LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Tuesday, June 16, 1992
The
House met at 7 p.m.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent Sections)
DECENTRALIZATION
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Jack Penner): Would the committee
please come to order. We are now
commencing consideration of Estimates for Rural Development, Decentralization. Would the minister have an opening statement?
Hon.
Leonard Derkach (Minister responsible for Decentralization):
Yes, I do, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson. I have a short statement to make. May I proceed?
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Proceed, please.
Mr.
Derkach: Thank you very much. I am pleased to present the Estimates for
Decentralization for review. As the
members of the committee know, this has been a part of the Rural Development portfolio
that I assumed early in the new year.
Since that time, we have embarked on several initiatives. We have had several official openings of
offices that have been decentralized, and in a general tone, I might say, the
entire experience has been a very positive one.
Members of the committee will know that the
decentralization initiative was announced in March of 1990, and it basically
had three objectives. First, it was to
provide for an economic boost to rural communities and to bring services closer
to the people who lived outside of the city.
Secondly, the employees affected by decentralization would be treated in
a fair and compassionate manner, and thirdly, decentralization would be carried
out in an efficient and economic manner on behalf of the taxpayers of the province.
As I said, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson and
members of the committee, decentralization has been a total success to this point
in time. To date we have decentralized
539 positions, including 104 Crown positions.
There are another 47 positions, where building contracts have been
awarded, and these positions will be in place in the near future. As well, 134 positions are currently in the
process or in progress and will be relocated to rural
In total this brings the number to 720 and
clearly shows that decentralization has given rural
The Decentralization Committee has been
diligently working with all departments of government and Crown corporations to
identify programs that can be decentralized in accordance with the stated
objectives, but none of this goes without some repercussions in terms of the
effect it has on people and their lives.
To date we have had seven layoffs as a result
of decentralization. Of the 211
employees who decided not to relocate, 165 have been redeployed to suitable
positions within government, which represents about a 78 percent success rate.
Of the 65 employees yet to be redeployed, 46
are not scheduled to relocate until 1993, and the other 19 have not declared
their intentions. I might also say that
we have had some very positive feedback, or I should say that staff in the department
have had some very positive feedback from employees who have decided to
decentralize.
* (1905)
I might tell you that from anecdotes that have
been received, certainly there is a very positive attitude about people who
have decentralized to rural
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I have to tell
you that it has been an extreme and an extraordinary success story in our province. I think that the credit has to go to the
people who have worked so hard to make this come about, and there have been roadblocks
put in place, and those have been surpassed in a very positive way.
On another positive note, the decentralization
initiative has been carried out in a very economic and efficient manner. The total projected cost for
decentralization, as members will recall, was targeted at about $10
million. To date, the total cost
associated with decentralization is $1.283 million in 1991 and $1.314 million
in 1991‑92, for a total cost of $2.598 million. This is substantially less than what was
projected in the beginning.
In a nutshell, I have to tell you that
decentralization has been a major success.
The initiative that the government and the people have undertaken has
indeed worked for the benefit of many Manitobans, indeed, most importantly, for
those rural communities that have seen a very positive stimulus in terms of how
the economy of their own local communities has been affected.
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, those are just
a few of the opening remarks that I thought were important to place on the record. We are still continuing our work on
decentralization and are pushing forward with as many of the projects as we
can. I will not say that we have
completed our responsibilities. As a matter
of fact, it is an ongoing process. As
indicated, we had identified about 650 positions for decentralization. We now have 720.
I am hopeful that in the near future,
communities that may not have had the benefit of decentralization will receive
that benefit as well. So with that, I
have concluded my remarks. Thank you.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Thank you very much. Would the critic for the official opposition
have a remark?
Ms.
Rosann Wowchuk (
The minister had said that opposition members
were skeptical and people who were involved in the move were skeptical as well.
Of course, I think the minister would understand that if he was being asked to
move to a new place where he had not lived before and was not sure what was
going to be happening, there was bound to be some skepticism on the part of the
employees who were being transferred out.
I am pleased that it has worked so well, and
that those people who have taken those jobs are settling into the rural community
and accepting the rural way of life because those of us who live there know
that it is a quality of life there that more people should be able to enjoy.
* (1910)
As for myself and members of our caucus, we
were skeptical. I never at any point said we did not support decentralization, but
we were concerned about the way it was handled and the fact that there was a
bit of politics being played with it coming before an election.
One of the concerns we do have is that some of
the jobs did not work out. In
particular, the ones that come to mind are the jobs to Dauphin that we have
discussed many times. There were many
jobs promised there, and that has not worked out. As we get a little further into questioning,
perhaps we can talk a little bit more about that part of it, but I am pleased
that services are coming closer to the community, and I guess when we get into the
questioning, I would like to ask the minister about some of the things that
have been raised by people in the communities.
For example, are the jobs that are moved from
one rural community to another rural community counted as decentralization jobs? There were jobs that went from Dauphin, I
believe, to Minnedosa, some water resources jobs. I would want to know whether those were
counted as decentralization jobs because if they were, then in reality that is
not decentralization. That is moving
jobs from one community to another community that are already there.
The economics of it as well, we have a few
questions in that area that we will raise as we get into the questioning, and I
guess whether there are concerns from any particular people who had great
difficulty with the moves and how those people were treated. That would be one of the concerns I have, and
some of the cost efficiencies that have happened, and we would want a little
bit of detail on the actual costs and who is picking up some of the costs,
whether they are within departments, or who is having to pick up some of the
things.
In reality, we are pleased that
decentralization has gone as well as it has.
The one disappointment I do have in the program is that it is not
reaching all parts of the province.
There seem to be targeted areas.
It was our hope that when decentralization was being looked at, the
government would look at areas of very high unemployment where there was need
to stimulate the economy and need for job creation, and it appears that many of
the jobs that have been decentralized have gone to areas that do not have nearly
the rate of unemployment as some of the other areas in the province.
So I guess I would also like to ask the
minister as we get into it if there is any consideration being given at the
present time or in the future to carry on further with decentralization. Are
there other departments that the government is looking at to take services out
of the city and closer into the community, and if that is the case, what areas
of the province would you be looking at to take these services out?
I will close my comments with that and let the
other critic make his comments, and then perhaps we can ask some questions.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Thank you very much. Would the member of the third opposition have
a statement?
Mr.
Kevin Lamoureux (
He made reference in terms of the economic
boost, and we had argued back when the government had announced the plan that,
yes, there would be some economic boost.
Whether it was maximum economic boost is something that we would
question. If you start transferring
individuals from the city of
Those were some of the concerns that we had
raised when the government had made the announcement. The government talked in terms of treating
the employees well. That was another objective. I think that most are quite familiar with
it. Well, the government has not
necessarily treated all individuals well. When the announcement was made, I
understand it was in
* (1915)
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I know that I
had conversations with some of my own constituents which this decentralization
plan had an impact on. With one
individual who was married, her husband was working within the city in one of the
canning manufacturers and felt that now the choice that they had is either to
accept the position, to go out, or to take some sort of redeployment program if
it was going to be made available.
The minister should be well aware of the fact
that the government was very reluctant at the beginning in terms of giving any
sort of assurances to individuals, because this was something that we had
raised shortly after the announcement was made.
The manner in which the then‑minister, in particular the Premier
(Mr. Filmon), responded to those questions did not give assurances that if
people did not accept the post they were being given, that they would have a
job at the end of it.
So I look at where I have had at least two
calls from individuals from within my own riding where the individuals were very
concerned that they were being forced to move out, pull up their families from
school. In this one particular case, the
spouse would have to quit work and so forth.
Then the government talks about doing it in as
efficient a manner as possible. Well, I
would be interested in finding out how efficient the government really has been
in doing this in terms of the leasing, in terms of the time period. The government had made a commitment, and we
will try to get, again, what that commitment was in terms of when these numbers
of positions were going to be put out, what type of a time frame and so forth
and some of the costs the government might be incurring that they did not plan
on, for example, in terms of the construction or the leasing and so forth.
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it goes without
saying that every member of the Chamber, I believe, wants rural
I had heard of complaints not only from the
people living in
So I am somewhat hopeful to clarify some of
the comments that I have put on the record in hopes that the minister would be
able to address them, even though I know he was not the minister when it was
initially implemented, and we will have a number of questions as to what the
current status is.
Having said that, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson, once again, to conclude, I would say that we are in favour, as an
opposition party, of the decentralization because we feel that it is something
that government can do to give the rural community the boost that is in fact
necessary, warranted and well deserved. Having said that, we will go into
questions.
* (1920)
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Thank you very much. I understand the minister might want to
introduce his staff.
Mr.
Derkach: Yes, thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson. I would like to introduce
staff to the members of the committee: first of all, our new Deputy Minister of
Rural Development, Mr. Winston Hodgins; Mr. Syd Reimer, who is the director of decentralization
or the decentralization co‑ordinator with the Department of Rural
Development. Sitting at our table behind
us, we have Mr. Don McIntosh, who is the director of personnel, who is employed
with the Department of Highways. We also
have Mr. Ron Sidoryk here, who is the acting director of leasing contracts and
expenditure controls and was the project manager for the Department of
Government Services.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Thank you. Are there questions?
Ms.
Wowchuk: Yes, I have several questions to ask, but I
wanted to assure the Liberal critic that we also have made statements about the
decentralization program that we have had concerns about. That is behind us now; we are trying to look
more forward and trying to get more information today as to where we are going. I just want him to be assured that we have
also had those concerns about how people were being treated and in fact have indicated
that we will be asking some of those questions.
I want to ask the minister; he has indicated
that there are 539 positions that have been decentralized and 134 to go. I want to ask if we can be provided with a
list‑‑rather than going community by community, whether we can have
a breakdown list‑‑of where jobs have gone and each community that
has received jobs, and which department they are with?
Mr.
Derkach: I would like to provide the member with a
copy of the decentralized positions.
However, I do not have copies with me, but I can make them available for
the member and would be happy to do so.
Ms.
Wowchuk: That is fine.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, and for the minister,
because of the limited time that we might have for this particular department,
I am wondering, if there is information that is going to be provided for one
opposition member, would it be given to both opposition members, so it prevents
me from having to ask the same question.
Mr.
Derkach: Of course, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, when
I said that we provide the information, it is to all members of the committee
if they so wish the information. It is
certainly to both opposition parties. [interjection! Yes, absolutely. It is understood.
Mr.
Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): I just want to ask the minister how many
positions are being decentralized to Selkirk.
Mr.
Derkach: We have complete and in place to date, in
Selkirk, 11 positions, that have been decentralized to Selkirk: one from Agriculture; four from Government
Services; five from Highways; one from Rural Development.
Mr.
Dewar: I remember, when I asked you this question in
Question Period, you came back with 41.
Mr.
Derkach: Forty‑one? No.
Either my hearing was wrong or yours was, because I do not know of any
community that has received 41 positions in rural
* (1925)
Mr.
Dewar: Well, I will be anxious to look. I am certain that is what you told me at the
time. Are there any more being planned
to move there?
Mr.
Derkach: At the present time, staff are looking at
other potential candidates that can be relocated to Selkirk. I can identify nine potentials, but that
again is just a ballpark figure and it could involve more.
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, all of this is
still being worked on, and there are no definite conclusions reached on the further
numbers who will be decentralized.
Ms.
Wowchuk: Can the minister tell us, is there a cost
analysis done of each department that has been decentralized?
Mr.
Derkach: I hate to interrupt but, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson,
I know where the 41 came from. If the
member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) could re‑enter, I would certainly clarify
it for him.
Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, 11 Civil
Service positions have been decentralized to Selkirk, that is true, but there
have been 15 positions in Hydro, which is a Crown corporation, and also 15 from
the Manitoba Telephone System which in total brings the grand total to 41.
Ms.
Wowchuk: Thank you, and I will relay that message to
the member for Selkirk.
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I want to ask
the minister, with each of the positions that have been decentralized, has a cost
analysis been done? For example, can you
tell us the cost in each area to set up an office? Is there a sheet that you can provide
us? Can you provide us with information
on what each of these decentralization projects cost and if it is possible to provide
us with that information?
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we had
projected the cost of decentralization at $10 million when the announcement was
made. To this point in time, about a
third of that has been spent, if not less.
When we calculate the leasing costs that were paid in the city as
compared to what is being paid in the rural areas, there is a reduction there
of about 30 percent or so, but it varies from community to community.
This is a very complicated process because
sometimes when we vacate space in the city, another department may take that
over, or in fact, because of the lease arrangements that we have with the
particular landlord, it may require that we have to pay the lease costs for a
period of time before we get out of the lease. So we do not have actual costs
and the savings associated with the moves in each and every case.
However, presently, as we conclude this phase
of decentralization, we will be putting those figures together, so that there
will be some comparisons made of the costs of leasing in the rural areas
compared to the city; also, what the actual savings may have been to
government, if any, for decentralizing.
Now, it has to be understood that there is a
certain cost associated with a move. In
my former department, that of Education, we had decentralized a fair number of
positions, and a lot of those costs were fairly substantive because it means
that in some rural communities, you have to hook up things like dedicated
lines. There could be relocation costs
associated with moving the families or the people who are moving out to the
rural areas, but all of that will be tabulated in the end, and we will have
those figures finalized. We do not have
that at this point in time.
* (1930)
Ms.
Wowchuk: Are departments doing any tracking of costs
versus what they were with those positions in the city versus what they are
now?‑‑and I think particularly of telephone costs, travel costs. Are those increasing? Is each department doing the tracking on
that?
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we do not have
that information here today, but that is still being worked on because the
process of decentralization is not complete.
But departments do track their incremental costs, if you like, to ensure
that we will know in the end what the net savings or costs were in each category
and for each department, but again, that information has not been compiled in
total, so I cannot give you that figure right now.
Ms.
Wowchuk: I did not expect the information
tonight. I just wanted to know whether
departments were keeping track so that we would know, and at what point a cost‑benefit
analysis would be done. For us in the
rural community we know that there is a benefit to have jobs in the rural
community, but government is always concerned about spending and budget
lines. I guess what I want to know is,
is a cost‑benefit analysis going to be done on the whole decentralization
program as a whole or department by department?
If that is going to be done, would the minister be prepared to share it
when it is done? I do not expect that tonight
because it is not available yet.
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we would be
happy to share that kind of information once we have all of the specifics nailed
down and available, but I can tell you that in a general sense where we see
some benefit, besides the benefit to the local community, are in areas such as
leasing costs where they are cheaper in rural
Additionally, when we had projected some $10
million of cost, we thought that we were fairly accurate in our projections,
but we found that departments have worked very diligently and have had the
assistance of municipalities and communities and so the cost has come in
substantially lower. As I indicated, it
is $2.5 million as compared to a realistic projection of $10 million. So I think all departments and all staff have
worked very hard in coming up with a realistic figure. So we are very pleased with it to this point
in time. However, in terms of the
specific details, we do not have that information as yet. We will get it down the road as we wind down
the 134 positions that are still to be decentralized, and then we can bring the
whole package together and let members of the Legislature know what the cost benefits
have been.
Ms.
Wowchuk: The minister has indicated that he is quite
pleased with the program the way it is going, and in fact I believe he said
yesterday that they were possibly looking at other departments that could be
decentralized. Is the minister prepared
at this time to share which other departments he might be looking at
decentralizing?
Mr.
Derkach: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is
not for me to go to a department and say, well, I am looking at decentralizing
your particular branch or particular branch of your department. What happens in the process is deputy
ministers are always looking at ways to deliver programs more effectively. When
a minister and deputy minister and staff identify a particular branch or
component of a department that might be decentralized, they bring that
forward. We are then charged with the
responsibility of matching that particular initiative with a community, a
community that will be able to handle that particular initiative and one where,
either the service is brought closer to the people, or where the service can be
delivered as effectively as it can out of its present location.
There have been instances. Yes, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I can
point to the example, I call it the perfect example, of the correspondence
branch. I can recall very vividly the
verbal abuse I took from the Liberal Party specifically regarding the move of
the correspondence branch and the fact that we were destroying the delivery of
an effective and efficient correspondence branch to something that was going to
utterly destroy the delivery. You see
how the Liberals measure success. We had a 77 percent failure rate in all
students who were taking correspondence courses. To the Liberals this was a magnificent success
story.
We have moved the correspondence branch to
Winkler. Our success rate has gone up
immeasurably. The turnaround time has decreased
tremendously and the services are being delivered as effectively and
efficiently as they were out of
I can tell you also that when we talk about
the correspondence branch, you can ask any people who use the service in rural
Ms.
Wowchuk: What the minister is saying‑‑and
I realize that he will not do it himself‑‑it has to be done in
conjunction with deputy ministers and departments. There are no new ones that have been
identified now that the minister can share with us. There are no departments
that have identified new positions that can be decentralized.
Mr.
Derkach: Well, none that I can speak about at this time,
because if I were to name a particular department or branch, I can tell you
that there would be chaos in the department tomorrow, because it would be news
breaking out of an Estimates process, so, no, there are none that I can speak
about at the present time.
Ms.
Wowchuk: The minister just spoke about the
correspondence branch. What I want to
ask is then, I was asking about tracking and about cost benefits. You are telling us this real success story
that the correspondence branch is working much better than it was. Is there an analysis being done of the cost
benefits, and is there anything being done to tell us why it has been more efficient
out of Winkler than it was out of
Hon.
Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Because we like to get the job done
through rural areas. Do you not want
some in Swan?
Ms.
Wowchuk: Of course, I do.
Mr.
Driedger: Then why are you questioning the process?
Ms.
Wowchuk: That is what we have Estimates for, is it
not, Albert?
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Are there questions of
ministers of each other? If we want that
debate, I will entertain the debate; if not, then I would suggest we ask the minister.
* (1940)
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am kind of humoured
by the dialogue that is going on outside of the mikes here, but let me tell you
that each department is looking at every unit that they have decentralized and
doing a comparison of how that particular department or that particular
initiative is functioning compared to what it functioned like in its old form. So,
although I cannot tell you about the record in each and every case, they are
keeping a record and they are looking at how effectively each area is being
carried out, and in those cases where there may be some problems I am sure that
they will be addressed to ensure that we can deliver the services effectively.
I am not going to sit here and say that 100
percent of every decentralized position or every decentralized initiative will work
perfectly. I mean, that is hoping for a
perfect world, but I can tell you that in a general sense the success rate, if
you measure it by comparison to what has been done in other jurisdictions, in
I think all of those aspects coming together
and working together towards a common goal has certainly provided a success story
in
Ms.
Wowchuk: I was not being critical when I was asking
that question. I was asking it in
sincerity, if it was being tracked and if there were things that could be
learned from it for future projects, because if one is successful and another
one is not, why is it not? That is
basically what I am asking, whether it is being monitored to a degree so that
we can learn from it. That is what I was
looking for.
Another issue that was raised yesterday at the
municipal convention at McCreary that we were both at was the moving of jobs
from one community to another, and in particular there was concern about a
water resources job that went from Dauphin to Roblin and jobs that went from
Dauphin to Minnedosa in a different department‑‑was it Agriculture
department? What I would like to
know: Are those jobs counted as
decentralization jobs when they are going from one rural community to another because
if they are, in reality that is not decentralization. That is moving from one
rural community to another. So I would like
to have some clarification as to whether those jobs from one rural community to
another are counted in the total of decentralized jobs.
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the
province as a whole there have not been very many of those kinds of situations occurring. What has happened is departments have been
charged with the responsibility of identifying services that could be delivered
from areas within the province more effectively than they could be from the
present location. I would say that in 99
percent of the cases, that has been from
The other question that was asked of McCreary
was, of course, the jobs that have been lost in the province as a result of reorganization
of government and downsizing and that sort of thing, and I would have to
indicate that is not counted as part of decentralization because that would
have occurred whether there was a decentralization initiative or not. So it is outside the scope of
decentralization.
Ms.
Wowchuk: There were a certain number of jobs that were
targeted for decentralization, then eliminated, but are not in the figures, in
the total number of decentralized positions.
Mr.
Derkach: Yes, there were 44 positions that came into
that category.
Ms.
Wowchuk: The minister raised another point that was
raised at that meeting in McCreary yesterday, and it is something that we
raised in the House, and that is the concern we have with the ratio of civil
servant positions in rural
We have a government that is taking credit for
moving jobs out to rural
There are fewer civil servant jobs in rural
Mr.
Derkach: I am advised that overall there has been a
decrease of 1,200 in government‑‑over the last two years, is
it? The proportion has not been greater
in rural
I do not have the figures specifically because
it is not part of decentralization, as to the exact proportion of the numbers
in
Ms.
Wowchuk: I was just looking through my notes here and,
unfortunately, have not got the sheet of paper with me, but I would be happy to
share that with the minister. It is a
sheet that indicates that there are less government positions in rural
I find that flies in the face of
decentralization because, on one hand, government is saying they want to bring
services closer to the people and increase their revenue and help the rural communities,
and then we have numbers that show that there are less civil servant
positions. In fact, I guess when we
looked at the serious cuts that we had two budgets ago, many of the jobs that
were cut were in Natural Resources and, I believe, Highways‑‑I do
not want to get the wrong department here‑‑and those were rural
jobs.
If the minister would like to see those
papers, I would be glad to share with him, and then perhaps he can comment on
that later.
Mr.
Derkach: I would be happy to see that stats sheet and
the source of it as well, but I can tell you that the impact would have been
fairly dramatic for the province if we had not embarked on a decentralization
initiative. Decentralization was not embarked
on just for pure political reasons, and I think the member understands that.
Now, the member for
It is an economic reality out there. That is why we embarked on the
initiative. It was to provide rural
* (1950)
It is regrettable that we had to downsize
government, but the treasury was not big enough to sustain the kinds of Civil
Service positions that we had in government.
We did not want to start cutting into the tax bite again. So there were restricted alternatives that we
could embark on. I can tell you that the
impact would have been far more dramatic had we not embarked on decentralization. So I think, as a net, it has been positive to
rural
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I am going to ask whether
the members around the table are hearing the same thing I am hearing. We operate on our farm a citizens' band
radio. There are times when we either cross‑channel or we have a phenomenon
that is called "skip." I think
that I am hearing a fairly significant amount of "skip" around this
table at this time. I am wondering
whether we can turn down the squelch just a wee bit. If we could do that, then we might continue
the discussion around the table.
Ms.
Wowchuk: The minister has indicated that this effort
has been of benefit to some parts of the province. Indeed, it has. Unfortunately, there are many
parts of the province that have not benefitted from it. The area that I represent,
I would like to ask the minister if there are
any plans to decentralize any positions to the
Mr.
Derkach: Presently, there are four positions
decentralized to
But, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, let me say
that when we looked at communities that we were decentralizing positions to, we
looked at the number of Civil Service positions that were present in those
communities when we began the initiative.
We find that there are some communities which had benefitted from the
decentralization of government jobs even though there was not a decentralization
initiative, and benefitted substantially to their credit. When we look at a‑‑[interjection!
Well, but it has been going on, I guess, in a
different manner. Let me put it that
way. Because you look at Swan River‑‑before
the decentralization initiative, they had 200 Civil Service positions existing
in a community with 3,800 people.
An
Honourable Member: How many?
Mr.
Derkach: 200.
Now, that is both federal and provincial. Therefore, by adding another
four, that brings it over 200.
So, we try, as best we can, to create some
form of balance in communities. In some
communities, one, either Crown corporation job or Civil Service job, is of
benefit to that community. We have not
been able to satisfy everybody. I can
acknowledge that. Down the road,
perhaps, we will continue to work at it. Indeed, together, I am sure that we co‑operatively
can address many of the other initiatives.
Ms.
Wowchuk: Just one more comment on that one. The minister said that there is a large
number of civil servants in
I believe one of the criteria that the
government was looking at is the rate of unemployment in those particular
areas. If he would look at the area that
In fact, the people of
The minister says four, I question the CEDF
because I think that was there before decentralization, but I will not argue about
that one. I would encourage the minister
when he is looking at further positions to decentralize, to look at those areas
of high unemployment, and in particular I would encourage him to look at
I would hope that he would keep in mind those
parts of the province that have not benefited from decentralization, and if he is
considering further, look at bringing some of the services that might be of
benefit to that area closer to the people.
Mr.
Derkach: It is true that when we made the announcement
about decentralization one of the factors, of course, taken into account was
the fact that in a community like
Down the road, I think there is still reason
to be optimistic about what is going to happen and the effect Repap will have
on that community, but the member should understand that none of this has been
stalled by our government, that indeed it is the circumstances and going
through the processes that have to be gone through. The economy in the pulp and paper industry
has certainly been one that has taken a turn that no one expected at the time
and so this has had some impact.
Hopefully that will be regained and
The member for
Fortunately, I guess, as we started going
through these branches we found that there was an important initiative to be embarked
on in Vital Statistics and that was to computerize their systems. That will take another year. Once that has been completed then a decision
will be made as to where and what will happen to Vital Statistics at that time,
but right now they are going through a process that has to be gone through,
because it would not make any sense to decentralize it and try to do the computerization.
* (2000)
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I want to deal
with the three concerns that I alluded to in my opening remarks. The first one
in terms of the manner in which people, civil servants, were being
treated. The minister made reference
that one of the objectives of this government was to treat the individuals in a
first‑class way, if you like. I am
wondering if the minister can tell how many of those individuals who were decentralized
into the rural communities, that accepted those positions and actually made the
move into rural
Mr.
Derkach: I listened to the opening remarks of the
member for
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not know
where the member has been for the last two years, because indeed if he is just here
to put rhetoric on the table regardless of whether it is fair, true or
otherwise, then I really have to question his integrity, especially in the
position that he holds in his caucus.
I have to tell you that deputy ministers from
every department‑‑right from the very beginning the objectives were
set, that we wanted to make sure that people would be treated fairly. This was an objective of our government, more
importantly a very strong objective of the Premier (Mr. Filmon). I think deputy
ministers went out and met with all of their affected groups. They met with the Civil Service to explain
the process. We put a process in place
that said that you had to have 90 days' notice before you would be
decentralized. There were endless
meetings held. The Minister of Rural
Development at that time, who was yourself, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, met with
every single municipality, I believe.
One or two may have been missed, but my understanding was that every
single municipality and town council was met with to discuss the decentralization
initiative and to bring back information as to how we could approach it in a
more timely and a better way.
In terms of the Civil Service Commission, they
had put together a comprehensive package for the MGEA and for all the civil
servants to make sure that they understood how we were going to embark on the
process, and that the process would be fair, that employees would be treated
fairly through the process and that we would make every conceivable effort to
find employees an alternative where they could not relocate, because perhaps another
family member was tied to a different position in the city. We offered training programs, retraining
programs to those Civil Service employees who needed retraining from one job to
another. I can tell you from my
experiences in dealing with the deputy ministers that I had dealt with in my
portfolio as Education minister and here, that they were very, very sensitive to
the needs of the employees who were decentralized.
I can tell you that the director of
decentralization who is at the table now was very sensitive and dealt very
seriously with the impact that this was having on people's lives. Costs of moving were paid for. We also assisted in the sale of homes where
civil servants were having difficulty in moving homes, so in other words we
tried everything possible to make sure that it was a positive experience for
everybody.
Now, I am not going to say we never made any
mistakes, because certainly we are all human and we all make mistakes no matter
what we embark on. But when you take a
look at the fact that after all of this there were only seven layoffs. I am sorry the member is getting a little
agitated by my long answer, and I am not trying to be extraordinarily long, but
I think it is important to put this information on the record.
There have been seven layoffs. The success rate is 78 percent. I believe that really spells out the kind of
success it has been, and I am not taking the credit for it. I think all of us share in the benefit of
this, because it has really meant that this has been carried out to the benefit
of our province as a whole.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I guess I had somewhat
anticipated that we would be getting into Heritage this evening, because there
are a number of questions that we want to ask.
We were feeling that there might be a will to keep the answers brief so
we can get a number questions, more so, onto the record. That is the reason why. It was not to imply to the minister that
there was no interest. But having said
that, the question that I asked the minister he did not answer, and that was,
how many of the individuals that accepted the jobs in rural
While they might be looking for that
particular number, I want to add, too‑‑because the minister alluded
to my opening remarks. My opening
remarks were based on the minister's opening remarks where the minister was
quite content on saying, everything is wonderful, that the government is doing
a 100 percent, fantastic, super job. We
should be commended and patted on our backs.
This is what the minister tried to say at the beginning of the Estimates
here.
What I said was that, well, maybe that is not
necessarily the case. Can the minister,
after he answers that specific question, tell me how much of that consulting
was done prior to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) in
Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think
there would a good significant number of those people saying, well, is it going
to be me? Who is it going to be? The reason why they made that announcement is
because he had a platform in which there were a number of individuals that he
thought he could please. That is the
reason why the announcement was made then.
No doubt there was consultation afterwards, and I do not question that
because the former minister‑‑and I have seen him sit through the
endless committee meetings dealing with bills and the sincerity that he approached
things‑‑I do not question that there was consultation afterwards. But originally when the announcement was
made, there were a lot of civil servants that had absolutely no idea; is it me
that is going to be moved? The
department heads, I do not know if they were included or not. But having said that, the minister does not
necessarily have to address that, and I would just go right to the specific
questions of the commuters.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Before I ask the minister
to respond, I want to indicate as Chair of the committee that the honourable
member for
We would then proceed back to Culture,
Heritage and Citizenship. That, of course,
is still, if it would be the will of the committee, the plan. I will ask now the minister to respond to the
question.
Mr.
Derkach: We do not have a record of how many people
are commuting as compared to how many have moved out to the rural areas. I suppose in the communities surrounding
So we do not have that information. With regard to the second part of the issue
that you addressed, I would just like to say that when the policy announcement
was made, at the same time Mr. Irving from the Civil Service Commission, I
believe, had met simultaneously to give that kind of information to the MGEA,
as I understand it. But, again, a policy
statement can be made and then you embark on the process of how you carry it
out. That is where the consultation
comes in.
* (2010)
Now, I know it would be awfully nice to get
out and start consulting first on issues like that; but, as soon as you do that,
you understand that the announcement then is not really an announcement because
you have already made it when you start your consultation process.
So I think, in fairness, that there was a lot
of thought put into how we embark on decentralization. Indeed, the minister at that time, the
Premier (Mr. Filmon), I am sure had many days of agony in terms of how you
embark on this without inflaming a lot of debate in the Civil Service and how
you calm the waters after the announcement is made, but I think we have lived
through that.
We have learned some things. Indeed, we have learned, I feel, a lot more
than some of our neighbours to the west of us who tried this initiative and
where it failed.
Mr.
Lamoureux: I agree with the minister in a sense that
next door it has not worked very well at all, and he has done a better job,
this government has done a better job, than the province west of us. But I would suggest that there is also
another way, and that is that you do not need to make a big splash, that there are
other ways, if you are not interested in playing the politics of it, in which
you can enter into the water gradually so that the waves that are being made
are somewhat minimal.
Having said that, what I would ask‑‑because
I do want to get into Heritage, as there was a gentlemen's agreement on it‑‑is
for the minister if he could provide the opposition parties with some of the
background leasing information in terms of offices for the decentralization
positions, where there were leases and where there were new structures needed
to be built, as I said, with regard to what I believe the member for
Thank you.
Mr.
Derkach: We have the project manager with us, and he
is taking note of that. Indeed, when we
have that information put together, we will provide it for the opposition
members.
Ms.
Wowchuk: I just have one more comment before we are
prepared to pass this. The member for
I hope that, when the minister and the
department or any department looks at future decentralization, they do consider
the people and have thorough consultation with those people in charge of the
department, that moves not be made for political reasons or as political
announcements.
The minister indicated that, I believe he was
implying that, Dauphin and
If there are things that can be moved, look
where the services have to go and do it, not for political reasons, but to get
the jobs to the rural community, where it will bring services closer to the
people.
Looking at next door, it is unfortunate that
it has gone the way it has in
Mr.
Derkach: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I guess I can
only rebut by saying that we did not look at this as a political incentive. The member says it appeared that way, but I
can tell you, if you look at what her former administration did in moving jobs
to certain locations in the province, that was political, and you can
identify. I mean, you do not have to be
a physicist or a sociologist to be able to say, well, why is the Civil Service
so high in this particular community and who represented that community? We are trying to get away from that, and certainly
you know when you look at the southern belt and you look at communities that we
have decentralized too, they have not always been the communities that we
represent.
Indeed, we have tried to create a balance,
because every community in this province is important and we have to treat it that
way. Down the road we will continue to
look at positive ways that we can impact on all communities in this province. Some
of the smaller ones have not received the benefit of decentralization, but
indeed they need to be considered if there is any possibility as well. My role in decentralization is going to be to
accommodate, as much as we can, moves to the communities that we have made
commitments to, and then beyond that to carry out our duties as diligently as
we possibly can.
Does there have to be a big splash about
decentralization? Our communities want the splash. They want to be noticed, and they want to
say, hooray, we have got a decentralization office that is opening. That is why we are having grand openings in these
communities, and I invite the members of the opposition parties to join us at
these openings because they are important. For that reason I have asked staff
to make sure, when we have an opening‑‑there is one on Friday‑‑that
members of the opposition be invited and especially their Leaders, because I
think it is important for all of us as legislative members to acknowledge that
we support the rejuvenation and the revitalization of rural
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, just to
conclude quickly. I would just like to
say thank you to the members for their questions, but very importantly I would
like to thank staff who have worked on decentralization over the past two
years. They have been from various
departments. We have at our table the director
of Decentralization, Mr. Syd Reimer, who has spent endless hours not only
working on decentralization but indeed visiting each and every community where
there is any potential to locate a decentralization office. He has met with countless municipalities
around the province trying to accommodate in the best way possible.
Also, people who are from other departments
such as the project manager, Mr. Ron Sidoryk, whose job has been to look after
the accommodations, and he has done a splendid job. Mr. Don McIntosh, the director of Personnel
from the Department of Highways has certainly done a commendable job in making
sure that the people needs are looked after and the personnel needs are looked
after in a respectful and accommodating way.
So to those people I think we owe our vote of gratitude.
Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, and
I have no more comments.
Mr.
Bob Rose (
I think the member for
* (2020)
I think that the attitude in rural
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 1. Decentralization
$2,000,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 131: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $2,000,000 for Decentralization for the fiscal year ending
the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
This completes the Estimates for
Decentralization. The next set of
Estimates that will be considered for this section of the Committee of Supply
are the Estimates for Culture, Heritage and Citizenship.
Shall we briefly recess to allow the minister
and the critics the opportunity to prepare for the commencement of the next set
of Estimates? Agreed? Agreed.
* * *
The
committee took recess at 8:21 p.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 8:24 p.m.
CULTURE, HERITAGE AND CITIZENSHIP
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Jack Penner): Will the Committee of
Supply please come to order. The
committee will be resuming the consideration of the Estimates of the Department
of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship.
When the committee last sat, it had been considering item 2.(a)
Executive Administration: (1) Salaries
$228,000 on page 31. Shall the item
pass?
Hon.
Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship):
Last evening, I indicated that I would attempt to get information on a
question that was asked by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) on whether
there had been an increase in the number of laundromats renting and in some
cases exhibiting videos. I am advised by
the Film Classification Board that as at April 1992 there were five laundromats
which had taken out video retailer licences.
In April 1991, there were only two that were licensed. These figures do include the laundromat that
was mentioned in last year's Estimates.
I also indicated last evening that any
retailer which rents, sells, or exhibits videos to the public requires a
licence from the Manitoba Film Classification Board, and retailers are required
to deny access to minors from renting or viewing any video with an age‑restricted
classification.
Ms.
Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Yes, actually I did want to start out with
laundromats, because I noticed a little snickering around the room when I
suggested that laundromats were an issue. I wanted to make sure that the point
that I was making was not misunderstood.
I think that an innovative department would say we have got an audience
there; we have a captive audience in laundromats for all sorts of cultural
activities, whether it is photographic exhibits or whether it is certain types
of videos or whatever, in the same way that people used to say, bring the culture
to the shopping mall, make sure it is where the people are. Well, it is another opportunity, and if some
laundromat operators are interested in that, then I would think there would be
an opportunity for somebody to pick up on that.
The other concern is obviously that children
are not exposed to things that in this society we do not believe that they
should be. I wanted to make both of
those points and thank you for the information.
I suppose in that context I am sorry they have declined.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, maybe I went in
the wrong order, but there were two laundromats licensed last year; there are
five licensed this year.
Ms.
Friesen: Good, it is a trend.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 2.(a)(1) Salaries
$228,000. Shall the item pass?
Ms.
Friesen: No.
Wait a minute. Which line are we
on? We have not passed anything yet as
far as I am concerned.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 2.(a)(1).
Ms.
Friesen: I am still on 2.(a)(1).
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): We are still on 2.(a)(1). We did not pass it.
Ms.
Friesen: Good.
Okay.
Mr.
Kevin Lamoureux (
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the Heritage Federation
does indeed have its own line. It falls
under Lotteries Funded Programs and it is 7.(m).
Ms.
Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think at the
end of last time we were actually talking about the loss of $2 million and the
29 staff years in this section of the department. I was trying to understand from the
minister's perspective what losses this had incurred in service to the public. I think it must be very difficult to claim
that you can lose 29 staff years and not have chosen to reduce certain areas of
service.
It seemed to me from my earlier questioning of
what this department is not doing is any kind of research and strategic planning
in the arts, an area that I was suggesting is likely only to be done by
government in this province since individual organizations do not have the
capabilities and we do not have an independent public policy unit.
So I am wondering, did the minister make that
choice? Was that a specific choice to say,
look, we are going to concentrate on services to clients, as they are called
here or citizens, and we are going to forego the research because that is a
choice that we have to make given the "difficult economic times?"
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I would just like
to correct for the record the staff year decrease. It is not 29.
It was 19. In fact, actual
expenditures in the department from 1988‑89 which were $41.6 million
rounded off, in this year's Estimates the total budget line for the Department
of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship is $58 million. I think where you might find the increase
occurring is in Lotteries Funded Programs.
So there has been an increase in expenditures.
* (2030)
Yes, there was a reduction of 19 staff
years. We have looked internally
throughout government at ways in which we can more effectively utilize the
staff resources that are available to provide the same amount or increased
programming. There has been increased
programming and changes in programming.
We talk about policy and research. I have been informed that before our
administration took over as government, there was not that kind of policy or
research being done. We are basically a granting
department. We provide grants in many
numbers of areas. It is not a department
that does a lot of research or policy.
It is a department that looks at empowering the community and the
community, in many instances, determines the needs that exist.
We try to structure our programs and our grant
guidelines based on what the community wants.
In fact, most of the application forms through the department look at
what skills are being developed as a result of the project that grant money is being
applied for and the audience participation.
So all of those things are factored into the priorities of funding for
the department, and we will continue along that path.
You know, I suppose when it comes to making a
choice of support for communities that have legitimate needs based on their analysis
of what will work in their communities, what kinds of activities their
communities should undertake, I believe I would prefer to put my money‑‑or
our money, the taxpayers' money‑‑back into the community doing very
worthwhile projects and programming, based on an awful lot of volunteers within
the community who do make major commitments, whether they sit on boards or are
actively involved in other ways. They do
a lot of fundraising.
We deal with the volunteer component
throughout
Ms.
Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I agree with
the minister that it has become a granting department, and that is pretty well
all it does. That is really what I am
trying to get at. I also agree with the
minister that there was not much planning or research done in years gone by,
and that was true I think of the previous administration. It is true of most areas, I think, of
cultural planning, whether you look in the United States or you look elsewhere,
for example at the federal government, most of the studies that have been done
in audience participation, in sponsorship, in the economy, the economic impacts
of cultural spending and the changing aid structure in its relationship to
cultural spending, most of those do not really begin until about '85.
Some of the things that they do show‑‑and
I do not think we can adapt all of them to
The minister says she wants to turn the money
back to the communities. Yes, but which
community? Is it going to the right communities? Is it going to communities that have no other
alternatives? Is it going to communities
which are going to, in the long run, return the monies into artistic or
cultural endeavours?
For example, one of the other studies that you
could find from the United States again‑‑and the parallels are not
exact, but you find that people who donate to the arts are people who have had
an active interest, either through parents or through schools, but a
participation in their own individual person early in childhood, usually
somewhere around the ages of 11 or 12 years old, and those are the people who,
in the long run, are going to contribute to the arts.
So in a province where you have a diminishing
business sector, you have an aging population, you have a government with fewer
and fewer resources, it seems to me that one of the best places this department
could put its money is where no other agency can do this activity, and that is
into some research and some planning.
Maybe it can be done on a regional basis. Maybe it can be done with other provinces.
I think the minister stated very clearly, this
is a granting department, but I think it could be something else. Does the minister have some response to that?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is interesting
to hear what some of the surveys in the States have done. If I can just indicate the highlights from the
Consumer Arts Profile study that has been undertaken, which are that two‑thirds
of Canadians over the age of 16 attended an arts performance in the last six
months. It also indicated a huge interest
in the performing arts. Almost three‑quarters
of those polled said their main reason for not going more was expense. However,
although Manitobans surveyed rated the ticket prices as an important decision‑making
factor, 53 percent said they were slightly less likely than Canadians elsewhere
to say that ticket prices are too high.
The general public surveyed in
We, I guess, are fortunate in
I guess the one issue that we could talk about
is education. I think comments that were made earlier that maybe, if there were
more exposure to the arts through education, people would more likely have an
appreciation and understanding and possibly a desire to attend different
cultural activities. I think that is something
that is a long‑term objective. It
is not something that can happen overnight.
I think our arts in the schools program is probably one of the best
across the country.
But when you look at what is happening around
us, there have been some articles just in the newspaper recently, talking about
what has happened in
So I think, without being extremely critical
about what is happening, in
We see, as I said, what is happening in
* (2040)
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Madam Minister, committee
members, I indicated before that we had a little something that we used on the
farm; it was called a citizens' band radio.
Periodically, on those citizens' band radios, we have a phenomena called
"skip" where interference rose in from the outside. I detect that "skip" present in
this room again, and I was wondering whether we could turn the squelch button
down just a wee bit so that we can continue on with the discussion around this
table.
Ms.
Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I had hoped we
would not get into this kind of discussion, because, I mean, we could bring up
the loss of the Gas Station Theatre; we could bring up the loss of the
Warehouse Theatre. We could bring up the
20 percent cuts to most arts organizations in this province that were made by
this government last year. There really
is no need for that kind of discussion.
We discussed it last time.
The minister wants to talk about the
We can look at the millions of dollars that
the government of British Columbia is going to put into the film industry,
based upon the research that they have done into the attractions of that
location and the existing basis of cultural industries and cultural training
that they have been doing in British Columbia under both the Social Credit
government and now under the New Democratic government, that they have made a
strategic decision based upon research and planning in their department.
What I was trying to do was to start out with
a different type of discussion with this minister and to suggest that there were
some areas for other types of activity, for some research, for some planning,
for a role that the free market economy which this government is so devoted to,
cannot and will not play. There is a role for government in that. The minister chose to get into a discussion
of different provincial planning systems. Well, we can continue on that line if
she wants, but there does not seem to be much purpose.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not think
that I was doing it in a terribly nasty or negative way when I indicated that
things are happening across the country, even under NDP administrations. I have great difficulty in thinking that a 1
percent across‑the‑board cut to the Arts Council and the Ontario
Science Centre and the Heritage Foundation and the museums in
So things are tough. I do not think that I was trying to single
out any one province specifically. It
just happens to be the one next door to us that has articles that we have seen
in the news media that indicate that those things happen. I think the member for Wolseley has given
this government some credit for our increased support for film. I know B.C. has a larger film industry, and
they have probably made major increases, but we have an additional $400,000 or
more that we have added through our provincial budget to the film industry in
We believe that there are economic impacts
that do occur in the areas where film crews are working and throughout the economy. It is a real boost to our economy, and a lot
of the money that we provide in the film industry for our cultural industries
comes back to
Ms.
Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, well, this is a
department which claims that it maintains awareness of provincial, national and
international trends in the developments within each discipline. Yet you can only come up with one newspaper
clipping on what other provinces are doing.
This is after an overnight break.
That does not seem to me like very much of an awareness of national
trends, let alone international trends.
So it seems very applicable to this particular department.
Could the minister tell us what international
trends this department is researching?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I have
indicated already, and lots of research and study and whatever might be all right
for academics, but I will tell you in a climate where financial resources and
taxpayers' dollars have to go into the most worthwhile projects and programs
throughout the province and when Manitobans tell us clearly that health care is
their No. 1 priority, that they want social services and education funding maintained
and enhanced, and when we have a limited number of dollars, and when we look at
where we want to prioritize those dollars going in the Department of Culture,
Heritage and Citizenship‑‑we have looked at areas where we believe
that we can enhance our programming so that, in fact, Manitobans can benefit.
If we can receive some economic benefit from
cultural industries, and that it is a proven fact, and we know what Manitobans
are doing and the ability that they have to run a very successful industry,
which is a cultural industry, which does impact very positively on our
province, that is one of the areas we will put more money.
Many times I have said that we are not a
policy and a research department. In
fact, we are a department that wants to empower the community through
volunteers in the community who commit endless numbers of hours sitting on
boards determining the kinds of activities that should be put in place to
attract audiences, to develop skills throughout the width and the breadth of
our province. In fact, we will continue
to do that.
We may philosophically disagree, but I do not
believe that piles of dollars going into research and analysis of what is happening
internationally is going to benefit Manitobans and is going to increase, in
fact, their awareness when we tell them that certain things are happening in
other countries, that it is going to make people want to do any more than what
the communities right here in Manitoba believe will attract audiences in the
types of things that they undertake to do and the types of support that we give
as a result of the communities' indication of what direction they feel they
want to go.
Ms.
Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think the
minister was too quick to dismiss research.
It is not academic research I am looking for. It is research that will inform the planning
of the department, and research that will assist community groups to look at
where their sponsorships are coming from, how much of a proportion of it can be
expected from corporations, how much can be expected from individual donors,
what motivates those individual donors.
For example, there is no way that a community arts organization can do
that kind of research for
So that is the kind of research that I am
talking about, one that seems to me every other government department would be involved
in in setting policy. I am looking for
some suggestions that might be of use to those community groups that we all
value, to those volunteers whom we all value.
The second thing is, when I asked about
international trends, I am simply quoting from the objectives of this
department, which say, under 14‑2A, which is the line that we are
discussing, that this department maintains awareness of provincial, national
and international trends and new developments within each discipline, apprising
ourselves and our clients of available options.
So when the minister came forth with a clipping
from The Globe and Mail on the national trends in arts, she may be right.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I have already
indicated and we have talked to a fairly great extent about the Canadian
Consumer Arts Profile that was done. We
were a participant in that. That is the
kind of joint initiative, federally and across the country, that gives not only
Manitobans but all Canadians an idea of what the trends are throughout the country.
We can utilize the information that has been
gathered. I read into the record already
tonight the kinds of things that we know are happening in
* (2050)
So we do have an idea of what is happening in
Ms.
Friesen: It is true; there is research elsewhere. That is what I am trying to ask. Is the minister aware of those kinds of research,
for example, the one that was done recently by the Rural Development Institute
in
One, obviously, is the demographic
profile. But another is, for example,
one of the perceptions in that study was that one of the things which kept
people away from some cultural organizations was the recognition that they were
perhaps or the perception that they were dominated by a relatively small group.
Has the minister found that this is true for other organizations? Has she thought about going outside the
existing client groups who apply for the grants and create the broader community,
in a sense, where they get the grants?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We fund through government, not through my department,
but I think that it is through the Department of Rural Development, there is an
agreement with the Rural Development research institute. The information that has been provided has
been utilized by our department.
We do board development throughout the
province. We have some expertise within
that helps boards in looking at roles, responsibilities, setting goals and
objectives, volunteer development, fundraising.
All of those kinds of things are done through the department. We have regional services staff people throughout
the province who work with community organizations. When there is a need
expressed, we try to help develop those needs into action, I suppose, through
application to different programs throughout government, specifically a lot
within our department, that can benefit many communities.
Ms.
Friesen: One of the basic things that report suggested
was that one of the difficulties facing rural Manitoba‑‑and it is there,
of course, for many areas of government policy‑‑is the particular
demographic structure and also the income level. I looked at the Neepawa one, and I was
actually very surprised to find that almost‑‑I think it is 65
percent of the population, family income is less than $30,000. That is family income.
It is also, of course, the usual‑‑what
has become the usual, unfortunately‑‑demographic structure of rural
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There are many communities throughout rural
When you look at cultural programming, I
guess, we could have the debate on whether it is excellence in culture, whether
it is community art, whether it is community recreation, whether it is small
museums throughout rural
So there is community participation in those
kinds of activities, a very large volunteer commitment, and in many instances
there is not a large dollar commitment.
Our department has programs that are sensitive to community needs, and
we provide grants in areas that help to develop the initiatives that are
undertaken. I have a lot of faith in
Manitobans and their ability to work together, to bring together people within
a community to provide the kinds of cultural, recreation and heritage venues, I
suppose, that will be of benefit to many.
Ms.
Friesen: When can we expect a new arts act? The minister has talked about it from time to
time in passing. Is there a schedule? I assume we are not going to see it in this Legislature. I am not asking you to commit to it.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I suppose it
all depends on how long this session continues.
No, realistically speaking, and I cannot give an exact date, but that
was one of the recommendations in the DeFehr Arts Policy Review Report. I would imagine that consultation on that
will begin this fall, and I cannot indicate whether it would be the next
session or the one following that. I
would think that within a couple of years we should be able to accomplish it.
Ms.
Friesen: Can I just follow up on that a minute? What is the process? Are you planning a white paper, some
consultation and then an act? Is that
the general idea, consultation before the act is drafted, in some form or
other?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, there will be consultation. I could not indicate today whether, in fact,
there will be a white paper. We will
have to sit down. It has been a pretty
busy year for the department with the establishment of the Arts Branch and implementing
the new programs that we believe will enhance the opportunity for community
arts to develop and flourish throughout the province. We have undertaken that and accomplished
those recommendations from the DeFehr Report, and we will begin this fall to
work on some sort of consultation process.
We would be able to indicate later on whether it would be a white paper
or whether it will just be consultation leading to the drafting of a piece of
legislation.
Ms.
Friesen: I have a couple of other questions before I am
prepared to move on. I do not know about
the Liberal critic. One is process. I
would like to ask some questions about the Arts Council and the minister's
relationship with the Arts Council.
Where would you like to look at that, on this line or elsewhere?
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I would suggest that you
probably consider that under the next item, under Arts Branch, if you will.
* (2100)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We could do that under 2.(b) which is Grants
to Cultural Organizations.
Ms.
Friesen: My last question, I am a bit curious about the
activity identified as: "Valuing
staff by appreciating commitment and competence in providing a safe,
stimulating work environment." It
was not in last year. Is there some
particular personnel policy or strategy in place here, and is it applicable to
other departments?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: In fact, as a result of the restructuring in the
Arts Branch, there was a whole new role and mission, and every single person
within the division had input into that.
Ms.
Friesen: Sorry, but input into what?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Into the Role and Mission Statement for the division.
Ms.
Friesen: Though this is just specific to this
division?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, it is.
Ms.
Friesen: I find it odd. I mean, obviously on the surface of it is
what sometimes people say, "is a motherhood statement."
An
Honourable Member: Oh, oh, oh; that is sexist.
Ms.
Friesen: It was in quotes.
It seems a bit odd. Is there something peculiar about it?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I guess, in sitting down and developing a
Role and Mission Statement, if staff feel it is important to state their
appreciation for one another and their commitment to competence, I think I
would only commend staff for taking a look at the realities of today,
stimulating a good work environment and providing for a safe work environment.
If they feel that is important, and it is
important to their sense of well being and their commitment to their job and to
the people of
Ms.
Friesen: That is exactly why I am asking about
it. Why did staff in this section feel
the need to say that they wanted to provide a safe and stimulating work
environment. The underlying assumption
there is that it was not before. Perhaps
the minister would like to correct that impression and just put something on record.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I can only speak on behalf of the staff that have
indicated to me that it certainly was not anything negative, that they started
by talking about their role and mission and the value they placed on their
ability to serve the community that they dealt with. It is a pride statement, so to speak. I believe if staff do take pride and want to
express that in a Role and Mission Statement that I give them much credit for
it.
Ms.
Friesen: Thank you, I am glad to have that
clarification. It sticks out like a sore thumb, having been going through other
departments where it is not. If the
minister is putting on the record that it is simply part of a formal process
within the department, not something which has been stimulated by particular events,
then that is fine. I am finished with
that one.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I would just like to say to my staff that I have
a very energetic and enthusiastic and positive, forward‑thinking staff
that I believe has an extremely good working relationship. There are many positive things happening as a
result of that. Maybe it should be an
example for other departments at some point in time, too, to take a look at the
positive side. So very often we hear
comments like, morale is low. I would
believe that morale is high and that we have a commitment and a dedication to a
strong work ethic.
It might come as a result of a very lean
department where we have looked at streamlining and making efficient and
effective decisions. It has been a
partnership of all staff working together to make it happen. So I think this statement is an indication of
that commitment. So I commend staff for
that initiative.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 2.(a)(1) Salaries
$228,000‑‑pass; 2.(a)(2) Other Expenditures $59,400‑‑pass.
Item 2.(b) Grants to Cultural Organizations.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, just a very
short question, and I would ask if the
minister can at least get the information off to me. What I am interested in is the recipients of
the cultural grants, both on this particular line and, I understand, in terms
of 7.(a), under the Lotteries, that there are also grant monies that are handed
out, if that could be made available? I
understand in the past it has been done.
I would just ask for the minister to provide that information sometime over
this summer.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I can undertake to do that and provide it.
Mr.
Lamoureux: The only other thing that I was interested in
knowing is that on 32 of the Supplementary Estimates it talks about the
increase in the capital grants, and there is an (a) in which it identifies why
this substantial increase. All I would ask
is, what percentage of the makeup of the actual $6.8 million is being spent?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Repeat the question.
Mr.
Lamoureux: In terms of the capital, how much is the
Manitoba Museum of Man and Nature receiving and the Centennial Concert Hall? That is all I need to know.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: The cladding in this year‑‑and it
is over a number of years for‑‑well, I guess for the Concert Hall
this year is the last year, and that will be completed. It is $2.5 million for the Concert Hall, and
$1.7 million for the
I think that the total, final bill or the
estimates that we have right now‑‑$9.3 million for the museum is
the estimate and that will be done over several years; $1.7 million this year.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Finally, again, if I could just get a
breakdown of the other recipients of their capital too? Thank you.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 2.(b) Grants to Cultural
Organizations.
Ms.
Friesen: I wanted to ask about the
Mrs.
Mitchelson: For 1991‑92, it was $1,963,700; for
1992‑93, $1,989,200; and last year's 1991‑92 grant commitment was
$350,000 more than the year before.
(Mr.
Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Ms.
Friesen: What is the relationship of the department to
the
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Thank you, new Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson.
We are currently in the process of negotiation right now. We do have the ability to appoint one board
member. We are looking at negotiating
with them and possibly having the ability to appoint a few more.
Ms.
Friesen: Does the
* (2110)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There has not been a board member for five or
six years appointed by government.
Ms.
Friesen: I believe that the board, at the moment,
numbers about 20. So the minister is
looking for an opportunity to appoint a portion of that, a quarter perhaps or
the same? The
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we are not looking
at appointing half of the board, we are looking at, I do not know, three or
four members at most, I suppose.
Ms.
Friesen: The minister said she was negotiating for that
now. Is there a timetable on that? Are you looking perhaps for‑‑I
think they have just had their annual meeting or it is just in the process of
happening this month. Are we looking at the
next annual meeting?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We expect the negotiations to be completed maybe
by August or so in that respect. They
are just gearing up for an annual general meeting right now.
Ms.
Friesen: I would like to draw to the minister's
attention something which I thought I had drawn to her attention last year, but
I might not have done. It is
particularly appropriate perhaps under this section too, where we are looking
at both the
This is the second year running that the
Department of Trade and Tourism has produced its booklet of travel, what is it called,
travel cards, you know, travel bargains for
I am not sure if I mentioned it in Estimates
last time. The
Now last year I dismissed it because the map
was sponsored by Safeway, and it was pretty tricky with 29 Safeway locations to
actually find room for the
I hope she will be able to make sure that next
year the million dollars of public money at least has the opportunity to be
drawn to the attention of tourists both inside and outside of
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I cannot recall
and my staff cannot recall either that that was brought forward last year
through the Estimates process, but I might say it is a good suggestion, a good
recommendation. I will follow up‑‑I
know you cannot be in both places at once either‑‑and I will follow
up with a memo to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson). Along with many other initiatives that are
ongoing, a lot of the market research that has been done on tourism does indicate
that heritage is one of the reasons that people do come to
It is probably above more than 50 percent from
many different areas. As a result of
some of that market research, we are establishing an interdepartmental
committee with Industry, Trade and Tourism to look at support and planning for
future. There are many future heritage‑tourism
projects that merit much consideration.
So I think that over the next period of time we will see some positive
move in those directions. Your comment about
the
Ms.
Friesen: I did want to pursue the relationships between
tourism and the department of Culture, and I notice that there is a section in
Heritage where we can look at that, particularly looking at the Westman area.
I am glad to hear the minister's comments on
the importance of culture, generally, and tourism marketing. I hope and wish her success in getting that
across to Industry, Trade and Tourism. I
thought there might have been a chink in the fish and game routine. This last round of advertising,
Mrs.
Mitchelson: They indeed still are a very important factor
in attracting tourists to
This was just very recent, dated June 10, and
we will start that process very soon, as soon as staff from both departments get
through the Estimates process and can get into meeting and trying to determine
what can be done in the future. So it is
kind of an exciting challenge for our Historic Resources Branch to be
undertaking.
Ms.
Friesen: I wanted to ask a couple of questions about
the Manitoba Museum of Man and Nature.
Perhaps in the possibility of the minister appointing members to the
Winnipeg Art Gallery Board, one of the things that I would commend the
I am still disappointed that the Museum of Man
and Nature has chosen to end that, given the amount of public money which is committed
to that museum over the past 20‑odd years. I am curious, and I am not sure of the
minister's relationship to the
I might say that similarly the Heritage
Federation also gave a grant of $10,000 to Prairie Public Television to do a
film video on the heritage of the Exchange District. Now, I do not know the conditions of that
grant and whether it is tied to local production crews or anything else local,
and I do not know whether the minister wants to get into those kind of grants,
but the two coming together struck me as odd.
Here is public money going to a very
worthwhile American endeavour. I mean, I
belong to Prairie Public Television. The
issue is not the quality or anything, it is the principle of where public money
is going.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We do not have a hands‑on, day‑to‑day
function of dealing and running the
* (2120)
I cannot tell you where that money came from
and who made that decision, but we certainly can ask those questions of the museum,
and I am sure they would be more than willing to respond to that questioning,
but it would be their decision. It certainly
was not a decision that was made by us in any way or we had any part of. We did not have any part of that decision making.
Ms.
Friesen: In both cases, in terms of market niche and advertising,
if that is what is intended, I can see that there are reasons for dealing with
Prairie Public Television. It may be
that the Museum of Man and Nature one was specifically connected to the
Muppets. It may be that it is short
term. I do not know, and I guess the
first time I saw the Museum of Man and Nature on Prairie Public Television, I
just raised my eyebrows, but when I also saw money going from the Heritage
Federation to a video, and I do not know the terms of the making of that video,
essentially paying an American corporation to tell us about ourselves, well, it
certainly seemed to me a general area that I would like to draw to the
minister's attention. As I say, in both
cases there may be very good reasons and there may be short‑term reasons,
and in the case of an arm's length agency, there may be particular ways in
which the minister wants to address it.
It is not something I would perhaps raise in a specific way, but the
general issue might be one to draw to your attention.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do thank the
member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) for drawing that to my attention, and I will
ask the museum and I think we could ask probably the Heritage Federation, too,
for the reason or rationale that the grant was provided. I am sure both would be very willing to
provide that kind of information, and I will share it.
Ms.
Friesen: We are talking about increased production and
marketing for
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Film is in 2.(c), but I guess I would ask whether
we have any more questions on Grants to Cultural Organizations.
Ms.
Friesen: Is this where you prefer to talk about the
Arts Council?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Okay.
Ms.
Friesen: Then I would like to ask about the Arts
Council. In an earlier discussion when we were talking about research and planning
in the arts, the minister indicated that the Manitoba Arts Council had some
responsibility in that area. I looked at
their organizational chart and I could not see really where they had the staff
or the opportunity to do that or the budget lines, and yet in the report from
the chairperson, they do, in fact, talk about some reflections on policy that
they have had as a board, in reacting for example, to the funding of
controversial theatre pieces. Could the
minister give us an indication of what she expects in terms of policy and
research from this agency?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed that there is one‑half
staff year at the Manitoba Arts Council who is committed solely to research.
Ms.
Friesen: Has that, over the last four or five years
produced any reports, and would they be available to the general public?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: In many instances I am informed it is
internal analysis of the organizations that they fund, and they do briefs and
that kind of thing, and I could certainly ask the Arts Council whether there is
anything that they could provide for us, anything that has been a public
document that could be provided, and I would be prepared to attempt to obtain
that for you.
Ms.
Friesen: The report of the Arts Council, and this is
the one I am thinking of, the annual report that we get in the Legislature, is
there a broader report that is available to the public? It seems to me that from the perspective of
the minister this could be one of the most important documents that you produce,
because the range of activities, the range of programs that are presented here
throughout Manitoba, the accomplishments of individual artists are enormous.
Yet, it seems to me that this gets very little
distribution. Also, it is very uninformative about what the actual projects are. For example, one of them that is actually
mentioned in a report is the project of Aganetha Dyck at the
Would it not be useful, in the absence of the
skills transfer program, for example, to have a much longer report that enabled
people in other galleries and other smaller locations in
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There is not anything more extensive. I do know that they do do fairly major and
extensive news releases, on occasion, when grants are given out and that kind
of thing.
Unfortunately, sometimes it is not a high
priority issue with the media. Those
kinds of things do not get covered in the newspapers, I would say, as
frequently as they should be covered; they are good news stories and they are
stories about Manitobans who have made major accomplishments and have
contributed much. I am sure that, from
time to time‑‑the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) does know if
she has done a news release‑‑it does not always get covered. So it is not always the best way to try to get
information across to the general public.
Indeed, we try, and I guess we will continue
to try. But one of the reasons, I
believe, that the DeFehr Report recommended an arts act, was that it would
enable a minister responsible for culture, who would be an advocate within
government, to provide an annual report to the Legislature on the state of the
arts in Manitoba. I think that is
probably one of the most important aspects of an act.
Indeed, I would believe that that would be a
very comprehensive report. Some of the
things that we have just talked about should probably or should, I think,
definitely be included in that annual report, indicating what the state of the arts
is and what we have accomplished‑‑and not only what we have accomplished
but what Manitobans have accomplished through their contributions.
Ms.
Friesen: I think there are two audiences. One is the general public that a state of the
arts might reach. But the other is the
artists and the community groups themselves, and the institutions, both large
and small‑‑I think, right from now, I do not know why it would need
to wait for an arts act‑‑who would have an immediate interest in
what is being done in other cultural disciplines and what is being done in
other parts of the province.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I think it would be a very valuable tool. I know that within this year's budget we
certainly do not have the resources to compile that kind of thing within the
department. I think the comments that
you have made tonight about the Annual Report of the Manitoba Arts Council
certainly could be passed on to them for consideration in next year's annual
report. I would certainly undertake to
talk to the chairperson at the Manitoba Arts Council and pass on your comments
to her and see whether they merit some consideration and if, indeed, they might
change their format for publishing next year.
Ms.
Friesen: Sorry, no.
I wanted to go to marketing.
* (2130)
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 2.(b) Grants to Cultural
Organizations $4,265,000‑‑pass.
2.(c) Arts Branch: (1) Salaries $448,000.
Ms.
Friesen: I wanted to ask about the marketing and
increased production that is indicated here in one of the results of this part
of the department. It really follows on
from what I was suggesting for the Manitoba Arts Council report and also what
to me is a fairly minimum tourism research at this stage. Well, maybe I will start by, if the minister
could tell us what has been happening in marketing and increased production in
this area.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Was that cultural industry?
Ms.
Friesen: The minister asked, was it cultural
industries? I am on page 38, under
Expected Results, increased production and marketing by
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, this does include
sound, film and publishing, and there has been expanded marketing through our
publishing program. We have a marketing component,
also through our cultural industries with some of our films like The Last
Winter which has been seen and marketed internationally.
Ms.
Friesen: I know that there has been an effort to
increase national and international awareness of films and literature, I guess
sound as well. Could the minister give
us an idea of what is happening within
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I just happen
to have a book in front of me that has books, books, books, a
Ms.
Friesen: Are there any incentives being offered as
part of marketing packages for teachers and/or others to purchase
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is my understanding
that under the first year or two of the agreement that, in fact, libraries
throughout
I guess we will see, as a result of this
catalogue that has been distributed, what the response will be and whether we
will see an increase in the sale of
Ms.
Friesen: I am interested that free books did not
work. Was there a study on that that
indicated that?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed that there has not been a study as
to why we have a reasonable amount of purchase but it is not great.
Ms.
Friesen: What other types of marketing have been tried
in other areas, in popular music, for example, or in video or in film?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Basically, we provide grants and the
marketing is done. I do know that we
have a fairly long list of films made in
So we have had many, many successes. That is just to name a few. I suppose that is the one venue that
certainly does market
* (2140)
Ms.
Friesen: It is not the quality or the number that is
the issue. I mean, I take that as a
given. The thing is how do we market
these? The minister is indicating here
that some are going to be shown on TV and that presumably is to a small Canadian
or regional audience anyway. How are we
doing internationally?
The minister says that grants are given, but
are there, for example, national or regional or provincial consortiums that could
help to market a number of
Mrs.
Mitchelson: The grants that we give in cultural
industries go to investment in film. We
do have a distribution agreement but marketing is built into that grant, and
they are marketed on an individual basis.
Ms.
Friesen: Some of the recent studies that I have read
on this suggest that this is the real difficulty, the marketing of cultural
products in regions‑‑and these are not studies actually from
It is not an issue which is alone to
I think much the same kind of argument is
being made about regional theatre, that the emphasis on grants, in the granting
agencies, and in the structures of all of those kinds of programs, the emphasis
is on the product, not upon the marketing of it. So I am looking for some kind of response
from the government since it does highlight production and marketing, what other
innovative ideas it has perhaps found from other jurisdictions.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I suppose a couple of years ago it might have
been a little premature to think about marketing. I think our recent successes have shown that
we do have a very marketable product here in
We have marketed, and very successfully, in
Ms.
Friesen: Are there national consortiums that are
marketing internationally, that
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed that, no, there is not anything
nationally that is extremely successful.
The Last Winter tried through that kind of venue and had to give up on
it. They are marketing on their own, and
I might say much more successfully, into the
Ms.
Friesen: One of the other issues that I wanted to raise
was the role of marketing in opening up new audiences, particularly in the area
of cross‑marketing, for example, using video to introduce people to
Manitoba literature, or using film to introduce people to music; or by marketing
in different venues, marketing different kinds of cultural activities in one
venue so that the audience begins to cross over‑‑for example, from
theatre to film.
(Mr.
Bob Rose, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
I wondered what the department was pursuing in
this area. It seems to me that
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I guess there are lots of avenues that could
be explored. When we appointed the Arts
Policy Review Committee and sat down and looked at ways‑‑and that
was one of the challenges I threw out to the committee, to look at innovative
ways and ask whether in fact there was a willingness out there to try to be a little
imaginative or creative.
The one area that came very quickly to my
mind, and I threw out on the table, and we have talked about it and it has not
got off the ground yet, is maybe a season ticket package for the ballet, the
symphony, the theatre centre, so you could get a season ticket that might cross
many different venues and give more people a little taste of everything and
maybe encourage increased audience participation. That was certainly something that was
discussed throughout the consultation process, and I think something that the
DeFehr committee felt warranted some consideration. As I said, it has not got off the ground yet,
but it is certainly something that we would encourage. You know, I have mentioned it from time to
time since then, but it has not taken off.
Ms.
Friesen: Can it be encouraged by including it in the granting
structure?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is the Arts
Council that deals with the major arts organizations. We have a a new chairperson at the Arts
Council that has just started, just sort of getting into it with both
feet. I think that we will find that she
will be a very enthusiastic and energetic person that has been extremely
involved in community arts for many years.
We will provide the opportunity for debate and discussion around
innovative ways to deal with funding and also with encouragement of
participation throughout the broad range of the community.
The Consumer Arts Profile does help us to
identify certain market opportunities and Ballet in the Park, of course, is a fairly
successful event. This summer there will
be three symphonies at The Forks on Labour Day as a part of
We are pleased that that opportunity is going
to be provided to Manitobans and to tourists that might want to travel to
Ms.
Friesen: I am finished.
* (2150)
Mr.
Lamoureux: I have a couple questions on this particular line. In regard to the Prix Manitoba Award, when is
the next award handed out? I know that
there is a brochure that the minister has on it, if there is one that is
available?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the next Prix Awards
will be in recreation sometime this year, and it has not been scheduled as yet
but it will be sometime later this year.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is an
annual award, is it not? How often, or
what is determined in terms of when the award would actually be presented?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There are Prix Awards for heritage which are presented
on a yearly basis, and that is usually on Manitoba Day or around Manitoba
Day. Every two years we have a Prix
Award for multiculturalism, and that is usually done in conjunction with the
Manitoba Intercultural Council's biennial assembly. We have introduced the Prix Award for
recreation which is once every two years, and it will be this year.
Mr. Lamoureux: I
would just ask if I could get a copy of the brochures. I know that the minister does have brochures
on them, if that would be possible?
The other thing was in regard to the Film
Support Grants. I know that the federal
government had withdrawn some of their funding towards it. The minister tried to compensate for that by adding
additional provincial government monies.
How much of a withdrawal did we see from the federal government? Is this a complete 100 percent compensation
from the provincial government in that area?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we are just trying
to get the agreement. It was an ERDA
agreement that was signed back in 1985, '86 I believe, and it was a joint
venture. When the agreement was finished the federal government indicated that
there would be no more support. I think
we did get $800,000. They were initially
in at‑‑okay, we were just trying to go back historically, and I
think there was $6 million for film over a period of five years, and at the end
of the agreement the federal government indicated they would not be involved in
a cost‑shared agreement. It was a
60‑40 agreement, 60 percent federal and 40 percent
When the agreement ended, we last year got
about $800,000 from the federal government to contribute. This year we have nothing as yet from the
federal government. We are still in the negotiation
process. The federal government does
know that it is a priority for
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I know one of
the concerns‑‑I believe it was the Arts Council that actually had a
recommendation with respect to concern about the national government divesting
itself of some of the responsibilities, and this is one of the areas, no doubt,
that they would have been making some reference to, because even though it was
an ERDA agreement that allowed the monies to flow from there, I would hope that
the government would continue to emphasize the importance of the national
government's role in ensuring that the resources from our national government
do continue to come. I know that in the
constitutional debate that is going on there seems to be a lot of emphasis to
do what this line has unfortunately indicated, and I think as a government, not
only this particular minister but we have seen a consensus in Manitoba that we
should be emphasizing that, if anything, the Government of Canada has a larger
role to play.
Finally, I wanted just to ask in terms of the
Project Support which went from $98,000 to $200,000. I am not too sure what that is. Can the minister just explain to me what it
is?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Although we have some difficulty in this area
getting a cost‑shared agreement, and throughout government we have
experienced offloading in many major areas of expenditure by the federal
government and it certainly is a concern across government, I do want to
indicate for every dollar that we contribute provincially through CIDO, we
lever anywhere from $2 to $4 from Telefilm, which is national or federal money
for a production.
There is federal money going into film in
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Rose): Item 2.(c) Arts Branch: (1) Salaries $448,000‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $110,900‑‑pass.
We declare a five‑minute recess.
* * *
The
committee took recess at 9:59 p.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 10:08 p.m.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Rose): Order, please. I call the Committee of Supply to order. We are considering item 2.(d) Public Library
Services: (1) Salaries $664,700. Shall the item pass?
* (2210)
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I had a couple
of questions on this particular line, because a while back the minister had in
fact had a challenge that was put out to the Public Library Advisory Board, in
a sense that they were to go out and consult and come back to the minister with
a number of recommendations, with the bottom line to improving‑‑right
from her own press release‑‑final recommendations to improve accessibility
and delivery of the library services across the province.
My question to the minister is: Has she received that report as of yet?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I guess the member for
Mr.
Lamoureux: I guess it was not because of a lack of
interest in terms of listening; I was talking to the government House leader
(Mr. Manness) in regard to this session.
That is the reason why, unfortunately, I was not able to listen to all
the details. My apologies‑‑if
she feels that it is necessary to give an apology for it.
But, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I did want
to pick up on a couple of the concerns.
I know that there are a number of rural libraries, and I wanted to know,
has there been an increase in rural libraries in the last number of years,
decrease, has it remained the same?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Last year there was a new library established
in
Mr.
Lamoureux: It is encouraging to hear that we see more libraries,
because I find that they play a major role in providing information, and not
only that, but provide an excellent service to the communities.
I would ask the government, what role do they
play? Do they sit down with the
municipalities to try to come up with where libraries should go and so forth?
(Mr.
Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: It is a municipal initiative. In fact, if there is a desire to establish a
library in a community, Public Libraries is approached and it goes through a
municipal process, and then we go through a process of planning support and assistance
to the municipalities in establishing a local public library. So there is a process when our department is
approached by a municipality that does express a desire; indeed, we work with
them to support and plan the establishment.
Mr.
Lamoureux: I would then take it that
the government, as a policy, when it comes to rural libraries, they are there
to promote additional libraries in different municipalities and so forth, and
provide financial assistance. Is that a
fair assessment?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Indeed, we are there to assist when municipalities
express a need or a desire to establish.
What happens is there are by‑laws in municipalities and they have
to have first and second readings of by‑laws to establish a municipality.
As I indicated, there was one new one
established last year. One new one is just in the process of the final reading
of the by‑law to establish. That is
the one in MacGregor. So it is pretty
well a fait accompli. Morris and Oakbank
are both dealing with the department, and we are working with them to help them
through the process with support and planning.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Do we find any rural communities actually
losing libraries?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, none have shut down,
to my knowledge, that have been established.
Mr.
Lamoureux: I am pleased to hear that. I wanted to move on in terms of a concern
that I have addressed previously, I guess, in the Estimates, and that is in
regard to libraries from within the city of
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We have discussed this issue over several
sets of Estimates since I have been minister.
I know there has been questioning in the Legislature also on, are we
going to dictate to the City of Winnipeg the number of branches that they
should have or whether all existing branches should remain. I have indicated in the past that those are
local government decisions, that the City of
I have indicated in the past that it is a
local government decision and the City of Winnipeg has to determine on behalf
of the constituents that it represents where library branches should be, how
many there should be and what amount of funding there should be for those
libraries.
Mr.
Lamoureux: I know that the government in the past has
talked about the illiteracy problem within the city of
I would suggest‑‑because I know we
have very limited time and there are a number of areas that we really want to
concentrate on, at least we do as an opposition party, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson‑‑I
was going to suggest to the minister, again, that I believe that she does have
a larger role to play in terms of libraries and community‑based
libraries, at the very least, as the government taking some sort of a position
on it.
Having said that, I wanted to ask the minister
what conversations has she had with the city or if she has had any communication
with the city with respect to potentially creating a multicultural
library? I know this is something that a
local councillor of mine has often talked about and, in fact, has even suggested
that we might even see this multicultural library located at Burrows and
Keewatin, which I would suggest is probably a very good location to have. Not only does it happen to be in the riding
which I represent, but it is an area I think much deserves and warrants‑‑if
we are going to be moving toward a multicultural library or providing a
multicultural library, that this be one of the areas that be given serious
consideration.
* (2220)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: If there is a well‑planned request and
we can work through a proposal that might come forward to government with the
community, I have heard that there has been an expressed desire. We have not had any formal proposal come to
government to establish a library, but I would still believe that we could work
along with the City of
As I said, libraries are municipal
responsibility, and if there were resources at the staff level that could work
with the City of
We talk about literacy, and I think I have
said that buildings alone and libraries do not necessarily mean that we are going
to have more literate people. It is the
programs that are provided through the public libraries and through community libraries,
in fact, that will determine the success and the utilization of the books that
are there in a very positive way. I have always indicated that.
We may have had the conversation last year
about looking at‑‑and I know I have discussed with my colleague the
Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey)‑‑the issue of having school
libraries more accessible to the public and maybe extended hours to provide opportunity
outside of school hours for people to utilize those facilities.
I have asked the questions even of the Public
Schools Finance Board on whether they are interested in looking at that, and
they certainly are interested in trying to accommodate in a certain way. I do not understand even why, possibly in
some areas, if there were nursery schools that wanted to utilize the public school
library, those kinds of activities could not attempt to be undertaken.
We have also offered to the city, at the staff
level, the opportunity to sit down at any time and meet with them to discuss library
issues, and I know they have not approached us as yet. But we would certainly
be prepared to work co‑operatively with them on looking at new and
innovative ways of trying to make books that are presently available more
accessible.
Mr.
Lamoureux: I think the minister makes my point at least
in part, in terms of that there is some need to have a co‑ordinated approach. She makes reference to the ideas that there
are public school libraries, which, I think, is an excellent one and worthy of
pursuing. But it is that sort of a co‑ordinated
approach and why it is also important for the minister, as I say, to think in terms
of the community‑based libraries and that she might have a more
significant role to play other than just giving a block grant.
Having said that, I also wanted to comment
when the minister said that a building in itself does not rectify a problem, if
I can put it that way, and the minister is quite right in that assessment. There are a number of factors that need to be
taken into account. She points out one.
I look at the Brooklands library, and one of
the reasons why that library is a library that has been rumoured on numerous occasions
as being a library that should be closed is because of its circulation. Well, once again, circulation is not the only
factor that needs to be taken into consideration.
We should be looking in terms of the mobility
of the individuals or the people who live around the area, incomes and so
forth, the whole demographics of the area in terms of the educational levels
and so forth. A decision should not just
be made on one factor.
Having said that, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson, I am prepared to pass the mike.
Ms. Friesen: I
wanted to ask the minister what the impact of the most recent census figures
will be on the libraries in rural
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There will not be any impact this year
because we are using the old census numbers.
Ms.
Friesen: When do the new census numbers then come into effect
in the department's granting program and what studies has the department done
to show what the impact will be on rural libraries?
Mrs. Mitchelson:
Normally the new census numbers would be used for next year's budget
process, but we are fully expecting that we will have the Public Library
Advisory Board's report and recommendations to deal with at the same time as
the new budget process for next year's Estimates will be undertaken. So I am not aware yet of what the library
board will recommend to government and how we might be able to deal with those recommendations.
Ms.
Friesen: I am sorry, I think I missed a step
there. I am not sure of the connection
between the two. Is the minister suggesting
that there will be a new funding formula in place?
Essentially what we are looking at is a
continuing decline of parts of rural
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I would imagine that they will make recommendations
on maybe new models and new methods of funding when their report comes in. I fully expect that they will.
Ms.
Friesen: My other question dealt with training,
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, Public Library Services has definitely
had input and it looks like there is consideration to expanding it to a two‑year
course, but we have been leading the discussions through public libraries on
that issue.
Ms.
Friesen: Is there a timetable on that? When is that likely to begin and what are the
implications of that for staffing when you move from a one‑year to a two‑year
program? Presumably there is, first of
all, a hiatus, and then second of all, there is an issue of, does it lead to a
different wage scale and are rural libraries, for example, going to be able to
afford that? I guess there is a range of
issues.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We actually do not teach the course. We are very highly involved in recommending a
program. My understanding is that the
Public Libraries Advisory Board will be dealing with that issue and how it
might impact on rural
Ms.
Friesen: Is there a report of the Public Libraries
Board that is publicly available? How do
we know what they are planning and what they are proposing?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There is not a report but I think staff have had
dealings with the discussion paper that was circulated in the community that
does have an idea of the kinds of things that have been looked at. It will be a public document once the report
is received.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 2.(d)(1) Salaries
$664,700‑‑pass; item 2.(d)(2) Other Expenditures $323,000; item
2.(d)(3) Grant Assistance $1,577,300‑‑pass.
2.(e) Historic Resources: (1) Salaries
$1,033,300.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, only one brief
question in regard to the heritage preservation and some of our buildings. Last year during the Estimates there seemed
to be a concern regarding the theatres, and I was wondering if the minister
might be able to give some sort of report to the committee of what the latest
is on those buildings.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the department
has received permission to go in and take a look at the inside of the theatres
and see if there has been any damage over the winter. They have not been in as yet, but they have
received permission from the owners to do that.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I guess that in
part what I was looking for is to find out if there has been damage because of
being moth balled, if you will.
Unfortunately, I guess we will have to possibly wait till the next time
we are in session before we get a response to it, but I would ask that after
her staff have gone through the building, if the opposition parties could be
given a copy because there seems to be a lot of interest in terms of what was
going on in that area.
The other thing that I want to touch very
briefly on is in regard to Manitoba Day.
What other activities‑‑I know this year, for example, we had
the citizenship court in the
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think all of us
do recognize that there is not in many instances great public awareness of
Manitoba Day, that indeed May 12 is Manitoba Day, and we have been struggling
as a department over the last number of years to try to increase the profile of
Manitoba Day in a significant way. Of
course, we have dealt with citizenship court.
A few years ago we designated this building as a historic building. There have been trivia quizzes and I think
they were broadly carried by the Free Press during the week leading up to Manitoba
Day and through that week, and many people did participate in attempting to
answer some of the questions surrounding the history of Manitoba that were
presented.
We had a satellite TV hookup and 73 schools
throughout
Very often, again, this is another one of those
instances that is good news and does not seem to get picked up terribly broadly. I would like, you know, the media throughout
the
It is probably one of the nicest ceremonies
that I participate in throughout the year, the presentation of the Prix Awards. I do not know how we raise the profile
without a sense by the media that they are important events. I think we have to look toward the future,
and we are starting already to look at ways that we can heighten awareness for
next year's Manitoba Day.
It also usually falls right in the middle of
Multicultural Week, a week that we celebrate.
Many of the schools do celebrate Multicultural Week that same week. Whatever day the 12th falls on, it is usually
in that week sometime. I have tossed out
the idea of a theme for next year already; I am not sure what it will be. A couple of years ago it was the 75th
anniversary of women getting the vote in the
For 1993, we are looking at, without any final
decision on special places, and that might be the focus for next year's activities. But I think that it is important that we get communities
involved in the planning and preparation of special activities within their
communities, so that it will heighten the awareness within the school system,
within the educational system.
Also, maybe we can tie in the theme of
Multicultural Week and Heritage Week to some degree too. There has been a suggestion for a major
multicultural festival or activities on that day. That is certainly an
option. It might be nice to have a different
theme every year, and start planning and preparation for it, so that a broad
cross section of the community will know that Manitoba Day is May 12, and that
it is day that we should celebrate and be proud of who we are.
Ms.
Friesen: Can the minister tell us what input the
department has had into the new planning act for
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There is an intergovernmental committee that
is dealing with the plan. Our
recommendation, of course, is that the Heritage conservation districts be
included in the plan. There are continual updates, but there is not as yet a
definite plan that has come forward. But
we are involved on a continual basis, and that has been our recommendation.
* (2240)
Ms.
Friesen: It is the Heritage conservation districts
concept that I am interested in particularly.
I did get from the department the new proposal‑‑it is not
that new, actually; I think it has just been recirculated‑‑for land‑use
planning, and I did not see anything in that on conservation districts.
So there is, in fact, a separate process that
is looking at the act and one which is looking at the land‑use
planning. Am I right? Or is the document that is circulating now,
as a draft land‑use planning proposal for Manitoba, what is eventually
going to become the new planning act, and is that what the department has had
input into?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Our department has had input into both, but they
are separate and apart, The Planning Act and the land use policy are separate
issues.
Ms.
Friesen: I have raised this particular question
before, but I am wondering if there is any new news or good news on this, and that
is, the proposals for an international world heritage site in
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we are monitoring
the process, but there has not been anything major that is new. There still needs to be further negotiation
with the federal government and natural resources on a proposed national park
in the area, but as I said there has not been anything new. Negotiations are still ongoing.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Reimer): Item 2.(e) Historic Resources: (1) Salaries $1,033,300‑‑pass;
2.(e)(2) Other Expenditures $195,100‑‑pass.
2.(f) Recreation: (1) Salaries $290,200‑‑pass;
2.(f)(2) Other Expenditures $159,200‑‑pass.
2.(g) Regional Services: (1) Salaries $933,200.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, just one
question on that particular line. Were
there any staff changes in that area?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I would like to ask for clarification. Are you talking about the numbers of staff or
a changeover in staff?
Mr.
Lamoureux: I am thinking if there was a vacancy or if
there was a changeover in staff in that area.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: The director is on a one‑year leave,
and we have staff from each of the regions that are rotating and spending two
months each as acting director while that person is on a one‑year leave.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Would that be the position in terms of Beausejour? Is that the area?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed that one of the staff people in
Beausejour has been brought into another vacancy within the Department of
Culture and is doing some policy and planning right now.
(Mr.
Jack Penner, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mr.
Lamoureux: So then there would be a vacancy in
Beausejour right now, and if there is I would ask the minister is it being planned
on being filled or is it just a transfer from the town of
Mrs.
Mitchelson: No. It
is just that it is vacant on a temporary basis while this person is in acting,
getting some experience in that area, but he will be moving back into that position. He is only doing it on an acting basis.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 2. Culture, Heritage
and Recreation Programs (g) Regional Services:
(1) Salaries $933,200‑‑(pass); (2) Other Expenditures $265,000‑‑(pass).
Resolution 20:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$10,556,300 for Culture, Heritage and Citizenship; Culture, Heritage and
Recreation Programs; for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 3. Information Resources (a)
Communication Services: (1) Salaries $904,700‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $77,400‑‑pass.
(b) Advertising Services: (1) Salaries $634,900‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $116,600‑‑pass; (3) Public Sector Advertising $2,509,600‑‑pass;
(4) Less: Recoverable from Other Appropriations
$2,631,700‑‑pass.
(c) Information Services: (1) Salaries $541,100‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $163,400‑‑pass.
(d) Queen's Printer: (1) Salaries $1,879,500‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $2,220,200‑‑pass; (3) Less: Recoverable from Other Appropriations
$3,268,300‑‑pass.
(e) Translation Services: (1) Salaries $898,100‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $387,900‑‑pass.
(f) Provincial Archives: (1) Salaries $1,359,600‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $256,500‑‑pass; (3) Less: Recoverable from Other Appropriations $28,800‑‑pass.
(g) Legislative Library: (1) Salaries $780,800‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $179,700‑‑pass.
Resolution 21:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$6,981,200 for Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, Information Services, for the
fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 4. Citizenship (a) Immigration Policy and
Planning: (1) Salaries $367,800‑‑[interjection!
Sorry, you were almost too late.
Mr.
Lamoureux: I have a number of questions in this whole
area dealing with Citizenship all the way down to Multiculturalism. No doubt
the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) and I will both have a number of questions
in this area.
* (2250)
So we will get started off by asking some
questions in regard to‑‑the number of immigrants that have been
coming to
I would ask the minister, in terms of what
sorts of commitments does she have, and if she can give us some brief‑‑underlining
the word brief‑‑history in terms of the numbers that have been
there in the last couple of years.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We have indicated‑‑and ever since
Citizenship was moved over and our department was renamed to Culture, Heritage
and Citizenship, we have had a more major focus on immigration. One of the first announcements that we made
was the desire to negotiate expeditiously with the federal government an immigration
agreement not unsimilar to what
We as
We are down in 1991 to just over 2
percent. That is a serious concern. We have expressed that concern, and we are actively
pursuing an immigration agreement that will put in place the ability of
Manitoba to receive 4 percent of the immigrants that come to Canada and many
other components, of course, to that Immigration Act.
We are concerned, yes. Our numbers are down. I think an immigration agreement might
resolve some of that problem.
Mr.
Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I know last
year we had talked about it at length in terms of the percentages and so
forth. No doubt I could probably go back
and put together some numbers for myself, but I would ask if the minister could
give us the indications in terms of the actual percentages. That would include the decimals, if you like,
of
I wanted to ask some questions regarding an
issue that has come up with respect to the whole question of the
domestics. I know the minister has met
with representatives from the domestics, some community leaders, and had given
some sort of indication that she had consulted with the federal department in that
there seemed to be some sort of an informal agreement that the minister would
be able to look after some of the cases.
I am wondering if the minister can report back
to us in terms of the number of domestics‑‑I have heard from four
to 12‑‑in terms of the actual breakdown of what is happening with
these individuals, in what stage they are at.
If the minister can shed any light if these individuals have any reason
to be optimistic, that we will be able to work things out on their behalf with
the Department of Immigration?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, as a result of
questions, I think, that were raised by the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli)
initially in the House and subsequently, of course, by the member for Inkster
(Mr. Lamoureux), indicating that there was some problem with domestic workers
being sent notices and indications that they might not be able to apply for
landed immigrant status from within the country.
I did meet with those organizations who
expressed concern. We have only been able to confirm four domestic
workers. We have heard that there might
be more numbers, but with the two organizations there have only been four
people that they have indicated have had a problem‑‑that I am aware
of anyway.
What we did as a result of those concerns
being raised was contact federal officials who have agreed to a unique circumstance
whereby if those domestic workers who have concern and some problems are
prepared to sign a release form, that the information in the files that the
federal government has can be shared with our officials at the provincial
level, whereby those files can be reviewed with the person who has expressed a concern. If there is anything that we can do on behalf
of that person to try to help, we would be prepared to do that.
First of all, what we need to do is get the
release form signed so that the documents that the federal government has in its
jurisdiction can be shared. We do not,
as yet, have an agreement with the federal government that would give us
control over immigration. It is still
their responsibility, but as I indicated, they are prepared to share those
files with our provincial officials who can, in turn, meet with the domestic worker
who is involved and see if there is any way that we can provide any support or
any help.
Mr.
Lamoureux: I was wanting to make a suggestion, and I am hoping
the minister will take me up on it. I do
not know the names of the individuals, with the possible exception of one, that
the minister has, as a case, if you will, that is being worked on. I know of at least two individuals,
personally, through some contacts that I have.
I would like to be able to contribute in some
way, in being able to do what I can to see if we can help them, and to make myself
available if she has a staff person who is working on these cases‑‑as
I am sure the member for Rossmere, who also knows of some individuals‑‑that
if we can sit down with her staff person and bring up the cases that we have,
as opposed to just handing them off to the department, if we could have the
option to sit down with the person that she has delegated and possibly arrange
some meetings with the individuals who have been affected, to address the
problem and possibly have these people remain in Canada without having to face
deportation.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: We would be more than willing. If any members have people that they are
aware of that have problems, we would be more than willing to sit down with
that person, the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), and a staff member of the
Citizenship branch.
I do have to stress, too, that the person who
is asking for assistance, in order for us to obtain files from the federal government,
would have to sign a release form. We
have sent some of those forms out to both of the organizations that represent domestic
workers, but to date they have not come back to us with authorization. The only way that we can intervene is if we
have the federal files at our disposal.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): The hour being eleven
o'clock, what is the will of the committee?
Hon.
Darren Praznik (Deputy Government House Leader): I
would ask if this committee could recess until 10 a.m. tomorrow, subject to the
unanimous approval of this committee to sit at that time. I understand that there are some discussions
going on between House leaders, and those are incomplete. But if we could recess subject to the
unanimous consent of the committee to meet, if we could reconvene at 10 a.m.
and proceed, subject to that unanimous approval at that time.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Is it agreed that we would
reconvene‑‑
Mr.
Praznik: Recess until‑‑
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): ‑‑at 10 a.m.
tomorrow, June 17?
Mr.
Praznik: I understand that we are recessing until 10
a.m. tomorrow, subject to‑‑
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Is it agreed that we recess?
Some
Honourable Members: Agreed.
Ms.
Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): It is agreed that we
recess, but I would just request that it be 10:30 a.m. that we resume.
Mr.
Praznik: I have no problem with that, if we recess
till 10:30 a.m. tomorrow.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): It is agreed that we reconvene
at 10:30 a.m. tomorrow. Thank you.
The hour being eleven o'clock, the committee
stands recessed until tomorrow at 10:30 a.m. (Wednesday)
INDUSTRY, TRADE AND TOURISM
* (1900)
Madam
Chairperson (Louise Dacquay): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order. This section of the Committee of
Supply is dealing with the Estimates for the Department of Industry, Trade and
Tourism.
Does the minister have an opening statement?
Hon.
Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Chairperson, I take it that the
process to date has been that it is quite all right to remain seated. We can be more comfortable while we deal with
these Estimates.
An
Honourable Member: We have got lots of questions here.
Mr.
Stefanson: Do you?
I am getting nervous looking across the way.
I have a brief opening statement. I am pleased to have this opportunity to
present the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba with the 1992‑93 fiscal year
spending Estimates for the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism.
However, Madam Chairperson, as we plan for the
future, we learn from the past. Good
government must bear in mind the cost of renewal and what the tax‑paying
people of this province can support. Our
government is committed to fostering the economic climate for job creation
through growth. My department will continue
to work with the private sector to encourage co‑operation and partnership
in the creation of long‑term jobs that will provide a foundation for the
future. To that end, the Industry, Trade
and Tourism department is emphasizing strategic initiatives through a more
project‑oriented approach. With careful
planning and quality products,
My department, in consultation with the
private sector, has focused on several sectors with the greatest sustainable competitive
advantages. The word
"sustainable" is to be taken in the context of the long term and in
the context of environmentally sound development. Examples of these sectors include aerospace,
information technology, the health industries, tourism, environmental
industries, food processing and transportation.
Madam Chairperson, to fulfill the mission of
the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism, we must capitalize on new opportunities. This can be achieved through the opening of markets,
attracting new investment, fostering growth and new economic sectors and by
promoting new technology and innovation. We must build on our strengths as a
province.
The majority of enterprise in this province is
small and medium in size. We are
encouraging skill development for entrepreneurs and small business. For example, the Business Start program
guarantees loans targeted primarily towards women and rural Manitobans. We have added or strengthened financial assistance
programs to support investment and research and development in
The Manitoba Industrial Recruitment Initiative
or MIRI provides assistance to attract new business investment, development
opportunities and related job creation.
The Crocus Investment Fund, controlled by the
Manitoba Federation of Labour, is to promote employee ownership in
The Manitoba Industrial Opportunities Program,
or MIOP, provides financial incentives to private companies in locating or expanding
here in
The Economic Innovation and Technology Council
will provide guidance for economic renewal through leadership. The council will provide a forum for
consultation and dialogue between business, industry, labour, the research and
academic communities and government. The
council will assume responsibility for the direction and management of the
Economic Innovation and Technology Fund, providing grants and incentives. The council carries on the activities of the
Manitoba Research Council, including the operation of technological
laboratories and facilities.
My department will fund the Economic
Development Board Secretariat, as it links the economic activities of
government to the efforts of the community and private sector. The recent Doing Business in
Talking about federal‑provincial co‑operation,
earlier this year the province signed the Canada‑Manitoba Partnership Agreement
for Tourism. The five‑year
agreement, the third such joint venture, is intended to stimulate a
refurbishing of the tourism industry infrastructure. The Federal‑Provincial Western Economic
Partnership Agreement, WEPA, in communications technology research and industry
development, will target advanced telecommunications technologies and
applications.
Talking about interprovincial co‑operation,
In talking about province‑state co‑operation,
Contact '92, held in
The Health Industry Development Initiative
works to enhance our existing health technology infrastructure and seeks to develop
the health industry in
The Manitoba Pharmaceutical Fair, the first of
its kind in all of
The Industrial Technology Branch delivers the
Manitoba Aerospace Technology Program and the Manitoba Environment Industries
Development Initiative. The branch
assesses and advises on proposals and actions of government, the private sector
and others engaged in science, research and development, engineering and other
technology‑related activity.
The Manitoba Centres of Excellence Fund will
continue to provide additional support to researchers who are successful under
the Federal Networks of Centres of Excellence Initiative.
Madam Chairperson, my department will continue
co‑operation with the
I am sure the honourable member for Flin Flon
(Mr. Storie) is interested that our Tourism Division continues to play a
critical role in
Madam Chairperson, the department has been
involved in extensive consultations with the federal government regarding the North
American free trade negotiations, the multilateral trade negotiations and the
Canada‑U.S. Free Trade Agreement.
These consultations have taken place at the ministerial and staff level. During this period we have made presentations
to the federal government on several issues of concern to Manitobans. The
significant level of trade policy activity will continue for the foreseeable
future on both the NAFTA and the MTN fronts.
We are hopeful successful multilateral negotiations will place agriculture
and particularly the grain sector on a more sound financial footing. We want to position
The Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism
will continue to promote meaningful job creation in concert with the private sector. Madam Chairperson, we have formulated a
prudent and responsible course of action for this department and this province
which will pay dividends for
Madam
Chairperson: Does the critic for the official opposition have
an opening statement?
Mr. Jerry
Storie (Flin Flon): Madam Chairperson, as I said, it is always
nice to watch the minister introduce his department. I have to say that perhaps the minister has
not been through this as often as some of his colleagues, but it is always a
mark of a rookie when they get you to read the stuff they prepare, and you know
you should always avoid that, if possible.
It is wonderful stuff, but it is usually very dry.
Madam Chairperson, I am not sure that much of
what the minister said reflects the reality that most Manitobans see around
them. What Manitobans see is record high
unemployment, record high welfare lines, food bank lines, record high deindustrialization
of the province. Yesterday or the day
before we heard in this Chamber that the manufacturing base has dropped 21
percent since 1988. That is a staggering
statistic and one that I hoped the minister would have addressed in his opening
comments, not in a defensive sense, not in a sense that, you know, it is all
the previous government's fault or it is all somebody else's fault, but in the
sense that at least the government has to acknowledge where the economy stands
today.
I think everyone on this side appreciates,
certainly anyone that has been in government appreciates, that around the
cabinet table I think there is a little more honesty than what we heard from
the minister today about the circumstances that we face. We have record high unemployment, record high
numbers of people on social assistance; we also have a record number of bankruptcies
in the province, a record number of foreclosures in the province. There was an article on March 3 that said: Foreclosures
smash records. We have seen the same
kind of headline with respect to unemployment, with respect to bankruptcies,
Madam Chairperson, and I think everyone in the province understands that we
have some serious economic problems.
* (1910)
People of
When I look through the Department of
Industry, Trade and Tourism, and I went through the different sections, it is certainly
hard to select from this any sense that the government really has a
priority. I remember when the Budget
Address was read they talked about the increase in the economic development portfolio,
that there was substantial increase.
Well, the fact of the matter is that in many areas in the Department of Industry,
Trade and Tourism there have actually been reductions. For example, just to
name a few in the first resolution, in the first section, Strategic Planning
has been cut. Now I cannot imagine a
more disastrous area to begin reforming government than by cutting out
Strategic Planning from an area in the Department of Industry, Trade and
Tourism.
If this government thinks a stand‑aside
philosophy in terms of planning for our economic development is good enough,
they really do not understand what is going on in the rest of the world where
governments are increasingly involved with the corporate sector, with labour,
with the communities, different levels of government in planning. To start pulling out money in the area of
strategic planning seems quite the reverse of what both logic and experience
would dictate. I do not think it makes sense.
Then we have a rather bizarre commitment made
by the government before this minister's tenure in the Department of Industry,
Trade and Tourism began, a $1‑million grant to the Faculty of Management,
political commitment of dubious distinction that has had virtually no
benefits. In fact, the department has
gone for accreditation through some American accreditation scheme and failed
quite miserably, and yet this minister, at a time when the economy needs the boost
and at a time when he is cutting back in planning and cutting back in other
areas, sees fit to give, I guess, a grant in an area where certainly there are,
I think, legitimate criticisms to be made and where it is not at all certain
whether the province will see any benefit.
But it was a political commitment.
If you move on into the Industry and Trade
division, there have been cutbacks in the Sectoral Development area, there have
been cutbacks in a couple of other areas, small cutbacks in Trade division. Health Industries Development Initiative,
again a couple of hundred thousand dollars in an area where the Minister of
Health (Mr. Orchard), the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.
Stefanson), the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) have said is a priority with the
government.
Well, you have to wonder how big a priority
can it be when you go to move onto some of the other areas like the newly created
Economic Development Board Secretariat, a board that is duplicating,
theoretically, what a number of other committees in government are already
doing, and the department itself spending some $886,000.
We have a shuffling of the deck with respect
to what used to be the Manitoba Research Council, now is the Economic
Innovation and Technology Council and the Economic Innovation and Technology fund
which gets a grand total of $1 million.
It is hard to say from those numbers that the government has any plan,
or if it has a plan, is seriously funding the plan to an extent that we have any
hope of success.
Madam Chairperson, the government appears not
to be relying on any expertise within the department of Industry, Trade and Tourism
to develop an economic agenda. It
appears even from the Estimates that the government is committed to its stand‑aside
version of how the economy of the province should develop.
I do not know how long the people of
People have no confidence that things are
going to get better. Unless someone
shows some leadership, unless someone can develop a sense of confidence in the
people who have the resources to spend, we are going to see the economy
continue to deteriorate. If the minister
does not know, the sector that has created all of the jobs in the last decade,
the small business sector, has been devastated, and many companies that had a
pretty good reputation, felt that they were quite solid, are now on very, very
shaky ground.
The minister should know if he has talked to
members of the restaurant association or the hotel association that there are still
many, many of their members, the service sector part of the economy, that are
teetering. The minister only has to
drive down any major artery in this city or drive down Rosser in Brandon or Main
Street, Dauphin, to know that the economy is struggling perhaps even more than
it was a couple of years ago.
I hope through these Estimates the minister is
going to (a) point out where the strategy really lies, and (b) convince members
of this committee that there is a strategy and that it is funded in some sort
of an appropriate fashion.
Madam Chairperson, I will spend a little more
time talking about the tourism agreement.
The minister referenced it in his opening remarks. He knows, as everyone else in the province knows,
that it is a scaled‑down version of a tourism agreement that was
originally signed in 1985, that spent about $30 million, and we are now
spending $10 million over five years.
Hardly, I think many people in the tourism industry would say, a significant
commitment to an industry that hoped to achieve a billion dollars worth of
economic impact by the year 2000.
Madam Chairperson, we are going to have a lot
of questions. They relate specifically to the department, but perhaps more generally
to this minister's and the First Minister's (Mr. Filmon) overall apparent
agenda of standing aside at a time when we cannot afford to.
Although this would be viewed as somewhat
outside of the immediate concerns of the department, I think we are going to talk
as well about some of the missed opportunities that this minister and this
government have had, whether we are talking about Piper aircraft or Purolator
or Sea Inc., manufacturing jobs, important jobs to the
Madam Chairperson, those are my introductory
remarks, and I hope that the minister will be quite flexible as we go through this
and perhaps jump from area to area, although we, I gather, have an agreement to
attempt to conclude the department's Estimates this evening, if possible.
Madam
Chairperson: Does the critic for the second opposition party
have an opening statement?
Mr.
Reg Alcock (Osborne): I do have a couple of things that I would like
to say, just in part by way of serving notice to the minister and the staff in
the gallery about the areas that I would like to talk about tonight.
I am both pleased and saddened by what is
occurring tonight. I am pleased to be coming into these Estimates. I have never done Industry and Trade before,
and I asked for this department for reasons that I will discuss in more detail
in a minute, because I think it is a very important department and I am saddened
by the fact that it comes so late in the Estimates cycle, so that we will have
less time than I would like to have to go through these Estimates.
I want to start off slightly differently than
I have with other departments that I have been examining. I want to start by saying that I have been
particularly pleased by the attitude of this minister and the willingness of
this minister to struggle with issues outside of this Chamber. Rather than the less, shall we say, co‑operative
or problem‑focused approach that other ministers have tended to take in
certain portfolios that I am involved with, this minister has been willing to
listen to virtually anything and anybody if they have something to contribute
to the debate on how we make this a better and a stronger province. I have been very pleased with that.
* (1920)
I have been pleased by the approach that he
has taken, particularly on the issues of co‑operation among other
provinces and other regions. I think
that if a small province like
I am pleased that this minister is chairing
the task force of trade ministers to look at reducing interprovincial barriers,
and we have had a couple of discussions about the prairie regional concept that
I found quite rewarding.
Rather than attempt to hold this minister
individually accountable for the economic ills of this province, I want to try to
talk tonight, and this situation does not lend itself to a real sort of problem‑solving
dialogue, unfortunately. We all fall
back into the positions that we hold and tend to blame those around us for what
is going on. But we have got a really
serious problem. We are shrinking. We have been shrinking for a while, and it is
not just a loss that has occurred because of the current recession; it is a
loss that has been going on for a while.
It did not begin with the term of this government, it predates it. Our relative position in this country is
eroding.
Now I have no doubt that over the next two or
three years we are going to see a significant increase in economic activity in this
province. When the minister talks down
the road about a forecast, I have no doubt that we will indeed grow against the
trend that we have been following. My
fear though is that it will all be based on heavy, heavy hydro development and investment
in the North, which is the traditional pattern that has been followed in this
province for three decades anyway, and that once again, as soon as that little
spurt to the economy is over with, we will begin to fall back, unless we find a
new way of building alternate sources of wealth in this province and in this
city.
That is the challenge that confronts this
minister. It is an enormous challenge
and I realize that this province does not have the resources to buy its way out
of this, that we have to be more innovative and more strategic and more
creative than I think we have been in the past.
I believe that with the attitude and approach the minister has taken,
there is some potential for at least examining realistically some of the problems
that we face. That is what I would like to do tonight. I would like to try to understand the
analysis that the government has about why we are in the situation that we are
in, and I would like to examine what the underlying basis is for some of the
directions that they have taken.
I think it must be very frustrating, and I
realize this minister has only been around for two years, but for the term of this
government they have made a range of announcements, and I have made a range of
orders for return. Despite the fact that
they have tried a wide number of initiatives, the palpable success of those
various initiatives is hard to determine.
It is hard to say, well, here is an initiative we undertook and this is bearing
fruit.
Nobody is going to turn this situation around
in one or two or even four years. The
fixes are perhaps longer term than that.
I would like to try to understand the output from the range of
announcements and initiatives that the government has undertaken to get a sense
of the new direction that I hear talked about, but I am not certain that it has
been realized in a policy sense or in an operational sense.
So I will stop it there, because with the
shortness of time I would like to get to questions and get into the discussion.
Madam Chairperson: I would remind the committee that we will defer
consideration of item 1.(a) Minister's Salary on page 104 of the budget
Estimates until after all other items have been agreed to.
At this time I would request the minister's
staff to please enter the Chamber.
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, joining me at the table
here is Michael Bessey, the Acting Deputy Minister of Industry, Trade and
Tourism; Dennis Cleve, the Assistant Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade; Val
Zinger, director of our administration; and Neil Allison, director of Strategic
Planning.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(b) Executive Support.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, I guess the first question
is‑‑I missed the introduction of the deputy minister‑‑is
the deputy minister an acting position or has that position been confirmed?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, I think this question was asked
during the Estimates of Executive Council by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.
Doer). The position is acting. We are in the process, if you happen to have
noticed, of doing a search for a permanent Deputy Minister of Industry, Trade
and Tourism. The ads have been placed
in, certainly the local media, at least one national newspaper, and we have
retained a professional consulting firm to assist us with that search.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(b) Executive Support: (1) Salaries $350,000‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $49,500‑‑pass.
1.(c) Strategic Planning.
Mr.
Storie: This is one of the areas where I find it rather
curious that there is money being cut, at a time when the world is becoming
more complex and we talk quite glibly about globalization. Yet we are cutting our capacity within the department
to deal with those complex issues, to sort of pull all the pieces together at a
time when
I guess, two questions to the minister, No. 1,
how many staff have been cut in this area?
It looks like about $180,000 or $190,000, and No. 2, if the strategic
planning is not being done in Strategic Planning, where is it being done, or is
there no planning going on?
* (1930)
Mr.
Stefanson: In terms of the staff reductions, as
indicated in the Estimates book, there was a reduction from nine to three, a reduction
of six, with three being reallocated.
In terms of the functions, when you talk about
trade policy, the trade policy issues, and I know the honourable member did not
refer specifically to trade policy, but the trade policy issues are housed
separately in the Trade division, and actually one of the three transfers added
to our trade policy capabilities.
In terms of the replacement of the Strategic
Planning functions, it is our view that, with the changes that have occurred at
the Economic Development Board Secretariat, with the staffing complement there,
one of the major functions of that secretariat will be strategic planning and
policy.
We also intend, on the innovation and
technology side, to be consulting very closely with the EITC, the Economic
Innovation and Technology Council that has been structured and is referred to
in the Estimates, in terms of utilizing their expertise in those particular
areas of strategic planning and policy advice.
So we feel that we have not reduced our
capabilities to provide us with strategic planning and policy, but in fact have
created just as sound an opportunity, but spread in different areas within the
department and bringing different areas of expertise to the table in terms of
helping us make those decisions, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Storie: I do not know, the minister apparently seems
to see the role of the Economic Development Committee of Cabinet and the Development
Board Secretariat as being involved in the planning aspects. Certainly, from reading the Estimates books,
it is not clear that that is really what its function is. Certainly, we understand that it has been
running around tracking down opportunities, but I hope the minister is not
confusing tracking opportunities, trying to attract investment, with strategic planning,
because the two things are not synonymous at all.
Then the minister referenced only trade, but
trade is not the only area where you need strategic planning. The department is continuing on with many of
the strategic initiatives of the previous government. The Health Development Initiative is not an initiative
of this government. It was one of the
areas that was identified by the previous government. Indeed, the information technology area is an
area that was identified.
So the question is: Who is now scanning the horizon, saying, where
is the country going, where are we going in the economic infrastructure of the
globe, and how are we going to fit in?
The secretariat, certainly from what we have heard of it so far, is nothing
more or less than a brokering house for the province.
Mr.
Stefanson: I guess this is where I should attempt to
make it perfectly clear for the honourable member. It is not merely a brokering house. It has many functions, of which strategic planning
is certainly one. I would hope that the
honourable member would agree and recognize that economic development goes well
beyond merely the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism.
In fact, most departments of government have a
role to play, to varying degrees, in economic development, some more so, whether
you want to talk about Energy and Mines or you want to talk about Environment,
or various departments of government. Clearly, we now have, for the first time,
a forum, a natural forum, that is able to pull together all of those
departments, to pull together the resources within all of those departments, to
formulate a comprehensive plan and policy in terms of planning for the economic
future of Manitoba.
As I said in response to the honourable
member's first question, we view the change of functions internally, including now
the Secretariat of the Economic Development Board, including the Economic Innovation
and Technology Council, the combination of the private sector and labour, and
the academic and research community, that we have an enhanced capability to do
that kind of strategic planning.
I want to say it once again. The Economic Development Board Secretariat,
one function is clearly projects. The
honourable member uses the word "brokerage," and so on, but that is
only one of many functions. Certainly,
strategic planning is another function that they provide.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, I am reading in the
departmental Estimates, the Supplementary Information; it says the objectives of
the Economic Development Board Secretariat are:
"To serve as a focal point of the government's economic development
efforts aimed at encouraging entrepreneurship, economic growth and job creation
. . . ." It does not reference
strategic planning. Certainly if you go through the Activity Identification it
talks about integrating what is going on in other departments and task forces
and commissions. That is what leaves the
impression that much of the work of the secretariat appears to be geared toward
project‑oriented, project‑based kinds of activity, which in and of
itself is good.
Someone has to be there to work out the kinks
and to try and make sure that initiatives progress, but it begs the question of
who is doing the thinking about the next three years and the next five years in
the
I remember when this government came to office
in 1988 it had all the answers. It was
going to create economic activity; it was going to develop the economy; it was
going to work with our strengths, and what we have seen is decline.
My question‑‑[interjection! That
is right. Well, we are hoping Eric the
Red will get the wind in his sails, because it is not obvious that Eric has got
the wind in his sails right now. We are talking about Eric the Red, not the
minister.
Madam Chairperson, the question is: Can the department, can the minister tell us
today why we are mired in last place in terms of economic development across
the country? What is happening in our
economy? What circumstances are
impinging upon our economic activity that are leaving us in last place? Do not tell me that we are trying to work
with Purolator to get a company. I want
to know why we are in this situation.
What is the minister's analysis?
What is the department's analysis?
Mr.
Stefanson: I knew it was just a matter of time until we
got on to this issue. I have to address
one of the honourable member's early statements about us having all of the
answers. I do not think we have all of
the answers nor, I do not think, anybody has all of the answers. If we can find that person, we certainly
should all be talking to him or her.
The question that the honourable member
started on in terms of the strategic planning, and I will not read the
paragraph, because I know the honourable member can do that for himself. If he turns to page 70, and under Activity
Identification reads the second paragraph, it talks at length about preparing
short and long‑term economic strategy options to stimulate economic renewal,
and reviewing the effectiveness of major economic program delivery areas and so
on.
So it could not be more clear that the
function of the secretariat goes beyond projects and gets into areas of
strategic planning and economic plans, so I hope we can move off that issue and
that that makes it perfectly clear for the honourable member.
In terms of economic indicators, we have had
many discussions on these in this House during Question Period. I would gladly, once again, if the honourable
member would like me to walk him through all of the projections for
Well, I will gladly walk through the 1992
projections for
If you would like me to do that, I would be
more than pleased to do it again. I have
done that on many occasions during Question Period, but I would gladly‑‑
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, if the minister wishes to
have those on the record, he can certainly read them in. It will be nice to read them back to him next
year when they, once again, fail to meet their projections.
Mr.
Stefanson: I look forward to the opportunity to discuss
them again with the honourable member a year from now, and we will see. We will see where
Point of Order
Mr.
Alcock: Just one point of order. Rather than entering into that discussion,
could the minister table that list rather than take the time to read it in?
Mr. Stefanson: I am prepared to table that particular
document that I was referring to, Madam Chairperson.
* * *
* (1940)
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, the minister conveniently neglected
to answer the question. The question is,
why have we performed so poorly? If we
want to deal in the realm of speculation and say, well, yes, it is estimated
now that we are going to be doing better, thank you very much. That is speculation. We want to deal with the reality of the
situation, and the past four years have been disastrous. The question is, why? The minister may have a lot of faith in the
projections at this point. Maybe he had
faith in them last year and the year before and the year before. They failed to materialize, those projections.
We are in last place in many of the economic
indicators that he talks about. What I
asked was, if the Economic Development Board Secretariat is doing so much
strategic planning, can they now tell us, can the minister tell us, what the
problems are? Why are we performing so poorly?
Just in four or five simple sort of strategic points. Now, surely with spending a million dollars a
year we have those few points. We can at
least identify what the problems are, the collective problems.
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, we are not performing as poorly
as the honourable member likes to suggest.
As I indicated, there are several economic indicators, and clearly in some
of those instances we are faring below the Canadian average and in many others
we are faring above. During 1991 and the
early part of '92 in areas like unemployment rates, in areas like bankruptcy
rates, both personal and business, and in areas of some private sector
investment, in various economic indicators we are faring above the Canadian
average and faring quite well. On the
unemployment rate‑‑well, nobody is happy with their unemployment
rates in all of Canada‑‑we tended to be about third within
So, again, it is not the doom and gloom that
the honourable member likes to paint in terms of all economic indicators. Clearly,
in some areas we are faring below the Canadian average and in other areas we
are faring above, but I have to remind the honourable member that a part of
economic development and a major part of your success, in my opinion, is the
economic climate that one creates in their region, in their province, to make
it attractive for existing businesses to function and to make it attractive for
businesses to potentially move to your province. Unfortunately, we inherited a
situation in this province in 1988 where we were the second highest overall tax
zone in all of
The economic climate of this province in terms
of investment for Manitobans, for people looking to invest in the province, has
increased significantly. That is one of
the reasons why you are seeing the economic indicators point favourably to the
future of
We do not believe in increasing taxes and
Workers Compensation rates and all of the kinds of things that occurred in our
province from 1982‑1988 that created an extremely unfavourable climate
for anybody to want to do business in this province. We have not increased personal taxes. We have reduced them. We have not increased corporate taxes. We have increased the threshold on payroll
tax. I could go on and on in terms of what
we have done to enhance the economic environment in this province, and that is
fundamental.
I think anybody who looks at economic success
in the past will recognize that is a very important part of economic success. I know the honourable member for Flin Flon (Mr.
Storie) disagrees with that. We saw what
they did during their term in office. We
believe that is a major part, and there are other parts to that. I can speak at length to them in terms of the
other factors that lead to economic success in the future. Clearly, your
environment is one of them. We have
worked aggressively to improve that environment, and we are going to see the
successes in the years ahead, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Storie: Well, the minister goes back to that old saw
about they are trying to create this climate, this supposed climate. I reference a group that the minister funds
from his department and has some faith in, CanWest, the CanWest foundation
which supplied the minister with some of the ammunition his colleagues used in supporting
free trade, ammunition in which the powder was wet.
Madam Chairperson, CanWest just sent me, as a
matter of fact, an overview of the economic circumstances in
Many countries in the world have higher tax
regimes for business than we do. In
fact, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, when they did their
study of the tax mess, as they called it‑‑some sort of synonym for
tax mess‑‑in Manitoba showed that, in terms of payroll tax and
provincial tax versus state tax, we were comparable to our closest competitors
in the United States.
The minister still has not answered the
fundamental question. I do not care
whether he thinks we are doing better. I do not care if he compares this year
over last year whether we are making marginal improvement. When you are at the bottom, you have only one
place to go. So if you have only four
jobs left and you get one more, you have a 25 percent increase.
What I want to know is the minister will at
least acknowledge that we have some problems, I hope. Can he tell us what problems face the
Mr.
Stefanson: I have never suggested, Madam Chairperson, that
there are not some problems facing the Canadian economy and facing the
I think it is more. In some of the recent information that I have
been provided with, a result of at least two occurrences in our economy‑‑one,
the recession, and I will not talk at length about the recession, but I would
like to think that most in this House would acknowledge that Canada has been
through a serious recession, not a great deal different than the early '80s.
I know certainly the honourable member for
Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) was around at that time, I believe. I can go back and point to the economic
indicators at that time, and I can point to the loss of manufacturing in jobs
in
The other interesting aspect to note, and that
is why the honourable member says "partly" in terms of the Free Trade
Agreement, is the United States have not been without losses in manufacturing
either. In the last two years, in terms
of manufacturing factory jobs, or in the first two years of the Free Trade
Agreement, the
In that particular sector of our economy, that
has been an economic reality that has been facing
* (1950)
Clearly, it is fundamental for a nation and
for a province to be able to adjust to those emerging opportunities and take advantage
of them.
That is a challenge facing us, and I feel what
we are doing in terms of the economic climate with the kinds of financial programs
we have now put in place, and we can talk about them again in a few minutes, in
terms of not only the traditional programs of MIOP and so on, but the new
programs with the Manitoba Industrial Recruitment, which is a new program;
Crocus Fund, which is just coming on stream, which is a new program; the continuous
opportunities under Vision Capital, that we have the capital resources
available and, therefore, have the expertise and the opportunity to move into
emerging areas, not backing off on continuing to pursue manufacturing
opportunities, but recognizing that it is a problem area that is not unique to Manitoba
and it is not unique to Canada. It is a
problem facing many parts of the worlds and has to be addressed.
I could go on at length, Madam Chairperson,
but I am sure the honourable member has another question.
Mr.
Storie: I do have some other questions, but we are not
going to be able to answer them all. We
could probably spend a whole evening on this.
My colleague from Osborne has some questions in this area, I think.
Mr.
Alcock: It strikes me that before you can begin to
build a strategy to get us out or to address some of the deficiencies that we
are experiencing in the economy, you have to have a sense of what they
are. I know from other conversations
that there is some appreciation of the weaknesses in our current position. I want to first pick up on the question that
the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) was asking about the impact of the Free
Trade Agreement on this particular province.
I also want to talk a little bit about what this branch has been finding
in some of the analysis that it has done relative to the economy of
OECD established an industrialization index,
1985; Stats Canada, which has probably the best reputation for economic statistics
in the world, adopted it as a measure.
When I look at that information, and I have
spent a fair bit of time thinking about and looking at some of the analysis of free
trade in the global context, there is no question there are strong, strong
arguments in favour of the free movement of capital and goods and people. We do not have that with this agreement. There would seem to be evidence that this
country is losing industrial base, not just losing jobs like the minister referenced
from the '81‑82 election, but losing base, in that jobs are being shut
down that will not come back.
I would like to ask the minister if the
evidence that his department has collected has led him to alter his strong
feelings of support for the Free Trade Agreement.
Mr.
Stefanson: In terms of answering the honourable member
for Osborne's question, there is a restructuring occurring, I think, in our
economy, and as I alluded, at some length, to the honourable member for Flin
Flon (Mr. Storie)‑‑and I gave some numbers in terms of what we saw
happening in the manufacturing sector‑‑it is not unique to Canada
or even North America, the shift from the traditional manufacturing resource
base to the more information‑technology, human‑resource side in
terms of the economic opportunities.
That does represent an incredible challenge to us as a province and, I
think, as a nation. We will get into R
& D and those kinds of things over the course of tonight's Estimates.
But in terms of the attempted empirical data
that have been done by the Royal Bank, by Strategical, by the
Mr.
Alcock: Given that, then, and as I mentioned before,
it is true that many parts of the world have been experiencing recession and
the kind of restructuring the minister is talking about is taking place
throughout the industrialized world. But
the empirical evidence suggests that it is happening, the impact, the degree,
the depth, the amount of restructuring, the proportional size of the
restructuring is much greater in this country than it is anywhere else among
the G7 countries. Now, if it is not a
result of the trade agreement, then to what does the minister attribute it?
The question is, if we accept your argument
that it is not the Free Trade Agreement that is causing this, and I accept the fact
that the restructuring is going on throughout the industrialized world but the
impact here is much greater. Proportionally it is bigger, and in any way you
want to measure it, the impact has been much, much stronger in Canada, and the degree
of change has been much greater, the degree of loss, if you measure that as
being an indicator of the restructuring.
If it is not a result of the trade agreement
with the
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, I have to admit that is a
good question. I want to start by
suggesting that while some might say we have slipped a little more than the
In terms of the root of the question, why the
difference, I feel there are several reasons and probably two of the most important
would be during that time frame, the Canadian fiscal policy‑‑we
came through a period where we had significantly higher interest rates,
certainly if we are comparing ourselves to the United States, than the United
States. The gap was wider than is often
even the norm, and during that time we also ended up with an exchange rate
where the Canadian dollar was that much stronger relative to the
So, looking at our opportunities to export and
so on, some would argue that the fiscal policies of the federal government in terms
of bolstering the economy of southern
So I feel that was one of the causes for the
shift, but another important one is our ability to shift from a resource‑based
manufacturing economy to an information‑based economy. When we were at a recent science and
technology ministers' meeting last year comparing Canada to other parts of the
world, that we are more of an adapt or an adopt nations in terms of taking
abilities that exist elsewhere and adapting them to our nation, taking
technology that exists elsewhere and adapting it to our nation.
That comes back again to the issue of research
and development and innovation and technology and part of the reason for our
enhanced focus in that area, because Canada as a nation has been slower to
adapt to the shift in terms of the shift away from the resource‑based
economy and has been not faring as well as other parts of the world in terms of
innovation and technology, that we have applied the technology created in other
environments. So those would be, in my
opinion, two fundamental reasons that have led to the kind of gap that the
honourable member is referring to.
* (2000)
Mr.
Alcock: I thank the minister for that answer. Rather than get into that particular debate‑‑I
mean, I think the minister has identified certainly a part of the problem‑‑I
would like just to reference the indicators that the minister tabled. I will not try the patience of all of us this
evening by debating them. Let us assume
that what the minister has tabled is accurate for the purposes of this
discussion.
In the
Mr.
Stefanson: I guess the simple answer is the cyclical
nature of some of those economic indicators, focusing in on private sector
investment as an example. [interjection! What was that? Private sector
investment, you will see in 1992 that we are going to be second in the
nation. An industry like our mining industry,
which is an important industry in Manitoba, we will be the beneficiary of
recent developments in Flin Flon, Inco in Thompson, that obviously will significantly
move us in that economic indicator.
Really, it is the fluctuating nature of some
of them and the timing of the investments of the private sector in areas like that
to a significant extent, when they are able to make their investment, when they
are able to make the decision to move forward with their project. So, clearly, in that economic indicator, that
is a part of it. In fact, you will note
that the three that the honourable member for Osborne refers to, private sector
investment we will go from 10th to second in the nation, gross domestic product
we will go from 10th to third in the nation, and manufacturing shipments we
will go from 10th to 4th in the nation are the predictions certainly in 1992.
I could certainly see what additional
information we might have to provide some of the whys of where we end up being positioned,
but a major part of it are fluctuations that occur in terms of the timing of
investment and I guess adding to what I have suggested that the confidence and
the kind of economic climate that we are creating here in Manitoba is starting
to show signs and that confidence is now being demonstrated in the economic
indicators in the next two years.
Mr.
Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I have no doubt, as I said
in my opening statement, that Manitoba is going to, over the course, hopefully
later this year, probably not until next year and then the year after, show
some fairly strong growth and some fairly positive growth against the total
creation of wealth in Canada. I am concerned about two things.
I think it was Clarence Barber, who some 20
years ago made the statement that the Manitoba economy is never very dramatic, it
never grows very fast, it never sinks very fast, it just sort of pokes
along. I think that view is not true
today. I think, while we do not have the
dramatic escalations that are essentially population driven in Vancouver and
Calgary and the like, this economy has not been as steady and reliable as we might
have liked it to have been in the last couple of decades. We, in fact, have
gone, technically into a recession in real terms more frequently than the
national economy has. Part of that is
because of the effect of the agricultural sector, but it has been in part due
to the losses in mining.
The problem is that, as we come into the
investment pattern that is coming‑‑and we have talked about this
before‑‑if Repap gets up off the mat and does actually make the
investments that it is talking about making, as the Inco investment gets going,
as the smelter investment gets going in the North and with new mining activity,
and once the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) has forced Conawapa
through the environmental impact process and we get that going, then we will
indeed experience very positive growth, in fact, probably stronger growth than
we have seen in the last couple of decades in this province.
Again we encounter the problem, after we go
through two or three years of that, then we just fall right back into our more traditional
pattern and begin to sink once again relative to the rest of the country.
The question that I have is, in the
understanding of the department that has been grappling with this problem
surely for the last many years, why has
* (2010)
Mr.
Stefanson: I think, during the honourable member's
preamble, he partly answered his previous question as well and raised some good
points in the areas of agriculture and mining and the importance those sectors
play in our economy and how cyclical they have been in the past. Going back to his question, 10 out of 10 in
terms of gross domestic product last year, certainly a major part of it was
both of those sectors in terms of how they fared. In terms of the projections in those areas,
obviously they are predicted to improve significantly. We feel, I will not speak for the Minister of
Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), but with the kinds of things we are doing in
that particular industry, we will have enhanced activity here in our province.
In terms of the cyclical nature, I think part
of it has been the dependence on significant public capital investment in the past,
without being too political, in terms of not creating the appropriate climate
for sustained private sector investment and/or opportunities to enhance that,
such as are being created in the area of mining now by our current minister
with the mining incentive act and the R & D incentives that are being
provided to create opportunities for companies to sustain investment in our province
in research and development and so on, but another part of that as well is the
whole shift to innovation.
We feel by shifting the focus into that area
we have the opportunity to be in an area that can be sustained and does not develop
a dependency on public capital investment.
So those are some answers to the honourable member's question, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Alcock: One very brief question for the minister, and
I will pass it back to the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) for a minute. The question is more of a procedural one to
the minister. I am cognizant of the fact
that time is short, and I do want to spend a considerable amount of time on
this question of R & D and the council and the output of some of the new programs.
Is the minister prepared, within the limits of
staff having to move in and out of the room, to move around a little bit in the
Estimates and to discuss some of these various areas?
Mr.
Stefanson: By all means, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Storie: I guess just one other question that follows
from some of the points that my colleague was making but, before I ask the
question, a comment about the minister's reference to mining and the investment
that appears to be going on in northern Manitoba.
First of all, I think it is quite clear that
Repap is not prepared now or certainly in the short term to continue with its investment. I think they have made that quite clear that
that is not likely to happen in the near term, certainly before the next election.
No. 2, the minister referenced mining. It is true that the government was forced
essentially into making a commitment after three years of delay, which some
people would say cost the community its life.
The fact is that when this modernization is completed, there will be
approximately 450, perhaps more, jobs lost in the mining industry.
Since this government took over, there are
approximately 1,000 fewer jobs in the mining industry. As of the end of 1993, there will 270 fewer
jobs in
So depending on how many of those actually
take place, we could have anywhere between 450 and 600 jobs lost in the mining industry. So while it is an important investment in
terms of the long term, it is certainly not going to add significantly to the economic
activity in the province. It is
basically a hold pattern. So I think we
should be clear on that and, certainly, the private sector investment figures
that have been used in the past few years have, I think, rather optimistically
included those numbers in their projections.
Perhaps they are doing the same this year, in terms of Repap at least.
I guess the question is, the minister
referenced, and it is referenced in the Detailed Estimates about the co‑operation,
the co‑ordination of efforts between departments. I am wondering how that co‑ordination
takes place. Is there a deputy
ministers' committee? How does that co‑ordination
take place between the economic secretariat and the department?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, I am tempted to take the honourable
member's preamble, but I know we are operating under some time lines, and his
comments about Repap. We could talk about
the positive steps of this government to stop the bleeding, so to speak, and
create the opportunity for future investment, and in terms of the mining, the
problems with resource dependency, the kinds of incentives that are being
brought in by this government in terms of the mining incentive act, in terms of
additional research and development and so on.
I will go very quickly to the specific
question about the co‑ordination between departments and how the
secretariat performs that function, and it does so in various ways. It has the mandate and the opportunity to
second individuals from various departments on an as‑required basis. As an example, one of the staff complements
has been filled with a secondment from Energy and Mines, coincidentally.
There are also specific deputies' committees
to deal on an individual project or issue basis. We have some in place dealing with some
specific issues at hand. It also is‑‑as
much the identification at this forum now does exist both at the political level
and at the administrative level to perform that very function‑‑that
there is a body that can be turned to co‑ordinate activities between the
departments. It has the mandate to draw on
information, to draw on resources, to draw on whatever is required to deal with
other departments in terms of putting together either a project or a policy or
a program as it might relate to a series of departments.
I am sure the honourable member from his days
in government can recognize that often it is very important to have the co‑operation
and expertise that exists within various departments when you are dealing with
economic development, and that is now structurally in place and providing that
to our government.
Mr.
Storie: Well, Madam Chairperson, I do not know when
actually the Economic Development Board Secretariat was sort of structured. I know the announcement was made at least six
months ago or eight months ago, but it is important. I agree with the minister, there needs to be
that kind of co‑ordination. The minister
referenced the great things the government has done. It has not escaped notice in northern
* (2020)
Now, the question is: If you ignore the needs of your two largest
and now almost only employers in mining in the province, really, what have you
accomplished? The minister will know exactly
how much money was actually spent out of the $14.5 million that was budgeted
under the Manitoba Exploration Incentive Program, and I think zero is the sum
that comes to mind. So that does not
speak very well of any kind of co‑ordination, it speaks of bungling,
quite frankly.
I know that the government‑‑and I
have said publicly, have indicated to the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr.
Downey) and will applaud the government for a number of its initiatives in terms
of mining exploration development incentives.
I think they will be effective over the long term perhaps, but of course
it is another case of too little, too late for at least three mining communities
in the province who have disappeared since this government took office.
I want to leave that. I am prepared to pass 1.(c)(1) and 1.(c)(2),
Madam Chairperson, with the concurrence of my colleague.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(c) Strategic Planning: (1) Salaries $160,400‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $143,300‑‑pass.
1.(d) Finance and Administration: (1) Salaries $677,400‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $288,100‑‑pass.
1.(e) Grant Assistance ‑ Faculty of
Management.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, I have looked at this political
commitment for the past number of years with sometimes dismay and many times
disgust, because I do not believe it is a good investment of the taxpayers'
dollars. This government is going to be
spending upwards of $4 million or $5 million for a development plan in a
faculty that is, I do not think, progressing at all. If anything, it is going backward.
I am wondering how the minister can justify
spending 2 or 3 percent of the department's budget in an area with very little return
to the people of Manitoba, how he can justify spending a million dollars of
taxpayers' money to fulfill a rather pathetic political promise.
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, first of all I should
correct the honourable member. He
referred over the term of this agreement being $4 million to $5 million. The dollar amount over the five years is
$3,668,800. This is the fourth year.
An
Honourable Member: Plus interest.
Mr.
Stefanson: No interest.
That is the amount.
This is the fourth year where we are
contributing $998,800 as part of that agreement, and really what it is doing is
it is creating an environment for the development of business and entrepreneurial
expertise here in our province. It is
elevating our Faculty of Management in the eyes of many, and I am sure that one
of the next questions might be a recent article that many have disputed, but it
is certainly elevating our faculty to among the top in the nation and will
continue to do so. So in terms of creating
the kinds of opportunity for Manitobans, and particularly our youth, to develop
the expertise in the areas of management which are going to be important
aspects of economic development, certainly for our province and our nation, we
will be able to do that right here in our province.
Reminding the honourable member that this
enhancement is not being funded solely by the
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, the minister may have a
list of accomplishments provided to him courtesy of Dean Mackness. I do not know that they hold much
credibility, given the experience and the reputation that the faculty enjoys.
I just point out for the minister's
information that he is now spending more on a grant, on a political grant, to
the Faculty of Management than the
Industrial Technology is spending less
money. Tourism Division, there is less
money planning the tourism promotion campaign, marketing, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, I think that is an unfair comparison
the honourable member does, because when he talks about the investment
promotion and he is looking at it within the Estimates, he is dealing with the
operating function in terms of the salaries and some of the expenditures that
accompany it, but he does not take into consideration the pools of capital and
the various financial programs that are available to that same division. What he should be looking at is that the
Industry and Trade Division, as a total division, has gone from $16,289,000 to $19,534,000. It has gone up in excess of $3 million,
almost I would suggest‑‑I do not have a calculator‑‑20
percent in terms of an increase in that division's overall expenditure,
certainly showing the commitment of our government to that very important area.
The other comment I have to take some
exception with is the suggestion about the perception of this faculty. Even though an article appeared in Canadian
Business that was less than complimentary, 19 of the 26 business schools that
were surveyed in that particular article have signed letters which denounce the
analytical techniques used to establish the rankings and state that the
rankings have no validity and stand as a major disservice to management
education in
That came from 19 of the 26 schools that were
in the survey, no matter where they ranked, whether they were in the top couple
or they were at the bottom. So clearly
the schools themselves, wherever they fell in the rankings, have indicated that
survey was flawed in many respects. We
have additional information, and I could certainly go through it in great
detail for the benefit of the honourable member that points to the many
positive attributes of that faculty and the job it is doing here in
So in terms of the comparison of this $998,000
support to our Industry and Trade Division, and I only touched on our Industry and
Trade Division, I also did not mention the increase in our Strategic
Development Initiatives which goes from $3.3 million to $4.7 million, an
increase of $1.5 million, approximately, again whatever that translates into,
about 50 percent. Those are resources
that are available to investment promotion and so on.
So I think, so that the honourable member is
clear on that when he is doing that comparison, that we have significantly enhanced
those areas within the department in terms of the resources available to them,
Madam Chairperson.
* (2030)
Mr.
Storie: I recognize that talking about the people who
are in marketing, for example, does not include the dollars that are actually
available through tourism to the Canada‑Manitoba tourism partnership of
the agreement. The fact of the matter is
that we have significantly less money being devoted to marketing an industry
that is one of our most important than we have to a relatively small, and quite
frankly, relatively insignificant faculty at the University of Manitoba, a
faculty which can get its funding and has for many years, through the normal
process of the Universities Grants Commission.
The minister obviously is going to continue to
defend it, and I guess he can continue to defend the indefensible if he wishes,
but it does not make any sense in terms of the overall importance of these
other areas to
Madam Chairperson, I am prepared to pass this
section.
Mr.
Stefanson: Not to prolong this discussion, but I have already
pointed out the significant increases in Industry and Trade and Strategic
Initiative, but I also would point out, since we are talking about the
marketing of tourism, on page 53 of the Estimates book, it shows that last year
the marketing was $3,399,000, it has now gone to $3,805,000, an increase of $400,000,
in excess of 10 percent over last year and significantly higher than the
$998,000 support provided to the Faculty of Management. So I was not clear what the point that the
honourable member was making in terms of the marketing in the Tourism division,
but clearly it is significantly more than the support being provided to the
Faculty of Management.
Mr.
Storie: The point was the personnel who go into, not
the dollars that are being spent. What
the minister is buying in his grant to the Faculty of Education is staffing, by
and large, expertise. I am saying the
expertise is needed in developing so many other sectors of our economy, but I
see we are not making any headway. The
minister is never going to admit that he is categorically wrong as is the
government. So we will go on to the next
section, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Stefanson: We will not prolong this but, of course, we
will not admit that we are categorically wrong when we are not categorically
wrong in terms of what we are doing for this faculty. The honourable member is now splitting hairs
and referring to staff complements in the marketing, recognizing that many of
the expenditures that go with the other almost $3 million that are spent by the
department go to organizations and so on, that also have staff elements
involved, that we are drawing on expertise in our community in terms of
providing marketing.
So I do not think we need to debate this any
longer, but clearly we are spending an awful lot more in the Marketing division
of Tourism than we are in support for the Faculty of Management.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(e) Grant Assistance.
Mr.
Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I simply want to make a
couple of remarks just so that I not be completely associated with the comments
of the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), much as I have enjoyed our new‑found
colleagueship.
I am of mixed opinion on this, and I would
like the minister to give me a little more detail about the productive side of
this arrangement on at least one particular area. I think it is important, when we look at the
research that has been done on how we stimulate the development of new business
and new opportunities, there is something to the provision of training and
focus on the whole question of entrepreneurship.
It is not something that rises quite as spontaneously
as most would like, and it is something that, I think, if we can identify a
lack of in this province, there is significant strength to the argument that
suggests that we have been a little too dependent upon government, on grants,
on support, on safe ways of doing things.
So to the extent that this is an attempt to address that problem and
strengthen an organization that does provide some support for entrepreneurs and
some recognition of the value and the contribution that they make to the community,
I think that this is a very positive initiative.
I would like the minister, though, if he can,
just tell us a little bit about what the predicted output is at the end of this
five‑year period?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, at the outset there was
and is a development plan that indicates that the funds are to be used to
increase faculty members, to increase the level of student services and
benefits, to provide a research fund, to initiate a Ph.D. program and to
provide additional support to the library and increase access to data services.
With those objectives in mind, to date a
summary of the accomplishments include:
13 of the 17 positions included in the plan have been filled, and all
new recruits have either completed or are close to completing a Ph.D. in a
business discipline; the undergraduate enrollment under the plan will increase
by 60 in September of 1992; the first Ph.D. students will be admitted in September
of '92; there was expenditures made on database acquisitions in the last year
of some $34,000; the funding of the plan has allowed for the expansion of book,
journal and other holdings by the library, and library hours have been extended
as a result; the placement centre continues to assist management students in
finding employment; and 16 distinguished scholars and senior business
executives visited the faculty last year.
Those are some of the accomplishments that point to the progress being made
in the faculty.
Mr.
Alcock: Madam Chairperson, in the agreement around
the sale of Manitoba Data Services, was there not the provision of a portion or
an amount of research money relative to database technology, I guess, and
access to mainframe time and allocation of time? Was any of that directed at this faculty?
Mr.
Stefanson: The short answer to the question is yes,
Madam Chairperson, that there was an allocation made at the time of the divestiture
for the opportunity for the computer services department and this faculty to
access computer‑related technology, and that has been taken advantage of
to a certain extent to date. If the
honourable member is looking for exact dollar amounts to date, I do not have
them here this evening, but I could certainly undertake to provide him with the
value that has been utilized to date.
Mr. Alcock: I
would be interested if the minister could provide some detail on that. Also, he mentioned one portion of this initiative
was the establishment of a research fund, and I would be interested in knowing‑‑I
do not want to use up time just reading these things into the record now, but
if the minister could provide some greater detail on what that research fund
has been directed towards, what issues they are looking at, and what the size
and depth of that particular initiative is, I would be quite interested in
that.
I am interested, though, when you look at the
creation of something, whether it be the creation of a new company, a new product,
a new way of doing business, whatever, that creative ability is based on the
energy, talent, skills, knowledge, that intangible that we keep calling
entrepreneurial spirit, and it is something that, I think, is increasingly
recognized as fundamental to the process of creating growth, and yet we do not quite
understand how that is created. It is
part science and part art, and I am wondering, while the intent of this seems
to be to develop more of that, whatever that may be, whether there is a
research component in this project that looks at this question of exactly how
they do train to build that level of entrepreneurial energy or spirit or that
intangible quality that leads to the creation.
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, well, that leads me into
once again citing that the Economic Board recently had the Department of
Education in to talk about the many aspects and the role that education has to
play in terms of economic development. I
am not here to speak to the Estimates of Education, but I think the honourable
member is aware of a new course being offered, I believe, starting at the Grade
10 level, that talks about skill development, and a component of that is an
entrepreneurial aspect, so we are starting to see some evidence now of opportunities
for our young people to be exposed to it in the high school.
* (2040)
We contributed some financial assistance to
the hosting of a Young Entrepreneur Association National Conference here in
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1.(e) Grant Assistance ‑ Faculty
of Management $988,800‑‑pass.
2. Industry and Trade Division (a) Industry
and Trade Administration: (1) Salaries
$199,000‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $7,400‑‑pass.
2.(b) Industry: (1) Sectoral Development $971,000.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, this is where I was trying
to make my point with the minister. In
the Expected Results in the Detailed Estimates, it suggests that this department
branch will be involved, "in the creation of 900 jobs and new, private
sector capital investment of $750 million." If this department actually did that‑‑and
I am not suggesting they did not‑‑with a budget that is now
established at $971,000, the question is:
What could we do with twice that much money? Does it not seem that those kinds of outcomes
are far greater than what you would logically expect from any kind of
contribution to the Faculty of Management?
That was my point. It is a
question of whether it is the best use of resources.
I will leave that argument. I do not think the minister is so dense that
he did not pick up the gist of my question before. I think he is very capable
about understanding it, and I think he is defending a political commitment.
Madam Chairperson, I guess the question is
here: What role is this group playing in
the activities in other parts of the department, for example, the Health
Industry Development Initiative? How do
they co‑ordinate their activities, or are these two separate entities?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, I have to take the bait on
the preamble, unfortunately, that I am sure the honourable member recognizes
that this is the staff component basically.
In terms of the kinds of job creations and investment, that a major part
of creating that is through some of our financial programs that our staff
utilize as instruments to create that.
As I have already indicated, if you look at this division in total,
there is a significant increase in this entire division.
In terms of the specific question, once again,
there is a great deal of co‑operation between this branch and our Health Industry
Development Initiative, but for all intents and purposes they are two separate
divisions with, obviously, the Health Industry Development Initiative focusing
specifically on that strategic area but working co‑operatively on an as‑needed
and on some projects with the sectoral division. So they are separate, but there is certainly
a strong element of co‑operation between them on an as‑required
basis.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, could the minister give us
some sort of overview of the current projects that this branch is working on?
Mr.
Stefanson: Is the honourable member looking for project names? Because if he is, I am sure he knows from his
prior experience that in many instances, when you are dealing with companies,
they want it kept confidential for obvious reasons, so I am assuming he is not
asking me to say what companies we are negotiating with.
Mr. Storie:
The sectors and the types of projects.
Mr.
Stefanson: I am not sure if this is in our Detailed Estimates
books, probably not. The simplest might
be if I were to circulate a copy of our organization chart that breaks down the
development officers by functions. For
instance, we have a development officer for aerospace and government offsets.
Mr.
Storie: Just for clarification, I would like to think
and I am sure Manitobans would like to think that the department has some
prospects, that we are working on food processing and perhaps something to
utilize sugar beets or some product, some manufacturing potential.
What I was looking for was some sort of idea
of where the department is in terms of prospects, what sectors and what kind of
project? I do not need to know that it
is Carnation or McCain's or a name, I want to know what areas and what
prospects.
Mr.
Stefanson: I do not have a problem suggesting this, but
I am not sure how useful this will be for the honourable member. In terms of the kinds of areas that we are
currently negotiating with companies: in
the information technology area, in the pharmaceutical area, in the
agricultural and food processing, in chemicals, in transportation equipment, in
agricultural equipment, in forestry, in aerospace, in space, in apparel and textiles,
to name some; and I am sure there are more.
But that gives the honourable member a flavour
for some of the sectors that we are currently negotiating with companies in terms
of existing, expanded or relocation to
Mr.
Storie: Yes, that is a little broader than I had
perhaps‑‑it may not be possible for the minister to be any more
specific without, I guess, identifying those projects.
This sector appears to duplicate what the
Economic Development Board Secretariat does.
I mean, it says that it is out there promoting industrial and commercial
opportunities in
An
Honourable Member: We found the source of intelligence.
Mr.
Storie: Yes, we found the source of
intelligence. Can the minister explain
why we should not believe that this is overlap, that in fact there is some duplication
here?
Mr.
Stefanson: I can assure the honourable member that it is
not overlap, but quite the opposite, working co‑operatively towards success
in the end. Clearly, this department has
many functions. It has the ongoing, day‑to‑day
interaction with the various sectors that they are responsible for, including
the existing businesses that are functioning here in our province.
A major part‑‑and I am sure again
that the honourable member is aware that while we all like to talk about the
businesses that governments are attracting or attempting to attract or whatever‑‑of
our economic activity are the businesses that already exist in our province,
that are doing business, but might have some area of support that is
required. Clearly, this sector can
provide that assistance and that expertise on a day‑to‑day basis
with existing businesses.
A part of it is clearly recognizing
opportunities and dealing with opportunities for existing companies or
companies that are looking in
* (2050)
You asked a question earlier about the
function of the Economic Development Board being a project driven and solely projects. Well, projects are a part of the function of
the Economic Development Board. On
certain projects, depending on the nature of the project, the magnitude of the
project, whether or not it relates to more than one department beyond Industry,
Trade and Tourism, there can be a role for the Economic Development Board
Secretariat to play, particularly where it is straddling other departments,
which happens quite frequently, particularly in some of our focus areas, such
as the Health Industry Development Initiative, and so on. That gives you a flavour.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, I guess there are some of
us who are more dubious about the need for the Economic Development Board
Secretariat than others, and that perhaps some of us believe that the acting
deputy did not have enough to do, and he had to have something additional.
[interjection! That is right, I have seen that.
I would just ask one other question on
actually the next section, on Investment Promotion, and then turn it over to my
colleague. This particular branch has an
office in Hong Kong and contract representatives in
Mr.
Stefanson: Once again, in terms of the preamble, without
taking the debate at length, I am confident that the establishment of the
Economic Development Board, the establishment of the Economic Development Board
Secretariat and the Economic Innovation and Technology Council will be
structures that will remain in place in this province for many years to come,
hopefully, under the particular government that is in place today.
But many years in the future, whatever party
might govern this province, will see the merits of the kind of structure that has
been put in place in the last few months.
In terms of the specific question, yes, Mr. Walker still runs the
I could give you the exact breakdown, I
believe we pay a little better than half, I think. We pay 60 percent; and Finance, 40 percent,
something like that in terms of the allocation of the contract cost.
Mr.
Storie: I guess, Madam Chairperson,
there are many provincial governments that have offices in numerous other parts
of the world. There are some provincial
governments, in
Certainly I know the circumstances of the
Mr.
Stefanson: That is a good question, and it has been a
topic of conversation recently at Trade ministers' meetings in terms of, as the
honourable member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) suggested, many provinces have
significant presence.
We have just seen the
So that is a growing area of evaluation in
terms of getting the best value for our dollars, and in terms of co‑operation.
But in terms of the specific questions, Hong Kong, besides having responsibility
for that region, has responsibility for
Clearly we feel it is still important to have
presence there in terms of issues that are still outstanding with the changes that
are going to occur in 1997 in
So we use a series of indicators to gauge the
success and the need for the office, and in the case of Hong Kong being the activity
under the Immigrant Investor, the Entrepreneurial Program and the level of
business that is being done between that part of the world and the
In terms of the
Once again, it is evaluated to a large extent
on economic performance as it relates to business opportunities and business creation,
both here in
As the honourable member knows, some
borrowings have been done from that part of the world in the past, and clearly
there is a need for a liaison into
They obviously have investments here in
Mr.
Alcock: I would like to pass the mike, if you like,
to the member for
Mr.
Stefanson: I have a problem doing it now. I am anticipating we are coming to the Trade
section very shortly, and knowing questions that have occurred in this House
previously, that probably there will be questions from all three, but if the honourable
member wants to ask his questions now, that is fine with me.
* (2100)
Mr.
Edward Connery (
Can the minister tell us where we are at with
the North American Free Trade Agreement?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, the federal government continues
to negotiate with the
(Mr.
Ben Sveinson, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)
Having said that, they are consulting
extensively with the provinces. They
have had a series of Trade ministers' meetings. We have had a whole number of
administrative meetings that have occurred on this issue. They shared a copy of the draft text with us
not long ago which all members of this House are aware of, so they have shared
information to allow us to continue to address concerns on behalf of
Manitobans.
Certainly, all honourable members know the
position of our government, that we do not support North American free trade unless
six conditions are met, and I will not read those six conditions into the
record again. I have done that
before. In terms of where they are at in
the process, it remains to be seen.
There have been suggestions that the three
countries could reach a tentative agreement as early as in the next few weeks. Procedurally,
that would still mean, within
Our intention would be to do that again at the
point in time when we have something that we can publicly go to the people with,
that the government has produced at this point.
That is one of the dilemmas we are faced with, that there is information
in the system, information that the federal government has generated and has
provided to us in confidence, and we are not in a position that we can take
that forward to the public and share it yet.
We look forward to the opportunity when we can do just that to solicit
further input from Manitobans.
Mr.
Connery: Mr. Acting Chairperson, when we had the U.S.‑Canada
Free Trade Agreement, a policy that I personally supported, the federal
government was to give the provinces some assistance in, I think, labour
training and adjustment and in business.
How has the federal government lived up to the
U.S.‑Canada Free Trade Agreement and the promises made at that time?
Mr.
Stefanson: A good question, and certainly we have
expressed concern about the labour adjustment provisions to date as provided
under the Canada‑U.S. Free Trade Agreement, not so much with the types of
programs put in place, but the level of funding as it relates to
It was partly for that reason that one of our
six conditions in terms of a North American Free Trade Agreement is that there be
adequate labour adjustment provisions to address any shifts that might occur in
That is part of our ongoing analysis and
review that is being done right now, is both the comparison to some of the
weaknesses in the previous program and our concerns about adequacy if an agreement
is reached in terms of labour adjustment provisions for the future.
Mr.
Connery: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I guess it is my
philosophy that a promise made is a promise kept. What is to say that promises made in this new
agreement will be kept? We have not seen
the federal government keep their promises of the original.
Also, I am not sure if one of the six conditions‑‑and
I should remember, but I do not‑‑was it that there would be no changes
to the Canada‑U.S. Free Trade Agreement?
If that is the case, the feeling that I get is that in this North
American Free Trade Agreement, there will be changes to the Canada‑U.S. Agreement.
Mr.
Stefanson: The honourable member raises a legitimate
concern that we share in terms of the issue of adjustment provisions, in terms
of our concern with the adequacy as provided under the previous agreement, and
he raises, obviously, a very important and valid point about concerns about the
future. I think the same concerns could
be raised in a whole range of areas, where we deal with another level of
government, where we deal with the federal government in terms of commitments,
and we have seen recent examples here in the House with Family Services and the
treating of federal support for Treaty Indians off reserves and so on.
So clearly that is one of our six
conditions. It is an important
condition, and we will look for solidifying those assurances as much as we
possibly can, recognizing that sometimes in the final analysis, it comes down
to the good faith between governments and the working relationships between
governments. So it is a valid concern, one we share and one that we will do our
utmost to develop as much certainty to as we possibly can.
The honourable member is also right that one
of our six conditions is that there be no renegotiation of the Canada‑U.S.
Free Trade Agreement.
Mr.
Connery: What worries me, I guess, is that some of the
ability for us to challenge decisions of the Americans, and we see this in the
shingles and the pork and so forth, where they impose tariffs. Then you have to go to a tribunal to see if
the tariffs were fairly imposed, and then you find out six or eight months
later that those tariffs should not have been imposed.
We find that not working all that great
because the damage has been done. The
Americans are great at nontariff barriers, and that is one area where the‑‑so
they lose; they have to take off the tariff or refund the tariff, but in the
interim, they have put businesses out of business.
I think that we have to have a federal
government that is tough enough to stand up to that sort of thing. We see in the produce industry, where they
will put loads of produce under detention for residue testing. It can take anywhere from a week to two weeks
to do the residue testing. Meanwhile, we
have not had one load in the many, many years that we have shipped to the States,
where there was any finding of any residue.
There was no cause to the continuous
harassment, and the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) has also addressed
this issue, but they continue with that sort of harassment. I guess it is very frustrating for business
people, whether you are in agriculture, processing, manufacturing, anything, to
try to develop trade with a government that continues to allow their industries
to badger and use nontariff barriers as a means of discouraging trade, yet we
do not retaliate.
* (2110)
We just seem to be the little doormats at
times for the big American companies, and I think it is time that the federal government
stood up to their obligations and supported Canadian industry.
If we cannot have an agreement that is going
to work well for both and fairly for both in the already signed U.S.‑Canada
agreement, what are we going to have in a North American Free Trade Agreement?
Mr.
Stefanson: Well, the honourable member raises some legitimate
concerns that have been expressed certainly at trade ministers' meetings and by
the First Ministers to various degrees.
The issue of border inspections has certainly been discussed at trade
ministers' meetings in terms of the concern the honourable member expresses,
and I believe that Michael Wilson has been carrying that message forward in
very specific terms, Mr. Acting Chairperson.
In terms of dispute settlement, while none of
us are pleased with having to deal with dispute mechanisms, to a certain
extent, we now have this structured environment that provides us with an avenue
to deal with them. While we are not
happy that we end up in some of the situations dealing with them at panels and
so on, there now is this formalized process that allows both countries the
opportunity to deal with them at that kind of level, and clearly, while we see
on the one side some of the panels initiated by the United States, I could
certainly provide a summary of instances where issues have been initiated on
the Canadian side in terms of triggering panels.
So that aspect is not all one‑sided. There clearly have been issues that we have
taken forward, and I would be pleased to provide the honourable members with
details on some of the specific panels that have originated in
Mr.
Connery: Well, to wrap up on the free trade side, I
just want to put on the record, Mr. Acting Chairperson, my long‑term concern
with going into a new North American Free Trade Agreement when we are not
satisfied with the current U.S.‑Canada agreement. So I would like to just make sure that my
concerns that I have raised before are on record.
I think we are moving far too quickly, that we
are not ready. We have not adjusted to
the American trade deal. We are dealing
with a completely different environment in
We talk about them catching up and the big
population down there, but as the minister knows, there is not a great deal of trade
currently with Canada and Mexico, so we do not have a lot in common, although
we find in horticulture that there are some crops now that are starting to get
a high degree of pressure from Mexico.
Some of the crops that were grown in the very southern states are no
longer to be found or very little production to be found, and they are in
I am told by people who have wintered in
Our environmental problems, we are taking
drastic strides, which I support, in the use of CFCs in refrigeration and
freezer plants. Will those same
regulations be enforced in
Those are my comments, if the minister cares
to respond, but I would have, after that, another question on the aerospace industry,
if that is appropriate in this section.
Mr.
Stefanson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I do not think I need
to respond at length. I know we are
working under a time line. The honourable
member raises some legitimate concerns that we share and we have expressed and
will continue to pursue with the federal government.
Mr.
Connery: Would this be an appropriate place to ask a question
on the aerospace industry? We seem to be
in Industry and Trade Division. [interjection! Okay, I guess then, having had that
agreement‑‑there was an announcement made in
It indicated that the bulk of the training
would be at the Canadian Forces Base,
The Minister of Education, after he had made
the announcement, responding to a question in the House by myself, indicated
that, yes, the bulk would go to
Mr.
Stefanson: The short answer is yes, and we expect to have
some further announcements as it relates to
* (2120)
Mr.
Connery: Just as a final comment, Mr. Acting
Chairperson, that in my estimation and the estimation of many people in the Portage
area‑‑when I talk about the Portage area, and we start talking
about a major industry or major thrust, I think we can take an area from Elie
to Austin, from St. Claude to Amaranth, in that area, where people are within
driving distance, so the economic thrust would be to a large part of central Manitoba‑‑that
the aerospace industry is the one opportunity for that part of Manitoba to
really move ahead and grow.
I have had many discussions with the minister,
and I think I have had very good responses, but I just wanted to put it on the record
that that is an area that can really make a difference to central Manitoba,
Portage being the centre of that area, but west of Winnipeg, for a large number
of people, and to allow for a lot of our young people who are graduating from
schools and universities to maybe get some high‑tech jobs and be able to
stay at home and have a good job and still be in the community and to make the
community grow.
As the minister knows, some rural areas of
Mr.
Stefanson: I agree with the honourable member. We have an excellent nucleus to build around,
with the awarding of the Military Flight Training to Canadair, and as I
indicated, I expect some further specific announcements in the very short term.
Mr.
Storie: Mr. Acting Chairperson, if the minister will
allow this, perhaps we can deal with the trade issues right now, seeing as the
member for
I am not going to be asking a great number of
detailed questions, but I want to put on the record, first, that this minister,
on a number of occasions, has been asked to share with us any kind of analysis
that has been done on the impacts of the Free Trade Agreement.
It seems to me that after two and a half years
now of free trade, we have to have some sort of objective assessment of where we
are being hurt.
I recognize that there are all kinds of other
factors that impinge on our performance, but it seems to me that some of the events
of the past couple of years are directly attributable to the Free Trade
Agreement. Businesses have moved their
operations south of the border because they now can, because the tariffs are being
reduced, because they see the long‑run cheaper operating costs in the
southern states in particular.
What caused me to ask this question, Mr. Acting
Chairperson, was the minister's comment to the member for
The minister said, well, you know, we have
been doing our studies and generally without being, I think, impolite, has danced
around the issue and in some cases attempted to leave the impression that there
was some sort of objective analysis of this agreement and its impact on sector
by sector in terms of the province. I do
not believe that is the case.
I know that the minister has done some
polling. I know that there has been a
survey of business attitudes, but I am not sure there is any concrete
evidence. So when the minister tells us that
he really is not at liberty to share this information with us, it causes me a
great deal of concern because that is exactly what happened with the Free Trade
Agreement.
I want to go a little further than the member
for
What is the government going to do when the
inevitable day comes that North American Free Trade Agreement is signed over
the objections of the member for the
The member for
It is not good enough for the people of
Mr. Acting Chairperson, the bottom line, and
the member for
The minister said, well, the
In the '81‑82 recession, the vast
majority of manufacturing jobs that were lost came back. Sixty‑five percent or 70 percent came
back. The Conference Board of Canada has
estimated that only 25 percent of the jobs we have lost‑‑and it is
more than 500,000 now‑‑are coming back.
The question has to be asked, at what point is
the government going to pull its head from the sand and say this agreement is not
working? It is not working the way we
thought it was going to work. It is not
being implemented. There is not the same
sense of urgency on the part of the
Mr. Acting Chairperson, the fact is that there
is and continues to be harassment of Canadian manufacturers, Canadian food
processors, you name it, and there is no evidence that is going to end. The fact of the matter is that the agreement
is going to work against our interests, most people would say across the board,
whether it is energy or manufacturing or the service sector, you name it. What will it take for this minister and the government
to get serious with their federal colleagues about the impacts of the
agreement, and when can we expect the facts?
Mr.
Stefanson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I am not so sure if
that was a question or a speech or what that was, but I have to respond to some
of it. Unfortunately, the honourable
member sort of mixes the Canada‑U.S. and the NAFTA in terms of his
confusion over what reports have been done and what reports are available and
so on.
* (2130)
I will speak firstly to the Canada‑U.S.
agreement. As we see so often in this
House, members of the official opposition come with their blinders on, and
their pure ideological point of view on free trade, opposing a Canada‑U.S.
free trade, wanting to put the barriers around the Province of Manitoba,
wanting to put the walls up, not having confidence in Manitobans' ability to compete,
creating an uncompetitive environment during their term in government to make
it more difficult for Manitobans to compete.
We do not believe in that. We
believe that Manitobans can.
I can tell the honourable member for Flin Flon
(Mr. Storie) is listening closely to what I am saying because he has not heard this
before. I am sure he would like to hear
it, probably for the first time.
In terms of Canada‑U.S. free trade, in
terms of the changes that have occurred in terms of manufacturing employment
and in terms of the adjustments in terms of our trade deficit, we discussed at
some length earlier, from questions from the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock),
in terms of other issues that are affecting the economic environment, in terms
of the recession, in terms of high levels of interest rates for a period of
time, in terms of the impact of the GST and other factors, in terms of value of
the Canadian dollar, and so on‑‑but even with all of that, the
exports from Manitoba to the United States from '88 to '92 have gone up by some
$100 million. So, clearly, our exports are
growing which translates into job opportunities for Manitobans, and while they
are not significant, they do create opportunities.
I think it is time that the member for Flin
Flon (Mr. Storie) and the opposition party recognize that it is becoming a
global economy, and the days of thinking that you can put walls around your
province and spend taxpayers' monies to create a false economy never should
have existed in the first place and certainly cannot exist today. Hopefully, they will come to that realization
one of these days.
That is on Canada‑U.S. free trade, but I
want to move to North American free trade, because the honourable member made some
incorrect comments. We have not been
doing any polling on North American free trade.
We consulted back in July of last year, as I have already suggested,
with sectors of our economy, with academic institutions, with labour in terms
of helping us formulate the position of the
I really take offence to his suggestion about
being patsies. He should contact some of his colleagues in other provinces, because
if there has been any one province that has led on issues like the environment
and labour and the concerns of Manitobans and of Canadians, it is the
I think it is time that the honourable member
for Flin Flon recognized that. He should
be picking up the phone to phone some of his colleagues and give them the kind
of advice that his Leader seems to be giving when he gives them advice two
weeks in advance of them taking their official position.
Mr. Acting Chairperson, we have made our
position clear on North American free trade in terms of opposing it unless six fundamental
conditions are met. We have put those
conditions on the record extensively. It
is based on consultation with Manitobans.
It is based on some internal analysis.
That is the one document that I have indicated that we are looking
toward making available for members of the opposition. I will continue to work toward providing that
document.
Unfortunately, the honourable member for Flin
Flon (Mr. Storie), in his preamble, mixed and added confusion with his comments
on what research has been done on Canada‑U.S. versus what research has been
done on NAFTA, Mr. Acting Chairperson.
There has been some work done at the national
level by organizations like the Royal Bank, by Strategical, by policy branch
within the University of Toronto and by others in terms of attempting to
quantify the Canada‑U.S. trade agreement, recognizing‑‑and I
would think the honourable member for Flin Flon would recognize, because of all
these other variables, that is a difficult thing to do.
I can assure you, Mr. Acting Chairperson, when
talking to Manitobans about the impact of Canada‑U.S. free trade and the impact
on their businesses, that is not the issue they point to that has caused
difficulty. Other issues have caused
some difficulty for business, issues such as the recession, issues such as the
kind of economic environment that was created from 1982 to 1988 under the NDP
with the kind of tax policies that they implemented here in our province.
Those are more fundamental issues to
Mr.
Storie: Well, Mr. Acting Chairperson, I guess we
expected the minister to defend the policies of his federal cousins. I guess I continue to say that I share the
concerns of the member for
The member for Portage la Prairie talked about
his own experience, and I think the minister will acknowledge that the member
for Portage la Prairie has some expertise when it comes to international trade,
has some expertise. His experiences are exactly
what we predicted would happen under the Free Trade Agreement and now under the
North American Free Trade Agreement.
I can tell you that I told the member for
The member for
There is one other issue and then we can move
on, Mr. Acting Chairperson. I hope the
minister was not confused about my request.
Yes, the federal government did a sector‑by‑sector analysis
of free trade which was nothing more than a propaganda effort. Certainly, if the minister has studies that
he has at his disposal with respect to the impact of the Canada‑U.S. Free
Trade Agreement, I would certainly like copies.
I assume that given that we are two and a half years into the agreement,
that those should be able to be made available.
I hope there is nothing secret in those documents. I would like to see those.
Number two, I am not sure whether the minister
indicated the department or the government has done any analysis of the impact of
the Free Trade Agreement. We have asked
on a number of occasions on what basis they continue to support it. Hopefully, the province has its own
analysis. It certainly would be in its own
interest to have that kind of analysis.
I think we deserve, the people of
Finally, the minister talks about, you know,
we cannot build walls around our country.
Well, it was an interesting debate that the member for Arthur‑Virden
(Mr. Downey) and I had in
I would be interested to know what the
Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) and the Minister of Rural Development (Mr.
Derkach) have to say about supply‑managed industries, which really are
the kinds of principles that are supported by economic nationalists. I am wondering how that fits in with free
trade. Is the minister now saying we are going to abandon, as some people have
suggested, supply‑managed industries?
Can the government continue, ideologically, to have it both ways? Which side of the fence are we on on this?
Mr.
Stefanson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I will not prolong
the debate on it, but the honourable member is absolutely incorrect in terms of
his analysis of opportunities in the Agri‑Food business. I guess the future will show what
opportunities do exist and will exist here in the
* (2140)
In terms of his request for an internal
document on the impact of the Canada‑U.S. Free Trade Agreement, I have
already indicated to him that there have been extensive national documents
prepared that we utilize as a resource, that any analysis would be hinged on
the assumptions you make as it relates to the recession and other factors that
are out there. Clearly, there is no way of quantifying what the impact of the recession,
the GST or other issues have been.
To the best of my knowledge, no province has
undertaken to do an impact analysis of the Canada‑U.S. Free Trade
Agreement, but rather are dealing with studies done nationally and are dealing with
issues in terms of improving the economic opportunities in their own
provinces. That is the fundamental issue
at hand.
In terms of supply management, we made our
position clear, Mr. Acting Chairperson, at GATT, at Trade ministers' meetings, that
we support the strengthening and clarification of Article 11 under GATT which
is the protection for supply management.
That is the position taken by the national government, and that is the position
they are taking forward to the discussions as part of the
Just again, I alluded to it, in terms of the
growth in our exports over the last period of time, we continue to grow in terms
of our foreign exports. For 1991, we are
now up to $3,055,000, an increase of some 2.9 percent; all provinces combined,
a decrease of 2.6 percent. So our
exports, the exports of
While the growth might not be to the level we
all would like‑‑we all certainly would like to see additional
growth‑‑it is certainly heading in the right direction in providing
opportunities, unlike some other areas within our country.
Clearly again, the honourable member comes
with his ideological bent but has yet to point to any empirical data or anything
to suggest that the Canada‑U.S. Free Trade Agreement is working to the
detriment of Manitobans, nothing but the usual ideological verbiage that we
hear from the member from Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) and the opposition party.
Mr.
Alcock: I would like to just continue a bit on the
NAFTA, and I would like to do it from a couple of perspectives. The minister has repeated several times in
this House the six conditions, and has indicated that if the six conditions are
not met, then they will not support the agreement. We can debate whether or not they will be
met. I mean, there is a great deal of
evidence that suggests that they will not be met, that, in fact, decisions have
been taken already that violate some of the conditions.
(Madam
Chairperson in the Chair)
Let us leave the minister in the position of
being able to say: No agreement has been
finalized; therefore, it is difficult.
Or you can take the position that it is difficult to say whether or not
they have or have not been met.
I would like to ask him this question. If the six conditions or one or two or three
or four or all of the six conditions are violated, what form will your
disagreement take?
Mr.
Stefanson: I outlined earlier with the question from the
honourable member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Connery) what we see as a
potential process unfolding in the weeks and months ahead if a tentative
agreement is, in fact, reached in terms of opportunities for governments to
respond to that tentative agreement.
Our position obviously would be communicated
certainly at trade ministers' meetings and to the federal minister responsible for
international trade, Michael Wilson, at a minimum. Obviously, there are other
avenues to convey the position of our government, but clearly that has been the
process to date.
The issue has remained at trade ministers, and
certainly our position would be communicated at trade ministers' meetings, and in
writing to Mr. Wilson which we have done on several issues over the course of
these negotiations, besides raising the issues at trade ministers' meetings‑‑issues
of concern that arise during the course of, in part, some questions asked here
in this Legislature, feedback from our own community. We certainly corresponded to the federal
minister those concerns.
Mr.
Alcock: President Bush has now stated publicly that
once the Mexican agreement is completed, Chili is the next country that they
are going to open negotiations with. Has
the preliminary indication of that been conveyed to you?
Mr.
Stefanson: The issue of additional countries becoming a
part of any agreement has been discussed, and there is discussion and review of
the possible inclusion of an access clause in a North American Free Trade
Agreement. So that will be one issue certainly
for further review and comment on in terms of having an access clause, whereby
the opportunity could be there for countries to become a part of that agreement
with the terms and conditions of that agreement without going through the kind
of prolonged and detailed discussions, meetings and so on that take place. So it has been discussed in that context, the
possibility of an access clause.
Mr.
Alcock: Is the minister in possession of any drafts
of such a clause?
Mr.
Stefanson: No, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Alcock: I realize this is contained within the clause
on the violation of the FTA‑‑at least, that would be a debatable point‑‑but
the issue of some change relative to cross‑border transmission of water
has been raised within the NAFTA, and the minister had indicated that they
would be reviewing that and getting back to me with some information. I am wondering if he is able to do so at this
point?
* (2150)
Mr.
Stefanson: I recall the question in the House, and I
thought the second time I responded to it, but there is no obligation relative
to the export of water under NAFTA, not dissimilar to the Canada‑U.S.
Free Trade Agreement, other than the issue of bottled water which is addressed
under the agreement.
Mr.
Alcock: Although there is one change that allows for
the cross‑border transmission through pipelines of substances other than
oil and gas?
Mr.
Stefanson: That obligation is only as it relates to pipelines
operations and not an obligation to any export of commodities. That would still be under the decision making
of the provincial governments.
Mr.
Alcock: I am sorry, I wonder if the minister could
clarify. He is saying then that any decision to ship water south would be a
decision of the provincial government?
There is no obligation to ship water?
You could make the decision, but there is no obligation for you to
provide water?
Mr.
Stefanson: I am not sure what, specifically, the
honourable member was looking for, but there is certainly no commitment, no obligation
in any way whatsoever to export water.
It remains under the jurisdiction and control of the province.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 2.(b) Industry: (1) Sectoral Development $971,000‑‑pass;
(2) Investment Promotion $929,700‑‑pass.
An
Honourable Member: You could now read the resolution.
Madam
Chairperson: Oh, I am sorry.
An
Honourable Member: It is not the end of the resolution‑‑
Madam
Chairperson: Item 2.(c) Financial Programs: (1) Salaries $770,200‑‑[interjection!
Wishful thinking. (1) Salaries $770,200. Shall the item pass?
Mr.
Storie: Thank you, Madam Chairperson‑‑yes,
wishful thinking.
I have not a lot of questions on the salaries
but would deal with financial programs generally. There is one program that is obvious by its
absence, I guess, and that is what used to be called the Manufacturing
Adaptation Program. It was in the Estimates,
I believe, last year.
I am wondering what has happened to that
program, particularly given the comments the minister made somewhat earlier
about the importance of the manufacturing sector and the government's
interest. I am wondering what program
has supplanted that one or what other initiative the government has to deal
with the introduction of new technology into our manufacturing plants.
Mr.
Stefanson: The program still exists, only it is now part
of the Manitoba Business Development Fund which incorporates that program, I
believe the Technology Commercialization Program, feasibility studies,
technological studies, the health industry's development.
I am just highlighting them again, Madam
Chairperson. The Manufacturing
Adaptation Program is included under the Manitoba Business Development Fund,
along with the studies and the equipment loans.
The sectoral feasibility studies is under that fund; the Health Industry
Development Initiative including feasibility studies, design assistance,
strategic studies and marketing support; Technology Commercialization is there;
and Strategic Planning and strategic studies are there, all housed under one
Manitoba Business Development Fund.
So if the honourable member were to track
back, he would see the accumulation of these programs into this one fund,
allowing some additional flexibility to be better able to meet the demand as it
occurs and the opportunities as they occur.
Mr.
Storie: I have not yet found it in the detailed expenditures,
but I will look it up later. With
respect to the Manitoba Industrial Opportunities Program, I am wondering
whether the minister can tell us: Was
the Dow Corning pilot project funded through this initiative? Can the minister sort of give us an update on
where that project is?
Mr.
Stefanson: It is under the Energy Intensive Industrial Program
allocation of $1,743,600. That is where
the support for Dow Corning is located.
In '92‑93 our allocation for that project is $1.7 million. I think, as the honourable member probably
recollects, that the total commitment is $6.6 million from the fiscal year '89‑90
to '93‑94 for the pilot plant. Of that
$6.6 million, $2.5 was disbursed up to March 31, '91, by the previous Manitoba
Energy authority; $2.4 was disbursed in '91‑92, and the remaining $1.7 is
allocated in '92‑93.
Mr.
Storie: Can the minister tell us then what stage this project
is at? There was a pilot project. Is it producing now the material that it was
supposed to produce and is it operating as expected? When can we expect a decision now with
respect to, I guess, a major production facility?
Mr.
Stefanson: The pilot plant is just about to start
production I understand any day now.
Their pilot period is 18 months, and it will be during that time frame
that obviously their analysis will be done and will lead to decisions on the
future for production opportunities.
Mr.
Storie: Can the minister just sort of refresh my
memory on what product is actually going to be produced in this plant? Was it related to material that goes into
heat‑resistant ceramic bowls and what‑not, Corningware, or was this
the one that was producing ceramic material for super conductors, that kind of technology?
* (2200)
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, it is the production of silicon
metals that are used, I believe, in excess of some 500 different products from
industrial to commercial to a whole range of uses. We could certainly provide further details on
the product uses to the honourable member if he so wishes.
Mr.
Storie: I was just trying to pursue where this
product would be used. Dow Corning has a
number of manufacturing facilities in the
Mr.
Stefanson: As the honourable member is aware, it is a development
of the new technology for the production of silicon metal which will be
primarily utilized internally in terms of other products produced by Dow
Corning.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, I would like, I guess,
sort of a rundown at some point of the various projects that have been funded
by these different programs. The
Industrial Opportunities Program, for example, references some 36
projects. Each of them has its own
separate projects that they are funding and working on. I know that many of the Orders for Return
filed by the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) dealt with these programs, and I am
wondering whether the minister would undertake to update us and give us a
revised list. I know that last year he
did present us with a list of the projects being funded by some of these programs,
and I am wondering if he can give us an updated list on the projects, the
amount of dollars that are being spent on each project, and a list of projects
that are ongoing in their development.
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, we have two options. I have all of the information before me,
which would be probably quite time‑consuming if the honourable member
wants me to walk through each of our programs and outline the support provided
in 1991‑92. I can undertake to
provide him with the details of the support provided during the last fiscal
year if that is acceptable.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, the minister can provide
us with that information at his convenience over the next few days. It does not have to be immediate.
I just have one further question on this
section. That is on the Manitoba
Industrial Recruitment Program, and the government has set aside $1.5 million
for that program. I am wondering whether,
in fact, there has been any allocation of this fund. Have we been successful? If so, perhaps the minister can let us know
who or what were the beneficiaries of these grants.
Mr.
Stefanson: As the honourable member is aware, this is
the first time this program is appearing in our budget. It is a new program meant to focus primarily
on information technology, in part to overcome some differentials that occur
with the
Mr.
Storie: I maybe will ask one more question, I guess,
ask that we not pass this section. I am
not sure whether my colleague from Osborne (Mr. Alcock) had any questions here,
but perhaps move onto Trade.
The question was related to the Manufacturing
Adaptation Program, and the minister had indicated it is sort of subsumed under
the Manitoba Business Development Fund.
I would wonder whether the minister could indicate what kind of dollar allocation
there is for that program for 1992‑93?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, as the honourable member I
am sure is aware, one component of the Manufacturing Adaptation Program is the
opportunity to provide loans with a period of interest forgiveness. A loan authority for '92‑93 is $1.5 million. The operating side included in our budget‑‑the
combination of interests, some operating costs, some funds available for
feasibility studies under this program‑‑the Manufacturing
Adaptation Program is approximately $285,000.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, is the Manufacturing
Adaptation Program the main program then under the Manitoba Business Development
Fund?
Mr.
Stefanson: No, the largest fund under the Manitoba
Business Development Fund is the Health Industry Development Initiative which
is in excess of $800,000. Actually, the
next largest is the Technology Commercialization Program which has
approximately $360,000. So I guess
Manufacturing Adaptation would be the third largest.
Mr.
Storie: Yes, I am just wondering whether the minister
has given any thought to rethinking that program, redeveloping it, expanding
it, given, I guess, the relative importance of technology to our
competitiveness in the manufacturing sector?
One of the things that virtually everyone in
the industry has talked about was the need for Canadian business, and
Mr.
Stefanson: I feel to a large extent, we have addressed
the concern that the honourable member raises, only in another area. We will
get to it later in the Estimates, but through the Economic Innovation and
Technology Council, we have provided an additional million dollars of operating
funds to be directly related to Economic Innovation and Technology
developments. They have a million
dollars of operating funds; they also have a further million dollars of loan
authorities. So there is an enhancement
of $2 million through the Economic Innovation and Technology Council that
really is addressing the kinds of areas that the honourable member just
referred to.
* (2210)
Mr.
Alcock: I believe I heard, although perhaps not
clearly enough, the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) indicate to the minister
or ask the minister for some details on the operations of some of the various
funds that have been referenced in this section. I believe the minister agreed to provide some
detail over the next few days. Did I
hear that correctly?
Mr.
Stefanson: I agreed to provide a summary of support
provided during the last year under our financial programs with as much detail
as we were able to in terms of who the companies were and so on.
Mr.
Alcock: That is good.
That will save me a lot of questions relative to a few Orders for Return
that I have on the Order Paper right now.
I would like to ask the minister about one, I
had expressed an interest in the operations of the Vision Capital Fund some time
ago. In fact, if memory serves me, it
could be as long ago as the Throne Speech Debate in December. I recall very clearly the Finance minister
(Mr. Manness) standing up in the House and saying to me: We have a very positive story to tell; we
will get that information to the member immediately.
Six months later I am still asking the
questions, and I guess the question I have in addition to the details of the
information which I am sure the minister will table for me is, why does it take
six months to get a simple answer to a question as to how a particular program
is performing?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, that is a good question. There
is no easy answer. Just, obviously, the
fund managers have to compile the information, and we receive and review it
from a confidentiality point of view, but the point is well taken. It should not take that long to compile the
information. I have to admit I am not
underestimating the importance of providing that information, but in terms of
the many issues that we are addressing it is one of many, but the point is well
taken.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 2.(c) Financial Programs: (1) Salaries $770,200‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $37,000‑‑pass; (3) Programs $13,285,600.
2.(d) Trade:
(1) Salaries $971,100‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $634,200‑‑pass;
(3) Grants $195,500‑‑pass.
2.(e) Business Resource Centre: (1) Salaries $902,300.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, just a couple of questions
here. It may be under other sections, but can the minister indicate whether in
fact there are still business resource centres operating under the department
in Brandon and Dauphin?
Mr. Stefanson:
Madam Chairperson, we have a regional office in
Mr.
Storie: The minister is indicating then that there is
no business development centre per se in Dauphin?
Mr.
Stefanson: That is correct.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, I guess it would be safe
to say that small business is probably more important in rural
I guess I am wondering whether in fact the
department or this branch is developing expertise in delivering small business programs
using the kind of technology the Department of Education is using to deliver
courses, Distance Education technology; specifically whether‑‑and
this is a clear crossing of boundaries here‑‑we are using the
technology that is available through the Infotech Centre to deliver small
business programs.
* (2220)
Mr.
Stefanson: To date, the program is primarily delivered through
our rural counselling program where the consultants go directly to the
communities and spend a period of time in the communities and meet with
individual businesses and so on. There is
no program in place utilizing Distance Education and/or technology through
Infotech. As I touched on to an earlier question,
that is an area that we are continuing to see progress in, and issues such as
the one you address are under review at this time.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 2.(e) Business Resource Centre: (1) Salaries $902,300‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $601,000‑‑pass; Grants $30,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 88:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$19,534,000 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Industry and Trade Division, for
the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 3. Strategic Development Initiatives
Division (a) Administration: (1)
Salaries $106,800‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $10,000.
Mr.
Alcock: Perhaps I can just ask a couple of questions
at the beginning of this before we get into the specific programs. The Manitoba Centres of Excellence fund,
Mr.
Stefanson: The five networks that are being represented through
the University of Manitoba are the following:
(1) The genetic basis of human disease, innovation for health care; (2) The
microelectronic devices circuits and systems for ultra‑large scale
integration; (3) The neural regeneration and functional recovery; (4) The
respiratory health network of Centres of Excellence; (5) Promoting independence
and productivity in an aging society.
The projected cash flow for '92‑93 is $177,300.
Mr.
Alcock: Yes, I believe Manitoba‑‑what
was it, five out of 14 possible networks?
Mr.
Stefanson: Five out of 15 networks, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Alcock: It struck me at the time, Madam Chairperson,
that this was a relatively low number given the scope of the program. Am I
correct in that assessment?
Mr.
Stefanson: In terms of the allocation to
Mr.
Alcock: Has the minister sought an explanation of why
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, of course, the allocation
was not made on a regional population basis.
It was made on a project‑by‑project basis, based on a review
by a board established at the time, which, I believe,
Mr.
Alcock: I believe it was an assessment of what a
local site would add to the research quality or the capacity to participate in
the network in a given field. We were
given access or we were considered to be acceptable to five out of the 15.
Were details provided as to why we were not
considered acceptable in some of the others?
Presumably, some of them were simply outside the scope of our research
interest in this area. I mean, there may have been one in fisheries or
something of that nature that was more Atlantic or Pacific coast‑based. It would be interesting to know why we were
considered unsuitable in 10 out of the 15 areas.
Mr.
Stefanson: I believe, Madam Chairperson, at the time that
the allocations were made, obviously, while it was announced what the
successful projects were, the rationale was not provided at that time. The basis, obviously, was supposedly reasons
like quality of projects, the regional networks and so on, but there was no
rationale provided as to the projects that were turned down. If the honourable member would like, I would
be more than pleased, if he does not have it already, to undertake, recognizing
these were done in October '89, to provide a summary of the projects applied
for and which ones were not accepted.
* (2230)
Mr.
Alcock: Yes, I would be interested in that.
Could I ask the minister to tell us the
current status of the TR Labs proposal?
As I understand it from some of the discussions we have had here in the
House and discussions I have had with people in the community, TR Labs is a
telecommunications research project that brings together industry, government
and the universities. Right now in two
of the three
What I would like to know are two things. Has the request‑‑as I understood
it at the time, what we were awaiting was final approval from the province as
to the level of support and the allocation time frame, that sort of thing‑‑has
the project passed Treasury Board? What
is the nature of the financial arrangements?
How much is being put up by the federal government, how much by the
province, and over what period of time?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, as the honourable member alluded
to, we had a brief discussion about this not long ago. As part of the process
we are currently negotiating both for a private‑sector partner, and we
are also negotiating for the aspect of small business organizations being a
part of the network. We are currently in
discussions on a communications agreement with the federal government which
would include a contribution from them to the TR Labs and from us.
As soon as that has been finalized, I would be
more than pleased to provide the honourable member with the final levels of financial
support, but it should form part of that final agreement.
Mr.
Alcock: Madam Chairperson, when this was previously discussed,
it was indicated that the federal government had committed its funds, that the
university was supportive, the MTS was supportive, and I believe the TR Labs
personnel came into town and currently have a list of a dozen or so private‑sector
groups who are prepared to participate, and that the only outstanding item was
the level of provincial government support to this program. Is that the current status?
Mr.
Stefanson: The honourable member is mostly correct,
except the federal support is going to come under the communication agreement. So it still is a part of the finalization of
the communication agreement, the contribution from the federal government and
the contribution from the
I think, as I indicated in this House and to
the honourable member, I have a meeting scheduled shortly with TR Labs and at least
one private‑sector company.
Mr.
Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I believe the federal
government committed now‑‑I trust the minister will correct me if I
am wrong‑‑something in the order of $5 million in
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, I believe when the
honourable member suggests that, he is referring to the overall agreements in
each of those provinces, and he is correct in terms of the overall
communication agreement.
Mr.
Alcock: So just let me clarify this, just to be
clear. The federal government has been prepared
to put $5 million into each one of the three provinces. The provinces, then‑‑now in the
case of TR Labs, TR Labs would not access all of that $5 million. It would pick up some portion, let us say,
for wont of discussion, $1.5 million, which would then be matched by the
federal government, or that would be matched by the province, I should say, and
then there would be some additional involvement of the other parties. Of that total $5 million, other portions of
that $5 million might go into other kinds of telecommunications research, for
example, let us say antennas or something else.
I would just like to get clear in my own mind,
though, the status of the funds that have been committed by the various partners. Has the federal government committed its
portion of the $5 million?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, the federal amount has
been allocated but technically is not finalized until the agreement is put in
place. But they have allocated an amount
to TR Labs.
Mr.
Alcock: Has the provincial government allocated its
$5 million?
Mr.
Stefanson: We have a tentative allocation at this point
as well, subject to the conclusion of the agreement and the other issues that I
have already touched on.
Mr.
Alcock: Madam Chairperson, I noticed some further discussion. I wonder if the minister wanted to enlarge
upon his answer.
Mr.
Stefanson: We initially allocated an amount, but it is subject
to the conclusion of the agreement and the finalizing of the private sector
contribution that I referred to earlier.
* (2240)
Mr.
Alcock: I will make this my last question on this
particular topic, although I do want to underline one concern I have. Finalization
of this has dragged on somewhat longer I think than was anticipated. Part of this initiative involves the recruitment
and support for faculty and graduate students in the universities to conduct
research over a period of time in telecommunications, on telecommunications
issues as part of this western network.
I note that we are well past the recruitment season for this fall. So if we are going to recruit in off season,
we are already far behind the available supply of high‑quality students
within this year.
I would like to get some idea from the
minister as to when they anticipate having these agreements concluded, No. 1;
and No. 2, how long after that point it is anticipated it will take to get the
project up and running so they are in a position to begin offering positions to
qualified graduate students and faculty. Are we five months away, six months, a
year, or is this just remaining a figment of somebody's imagination while TR
Labs negotiates with the
Mr.
Stefanson: We would expect a concluded agreement
hopefully within the next couple of months, and then the opportunity for recruitment
occurring very shortly thereafter. As I
have indicated, there are preliminary allocations from the federal government,
from ourselves and from the private sector, and it is a matter of finalizing
all of those commitments.
Mr.
Alcock: Just to clarify or end on the one point: Has the minister offered any advice or
recommendation to the federal government as to the allocation of its $5
million?
Mr.
Stefanson: Yes.
Mr.
Alcock: I wonder if the minister would care to fill
in the blank between yes and the period?
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, until an agreement is finalized,
it would be premature for me to outline the projects that are in there, but
clearly the federal government outlined some specific projects that they feel
are important. We had an opportunity to
review them and concur with them, and that is exactly what we have done.
Mr.
Alcock: Let me seek this assurance. The minister in offering advice to the
federal government, has he, in offering that advice, confined it‑‑and
confining the question to the $5 million that the feds have got allocated for
communications research, has his advice been such that that entire $5 million would
be spent in the area of telecommunications research?
Mr.
Stefanson: I am not entirely clear on the honourable member's
question but, yes, we do support the allocation of $5 million in federal money
to research and development and communications.
Madam Chairperson: Item 3.(a)(2) Other Expenditures $10,000‑‑pass.
3.(b) Health Industry Development
Initiative: (1) Salaries $443,500.
Mr.
Storie: Just one quick question to the minister. I am sorry, are we on 3.(a)(2)?
An
Honourable Member: No.
Mr.
Storie: We are on Health Industry. Just a question, the minister was part of an
announcement not too long ago with Mead Johnson‑‑an agreement. I do not know whether they got any support of
any kind. I do not believe they did out
of this, but it is related to this area.
I am wondering whether the minister can tell
us what has happened with that agreement and perhaps just sort of expand on what
a qualified supplier is and what differing access Mead Johnson has because of
this agreement.
Mr.
Stefanson: Madam Chairperson, a qualified supplier
provides assurance for the opportunity to bid on hospital contracts. I can provide the specifics of the
commitments made in terms of a dollar amount being attached to research and
development, which I do not have here this evening. I will gladly provide that to the honourable
member. Also commitments to look for
further investments here in our province, we have had some discussion with them
as it relates to at least one aspect of their business and providing investment
here in our province.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, I guess this is another
one of those announcements that are suspect.
What exactly is a qualified supplier?
Does that mean people that are not "qualified suppliers"
cannot bid on a bid to supply materials to our hospitals? I am not sure that we want to get into any
kind of exclusivity in our hospital system, and if it does not give exclusivity,
then what exactly does it give? Perhaps
the minister can sort of explain how that works. Either we are giving exclusivity or we are
not. If they do not have it, then what
exactly do they have?
The second point is I understand that the
commitment or the undertaking to locate a supplier for certain products, particularly
with a company, I understand, in
* (2250)
Mr.
Stefanson: As I outlined to the honourable member, it is
not an exclusive contractual arrangement.
It is an assurance of an opportunity to bid. They will have an equal opportunity to come forward
and subject to price, quality, and so on, they are not overlooked in any
bidding process. They are assured the opportunity
to be at the table.
The
honourable member is correct that we are pursuing a specific initiative with
them, and we contacted a company in
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, it was a beautiful
announcement.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 3.(b) Health Industry Development Initiative: (1) Salaries $443,500‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $307,700‑‑pass; (3) Grants $1,000,000‑‑pass.
Item 3.(c) Industrial Technology: (1) Salaries $470,100‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $424,200‑‑pass.
Item 3.(d) Information Technology: (1) Salaries $314,800‑‑pass.
(2) Other Expenditures $1,707,100.
Mr.
Storie: Can the minister explain the increase?
Mr.
Stefanson: In seven words or less, it reflects
$1,621,200 for the Linnet agreement.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 3.(d)(2) Other Expenditures $1,707,100‑‑pass.
Resolution 89:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$4,784,200 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Strategic Development Initiatives
Divisions, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 4. Tourism Division (a) Administration.
Mr.
Storie: Madam Chairperson, we are prepared to pass
this resolution. I do have some comments
and some thoughts on tourism, but perhaps we can share them in the Minister's
Salary and not keep staff unduly long. I
know they are anxious to sit in and participate for several hours into the
early hours of the morning, but we can dispense with that perhaps.
Madam Chairperson: Item 4.(a) Administration: (1) Salaries $257,200‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $23,900‑‑pass.
4.(b) Marketing: (1) Salaries $518,800‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $3,286,900.
Mr.
Alcock: Madam Chairperson, just to facilitate things,
I think there is an agreement. To save
the staff jumping in and out, is there agreement to pass it up to the
Minister's Salary, and then we will put a few remarks on the record‑‑to
save people sort of leapfrogging in and out, and Mr. Bessey can go back to work.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 4.(b) Marketing: (2) Other Expenditures $3,286,900‑‑pass.
4.(c) Development: (1) Salaries $678,200‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $484,100‑‑pass.
4.(d) Canada‑Manitoba Partnership
Agreement in Tourism: (1) Salaries
$45,000‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $171,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 90:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$5,465,100 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Tourism Division, for the fiscal
year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 5. Canada‑Manitoba Tourism
Agreement 1985‑1990 $0‑‑pass.
Item 6.
Resolution 91:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$4,781,000 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Manitoba Horse Racing Commission,
for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 7.
Resolution 92:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$405,700 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Manitoba Bureau of Statistics, for
the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 8. Economic Development (a)(1) Salaries
$466,000‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $420,000‑‑pass.
(b) Grant Assistance ‑ Economic
Innovation and Technology Council $3,985,500‑‑pass.
(c) Economic Innovation and Technology Fund
$1,000,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 93:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$5,871,500 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Economic Development, for the
fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item 9. Expenditures Related to Capital (a)
Capital Grants: (1) Canada‑Manitoba Tourism Agreement $0; (2) Canada‑Manitoba
Partnership Agreement in Tourism $344,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 94:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$344,000 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Expenditures Related to Capital, for
the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
At this time, we will refer to item 1.(a)
Minister's Salary, $20,600. Shall the
item pass?
Mr.
Storie: Just before we conclude with the formality of
passing the minister's salary, I did want to put on record a couple of comments
specifically related to issues that we have gone over rather quickly, simply
because there was not sufficient time to go into detail.
* (2300)
There are three areas that I wanted to talk
about. One of them, of course, was the
area of Economic Development. I indicated
I was not prepared to see the $886,000 that was designated for the Economic
Development Board Secretariat passed, Madam Chairperson, simply to make a
statement that this is another shuffling of the chairs. This government has had four years to develop
a strategy. Every time they had an
opportunity they blew it, and they think by creating some sort of new entity they
are going to create magically some sort of activity. What it requires is commitment. What it requires is planning. I should say first what it requires is
planning and number two is commitment.
I am not convinced that this government has
any real sense of how to plan strategically for economic growth. Many of the areas that are succeeding right
now in the
In Energy and Mines when we talked about the
Manitoba Energy Authority, I identified projects including the Dow Corning project,
which is one of the few new initiatives this government has had anything to do
with, as initiatives that had been identified by the previous government. When I asked the minister responsible to
identify any new initiatives, he could not identify a single one, and that is
the problem we have right here.
This new initiative is not going to work
either unless there is some sort of strategic planning and a willingness to
carry out that plan including invest money that is necessary. This government has blown many, many, many
opportunities already, and the minister is aware of many of the ones that we
have referenced before. Perhaps we are
not even aware of all of the ones, but this board is not going to solve the
problem that the government I think has in terms of an attitude, in terms of
its strategic approach or lack thereof.
The Economic Innovation and Technology
Council, again, a rehash of something that already existed called the Manitoba Research
Council. Yes, they have some wonderful
people on it, and I have said that before, but this group is not a decision‑making
body, nor is it a strategic body in that sense. So I think the government has
to rethink its own strategy, because it is not clear that whatever strategy it
thinks it is using is working.
Tourism, Madam Chairperson‑‑and I
want to correct the minister on one point.
Some time ago, I asked the question about the impact of the lack of
American tourists on northern lodges. He indicated my statistics were wrong when
I said that 80 to 90 percent of the people who are using lodges and outfitters
in
Well, I confirmed it with the Manitoba Lodge
and Outfitters Association. In northern
Horse racing‑‑this government has
lost another industry. Most people in the province do not recognize it, but the
harness horse racing industry has folded in this province. Hundreds of job opportunities have been
lost. An industry has been lost, and the
minister and the government must take some share of the blame in the loss of
that industry.
Madam Chairperson, overall when you exclude
the Horse Racing Commission from this set of Estimates, when you exclude some
of the administrative, I guess, parts of this department's program, you have
very little new initiative. You have the
hope of spending some money with some of the new programs, such as the Industrial
Recruitment program, but as the minister acknowledges, nothing has been spent.
This government, if it is going to take
I think this government has a record of more
misses than hits when it comes to taking advantage of opportunities. Piper Aircraft, SEA, numerous others, so we
are not going to recommend, I am not going to recommend that we reduce the
minister's salary.
I am prepared to give the minister some
additional time in the portfolio, but I think Manitobans expect some
results. The 52,000 people who are
unemployed expect some results. The
small businesses who are struggling expect some results. The tourist operators who are struggling,
particularly in the North, expect some results.
The hundreds of miners who have lost their jobs in the last four years
expect some results. It is not good
enough for the minister to stand up and say, well, we have projections which
show‑‑that is not going to wash anymore. We want some results. That is what we expect from the department
and certainly that is what we expect from the minister.
I have a lot of confidence in the minister's
common sense. I hope that he will match
that common sense with, I guess, some commitment to take the province in a new
direction, to utilize our resources and to take some chances, take some risks
and invest on behalf of the province like many, many, many other jurisdictions
are doing. We cannot afford to sit on
our hands. We cannot afford a stand‑aside government. No other jurisdiction is making any headway
with that kind of government. Nor can we
stand a government that is not prepared to plan strategically with its
partners, business and labour.
Government is a partner, and we should never forget that.
The countries that are succeeding have
government as a very important, if not predominant partner. This government's philosophy and maybe this minister's
is at fault, not the programs of the department. We are looking for some improvement; we
deserve some improvement as a population.
Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
Mr.
Alcock: I will be very brief. I would like to conclude, as I started, I think,
thanking the minister for his candor and his willingness to discuss issues at
Estimates. I am saddened, frankly, that
we get to this point in the Estimates on a department that I think is so
important with so little time to have the‑‑and I do not hold any
individual, I am as much at fault for that as anybody else, but it is a shame,
given the seriousness of the issues and the complexity of the issues, that we
take so little time to deal with them in this forum.
I am somewhat comforted in doing that, given
the attitude of this particular minister and the willingness of this minister
to work towards solving problems and to step aside from ideological positions
and be a little more fact‑based in the analysis and the approach that he
takes to solving problems.
I am concerned about two things. One is a propensity on the part of the
government to focus a little more on sizzle rather than steak on the imagery of
change, as opposed to the very tough reality of change. I have heard some things from the minister tonight
that suggests that he is a little more reality‑based, so I am somewhat
comforted, but there is very narrow, very small amounts of money attached to
some very serious commitments. I hope
the minister will have some success over the next year or two in convincing his
cabinet colleagues that if you are going to get serious about research and
development, if you are going to get serious about carving a niche for yourself
in new technologies, that takes significant investment.
The second thing that is an area that I am
still concerned about is one of the problems that is identified as you go
through any of the economic or industrial development literature, one of the
problems that governments in North America have, democracies that have the
changeovers in governments that we do, is the very short horizons of the four‑year
planning horizons. They are simply not
long enough, and we need to look at mechanisms that allow us to step back from
the political processes as we make significant economic decisions for this
province, so that they will survive government to government. I talked a bit about that when I talked on
Bill 9 and would like an opportunity to discuss that further.
But, on balance, I am quite confident in this
minister. I am quite satisfied with the
work that has gone on, and I am particularly pleased with the willingness to
provide information and defend positions.
With that, I shall conclude.
* (2310)
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1. Administration and Finance (a) Minister's
Salary $20,600‑‑pass.
Resolution 87:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding
$2,688,600 for Industry, Trade and Tourism, Administration and Finance, for the
fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
That concludes the Estimates for the
Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism.
Hon.
Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): As agreed to in the
Assembly earlier on this afternoon, there will be a meeting of House leaders at
9:45 a.m., tomorrow (Wednesday). I am asking
that this committee recess at this time, and at that time it will be determined
whether or not there is unanimous consent to come back in this section of the
Committee of Supply at 10 a.m. tomorrow to consider the Estimates of the
Department of Natural Resources.
So, this committee is summoned at 10 a.m. for
tomorrow (Wednesday), but requiring unanimous consent.
Madam
Chairperson: Is that the will of the committee?
Some
Honourable Members: Agreed.
Madam
Chairperson: Committee is accordingly recessed until 10 a.m.
tomorrow (Wednesday).