LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Tuesday, December 17, 1991
The House met at 1:30
p.m
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
Mrs. Louise Dacquay
(Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Municipal
Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I beg to
present (by leave) the First Report of the Committee on Municipal Affairs.
Mr.
Speaker: Does the honourable member
for
Some
Honourable Members: Leave.
Mr.
Speaker: Leave? It is agreed.
Mr.
Clerk (William Remnant): To the
honourable Legislative Assembly of
Your Standing Committee on Municipal
Affairs presents the following as its First Report.
Your committee met on Monday, December 16,
1991, at 8 p.m., and Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 10 a.m., in Room 255 of the
Your committee heard representation on Bill
35, The City of Winnipeg Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant la Loi sur la
Ville de Winnipeg, as follows:
Mr. Michael Mercury
Your committee has considered Bill 35, The
City of Winnipeg Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant la Loi sur la Ville de
Motion:
THAT the proposed section 26 of Schedule D,
as set out in section 5 of the Bill, be amended
(a) by renumbering subsection 26(4) as
subsection 26(5); and
(b) by adding the following as subsection
26(4):
Appeal of notice mailed after November 1,
1991 26(4) Notwithstanding subsection (3), where the
notice of application for revision
referred to in subsection (3) is
given or mailed between November 1, 1991 and the date on which royal assent is given to the Act by
which this provision is enacted, the
right to make application for
revision for the 1991 licence fee in lieu of business tax is deemed to expire 30 days after the date on
which royal assent is given to the
Act by which this provision is enacted.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
Mrs. Dacquay: I move, seconded by the honourable member for
Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion
agreed to.
TABLING OF REPORTS
Hon. Leonard Derkach
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, I have three reports to table.
I have the Annual Financial Report for the
year ended March 31, 1991, for
Hon.
Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): I have some tablings, Mr. Speaker: the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission Three
Month Report for the period April 1 to June 30, 1991; also, the Six Month
Report for the period April 1 to September 30, 1991; and also, Manitoba
Lotteries Foundation, both the First Quarter Report for the period April to
June 1991 and the Six Month Report for the period April to September 1991.
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
Bill 41‑The
Ms. Marianne Cerilli
(Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), that Bill 41, The Manitoba Telephone Amendment
Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur le telephone au
Motion
presented.
Ms.
Cerilli: This bill will deal with
the problem that I think everyone is aware of that the Manitoba Telephone
System has been abused by white supremist groups for distributing hate messages
to a number of groups, minority groups and individuals. We feel that, by incorporating some of the
same language that is in The Human Rights Code, The Manitoba Telephone Act can
be strengthened to prohibit this kind of activity.
Motion
agreed to.
* (1335)
Bill 40‑The Human Rights Code Amendment Act
Ms. Marianne Cerilli
(Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), that Bill 40, The Human Rights Code Amendment
Act; Loi modifiant le Code des droits de la personne, be introduced and that
the same be now received and read for the first time.
Motion
presented.
Ms.
Cerilli: Mr. Speaker, this is again
to make sure that we can stop the use of the telephone system to discriminate,
to threaten people, to promote racial hatred.
What we were trying to do is to incorporate some of the language from
the federal Human Rights Code into our
Motion
agreed to.
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
On behalf of all honourable members, I
welcome you here this afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Economic Growth
Employment Creation Strategy
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, on three occasions this last six
or seven days in Question Period, the Premier said that
Regrettably today, in spite of the fact
that in the last week and a half we have heard of hundreds of further job
losses in
I would ask the Premier today, in light of
this crisis and in light of what is going on in the
Hon.
Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker,
because I knew that the prophet of gloom and doom opposite, the member for
Concordia (Mr. Doer), would always be seeking out the worst possible economic
forecasts because that lines up with his hopes for the future of this province,
I did say very carefully here in this House that there are a range of
projections and forecasts that are made. Indeed, I have the entire range if he
wants it, in this book, some seven or eight different economic forecasts made
by the major banks.
* (1340)
When the member opposite was in government,
he traditionally used the Conference Board as the think‑tank that had the
most credibility and that was least involved with the economy in the sense that
the banks are all customers of the province.
I used the Conference Board. The Conference
Board clearly did say‑‑and I repeatedly referenced the Conference
Board. I did not say everybody said
that. I said the Conference Board was
projecting 4 percent growth in 1992 for
I might say he has said that there will be
an unemployment rate of 8.6 percent. I
just refer him to the economic forecast statement that was put out by his New
Democratic soul mate in
They are suggesting as well, Mr. Speaker,
that unemployment for
Budget Introduction Date
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): I am not even going to get into it. The growth rates are predicted in B.C. and
In the Premier's own letter to the Prime
Minister calling on the economic summit of First Ministers in
I would ask the Premier: In light of the crisis, and it is very
serious, will the Premier now bring in a budget in the early new year to deal
and develop an economic strategy for Manitobans who are out of work, cannot
find work and are predicted not to find work, consistent with the advice the
First Ministers are giving the Prime Minister?
Will the Premier do this in
Hon.
Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker,
we on this side of the House have been working very, very hard to move the
timetable up from bringing in budgets so that, in 1990, for instance, we were
not able to have a budget passed in this House until October of that year,
about halfway through the fiscal year.
Last year, we were able to move that
forward with a great deal of hard work and effort so that, in late April, we
were able to pass a budget. As a result,
again, of the hard work and effort that has been put in by Treasury Board, it
is our expectation that we will be dealing with the new budget early in March
and, with the co‑operation of members opposite, will be well before the
start of the next fiscal year. We will
have an opportunity to have a budget on the table, Mr. Speaker, that will be
our best efforts to address the very serious issues that are facing the
country. Right across
I repeat that, in the
In one year, Mr. Speaker, 80 percent of the
jobs lost in
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please.
Economic Growth
Public Consultations
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Unlike the Premier opposite, the Premier of
Ontario, when he was in opposition, did not support the Free Trade Agreement
with the
Mr. Speaker, the Premier further states in
his letter to the Prime Minister that we should be working closer together with
business, labour and government, a partnership with government. We thought,
that is a good idea. In fact, we have
been asking the Premier to have an economic summit that could be used in
preparation of the next year's budget that should be brought in very soon so
that we can deal in a co‑operative and consensus way to deal with the
devastation on our economies and our families of
I would ask the Premier to, one, bring in
an early budget, and, two, use a summit with business, labour and government to
get Manitobans working again instead of being on the unemployment line.
* (1345)
Hon.
Gary Filmon (Premier): This
government does indeed work with people in all sectors of the economy and from
all parts of society. Indeed, tomorrow
afternoon, our cabinet will be meeting with the executive of the Manitoba
Federation of Labour, part of our ongoing commitment to consultation with
people from all areas ‑(interjection)‑
Well, Mr. Speaker, the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) talks about things that
are said about and by the people in labour.
He and his friends, the union bosses, of course, have not necessarily
said nice things about us.
I saw the president of the Manitoba
Federation of Labour in her acceptance speech as she was re‑elected
president saying that her No. 1 objective was to get rid of my government, Mr.
Speaker, which shows how politicized the labour movement has become in this
province.
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable First Minister
to deal with the matter raised.
Mr.
Filmon: That is a regrettable
situation but despite all of that, we put those issues aside and we deal with
everybody in society. We are dealing
with the Manitoba Federation of Labour; we are meeting with them tomorrow,
their executive. We are meeting with
Chambers of Commerce. We are dealing with
economic development committees throughout the province. We are dealing with the
Anyone who has ideas to offer is welcome to
give those ideas, Mr. Speaker, and to allow us to participate with them in
rebuilding the
First Ministers' Conference
Employment Creation Strategy
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): My question is for the Premier.
The average number of unemployed this year
is estimated to be 48,300, which is the highest ever recorded by the labour
force survey. At the same time, our
labour force is shrinking. I ask the
Premier, Mr. Speaker, why did the Premier of this province not place
unemployment, the recession and growing welfare as the No. 1 item on the agenda
of the forthcoming First Ministers' conference?
Hon.
Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker,
I just want the member opposite to recall that in his days in office during the
infamous Pawley regime, as they were in the recession of the early '80s, there
was one particular year in which for almost half the year they had 54,000
unemployed people in this province, higher than the number that he is quoting
today in Manitoba‑‑54,000 people for almost half the year.
During that year, Mr. Speaker, we were
dealing with a labour force that was at least 40,000 less in total than it is
today, so proportionately, our percentage of unemployment and our numbers of
unemployment are better. There are not
as good as we would like them to be. We
want to do better.
Mr. Speaker, that is what the programs we
have put in place, that is what the economic foundation we have put in place,
will do, is to improve the economy.
Mr.
Leonard Evans: They are leaving the
province, they are leaving the labour force, and I will be prepared to table
this document showing that we have this year‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Question, please. The honourable member for Brandon East, with
his supplementary question.
Mr.
Leonard Evans: Will the Premier
reconsider this matter? Would he specifically advocate the establishment of job
creation programs at the national level at the forthcoming First Minister's
conference, given the fact that we have the worst recession since the Great
Depression. It is continuing. Indeed, unemployment may reach a high‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mr.
Filmon: Mr. Speaker, what we will do
is ensure that we have control of the expenditures, the deficit level and keep
taxes down in this province, unlike the New Democratic Party, when the member
for Brandon East was in government, that drove up the deficit to obscene levels
and at the same time raised every single tax in this province so that their
taxes were the second highest overall in this country.
In addition to that, the money that they
spent‑‑and I will talk more about it when I speak today on the
throne speech‑‑on short‑term, make‑work jobs like
cutting grass and clearing brush, Mr. Speaker, that the member for Concordia
(Mr. Doer) when he was president of MGEA used to talk about, we will not put
money into that short‑term‑‑
* (1350)
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Brandon East, with
your final supplementary question, please.
Social Assistance
Alternative
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon
East): What does the Premier expect the tens of
thousands of Manitobans to do this winter with thousands exhausting their
unemployment insurance benefits and thousands going onto welfare? What alternatives do they have besides going
on welfare or leaving this province? Why
do you not give‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please.
Hon.
Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker,
the member for Brandon East persists on raising the issue of work for welfare
recipients. Then he denies that he has
raised the issue, and he runs as far away from it as he can.
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that
nobody in this province should take delight in the plight of people who are
regrettably unemployed. Nobody should
take delight in the fact that we have a national and an international recession
that is affecting negatively every single country in the western world. ‑(interjection)‑
The member for
Social Assistance
Provincial Tax Credit
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.
Speaker, in all the rhetoric, there is a human dimension here that seems to be
forgotten. I am talking about people who
are unemployed, people who are on social assistance. I met this morning, as did the member for
Burrows (Mr. Martindale), and regrettably not the Minister of Family Services
(Mr. Gilleshammer) although he was invited to the same meeting, with social
assistance recipients. They have a
number of questions, and I want to ask them on their behalf today.
The first question is: Why did this minister cut the provincial tax
credit program in its essence of change so it is now going to be given $60 a
month instead of in a lump sum payment?
Why did he do that without any consultation with the social assistance
recipients who will be affected by that policy change?
Hon.
Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to
explain that to the honourable member.
I would indicate I met with the group at
the West Broadway Ministry a few months ago, and we will be meeting again in
January. I was not able to attend the
meeting this morning, but we did have staff in attendance there. At that time I was meeting with the Canadian
Paraplegic Association about the same issues, about housing, about social
allowances. I can tell you that in the
community there is a great recognition of the additional social allowances
program we have put in place for the disabled, a program that was long overdue.
The question the member asked was about
cutbacks. There was no cutback in the
social allowances program. We enhanced
that program to all recipients by some 3.6 percent. We changed the delivery of the tax credits to
a more timely basis. They not only are
getting their lump sum payment this year, but they are getting the 1992 tax
credit on a more timely basis starting with cheques that I believe will be in
their hands this week.
I was pleased to have support on that
initiative from the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans)‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please.
* (1355)
Mrs.
Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, they will
now receive $60 a month when they used to have received a lump sum payment.
The minister has said this will give them a
choice, either to spend the money monthly or to collect it and spend it at one
time. Unfortunately, there is a
regulation in place which says that the maximum bank account which they can
have is $400. How can they save their
$60 a month to come up with their final sum when he will not allow them to have
a bank account of more than $400?
Mr.
Gilleshammer: Just to finish my
previous answer, when we passed that legislation last spring we did have the
support of members of the Liberal Party who voted in favour of that bill.
There are many issues in the social
allowances program. The social
allowances program, of course, is a very complex one. We were able to increase some of the
allowances for housing some 3 percent, on the basic some 3.6 percent, and make
that change in the tax credits.
That is not to say there are not other
initiatives we are looking at. There are
many aspects to the social allowances program that we would like to give
further study to and have further consideration of. We hope to be making some further
announcements in the near future.
Special Needs
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): I have a
final supplementary to the minister.
Mr. Speaker, a number of recipients have
informed us they are being told by welfare workers that they do not need
special needs because they can use their GST rebate, they can use their tax
credit rebate, neither of which was to replace special needs.
Will this minister today issue a memorandum
to all those working in provincial welfare that they are not to tell claimants
they are to use monies from their GST rebate and monies from their tax credit
rebates for special needs?
Hon.
Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, we have some 26,000 or 27,000
clients and cases in the social allowances system that the province is
responsible for, and we certainly will advise and say publicly that recipients
will get fair treatment according to the guidelines that are in place.
College Louis Riel
Admission Policy
Mr. Elijah Harper
(Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Education. Yesterday afternoon, I met
with Mr. Fred Kelly and his son, David Kelly, the student who was being denied
admission to a St. Boniface school. I
have some information, some correspondence here, that I would like to table
that they gave me concerning the school division's policy.
I would like to ask the minister: Why will this minister not meet with Mr. Fred
Kelly and his son to tell the story and learn the side of the story why his son
is being denied admission to the school?
Hon.
Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, it was the
honourable member for Rupertsland who came to me yesterday late afternoon and
asked whether or not I would meet with the Kellys. The member for Rupertsland came to me at
about 3:30 and asked whether I would meet with him immediately. I had to decline because of the fact that my
afternoon had already been booked, and it was impossible for me to meet with
them at that time.
I am not opposed to meeting with them, Mr.
Speaker, but let us understand the issue here.
It is unfortunate that the parents of David Kelly do not qualify under
Section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to have their child in an FL1
school. Nevertheless, that is the responsibility of the school division, if
they wish to waive the policy. The
school division has made its decision on the matter, and it is one which lies
with the school division and not with the government.
Mr.
Harper: Mr. Speaker, my
supplementary to the minister is that the minister is responsible for the
legislation and also has the constitutional responsibility to uphold the
interests of every student‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Question, please.
Mr.
Harper: My question to the minister
is: Why is this minister not meeting
with the school division and also the student on this matter?
Mr.
Derkach: Well, Mr. Speaker, it is a
fact that Mr. David Kelly does have access to a French immersion school within
that school division. He has attended
that school for some 10 years, but under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms
under Section 23, Mr. Kelly does not qualify to attend an FL1 school. It is under that particular policy that the
school division is operating and has denied access to Mr. Kelly to attend that
particular school.
Mr.
Harper: Mr. Speaker, my final
supplementary is: This is a public
school and the minister responsible‑‑
* (1400)
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member, kindly put your
question, please.
Mr.
Harper: Yes. Will this minister table in the House
appropriate matters and procedures for a minister to intervene in the school
board since the school board association has asked for these changes?
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Speaker, the
regulations regarding rights under Section 23 of the Charter are very specific
and very clear. I would be happy to make
available to the member, the section which the school division has made its
decision under. I will send that to the
member.
Child Day Care
Funding Formula
Ms. Becky Barrett (
Will the Minister of Family Services, in
light of this overwhelming evidence, do the right thing and put back into place
the funding formula that was once in place that included a legitimate, adequate
operating grant for child care centres and family daycares?
Hon.
Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, the daycare portion of the
Family Services department has seen an increase of some 61 percent in the last
four budgets. When we came to office in
1988, daycare was accessing a budget line of $27 million. That has increased by some 61 percent to $44
million.
Opposition members are frequently talking
about cutbacks. I say to you that this
is an overwhelming increase in the amount of funding that daycares are able to
access. What the member is referencing
is a change from giving grants to daycare centres which tend to be a subsidy to
all, to using taxpayers' money to target those dollars to those people most in
need and who want to access the system.
Our subsidy levels are higher this year than they have ever been before.
Centre Licensing
Ms. Becky Barrett (
Hon.
Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I know the member speaks for the
MCCA and I would remind her that they are one of the advocacy groups in the
child care community. I would not only
listen to them, but I would listen to all of the groups that represent the
daycare community, including the parents.
I wonder if, in putting forward this new
concept, the member has caucused this with, for instance, the member for
Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans) who has written me a letter to license more
spaces. There seems to be a little
divergent thinking on the part of the NDP on this issue.
We will consult with all of the people
involved in the daycare community, including the parents, when we make daycare
changes.
Point of Order
Mr. Clif Evans
(Interlake): The letter that the minister refers to
supporting a daycare in the community‑‑I would like to remind the
minister that there is no daycare in that community.
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a Point of Order. This is a dispute over the facts.
Federal Funding
Ms. Becky Barrett (
Hon.
Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family Services): I indicated that we would listen to all areas
of the community in terms of daycare, and I would say to you that we are
accessing more CAP recovery dollars with our daycare program this year than we
ever have before. So the member need not
worry about us not accessing federal funds.
The CAP recoveries this year under the daycare line would be higher than
they were in previous years.
Environmentalists
Minister's Position
Mr. Paul Edwards (St.
James): Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of the
Environment (Mr. Cummings).
Reaching an all‑time low in this
government's attempt to rationalize, ignoring the environment and the
environmentalists, the Energy minister stated yesterday: If we are going to listen to these
environmentalists, we should not have any mines, we should not have any
electricity, we should not have any thermal stations or any industry that is
going to pollute.
He then went on to question: If we are going to let environmentalists stop
every project we have in the works, what is left for us?
Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of the
Environment (Mr. Cummings), will the minister indicate to members of the House
whether or not he agrees with those sentiments and how they fit with this
government's many dozens of press releases outlining their commitment to
sustainable development?
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable member's question seeks an
opinion and is, therefore, out of order.
The honourable member for St. James, kindly rephrase your question,
please.
Mr.
Edwards: Mr. Speaker, will the
minister indicate what the policy of this government is, given their many
dozens of press releases outlining their commitment to sustainable development
and their inclusion of all the stakeholders in that quest?
Hon.
Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I think there are numerous
examples of the process that we are prepared to undertake in this government to
make sure that all stakeholders are heard, to make sure that the issues are
raised, and they are either mitigated or eliminated where they are apparent at
the prior hearing process. We are
committed to the concepts of sustainable development and environmental
protection, and it stays that way.
Conawapa Dam Project
Environmental Delay
Mr. Paul Edwards (St.
James): For the same minister, can the minister
indicate whether or not it is the government's policy that, as the Minister of
Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld) further stated, environmentalists will not be
allowed to unduly delay the construction of Conawapa, and the Minister of
Energy's further conclusion that, I would have to say that all our plans are
that it will be built?
Hon.
Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the process has been laid
out. The process is widely accepted as
being a fair and open one, and that is the way it will continue to be.
Economic Viability
Mr. Paul Edwards (St.
James): Mr. Speaker, will the Environment minister
ensure that the economic viability of Conawapa is part of the scoping for the
upcoming environmental process, given that the economic principle of
Manitobans' need for that power has now been questioned and that need in fact
has been confirmed by both the minister responsible for Hydro and the Premier
(Mr. Filmon) as not being what it was stated to be in front of the PUB?
Hon.
Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): In the review of the project, we are going to
be looking at the environmental impacts.
We will make sure that they are properly mitigated and properly handled
prior to any construction beginning and make sure that any recommendation from
the Clean Environment Commission and the joint panel in the case of Conawapa
are followed. There has been a prior
review of the economic factors. The
economic factors will continue to be part of the studies that this government
goes through and that Manitoba Hydro goes through, but we have laid down the
guidelines for the Conawapa review, and I believe they are fair.
* (1410)
Immigrant Credentials
Working Group
Mr. Conrad Santos
(Broadway): Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the
honourable Minister of Education.
No one who has lit a lamp puts it in a
secret place or under a basket but on a lamp stand so that everyone who comes
in may see the light. Since 1990, and
all of '91 is now almost over, there is a 10‑member working group on
immigrant credentials under the Department of Education and Training of the
Department of Education. They have been
consulting with professional technical groups, ethnocultural groups and post‑secondary
educational institutions in order that they may assess qualifications ‑(interjection)‑ I am laying the
groundwork‑‑so that they may assess the qualifications of students
whom they brought with them into
I now ask the honourable minister: What has ever happened to the result of that
consultation and the‑‑
Mr.
Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Hon.
Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, it is in fact true that we have
established a working group on immigrant credentials, and we had established
that within the Department of Education and Training about a year ago. That group has been actively working with
organizations that are affected by this kind of an issue. It is not an issue that can be handled
overnight, but indeed I know that the work is still ongoing. Now that the responsibility for that has been
transferred over to the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, I will
take the question as notice on behalf of my colleague.
Mr.
Santos: Now that the honourable
minister has passed the buck, can this government enlighten this House and the
people of
Mr.
Speaker: The question has been put.
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Speaker, once again I
will take that question as notice for my colleague.
Mr.
Santos: If the honourable minister
takes everything into consideration, would the honourable minister at least
tell this House and the people of this province what specific actions they have
in mind in order to deal with this problem of unusable skills and technical
training that are not being useful at all because of lack of recognition?
Mr.
Derkach: That is an issue that has
been before this province for many years and indeed, Mr. Speaker, I think it is
very evident by the remarks that have been made within this House, that all of
us would support‑‑that people who come to this province from other
countries would be given an ample opportunity to use their skills in a very
productive way within our society.
In terms of the findings of the report, I
am sure that will all be made available once the minister is ready to table
that, and I will take the specifics of that as notice.
Crow Benefit
Government Position
Mr. John Plohman
(Dauphin): The Minister of Agriculture (Mr.
I ask the Minister of Agriculture, what
precise action has this minister taken, or will he take to demonstrate that he
is firmly opposed to any Canadian position that would see the historic Crow
benefit given away at the GATT talks?
Hon.
Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture):
Mr. Speaker, the member says that we are having 125 meetings. That is right‑‑to let the rural
public of western
With regard to whether it is a negotiating
point at GATT, basically my understanding is no, is it is not a negotiating
point at GATT.
Mr.
Plohman: Can the minister explain
what action he has taken to call to the Prime Minister's attention in recent
days that farmers need immediate cash pursuant to the