quite frankly, as to
whether it is strictly a jurisdictional issue, because having seen the federal
government move in other northern matters such as cutting back in terms of the
Northern Development Agreement, ACCESS funding, aboriginal funding,
communications funding, I quite frankly am very suspicious of the federal
government when it does anything that affects northern communities. We do have a different interpretation.
I would also hope, Mr. Speaker, in the nonpartisan spirit of
the minister's statement that we might have a nonpartisan approach in this
Chamber in eliminating the $50 user fee that has been put forward on another
form of northern transportation, the Northern Patient Transportation, which is
equally as important to northern communities.
I hope the minister will lobby his Minister of Health in that regard.
The bottom line is this is a very, very serious matter. We are quite willing on this side of the
House to work with the minister, if necessary to go down to
Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Oui, Monsieur le president. Nous aussi, du
Parti liberal, nous sommes prets a assister le gouvernement provincial afin de
resoudre ce probleme que vient d'annoncer le ministre du Transport. C'etait inacceptable de la part du federal de
permettre que quelque chose de ce genre arrive aux residents du Nord. On sait combien le Nord est important, le
transport surtout. Moi‑meme, pour
avoir travaille dans le Nord pendant plusieurs annees, je
On ne veut pas etre partisans en ce moment. Mais c'est quand meme regrettable de voir que
la decision que le provincial a prise en fait des services a la famille et de
la sante, c'est la meme position que la NTA a prise ici. Mais dans un esprit positif, nous serons la
pour supporter le gouvernement afin de renverser cette decision que le
gouvernement federal a prise et qui est inacceptable en ce moment. Merci, Monsieur le president.
(Translation)
Yes, Mr. Speaker, we also from the Liberal Party are
prepared to assist the provincial government to resolve this problem which has
just been announced by the Minister of Transport. It was unacceptable for the federal
government to allow something like this to happen to northern residents. We know how important the North is,
especially transportation. Having worked
in the North for several years, I know myself just what transportation means.
We do not want to be
partisan at this time. But it is
regrettable to see that the decision that the province made in regard to family
services and health is the same one that the NTA has taken here. But, in a positive spirit, we will be there
to support the government in its efforts to overturn the federal government's
decision, which is unacceptable at this time.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
*
(1340)
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
Bill 3‑The
Interpretation Amendment Act
Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 3, The Interpretation Amendment Act (Loi
modifiant la Loi d'interpretation), be introduced and that the same be now
received and read a first time.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Harper: I am pleased to present
Bill 3, The Interpretation Amendment Act, for first reading. As members will recall, the Aboriginal
Justice Inquiry report was released on August 29, 1991. One of the primary recommendations of the
report was that the provincial interpretation act be required that all
legislation must be interpreted in a manner that does not derogate or adversely
affect the rights of aboriginal people. Bill 3 will be a first step in ensuring
that
Motion agreed to.
Bill 34‑The
Surveys Amendment Act
Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister
of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger), that Bill 34, The Surveys
Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'arpentage, be introduced and that the
same be now received and read a first time.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 15‑The
Highway Traffic Amendment Act
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and
Transportation): Mr.
Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), that Bill
15, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act, Loi modifiant le Code de la route, be
introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 39‑The
Mr. Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for
Motion agreed to.
*
(1345)
Introduction of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to
Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the
gallery, where we have with us this afternoon from the
Also, from the
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this
afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Economic Growth
Government Priorities
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, over the last few months when we
have been out of session, all of us have been listening to people across the
province. Whether it is in a coffee shop
or at a farm gate or in a living room or in a northern community, a southern
community, a rural community, an urban community, at a plant gate or an
executive office, all Manitobans have told us that the No. 1 issue and priority
facing Manitobans, indeed facing this country, is to get people working again,
to get people working and get
Yet today, we note with great concern that the No. 1 priority
for the Filmon Conservative government, for the government of the day, is to
get social spending under control. That
will be the message the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) takes as our No. 1
priority to the economic conference, the Finance Ministers' Meeting today, not
the No. 1 priority from other provinces, Mr. Speaker, because other provinces
are saying unemployment and getting people working should be our No. 1
priority.
I would ask the Premier:
In light of the fact that jobs are mentioned in the Speech from the
Throne over five times, what is the No. 1 priority for the province? Is it jobs as we have been saying, or is it
something else that the Minister of Finance is taking down to the Finance
Ministers' Meeting now?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Speech from the Throne
clearly lays out the government's agenda and its priorities. Economic development and growth and jobs are
the No. 1 priority for this province.
Finance Ministers'
Meeting
Government Agenda
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, then can the Premier explain to the
people of
Why is his Minister of Finance on a different script with a
different priority than the priorities that were in the Speech from the Throne
that were articulated in this House through constant questions over the last
five or six days? Why does he allow the
Minister of Finance to have a separate priority item from the government? Is it because he is not on the economic board
of cabinet or is it because they are not communicating or they have different
messages? Can the Premier please explain
that to Manitobans?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I have before me the draft
agenda for that Finance Ministers' Meeting and clearly it says
Mr. Doer: Mr.
Speaker, the Premier has not answered the question. His Minister of Finance going to the meeting
is saying that the No. 1 priority will be controlling social program
costs. Further, in an interview today on
one of the national media outlets, when asked the question of whether the
Manitoba government and the Minister of Finance supports the monetarist
policies that are leading to high unemployment in this country as contained
within the economic unity package of the federal government, the proposal for
an economic union, the Minister of Finance stated that he was in support of
those policies. Is this the policy of
the Conservatives in
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, as a result of the policies of this provincial administration in
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, this province is experiencing
some of the highest growth in manufacturing employment anywhere in the
country. I will be more specific for the
Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) so that he knows the policies that we
subscribe to and indeed the results of those policies.
I might say to you, during that same period of time
In addition to that, capital investment is expected to reach in
the manufacturing sector $293 million for 1991, up 7.7 percent from last year,
the fourth best growth rate of any province in the country as a result of our
policies and the direction we are taking.
*
(1350)
Bill C‑20
Government Position
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (
The federal legislation to cut cash payments for health care to
the provinces is now before the Senate.
It has passed through the House of Commons. We have only days if not hours to try to stop
the passage of Bill C‑20, when at home this government expresses concern
and alarm, as did the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) just a couple of weeks
ago.
Outside of this province this Premier tends to compliment the
federal government on its health care financing policies as this Premier did at
the First Ministers' meeting in 1989 when he said, on health care financing,
your government has taken some promising steps.
I would like to ask the Premier, will this government, will
this Premier who refused to send a member of his government to join me in
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I might say one of the major
topics of the Finance Ministers' Meeting that is going on today in
I might also say that I have said publicly over and over and
over again we are opposed to the federal cutbacks, just as opposed as we were
when the Trudeau administration began them in the early 1980s when they were
accepted, obviously, by the then NDP government of the day. ‑(interjection)‑
Well, Mr. Speaker, they had no effect on them whatsoever. They
may have expressed their differences, but they had no effect. They were put in by the Trudeau
administration, and regrettably they have been carried on by the current
federal administration in
We are opposed to them.
We have said so at every opportunity, every time we have met as First
Ministers, every time Finance ministers have met, every time we have had
discussions with the Prime Minister or any of his senior ministers. That opposition remains to those reductions. ‑(interjection)‑
No, I did not.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr.
Speaker, and the government has done nothing on Bill C‑20.
I ask the Premier, where has he been for the last six months
when Bill C‑20 was introduced in the House of Commons, a bill which the
Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) knew all about and did nothing to inform his
colleagues to ensure that medicare is preserved.
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, the member knows full well, because she has copies of all the
communiques that have been issued, that every single meeting that I have
attended with other Premiers I have indicated our total opposition to the
unilateral federal cuts in health and post‑secondary education.
Legal Opinion
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The question has been put.
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, this government has indicated in
the past, even in throne speeches, that we are prepared to address any actions
by the federal government with respect to transfers that we believe
unilaterally are not only unacceptable but possibly illegal. We are prepared to take any action that is
within our means to oppose those cuts.
*
(1355)
Finance Ministers'
Meeting
Social Programs
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, it is very clear what the agenda
of the Finance minister is in
Will the Premier tell this House today in addition to the
following what other advice is he going to provide to his fellow
ministers? Is he going to suggest that
they too freeze 55‑Plus programs, that they too cut high school bursaries
for single‑parent moms on welfare?
Are they too to cut training programs in their northern regions? Are those the kinds of pieces of advice that
our Finance minister is going to give to other Finance ministers?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I can tell you one thing that
the Finance minister will not be advocating.
He will not be advocating the position of the Liberal Party in this
House or the New Democratic Party in this House, which is simply to spend more
money and raise taxes at a time when the people of this province are already
under great economic pressures, when they are struggling to keep their farms,
struggling to keep their homes, struggling to keep their jobs. The last thing they need is to follow the
advice of the Liberal Party and the NDP of this province and that is to spend
more money and to raise their taxes.
That advice he will not give.
Labour Adjustment
Strategy
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, can the Premier tell us what
advice the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), representing his government, will
give to the other Ministers of Finance with respect to the formulation of a
national labour adjustment strategy, which is sorely needed in this nation as
well as in this province?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, this government has consistently
indicated that is one of the unfulfilled commitments of the federal government
with respect to the various changes that have been taking place in our economy,
restructuring and so on, during the past number of years, that a labour
adjustment strategy is something we need.
We will consistently carry that message to
Mrs. Carstairs: It
obviously was not in the cribnotes of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness).
Social Programs
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Would the First Minister of this province tell
us if the Minister of Finance is also going to make suggestions to his fellow
Finance ministers about "workfare" initiatives?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Despite the fact that issue was raised and
recommended to us by the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans)‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Point of Order
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the NDP
believes in work, not welfare. Never did
we ever suggest‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The honourable member does not
have a point of order. It is a dispute
over the facts.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, as I indicated just moments ago, that the member for Brandon East is
quoted in Hansard‑‑
Mrs. Carstairs: What
does that have to do with my question?
Some Honourable Members:
Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Mr. Filmon: Quite
evidently the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs) does not realize it
was that statement that she is attempting to quote that is generated by the
statement that was made‑‑
*
(1400)
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Point of Order
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the rules in
Beauchesne's are very clear when it comes to answers, that they should not lead
to debate and they should deal with the matter raised. I am sure the member for Brandon East (Mr.
Leonard Evans) would love to debate the issue of economic policy with the
Premier, but this is Question Period. I
would like to ask you to call the First Minister to order.
Hon. Darren Praznik (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the matter that the First
Minister was addressing arose out of a question that had to do with a statement
made in this House by the member for Brandon East. I would hope the member for Thompson (Mr.
Ashton) would ask that the same latitude that has been allowed for the member
for
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would maybe ask if the Premier
has some qualms with the New Democratic Party on some other unrelated issue
that he can call the member into his Premier's office and he can debate it.
Beauchesne's is very clear.
Beauchesne's says that the reply must be with the question asked. I would ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to
answer the question put forward by the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs.
Carstairs).
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. On the point of order raised, I
thank all honourable members for their advice, but I believe the honourable
First Minister was attempting to answer the question on the matter that was
raised.
* * *
Mr. Filmon: I
realize that this is a very sensitive issue for members opposite. If they will please refrain from heckling, I
will try and get the answer out.
Mr. Speaker, on Monday of this week the member for Brandon East
(Mr. Leonard Evans) said, "Will this government consider now finally or
implement an anti‑recession program such as providing jobs for welfare
recipients . . . ." ‑‑ jobs for welfare recipients. Clearly, as anyone would, the Minister of
Finance (Mr. Manness) took that as meaning work for welfare recipients. That is
what he was suggesting.
I just want to say to the member for
All-Party Committee
Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of
Transportation. The
My question to the minister is:
Will this minister put together an all‑party committee along with
the representatives from the bayline communities to go directly to
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and
Transportation): Mr.
Speaker, the issue of Churchill has been and will continue to be a difficult
one. I want to indicate to the member
that this Premier and this government are dedicated to keeping Churchill open
and viable. I want to also indicate that
a lot of correspondence and conversations have taken place in the last while
about the
I also had discussions with the official critic to some degree
indicating the plan of action that I was going to lay out which is basically
that Shirley Martin, the Minister of State for Transport, is the one who is
responsible for Churchill. We are
arranging a meeting, my colleague the Minister of IT&T (Mr. Stefanson), the
Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Downey) and myself. We are hoping to have that meeting with the
federal minister very shortly to bring forward very strong concerns.
Mr. Speaker, I want to indicate to the member that if we do not
make proper progress, I think this is not a political issue in this House. I think we all are on the same side with this
issue, that we will take and work together with whomever wants to in terms of
trying to resolve it.
Mr. Harper: My
supplementary question to the minister is:
Will he establish an all‑party committee or have representatives
of bayline go directly to
Why has this minister not taken similar action?
Mr. Driedger: Mr.
Speaker, I would believe, as elected government representing all Manitobans,
that we put forward a position that is on behalf of all Manitobans. We will continue to do it along that line.
Mr. Harper: I have a
short supplementary. My question
is: What is the minister prepared to do
or what is this government prepared to do to support the
What is this minister prepared to do?
Mr. Driedger: Mr.
Speaker, I thought I had outlined the proposal or the direction that we were
going to take. We will be meeting with
the federal minister responsible for it, bring forward our concerns.
Mr. Speaker, I can assure members of the House that if that is
something that will enhance our position, that it is an all‑party
committee‑‑that has to be the considerable period of time, we will
look at that. We first have to go
through a certain process to find out where we are at.
I have to indicate as I did publicly in this House before that
I think it is a very crucial time for decisions regarding Churchill. We will do whatever we can to make sure that
our concerns are brought forward.
Aboriginal Justice
Inquiry
Report Recommendations
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Justice. Last week the minister got
quite upset when I questioned him as to why there had been no action taken on
the AJI report. Yesterday the Law Reform
Commission of Canada released a report stating that provincial and federal
governments should start giving aboriginal communities the authority to
establish aboriginal justice systems.
This report follows five provincial inquiries into aboriginal justice
that made similar recommendations.
My question is: When
will this minister announce his first change to the justice system as a result
of the AJI?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney
General): Mr.
Speaker, as we approach this matter, I can set out for the honourable member a
chronology of events that have gone on in
Of course, it is going to be interesting to know if the
position that the honourable member takes with regard to justice systems in the
future in this country will be consistent with the position that he has taken
and that others have taken with respect to the Constitutional Task Force
report.
Judicial System
Aboriginal Participation
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): A supplementary question to the same
minister: Why is it so difficult for
this government to announce that it intends to ensure that the number of
aboriginal people working in all areas of the justice system from probation
services to courtrooms will be increased, or that changes will be made for
example to the circuit courts immediately?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney
General): I have no hesitation in acknowledging, Mr.
Speaker, that this government has done a much better job than previous
governments in this province in raising the level of aboriginal participation
in the delivery of justice services in
The honourable member is no doubt referring to what is going to
be coming, and I can tell him that within the next weeks he will be hearing
more about this. I will be happy to sit
down and show the honourable member with people involved in my department to
show the increase in aboriginal participation in the delivery of justice
services in
Mr. Lathlin: Mr.
Speaker, we are not asking for a review to be done on studies.
Aboriginal Justice
Inquiry
Report Recommendations
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): My last question is again to the Minister of
Justice (Mr. McCrae). Can the minister
table a document today or with a given time frame in the future that would
outline a clear plan of action as to how he proposes to implement the
recommendations which are contained in the AJI report?
*
(1410)
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney
General): Yes,
Mr. Speaker, in the near future. I say
to the honourable member, however, that the honourable member during the three
years that it took the judges to prepare this report, I do not recall him ever
urging the judges to hurry up and get on with it. Those judges, in the work that they were
doing, were doing the important work or researching the issues involved and
listening to the people here in
Now it comes time to do something, I have to tell the
honourable‑‑
Some Honourable Members:
Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Mr. McCrae: If the honourable member
and his colleagues are interested in hearing the response to an important
question, I suggest they sit and listen to the answer that I am going to give,
Mr. Speaker.
When it is time to do something, rather than study as has been
done for the past three years‑‑these things do take some time, the
honourable member ought to recognize that‑‑I think he will find the
announcements that do flow will be far more substantive than even he thinks is
possible and certainly more substantive than Howard Pawley, Al Mackling, Roland
Penner‑‑
Some Honourable Members:
Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Conawapa Dam Project
Contract Validity
Mr. James Carr (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the
minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro (Mr. Neufeld), and again, we would like
to congratulate the minister on his unusual candour.
This week he told us that
The minister may not be as trapped as he thinks. Clause 1301 of the agreement with
I have a copy of an Order‑in‑Council, which I will
table, from the government of
Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister responsible for The
Mr. Carr: Mr.
Speaker, will the minister consult his lawyers immediately and write a letter
to the Minister of Energy of the
Mr. Neufeld: Mr.
Speaker, I am not sure that
Mr. Carr: Mr.
Speaker, since the minister has already said on the record this week that he
regrets the deal and that he would treat the deal differently if he had the
information that he has today, will he now agree to call or write or otherwise
contact the Minister of Energy of Ontario and immediately renegotiate the power
deal with that province?
Mr. Neufeld: Mr.
Speaker, I think I had better correct the member for Crescentwood. I have never said I regret the deal. What I
have said is if I knew in 1989 what I knew today I would have difficulty
recommending the building of Conawapa to the cabinet of this government. As far as contacting the Minister of Energy
in
GRIP Program
Government Position
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, over the past year this Minister
of Agriculture has stubbornly defended and promoted GRIP even when confronted
by the farmers of
Will the minister now listen to the farmers and acknowledge
that GRIP is a failure as it now stands and if so, will he indicate to this
House what action he is prepared to take to correct those problems?
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, over the course of the last 15
months I have probably met with 20, 25, maybe 30 different farm groups,
organizations and associations of people on GRIP and the kind of support that
they want in rural
The member says lack of support in southwest
Premium Increase
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, since nearly 40 percent of the
farm families are paying a penalty of 11 percent by this minister under crop
insurance, his words ring hollow.
Will the minister explain how he can justify up to a 6 percent
lower coverage under GRIP for next year and a 35 percent increase in farmers'
premiums for the coming crop year when this program has not even met their
needs in the current year? How can he
justify this kind of policy?
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): All the farmers in the grains and oilseeds
sector have lived in this province and this country for years and years and
years, depending on the marketplace.
That is what they want to produce to and respond to.
The marketplace has failed them fairly significantly because of
the grain trade war. This program has
been put in place to offset some of that hurt.
Those farmers have always had to determine their cost of production by
the decisions they make in the choices of crops they choose and the kind of
inputs they put in and the technology they put behind their farming practices.
That has not changed at all. We give
them one more, I guess, a crutch to lean on in terms of GRIP, in terms of being
able to make those decisions. We have a
crop insurance review in place in the
If the member's statements are true, they will come out through
the review and the recommendations will come back.
Mr. Plohman: The
minister is not denying lower coverage and higher premiums next year, Mr.
Speaker.
Crop Insurance
Crop Adjuster Salaries
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): In view of the fact farmers desperately need
off‑farm income to survive, why is this minister now threatening to throw
200 crop adjusters, who are mostly farmers in rural
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): I am not asking anybody to do what he is
alleging.
The Crop Insurance Corporation strikes an agreement with the
people who work for them, whether it is the employees or whether it is the per
diems they hire to do various jobs. I
will ask the Crop Insurance Corporation what contract he is talking about.
Gas Utilities
Monthly Fixed Charge
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood):
Mr.
Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.
The gas company's $10 per month fixed monthly charge provides a
lightning rod of anger against the gas company.
Elimination of the gas company's fixed monthly charge of $10 a month in
favour of a commodity charge would promote conservation with people who
conserve gas in paying less. The Premier
promised that much on page 3841 in Hansard on June 25 of this year when he
said: " . . . I want the NDP to
save $10 a month for every senior in this building by passing Bill 44."
My question to the minister is:
Why does the minister support the fixed gas charge?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate
Affairs): Mr. Speaker, the PUB
controls the rates set for the public for several utilities, this being one of
them. The fixed charge is a charge set
by Centra Gas that will cover their standing ongoing expenses, their overhead,
bookkeeping and so on.
The bill we introduced to help collect the delinquent accounts
I believe will see the consumer saving a great deal of money, not necessarily
directly in what they are paying out but in what they will not have to pay out,
perhaps both. Certainly $10 a month is
the minimum; I think that they would be a bit ahead.
Mr. Maloway: The
minister is obviously unaware that the PUB‑‑
*
(1420)
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The honourable member for
Elmwood, kindly put your supplementary question now, please.
Mr. Maloway: Mr.
Speaker, will the minister explain why the PUB at this very moment is making a
decision as to whether or not they are going to eliminate the fixed charge and
why she has not at this point made representation to them on this matter?
Mrs. McIntosh: The PUB
is structured to work independently. That is the whole purpose of the PUB. For the minister to direct the PUB to make
any particular decision would be gross interference and most inappropriate.
Mr. Maloway: Mr.
Speaker, when will the minister make herself available and make representation
to the PUB before this decision is made in the next couple of days?
Mrs. McIntosh: Mr.
Speaker, I believe the answer I gave to the same question a moment ago still
covers the same question.
Government Reports
Environment Friendly
Products
Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Environment.
Yesterday in this House, the Farm Lands Ownership Board Annual Report was tabled, Mr. Speaker. It starts by duplicating the front page. Then there are three pages with various pictures of officials including the minister, one sentence letters. Then ther