COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

(Concurrent Sections)

HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION

Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Would the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this section of the Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 254, will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Highways.

When the committee last sat, it had been considering item15.1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits, on page 80 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass?

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Chair, are we approaching the capital projects of the department?

Mr. Chairperson: We are on 15.1.(b)(1) on page 80, Executive Support.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Chairperson, actually I had a few questions that I want to ask before we start passing the lines. The first one was in regard to a constituent whom I met at our local McDonald's. He was trying to get some information in regard to policy on truckdrivers, in particular regarding the logbooks. In one particular incident, I understand that there were two drivers, one was driving the truck obviously, one was the passenger. The passenger was requested to provide a driving log. I am wondering if the minister can indicate what obligations a passenger would have in terms of making available that kind of material.

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): When a vehicle or truck is stopped on the road by a compliance officer or the RCMP and they request the logbooks, the driver is required to supply the logbook. If he does not supply it, he is in contravention. In numerous instances, they also would be asking for the book from the co-driver, and the normal process is the co-driver would supply it.

In one particular case involving a particular co-driver and a particular company--I do not know exactly when that was--June of '95, the co-driver refused to supply the logbook. A subsequent court decision was that the interpretation of the word “driver” was not clear enough such that legally the co-driver was not in violation by not providing his logbook. But the normal processes both do. In this case, strangely enough, later on when the logbooks were seen, both logbooks were in compliance.

So there is a little glitch in the definition within our provincial legislation to be sure that the co-driver is also in that instance considered to be one of the drivers, so a small technical glitch, but the driver provided the logbook and the driver was in compliance.

Mr. Lamoureux: Is it then the minister's intention on bringing in some sort of amendment to the legislation if that would be required in order to resolve that glitch, or is the minister quite content with the current system and leaving it, because it seems if there is the one case, that it is not really a problem area.

Does the department feel that it is essential that the co-driver make available their log upon request? If the minister can just give some sort of indication of what the department's intentions are regarding it.

* (1540)

Mr. Findlay: The issue that I have described does not happen on a rampant basis. I am not aware of any other instance where a co-driver refuses to also offer his logbook for inspection, but there are a lot of other issues around driver hours and all that kind of thing.

There is a major North American study that is going on right now on driver hours, driver fatigue. It has been going on for three years. The results of that study will be available to transportation authorities in North America fairly soon, and in that context, I am prepared to look at it. But when we only have one incident where there was nothing in error anyway, where a person chose to be maybe a little obstinate in the process, that is not worth doing the changes because it is not a problem in the industry. It was not even a problem in that case, it was just a personality circumstance, I would suggest.

When we look at the overall picture of this study, looking at the broader issue of driver fatigue and hours and all that sort of thing, there will be broader changes likely that will be considered and we will deal with it at that time. But it is recorded and noted.

Mr. Lamoureux: The report that the minister makes reference to, I would be interested--I have a number of truckdrivers actually in my area, as I am sure everyone does--I would not mind to be provided a copy of it when it becomes available if the minister would be able to do something of that nature. I do not know how public the document actually is.

Mr. Findlay: The study is funded by Transport Canada and trucking companies. I have no knowledge that it will not be made public, but the decision will be made by the people who paid for the research to be done. I think in the broader interest of public safety, concerns about trucks, it probably should be released. But I cannot commit that it will because I am not the person who will make that decision. But it is a North American-wide one, so it will have a lot of implication to a lot of people, and the people who commissioned it and who will make recommendations from it will make that decision.

Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Chairperson, I actually have the privilege of representing or at least a number of the trucking firms are located in my area and jointly with the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) in some cases. They tend to gravitate to that area and I am very much appreciative of that fact. The trucking industry as a whole, from what I understand, is in need of employees. I am wondering if the minister can just give the committee some sort of an update of the employee demands that are currently out there.

Mr. Findlay: Employee demands.

Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, for employees. I understand that there is--

Mr. Findlay: Or demand for employees.

Mr. Lamoureux: --demand for employees. I understand that the job market is actually fairly positive in that area or a few prospects for jobs.

Mr. Findlay: In the broader context of what is happening in terms of transportation, particularly truck transportation, there is an expanded activity in the trucking industry not only in terms of the big companies and the long-haul contracts that they have in Canada and outside of Canada, there is also a very active expanding trucking industry--small truckers--developing and expanding in rural Manitoba.

I think it was about a year, year and a half ago, maybe a year and a half ago, there was a fair bit of concern, a lot of talk about the shortage of drivers. My understanding is a lot of that demand for drivers has been basically filled. I know there are private driving schools. I know that, through the Department of Education, we and the Manitoba Trucking Association were part of funding a driver training process.

There may be some companies have a little more trouble acquiring drivers than other companies. That probably reflects on how drivers are treated in companies, yet it might be a perceived shortage of drivers, but many carriers are having no trouble finding an adequate number of drivers. I do not think there is anything wrong with the nature and type and experience and professionalism of the drivers out there either. There is nothing to indicate there is any problem, that people brought in people who did not have enough education, training or experience. I do not see any evidence of that happening, so I think the market is being reasonably filled. I would not say it is 100 percent filled, but reasonably filled. I think for a young person or anybody who aspires to be a driver and wants to take the training and get the proper licensing and has the appropriate clean driver's licence, job opportunities are very, very good. I know of many young couples who will go driving, two of them, for a period of years to put away a grubstake before they build a house, start a family and that sort of thing. So the opportunities are good for the committed and the professional drivers.

Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Chairperson, before I go on to the other topic, the training programs that are out there, does the department monitor them? I am thinking in particular companies like Reimer that would have training programs for truckers, in particular, long-haul trucking. What role does the department play in terms of training?

Mr. Findlay: There is one company, I believe it is Reimer's, that has a training school, and we certify the company who in turn certifies their drivers. That provision is available to any company if it wants to do it, but they are the only ones so far doing it.

In terms of the private driving schools, trade schools, they have certain licensing under the Department of Education, not under us, but clearly before they get their licence they have to pass the license testing for DDVL. So that is our basic involvement.

Just on the broader question, it is clearly my understanding that every trucking company is very, very concerned about safety overall, not only with their rigs but their drivers, and certainly their insurance company makes them aware of the consequences of not having a good driving record, so there are a lot of checks and balances there. I think we also have a program that allows the company to review the licence of a person who is applying for work so that, if there are any problems on his licence in another jurisdiction, we can make the company aware of that, so that they can cross-reference what the employee has said about the cleanness of his record. So there are a lot of checks and balances to ensure that we have good drivers with clean driving records, and I think the industry responsibleness to safety is very, very good.

Mr. Lamoureux: From the trucking industry I want to move on to the taxi industry, which is another very important industry, as most industries are, obviously, but I have a specific interest in this area because many of my constituents are also quite involved in that particular industry. A couple of years back there was some legislation that was passed, and the minister might recall the legislation. It was somewhat controversial; in fact, out of that legislation that ultimately did receive third reading, there was a commitment made by government to have some sort of a working group. I know the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) was quite involved; I was quite involved. There was the minister who expressed interest in terms of trying to see if in fact the legislation could be modified to take into consideration some of the things that were being stated. There were aspects of the legislation that were not going to be proclaimed until well after the bill receiving Royal Assent. I am wondering if the minister might be able to give us some sort of an update in terms of that particular piece of legislation.

* (1550)

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, through the discussion on that bill, it was about three years ago, the commitment to set up the committee was not a government commitment; it was an industry commitment to set the committee up. I am not aware that that working group ever got up and running, and the government was not to proclaim it until it was up and running and functioning. We have had no requests from the Taxicab Board that we should proceed with proclamation. My general interpretation, things are working reasonably well in the industry; there is no need to do anything that might in any fashion upset that sort of status quo. Through the course of time and events, the conflicts of that point in time seem to have, as far as I am aware, been reasonably resolved. I am not saying fully resolved but reasonably resolved such that the industry seems to be functioning without the level of controversy, conflict, circumstance that existed at that time.

Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Chairperson, I would request of the minister at least some form of prior notification if it is at all possible regarding the future of that legislation if at some point in time the government is looking at proclaiming. The reason why is that I have a number of good personal close friends to a certain degree that would be more than happy to be able to sit down with departmental officials to explain from their perspective any thoughts--or, I should not say, any thoughts--any problem areas from within the industry because it is one of those issues which never takes too much in order to get people really wound up.

The minister was part of the process, Mr. Norquay was a part of the process, so they are fairly famliar with what it is I am talking about. My role, I would like to think, in this particular area is just to ensure that there is more harmony within the industry. If there is, in fact, a need, or if the government does feel that there is a need for movement in that industry, I would welcome any opportunity to make myself available for input and possibly even some industry reps, who, I know, would have nothing but good intentions. Some might have questionable intentions within the industry, but there are a lot of fine, outstanding individuals within the industry who would do what is in the best interests of the industry. I will leave that and then go on to another area unless the minister wants to comment.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, I will just receive that as honest and honourable input from the member and commit to him that I like harmony where it can be found and however it can be found, and currently it is there, as I understand it, and I have no intention of doing anything that would in any way disrupt that harmony. But, if circumstances change in the future, as we revisit it, I will remember what the member said and see how we can be sure we can find an avenue to harmony, and I know legislation often is not an automatic answer to harmony. There are other ways, and with the member's contact with that particular community, are they willing to use his efforts in the future if a conflict should come up that would require further work? So I thank him.

Mr. Lamoureux: I appreciate the gesture from the minister.

The last issue I want to bring up was the one of asphalt purchasing. I had received a letter, and I believe it was from Saskatchewan, where I understand the province now is going to be purchasing asphalt from the States as opposed to Saskatchewan. The concern, as expressed within the letter, was that preferential treatment is often provided to the person or the company that ultimately won the bid from within its own jurisdiction. So they feel that the bidding process might have allowed that company to be able to underbid the one in Moose Jaw, thereby potentially putting the viability of the company in Moose Jaw at risk in the long term, and, as a result, the prairie region could ultimately lose an asphalt plant.

I am wondering if the minister is at all aware of the asphalt tender that went out or if he might be in a position to be able to comment on it.

Mr. Findlay: As I understand the particular circumstance that the member raises, we in the process of our Highways capital activity, we tender contracts. The people who bid on the tenders, particularly with asphalt, have all been Canadian companies. Where the company then gets the product from is a choice of theirs. We do not have any control over where they source the product from. I think he is referring to one particular company that has an office of operation here in Winnipeg, bid from here as a Manitoba company, and a certain company in Saskatchewan is claiming that maybe that company had an unfair advantage because the source product is from the States. That company which laid the complaint and all the rest of Manitoba-type companies face this same preferential disadvantage across the U.S. border.

We do not have control over where they source the product, have not had, but we deal with tenders that are Canadian based. For the good of the taxpayer, we look for the best quality at the lowest price. That has been our process. If the member is asking that we should be more diligent to prevent product coming from the U.S., maybe we might be raising the cost of the product and then the cost of our tenders, and for $10 million of contract work at asphalt, we get less miles done. So there is a downside to it, too.

It is secondary event that the company did. It was not an American company that bid; it was a Canadian company.

* (1600)

Mr. Lamoureux: The reason why I bring it up is just more so to feel somewhat assured that the minister is aware of it, primarily because asphalt production is not something that every city in itself does. The concern that I would have is what more of a predatorial type of bidding that might take place in the future. In particular, if you have a company that is artificially lowering its price in an attempt to enlarge the market, and once it has the market, then it starts to put up the price. It gets a bit more awkward. In the short term, there might some benefits; the long term would be somewhat questionable.

I respect what the minister said, and, at that point, Mr. Chairperson, we are quite prepared to pass.

Mr. Chairperson: Item 15.1.(b)(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $438,900.

Mr. Dewar: I would like to ask the minister a number of questions related to roads and highways in the Selkirk constituency. There are two that I would like to raise today.

One is the River Road, and I have calls from constituents every year at this time concerned about the dust problems of that particular road. I understand that the government has in the past put on some type of a dust retardant. Once again, I have received those calls, and I just would like to ask the minister what plans he has to deal with that particular problem on that particular road. This is the River Road in the Lockport-St. Andrews area. He is familiar with that.

Mr. Findlay: River Road, there are a couple of things happening there. One is, there is about three-quarters of a million dollars being spent on slope stabilization of a certain component along the Red River. Some of that was done last year, and the rest will be completed this year.

The road receives dust treatment every year, but after the spring soft period, a certain little bit of deterioration happens in the roads, so before dust treatment is put on every year, the road should be reshaped. If additional gravel is needed, it is put on and the road brought up to an acceptable standard in terms of grading and gravelling. Then the dust treatment is put on. If you put the dust treatment on before that, when you put the fresh gravel on, you lose the benefit of the dust treatment.

So the normal process, when the spring softness is over, gravelling and grading happens and then dust control. That process will be used again this year, and I would imagine the department is either in or very close to the process of reshaping and gravelling and preparing for dust treatment.

Mr. Dewar: Mr. Chairman, a concern has been raised by a constituent, and it makes a lot of sense, that each year the department spends money on this particular treatment that you just described. Would it not cost less for there to be a long-term solution, either a paving or a seal placed on that road, so that there is a long-term solution to this problem?

Mr. Findlay: In terms of the overall geometry and circumstance of the road, I have already mentioned to the member that there is slope stabilization that is necessary to be done, and that should definitely be done before any surface is put on the road because if the road slid, the surface would crack, break, and you would lose the investment you put in there.

In addition to that, the road needs some work, particularly on some curves. The curves need to be softened, not quite so sharp, and that work should be done before any surfacing is done.

But at the present time, the process of what we are doing is the least-cost option, but we are proceeding towards the longer-term plan, and that is once the slope stabilization is done, we will look very carefully at whether the road warrants surfacing, but before we do the surfacing, we want to do the curve softening at the same time. So there is a long-term plan to make it a better road, and I think, ultimately, it will end up with a surface on it that everybody is happy with, a road that will last for a long time and curves that will be a little safer in terms of curvature.

There are a lot of elements there, but the final element is the surfacing which from my understanding of the warrants would indicate that it should be done.

Mr. Dewar: I want to thank the minister. As the minister is aware, this is a heritage road. It is a well-travelled road, as well. I do hope that he will consider this in his long-term plans for capital investment in terms of highways and that there be a long-term solution found to that particular problem there faced by the constituents.

The other issue, of course, is the provincial truck Highway No. 9 between Lower Fort Garry and the Perimeter. I do thank you for your written response to a letter that I sent you, and I have it here before me. Have you come to a firm decision as to your commitment to upgrading that particular stretch of that highway, or instead is there consideration still given to the Selkirk corridor project?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, I think everybody is fully aware of the traffic volumes on Highway 9 and all the turning actions that happen into and off of Highway 9, and it certainly serves a lot of developments there, different housing developments all the way up and down there. I have driven it a few times, and it is busy.

The member asks about the existing route versus a corridor. Clearly, he knows a petition came in from a lot of residents in the area which was received by myself, and I respect what they say. The route is the existing route. Even if a corridor was built, they would still travel the existing route. Even if a corridor was built, they would still travel the existing route. You know, we are really strapped for funds. A looming factor with us is always dollars, so we will be constantly looking at the most cost-effective way to get the maximum degree of improvements that also improve safety on that road. What final design ends up for the existing route of Highway 9, there are going to be some cost considerations in that, but we are working from the south end, steadily trying to do things and improve the safety on the road.

I do not, for a moment, think that the traffic volumes on Highway 9 are ever going to go down. They are like every road feeding into the city; they are going to continue to rise. A four- lane with sufficient safety factors in the geometry of the road is going to be a continuous consideration, but also within the concept of affordability too, because I think the member is also aware we have tremendous demand on Highway 59 south from the Perimeter going south wanting $60 million spent on 14 kilometres, and we have made commitments moving in that direction. Those are just a couple of the demands that are out there.

* (1610)

I think it is fair to say that on my table right now there is a billion dollars of capital requests and a hundred million to spend. So you really have to be cost conscious all the time. You have to maximize safety and efficiency of what you do with available dollars. So we will continue to progress towards that, and the idea will be to--I think the member should be able to read between the lines. We cannot be building new roads when roads already exist because we cannot even afford to fully upgrade the existing roads fast enough.

Mr. Dewar: I do appreciate the minister's concerns. I travel that road every day. I know it is busy, and it does have some serious problems. The department did some patching last year, and we appreciate that. Can you tell me what consideration is being given this fiscal year to doing some more patching on that road?

Mr. Findlay: Every year we announce a fall program and a spring program. The spring program for '96-97 will be coming out soon, and the member will probably be able to notice that we will reflect some continuous activities associated with that road to be sure that we continue to work on it to upgrade it and continue to work towards the full upgrade over the course in time. I think the member also will reflect that we cannot do everything in one year. It takes time. You do it step by step.

Mr. Dewar: Will the minister then confirm that the patching of Highway 9 will be in the spring--is it the spring project list?

Mr. Findlay: At any given time in terms of the commitments we have out in front of the industry, it will total anywhere from 1.6 to two times the total budget, so we might have commitments in the program, some half of which or three-quarters of which will be done this year and others next year and even the year after. But on roads of urgent need, once it is programmed, it is done as rapidly as possible. There are other commitments in the program that are not quite as urgent as commitments just coming into the program. So it is always a check and balance.

Clearly the member can also understand that where major floods happened this year, if there is road upgrade that has to be done, it will be done on very short notice because we have no choice. It means other projects already committed in previous programs, again, will have to wait. But it is always a balancing act, and I always get constant input from the department as to where we should be spending most cost-effectively scarce dollars. But Highway 9, because of the traffic volumes and the geometry and the accident history, is a very high priority.

Mr. Reid: I have a few questions, and you will forgive me if I cover some area that has already been covered in the Highways Estimates to this point. I want to ask the minister questions relating to an issue that was talked about a few moments here with respect to the Taxicab Board. In past we have seen--or at least it has been my experience--that after we finish the Estimates process the government has come along in the past and announced fee increases for various boards and committees that are operating under the responsibility of the Department of Highways and Transportation.

I want to ask the minister: Is his department planning to have any fees relating to the Taxicab Board? Is he planning for this fiscal year having any fee increases for the Licence Suspension Appeal Board or the Motor Transport Board or any boards or committees that are also covered under Highways and Transportation?

Mr. Findlay: In the process of developing the budget, there is no proposed fee increases in the areas the member mentions.

Mr. Reid: So then I take it from the minister's answer then that there will be no fee increases announced for any of those boards or committees under the minister's responsibility during this current fiscal year?

Mr. Findlay: I said that at the budget development process no increases were brought forward and no increases are being planned at this stage. I think the member should also be aware, though, that when services are delivered we always have to be considering at least and I think, where feasible, move towards the greater ability of cost recovery for services delivered. That is an ongoing agenda process, but at this stage there is nothing committed, nothing planned, in that context. There is not a lot of advantage to me saying never, never, because we do have to work towards trying to have cost recovery for services delivered, because at the same time, in the overall budget budgeting process more money is always needed in certain other areas like social services area. So our attempt is to, where we can, deliver the services we deliver at a cost-recovery basis, but in some cases we are not there. At this stage we are not planning anything in the budget we are discussing right now.

Mr. Reid: The only thing that I am trying to determine here is what plans the minister has for this current fiscal year that we are in now and whose budget document we are discussing here during this committee hearings. That is why I have asked the question here.

Can the minister tell me what level of cost recovery we are at for the boards and committees?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, in the case of the Licence Suspension Appeal Board and the Medical Review Board, there is cost recovery, but the rest of the boards we have various degrees of not fully recovering costs. We do not have the breakdown of the percentages in the different areas, but on those particular two we do, Medical Review and Licence Suspension Appeal.

Mr. Reid: Well, then perhaps I can leave the question with the minister and ask him to provide the information to our critic on the cost recovery for the other committees and boards under the minister's responsibility if he will be willing to undertake that and provide that information at some near point.

Mr. Findlay: Yes, we will gather the information as quickly as we can and supply that information. To get the question clear, the degree of cost recovery on an annual basis on the rest of the boards.

Mr. Reid: I want to ask the minister about rail jobs, as he might expect that I would do in committees of this nature, being that I am representing a community that has a strong rail presence or at least did until recent years in the province of Manitoba. I want to ask the minister if he can provide me with the information relating to the number of jobs that CN Rail has in the province of Manitoba, full and part time--and a breakdown, if possible--the number of jobs that CP Rail has in the province of Manitoba full and part time, and the number of jobs that VIA Rail has in the province of Manitoba full and part time.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, the most recent information we have is CN 3,880 jobs in Manitoba, CP 2,500 jobs in Manitoba and VIA 266 jobs in Manitoba.

Mr. Reid: Now can the minister tell me, since I did ask, are those all full-time jobs or are there part-time jobs into that total, and what is the date of that current information?

* (1620)

Mr. Findlay: We have it as jobs. I would not want to speculate absolutely all full-time jobs or not. The CN information is May '95, CP information is November '94, and the VIA is February '96.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me then--I mean, this is somewhat dated information. The minister knows full well there have been job losses that have occurred through layoff and employees that have taken buyouts from their various companies. The CN jobs, the numbers that he is showing is May '95, so that is a year old. The November '94 CP job numbers are a year and a half old. I mean, there have been changes. Even I know there have been changes in those numbers since that time.

I want to know if the minister has current information, and if he does not have, can he provide us with that information in the very near future.

Mr. Findlay: The only more current information that we have here is CN on January 29, '96, 3,480 employees.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me then, does he have information relating to the number of jobs, full and part time, and if he has a breakdown of that for the three railways.

Mr. Findlay: At this point in front of me, no, we do not have that.

Mr. Reid: Will the minister agree to provide that information for us at some very near future point?

Mr. Findlay: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we will provide that information.

Mr. Reid: And if the minister will also agree to all three railways, CN, CP and VIA, up-to-date employment figures, full and part time, for this province as well as their national figures.

Mr. Findlay: With the comparative national figures, as well as the provincial--

Mr. Reid: Up-to-date figures, yes.

Mr. Findlay: Yes.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me then, do we currently have 13 percent of CN's national work force employed in the province of Manitoba?

Mr. Findlay: Obviously, Mr. Chairman, when we get those numbers, if we can get them provided, you know, in the detail the member asks for from the companies, we will be able to determine what that percentage is. My understanding though is that the process that the railroads are going through is that they are doing basically proportional rightsizing, downsizing, modern adjustments in employee levels to workload right across the country.

I think it is fair to say also that jobs are a reflection of activity of that particular industry, and it is of some significant concern to me what may happen to the rail industry over the next two to five years, particularly with the grain haul industry.

I spoke to Canadian Transportation Research Forum yesterday in Winnipeg here. Clearly we have got to understand what is going on in that industry and that is that, you know, in rural Manitoba there has been a move in the last two, three, four years of diversifying what they produce and interest in value-added activity. Once the Crow rate was eliminated that really precipitated some very considerable decision making as farmers started to face the full cost of rail transportation.

Some of the things we see happening are certainly that more and more volume is coming out of elevators by truck. I have asked the major elevator companies and have been given a figure of about 25 percent of the product coming in the front door is going out the back door by truck. That is 25 percent lost to the rail industry. It is being hauled to various locations within Manitoba for various--whether it is going to feed lots, feed mills or to value-added type industries, whether it is crushing plants or various value-added announcements that have been made in recent time.

We are going to expand a number of value-added activities with raw agricultural product, and what it is going to do is, it will still be a product to export, but the volume will be smaller and the value will be much greater. So I think that puts a tremendous challenge in front of the rail industry to try to prevent some of the erosion of loss of tonnage that they are hauling and be sure that they can meet the modern needs of the shippers so that they can sort of, I would hope, in the future recapture some of the lost economic activity. But when they lose the volumes, that has to reflect in terms of the number of people that need to be employed.

The member always talks about jobs, but jobs are only there if there is work to do, and things have to happen to keep the work there, like keeping the volumes there, and the shipper is the person who makes the decision whether he is going to use a truck or rail unit to haul his product short distances, medium distances or long distances. So the equation, the member wants us to worry about jobs, but I think he should be looking at the overall activity that the rails are involved in and ask questions as to why they are losing volumes that they used to have. Why can they not capture the volumes in the new era of movement of bulk commodities of lower and higher values?

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me when the last time was he or his department staff met with CN, the last time they met with VIA Rail management and the last time they met with CP Rail management?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, staff have met with CP at the beginning of this month and with CN within, we believe, about six weeks; and about a month ago I was at a WESTAC meeting when we talked with both CN and CP officials.

Mr. Reid: The minister did not indicate when the last time he met with VIA management, and can the minister also indicate what message he has delivered to the railway senior management on behalf of the people that are employed in the rail industry in the province of Manitoba?

* (1630)

Mr. Findlay: Staff have not met with VIA in recent times. Certainly we made representations to the task force about trying to maintain the maximum amount of VIA job activities in Manitoba.

The member asks what message I delivered to senior officials. It is basically the message I delivered earlier to the member, and that is that we expect the railroads to respond to the new challenges in the marketplace, to maximize ability to keep freight on rail as opposed to on road, and of course along with that goes jobs. The other message we give to them is very clearly as you adjust your workforce sizes, we do not want to see any greater impact in Manitoba than would occur elsewhere.

Clearly the member is fully aware but never acknowledges that CN has set up a customer service centre and CP has set up a customer service centre in Manitoba in Winnipeg which in both cases serves the whole nation. That is a reflection that we have done some work to explain the advantages to them of being in the central location in the country and when those customer service jobs come out of other locations, they end up as a positive for Manitoba. On the telecommunications side, we have gained considerably, unfortunately at other provinces' expenses, but I think the railroad has a real challenge for them to keep existing volumes of activity and to expand on that. It is a major challenge, and if they do not succeed in that, there are more and more truck miles. Certainly there are jobs in the trucking industry when that happens, but it impacts our roads.

The member knows we do not have as many dollars for capital expenditure in the short term as we might like to meet all our road infrastructure needs. So keeping more bulk on rail saves the roads and this is true in Saskatchewan and is true in Alberta, but I will tell you the change in the WGTA, that federal decision is probably going to have its greatest impact in Manitoba because there is gong to be less product going to export simply because of the cost basis that the shipper faces.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me because when I asked this question of him last November when some 485 of the 700 people employed in the workforce at the Transcona CN Shops, 485 people were laid off, the minister said at that time it was only a temporary layoff. Have all 485 people been called back to work?

Mr. Findlay: I think the member tries to insinuate that I laid them off and I called them back. Clearly I do not lay them off and I do not call them back. I guess I might answer the member's question, he will say now I am running the railroads, well, I am not. But I am telling the railroads you are going to have to work hard to keep your business. They had layoffs, it is a company decision, and my understanding is the majority have been called back. That was a company decision, pure and simple, and we are not a government that interferes with company's decisions. We want the companies to survive, and we talk in terms of trying to be sure that we attract the majority of the business that we can from those companies to this particular jurisdiction because we respect the value of jobs, well-meaning jobs, good paying jobs, and clearly railroad jobs are those kinds of jobs.

But we do not run the companies, we do not order them, we try to discuss with them the realities they face because the truth of the matter is these railroads are competing not just in Manitoba, not just in Canada, they are competing in North America and their survival is no guarantee. It is going to take good management, an exceptionally motivated workforce and the future is not a guarantee. It is important for us that they do survive though, very important.

Mr. Reid: I never suggested the minister had control over the people being called back to work. What I am going to do is quote the minister's words for him: These are temporary layoffs, end quote. That was the minister's comments recorded in Hansard, so that is why I referenced the fact that the minister said they were temporary, being that I take it he received certain information from CN rails, telling him--at least I expect that was the case--that these were temporary layoffs, after we had sustained layoffs of 266 employees in September of last year and in November we had another 485 people laid off. That is why I was asking about the real jobs, the real railway jobs in this province, because the minister said that these were temporary layoffs, and that is why I asked him the question, have all these people been called back to work?

Mr. Findlay: I quote from the press release: They were identified by CN as temporary layoffs.

That was the press release. I am not in the inner workings of the company, but I am involved in business and I know that you do your work to your best intentions but you cannot guarantee the future. When the company reports to the world that these are temporary layoffs and I quote the company, I do not know the member can say that I did not tell him exactly what we knew at the time.

Mr. Reid: Since the minister said that this was as a result of the company's press release, I will take him at his word for that. Obviously, the responsibility lies with CN Rail for putting out information that was not accurate at the time, based on what the minister says here.

I want to ask the minister, since he and his staff have met with the three railways very recently, what they have told the minister and his staff with respect to rail employment within the province of Manitoba for this year. What is going to happen with the level of jobs that we have in this province?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, CN has announced that there will be national workforce reductions of an average of a thousand employees for each of the next four years. We are aware that in the first year they will be eliminating 1,500 jobs nationally. The decisions as to where those jobs are, which jobs they are, are in the hands of the company, the responsibility of the company, which is now a private sector company.

Mr. Reid: Has the minister received any breakdown on those numbers from the province of Manitoba?

Mr. Findlay: No, I did not.

Mr. Reid: Has the minister received any information from both VIA Rail and CP Rail with respect to rail employment prospects for this year and in future years?

* (1640)

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, CP Rail as of the 21st of November last year announced a reorganization into consolidating senior management at two locations, Calgary and Montreal, and as part of that announcement, announced the reduction of 1,450 positions across the country over an undetermined time frame. VIA announced the layoff 163 managers and unionized staff across Canada, eight of which would be in Manitoba.

Mr. Reid: The question also included VIA Rail, and I would appreciate it if he has information on that as well.

Mr. Findlay: I just mentioned the VIA Rail at the end there, that I gave the member earlier, 266 being employed in Manitoba. They had announced reductions of 163 across the country and eight of those reductions happened in Manitoba, and after that happened it netted the 266 employees in Manitoba.

Mr. Reid: I thank the minister for the information.

I want to ask the minister here, I have raised this issue in the budget speech debate with respect to the CN intermodal yards. It is my understanding, and the minister can correct me on this if I am wrong, that there is a study that has been commissioned by Minister Axworthy through the Western Economic Diversification to study the possible relocation of the CN Intermodal yards from its current location in west Winnipeg.

Can the minister tell me, is his department participating in any of that study that is taking place and at what point we may expect a decision with respect to that study, and is the minister recommending any action or any advice to the people conducting that study?

Mr. Findlay: We are involved with that committee in terms of its analysis. We are involved only in an advisory capacity. We have no dollars involved in it. Our recommendations are to analyze all options on a broad basis and certainly to consider the public benefit of all those particular options that might be considered.

So we do not have any real say in it. We have had an opportunity to give some comment. The study is completely under the control of the federal government, and the report will be entirely within their control, but staff have been involved in an opportunity to give comment, and we gave a broad range of comment to consider the full public benefit of all the options that will be under consideration.

Mr. Reid: Then could the minister summarize the comment that his department has given to the people conducting the study, summarize the position you have taken to that committee?

Mr. Findlay: I thought that is what I just said, Mr. Chairman. I summarized our position, what we have put forward but also stressed that we are only in an advisory role. We have no ultimate say, and we do not know what their primary objectives are. We just said, in the broad scope consider all options; consider the public benefits of all options and the public negatives as you proceed through the study.

Mr. Reid: Well, that is a pretty broad range. That is like saying that everything is open for consideration, that you have no specific plan or interest in putting forward any position, any specific position, with respect to this issue.

That is why I am asking more specifics about what your position was. Do you wish to see the Intermodal yards remain in the current location? Do you wish to see the closing of the end of Shaftesbury Boulevard that CN is requesting? Do you wish to see it relocated to another area of the city or outside the boundaries of the city of Winnipeg? I would like to know the position that you are taking or your staff are taking to that particular committee.

Mr. Findlay: The department and my staff are only one source of information that the study will gather information from, so we are not there making recommendations or giving information as part of the process.

Clearly, at the end of the day, we are not going to make recommendations for somebody to spend tens of millions of dollars of their money. We want the study to be open, not to be controlled by any one interest group, and we will look at the results when it is over to determine whether we would make any further comment, because there is no magic answer here. If any decision is made to move the yards, it is a significant, significant cost, and I can be quite honest in saying I do not know the way the Province of Manitoba has the capacity to put money into that kind of initiative.

Mr. Reid: Well, the province has a substantial interest here, as does the federal government and the City of Winnipeg. There is $30 million on the table for the Kenaston underpass project of which the province has a fair amount of financial interest in this project, and it is my understanding that the monies for this particular project would lapse within the next year and that we would lose the infrastructure money that is attached to that project from the federal government, and if it is not reallocated to some other project within the province which would include or could include the relocation of the Intermodal yards, then we would be doing a disservice to the citizens of this province in not bringing those funds to this province for investment in our infrastructure. That is why I raise that with the minister.

Mr. Findlay: The application is to use that money, and the consideration of where to use it is in the hands of the infrastructure minister which is the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) and the infrastructure committee. I can assure the member that nobody has any intention of allowing money to lapse with regard to spending it on infrastructure, but where the decision will ultimately be made I am not aware.

Clearly, any improvement in infrastructure in the city is an advantage to the transportation sector.

* (1650)

Mr. Reid: I have put my comments on the record in the House for the minister. He knows full well my thoughts with respect to a relocation of the Intermodal yards to the Transcona CN site which has facilities that could alleviate the problems that the current site has. There is plenty of land that is available there for the Intermodal yards to be re-established.

At the same time, I have also said on the record that it could alleviate some of the flooding for the residents living in that general area, because I would imagine there would be a sewer drainage program put in place at the same time, for which the community of south Transcona could be included in the decision-making process. That is why I say there is a possibility for some relocation of those infrastructure funds which will solve both problems.

I want to move on to one other area with respect to licensing. I want to ask the minister what plans his department has for the issuance of new vehicle licence plates for the motor vehicles that are registered in the province of Manitoba?

Mr. Findlay: The current plate was issued in 1983, and it was issued as a dual plate. The NDP government of '86 or '87 reduced it to a one-plate requirement in the province of Manitoba.

Clearly, over the last number of years, we have had lots of input from different interest groups and individuals suggesting that we should be looking aggressively at a reissue of it, and clearly we are looking at all the elements around an issue of a new plate, and now that we are into a cyclical renewal, it would take 12 months to go through a complete reissue. So the issue continues to be looked at, the pros and cons, the costs, the advantages and disadvantages. It is an ongoing process.

Mr. Reid: When was the last time the minister's department studied the development of a new vehicle licence plate for this province?

Mr. Findlay: It has been an ongoing issue for three, four years, maybe even longer, so for some time.

Mr. Reid: Has the minister's department issued a contract or contracted the services of an individual or a firm to look at the development of new vehicle licence plates during the course of this government's term, from 1988 to current?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, we are not aware of any contract being signed with anybody associated with licence plates. Clearly, in the process of developing ideas, different companies on different occasions, some company or companies might have been used, but not on a contract basis.

Mr. Reid: Then I take it the minister's department has employed the services of various companies or a single company for the development of a new licence plate, and perhaps it may have come out of the departmental funds. Can the minister tell me then, is this the case?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, maybe the member is referring to a contract that we did, I believe it was last year, for a reissue of the existing plate, in other words to issue more plates to meet the public need, but any other activities that are on an ongoing basis would be coming out of existing department resources. The only contract we can remember is one for a reissue of the existing plate.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me, did the department expend funds for a company to develop a new licence plate for the department and for the motor vehicles of this province, going back a couple of years, back to 1992 and 1993?

Mr. Findlay: We are not aware of any contract that the member asks about having been signed for new licence plates. As I said earlier, any work that has been done, Mr. Chairman, has been done between the department and service providers. If a new licence plate is ever acted upon, there will be an RFP, a request for proposal, from different companies that could provide that kind of service. That has not been done.

Mr. Reid: The minister referenced contract. That was not in my question. Departmental funds expended during the year 1992-93 to have someone, some company develop a new license plate for the department.

Mr. Findlay: The time frame the member references is before my time as minister and before the deputy's time, so we cannot comment any further.

Mr. Reid: Then will the minister undertake to research his records and to provide information relating to the company or companies that may have been involved in the development of a new vehicle licence plate: who the company was or companies were; if it is a numbered company, who the individuals were as the management of that company; what the value of that development was; and why the decision not to proceed was made with the further development and issuance of those plates?

Mr. Findlay: We will proceed to look back in the records and find out that information, but, again, as I said, it was before both the deputy's and my time.

Mr. Reid: I hope the minister then will bring forward the information in this short period of time.

I would like to answer the minister: When is it his plan to proceed with the issuance of a new motor vehicle licence plate in the province considering his statements to the UMM meeting in 1994 that it was cost prohibitive to proceed back to the dual licence plate system? I would like to know when the minister plans on proceeding with the issuance of new vehicle licence plates, and whether or not he is going back to the dual plate system.

Mr. Findlay: We continue to receive input, whether it is from the municipal levels of government, from police agencies, or citizens or citizen groups, both in terms of the need for a new licence plate and the need for the dual plate. My comment back then was reflecting what I believe likely was the decision of the government of the day, meaning the NDP government of '87, which decided to go from a dual plate to a single plate, which many people question today the reasons why that was made. I cannot imagine any other reason other than it was to save cost. Today there are better quality plates that can be made, and there is a strong level of support for a dual plate. That is my understanding. So all those factors continue to be taken into consideration to determine if or when that might be an appropriate decision to make.

Mr. Reid: I take it the minister has no plans to introduce the new vehicle licence plates this current fiscal year.

Mr. Findlay: It has been an ongoing initiative for going back, I would say, at least four years, continuing to give consideration as to the various reasons why we keep the existing plate, or reasons why we would move to another plate. Every jurisdiction does it over the course of time. I remind the member if and when a decision is made, we will be having to do it over a 12-month period. Ultimately, I imagine the decision will happen one way or the other, and we will get on with it. Whether it is in this fiscal year or not remains to be seen.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me the number of single-plate vehicles currently in the province, and the number of vehicles in this province that would require dual plates?

* (1700)

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, we do not have the DVL staff here at the moment, but I can tell the member that we have currently 36 categories of licence plates, between cars and trucks and trailers and taxis, delivery vehicles, PSV and farm plates. There are 36 categories. We are not aware that any of them are double at this stage. The other statistic, the member asked about numbers, we have 780,000 licensed units in the province right now.

Mr. Reid: I will leave it with the minister, Mr. Chairperson. Perhaps he can bring the information or send it along in a short period of time, with respect to the number of personal plates that we currently have issue in the province, the number of single plates we currently have issued in the province, and the number of potential of dual-plate vehicles that are currently registered in the province. I would like to have the minister come back with that information if he can, please.

Just one other point, Mr. Chairperson, in case I may have missed it. When I asked the minister information with respect to expenditures of funds from his department with respect to the development of a new vehicle licence plate that I think occurred between '92 and '93 fiscal year, that the minister also provide for us the names of the company or companies that were also involved in that process and the cost. That is all the questions I have at this point.

Mr. Chairperson: Item 15.1.(b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employees Benefits $438,900--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $89,000--pass.

15.1.(c) Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $366,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $281,500--pass.

15.1.(d) Financial Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $645,500--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $207,800--pass.

15.1.(e) Personal Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $751,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $203,400--pass.

15.1.(f) Computer Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,526,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $573,300--pass.

15.1.(g) Occupational Health Safety (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $173,300--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $58,400--pass.

Item 15.2. Highways and Transportation Programs (a) Management Services (l) Salaries and Employee Benefits $362,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $37,000--pass.

15.2.(b) Operations and Contracts (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,506,900--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $512,400--pass;

Mr. Findlay: Just to be sure we passed everything, would you check to make sure you passed everything under (g) on 15.1? Everything is passed? Okay, thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Item 15.2 (c) Bridges and Structures (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,926,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $302,100--pass.

15.2.(d) Transport Compliance (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,872,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $490,900--pass.

15.2.(e) Regional Offices (1) Eastern Region Office (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,177,300--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $531,500--pass.

15.2.(e) (2) South Central Region Office (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,058,300--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $588,000--pass.

15.2.(e) (3) South Western Region Office (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,939,600--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $496,000--pass.

15.2.(e) (4) West Central Region Office (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,558,100--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $390,200--pass.

15.2.(e) (5) Northern Region Office (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,247,900--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $403,300--pass.

15.2.(f) Winter Roads $2,000,000--pass.

15.2.(g) Other Jurisdictions (1) Gross Expenditures $2,440,000--pass; (2) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($1,000,000)--pass.

15.2.(h) Planning and Design (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,676,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $487,400--pass.

15.2.(j) Northern Airports and Marine Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $3,078,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $2,295,000--pass.

15.2.(k) Materials and Research (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,556,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $475,500--pass; (3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($1,009,200)--pass.

15.2.(m) Traffic Engineering (1) Salaries and Employees Benefits $806,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $220,300--pass.

15.2.(n) Policy, Planning and Development (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,591,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $472,000--pass.

* (1710)

15.2.(p) Driver and Vehicle Licensing (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $10,926,200--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $4,990,900--pass; (3) Manitoba Public Insurance Cost-Sharing Agreement $3,763,800--pass.

15.2.(q) Boards and Committees (1) Motor Transport Board (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $262,700--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $122,100--pass.

15.2.(q)(2) Highway Traffic Board (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $174,100--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $65,800--pass.

15.2.(q)(3) Licence Suspension Appeal Board and Medical Review Committee (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $221,000--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $91,600--pass.

15.2.(q)(4) Taxicab Board (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $302,400--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $94,900--pass.

Resolution 15.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $54,507,100 for Highways and Transportation, Highways and Transportation Programs, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1997.

Item 15.3 Infrastructure Works (a) Maintenance Program $57,216,800--pass.

15.3.(b) Mechanical Equipment Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $7,212,900--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $15,436,800--pass; (3) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($25,553,600)--pass.

15.3.(c) Construction and Upgrading of Provincial Trunk Highways, Provincial Roads and Related Projects, Provincial Programming (including Manitoba's share of Strategic Highway Improvement Program) $96,600,000--pass; Canada's Share of Strategic Highway Improvement Program $3,400,000--pass.

15.3.(d) Aid to Cities, Towns and Villages $1,300,000--pass; (e) Work in Local Government Districts and Unorganized Territory $3,760,000--pass; (f) Rural Municipal Bridge Assistance Program $400,000--pass; (g) Other Projects $2,500,000--pass.

Resolution 15.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $162,272,900 for Highways and Transportation, Infrastructure Works for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1997.

The last item to be considered for the Estimates of the Department of Highways and Transportation is item 1.(a) Minister's Salary on page 80 of the main Estimates book. At this point I would request the minister's staff to leave the table for the consideration of this item.

Item 15.1.(a) Minister's Salary $25,200.

Mr. Reid: I have just three quick points, Mr. Chairperson. The first one is, we usually have in this province, as we do across the country, a National Transportation Week.

In past years there has been some difficulty in getting the National Transportation Week organizing committee to look at or to extend an invitation in a nonpartisan way to members of the Legislature, including the government representatives and the official opposition. I was wondering if the minister could convey to that particular committee our disappointment in past years by that committee not extending that nonpartisan invitation and to make sure that similar events do not transpire this current year--National Transportation Week is due to occur next month--and that in subsequent years all parties of the Legislature be invited in a nonpartisan fashion.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, certainly within the province of Manitoba we put a high value on the role of the transportation industry. So certainly Transportation Week takes on a high level of significance, and the committee is working towards setting it up for this particular year. The member's comments are noted and we will raise it with the committee to broaden the invitation. We would also like it broadened not only in terms of elected members but we would like to see a bigger representation from the industry. I know they are all busy, but the transportation industry is important to Manitoba and if we can do events in the official program of National Transportation Week that draw public attention to the value of the industry then we are certainly promoting the industry. So not only am I going to take the member's comments seriously, I think I want to tell the member we want to raise the profile in upcoming years on this particular Transportation Week.

Mr. Reid: I thank the minister for that undertaking. I want to ask the minister, because this deals more directly with staff, which he has some responsibility for with respect to senior staff in his department, where Mr. Hrabinski has been reassigned, or has he been reassigned within the minister's department?

Mr. Findlay: Is the member referring to Adam Hrabinski? He has been assigned to other duties in the department. Those decisions are made by senior staff.

Mr. Reid: Could the minister tell me why Mr. Hrabinski has been reassigned?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, this was raised by the critic earlier. I commented that this is a public forum, and it is not a time when I like to discuss employee issues, particularly reassignment issues.

All I am prepared to say is senior staff, in their determination of who should be doing what duties, made decisions that caused him to be reassigned, and I would prefer not to discuss it any further than that, because it only causes difficulty for the employee involved who is currently employed in the department.

Mr. Reid: Not to incite any more debate on this issue, I will just make the comment and leave it at that, that I get the sense from the decision that was made by the minister and his senior staff that Mr. Hrabinski is being made to be the fall person for the used vehicle inspection program that the minister brought in in this province and that for the problems that were encountered as a result of the legislation in the inspection process, Mr. Hrabinski was left to respond and answer on behalf of the department instead of the Minister responsible for Highways and Transportation. I get the sense that when the minister was not happy, that now he has left this individual to hang out to dry as a result of maybe, perhaps, some of the comments that should more directly have been answered by the minister himself.

So I leave that with the minister for his consideration. I think there is at least a perception or the sense that this particular employee and maybe other employees in the department are not being treated fairly in this fashion, when it is people at a much higher level who have made decisions who did not come forward and stand up and be responsible for those decisions.

So I will leave that with the minister, and I have no further comments.

Mr. Chairperson: Item 15.1. Administration and Finance (a) Minister's Salary $25,200--pass.

Resolution 15.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty the sum not exceeding $5,340,000 for Highways and Transportation, Administration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1997.

This now completes the Department of Highways, and I would like to thank the staff and the honourable members of the committee for their indulgence and their co-operation.

The next set of Estimates to be considered in this section of the Committee of Supply sitting in Room 254 are the Estimates for Culture, Heritage and Citizenship. Shall we briefly recess, or would you want to proceed? The will of the committee is to proceed. [agreed]