DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Fifthon Sessi • Thirty-FifthLegislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Publishedunder the lllllhorilyof TluHonourable Denis C. Rocan SpeiiUr Vol. XLIII No.44 • 1:30p.m., Thursday,June 9, 1994 ISSNOS42-5492 MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-FifthLegislature Members, Constituenciesand PoUticalAlftUatlon NAME CONS'ITIUENCY PARTY. ASHI'ON,Steve Thompson NDP BARRE'IT,Becky Wellington NDP CARSTAIRS,Sharon RiverHeights Liberal CBRD..LI,Marianne Radisson NDP CHO.MIAK, Dave Kildonan NDP CUMMINGS, Glen,Hon. Stc.Rose PC DACQUAY,Louise SeineRiver PC DERKACH,Leonard, Hon. Roblin-Russell PC DEWAR,Gregol)' Selkirk NDP DOBR,G81)' Conconlia NDP DOWNEY,James, Hon. Arthur-Vinlen PC DRIEDGER,Albert, Hon. Steinbach PC DUCHARME,Gerry, Hon. Riel PC EDWARDS,Paul St.James Liberal ENNS,Harry, Hon. Lakeside PC ERNST,T1m, Hon. Charleswood PC EVANS,Clif Interlake NDP EVANS,Leonard S. BrandonEast NDP Fll..MON,G81)', Hon. Tuxedo PC FINDLAY,Glen, Hon. Springfield PC FRIESEN, Jean Wolseley NDP GAUDRY,Neil St. Boniface Liberal Gll.LESHAMMBR, Harold, Hon. Minnedosa PC GRAY,Avis Crescentwood Liberal HELWER, Edward R. Gimli PC HICKES, George Point Douglas NDP KOWALSKI, G81)' The Maples Liberal LAMOUREUX,Kevin Inkster Liberal LATIRJN,Oscar ThePas NDP LAURENDEAU,Marcel St. Norbert PC MACKINTOSH, Gonl St. Johns NDP MALOWAY,T1m Elmwood NDP MANNESS, Clayton,Hon. Morris PC MARTINDALE, Doug Bllii'OWS NDP McALPINE,Gerry SturgeonCreek PC McCORMICK,Nonna Osborne Liberal McCRAE,James, Hon. Brandon West PC MciNTOSH,Linda, Hon. Assiniboia PC MITCHELSON,Bonnie, Hon. River East PC ORCHARD,Donald, Hon. Pembina PC PALLIS TER,Brian PortageIa Prairie PC PENNER,Jack Emerson PC PLOHMAN,John Dauphin NDP PRAZNIK, DIUI'Cn,Hon. Lacdu Bonnet PC NDP REID, D81)'1 Transcona REIMER,Jack Niakwa PC PC RENDER,Shirley St. Vital NDP ROBINSON,Eric Rupertsland PC ROCAN,Denis, Hon. Gladstone PC ROSE, Bob Turtle Mountain NDP SANTOS,Conrad Broadway NDP SCHELLENBERG,Harry Rossmere PC STEPANSON, Eric, Hon. Kirldield Parle NDP STORIE,Jerry FlinFlon PC SVEINSON, Ben La Verendrye PC VODREY,Rosem81)'. Hon. Fort Garry NDP WOWCHUK, Rosann Swan River 3247 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday,June 9, 1994 TheHouse met at 1:30 p.m. previous govemmeDL Thisreduction in payments hasbeen accelerated in thelast federal budget, and PRAYERS we have beengiven notice that thefederal Minister ROUTENE PROCEEDINGS of Transport intends on cutting some $650 million from western producers. [interjection] If the Introductionof Guests LiberalLeader (Mr. Edwards) wantsto defend the Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I federal Liberal government, that is fineby us, Mr. directntion theatte of honourable members to the Speaker. We are here to defend the farmers, the gallery, where havewe withus this afternoon from railwayworlcers and theChurc Portof hill. the R.H.G. BonnycastleSchool sixty-five Grade 5 Mr. Speaker, we have one federal minister students under the direction of Mrs. Rasmussen. previousto theelection promising a milliontonnes This school is located in the constituency of the of grain. We have another federal minister, the honourable Ministerof Justice (Mrs. Vodrey). Minister of Agriculture, meeting with agricultural Bt aussi cet apres-midi, nous tenons � vous producers and railway workers across western signaler Ia presence, dans Iagalerie publique, de Canada and consulting with them, and a third 22 �tudiants de Ia sixieme � de 1 'Ecole St. federal ministerpromi sing to cut $650 million out Germain sous Ia direction de Madame Allard. of the budget for transportation. The federal Cette institution est situ�dans Iacirconscription Minister of Transport says farmers willnow have du �pu� de SeineRiver (MadameDacquay ). to haul grain by trucks.The last time we looked, in [Translation] the province of Manitoba there was no road to Churchill. Also thisafternoon,we have twenty-two Grade 6 students from the St. GeDDain School under the I would ask the Premier (Mr. Ftlmon) what direction of Mrs. Allanl. Thisschool is located in impact this will have on the Port of Churchill to the constituency of the member for Seine River have this massive reduction in transportation (Mrs. Dacquay). subsidies to the railways and the transfer of grain [English) by truckin tenns of thePort of Churchill? On behalf of all honourable members, I would Bon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and like to welcome you here thisafternoon. Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank • (1335) the member opposite for this kind of a question today because-[interjection] The member for ORAL QUESTIONPERIOD Dauphin(Mr. Plohman) is very right. Thisis a very seriousissue. It has hit us likelightning a bolt. We Grain TransportationProposal did not expect in any fashion that the federal Impact on Port of Churchill Liberal government would do what they aredoing Mr. Gary Doer (Leaderof theOpposition): Mr. to us today. Speaker, my questionis to therust Min ister. In my previous life as Minister of Agriculture, Since 1992, we have been opposed to the we talked about changing themethod of payment. reduction in support for the railways in the We never, ever talked about eliminating the transportation of grainthat was announcedin the payment. The past two federal budgets have original statement by Mr. Mazankowski in the eliminated 15 percent,and that is moving towards 3248 LEGISLATIVEASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 9, 1994 ourcommitment to theGA'IT process. Nowhere in Bon. GlenFindlay (MinisterHighways of and the GA'IT process was there any request that we Transportation): Mr. Speaker, what thiswill cost must eliminate the entire support to western the westerngrain industry is approximately $20 a Canadianagriculture. tonne, or 50 cents a bushel will be taken right out of their income side to pay for what the federal Thispresent Liberal govermnent is talking about government istaking away from westernCanada. doing away withsafety nets, which have kept grain farmers in business thelast four years and for the Boththe Minister of Agriculture(Mr. Enos) and nexttwo or threeyears. Now they wantto do away the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and our entire with the transportation subsidy. This is our government are very, very concerned about what birthright in terms of Confederation in western direction we are going in at this time. I want to Canada. table the letter thathas been sent to Mr. Young,the Minister of Transport, copy to Mr. Goodale, the Mr. Speaker,we have a U.S. government who is Minister of Agriculture, signed by both the out there maligning us all over the world in tenns Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enos), and myself, of whatwe aredoing in the industry,grain and we the Minister of Highways, laying out our very get a federal Liberal government that is playing serious concern that we will not accept this rightinto theirhands by takingaway our subsidies becausethis a is birthrightfor westernCanada, and that willcause us to collapse in westernCanada in ifthey follow through with this,it will shut down thegrain industry if they follow through with their the grainindustry in westernCanada . agenda thatMr. Young announced yesteiday. Rest assured, we as the provincial government GovernmentInte rvention did not put hundreds of millions of dollars into a safety netprogram to have a Liberal government Mr.Gary (Leaderof theOpposition): Doer Mr. come along and destroy the industry overnight. Speaker, members on this side of the House were opposed when Mr. Mazankowski made the first cut, andwe are further opposed with thismassive LegalOpinion cut by the year 1995. Mr. GaryDoer (Leader of theOpposition) : Mr. Mr. Speaker,after the GA'IT setof negotiations, Speaker, the federal Minister of Transport, who I the federal Minister of Agriculture said, and I think really does undermine our negotiating quote, thatno producer, no farmerwould lose any position with the Americans, has said that this is income as aresult of theGA'IT negotiations. GA'ITable and therefore it must be eliminated. Today, the federal Minister of Transport is Now, this isa federal minister, of course, whose saying that we will have a situation where $650 statements can be used as evidence by the U.S. million is reduced from the railways without any government. indication of what alternatives willbe in place for TheSaskatchewan WheatPool hasalready been grain. quoted as saying that it isnot GATTable, that it is I would askthe Premier(Mr. Filmon), will be not subject to GATT. We were not told after contacting the Prime Minister to get a handle on GATT was signed that this would be subject to the two conflicting messages from the Minister of GATT. Agriculture and the Ministerof Transport,and ask I would ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): Does be the federalgovernment to putthis $650-million cut have any legal opinion that the Transport minister on bold, so we can have an intelligent debate in is absolutely wrong in his legal interpretation and western Canada and keep the payments to the is just using GA'IT as a way to eliminate $650 railway and keep Churchill viable in the province million to theproducers of western Canada, to the of Manitoba? railway wolkersof westernCanada and to the Port • (1340) of Churchillwhich relies on railway shipments? June 9, 1994 LEGISLATIVEASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 324 9 Bon. GlenFindlay (Minister ofHighways and He bidin hisshell on thisissue becausedid be not Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I would like to wantto go out onit. sent reada paragraphout of theletter that we have The reason is, first and foremost, there were The option of eliminating the WGTA bas never figures put out. Mr. Sbenkarow projected losses been discussed or considered in western Canada -they were well coveredin the book-that were GATT does not require its elimination. Only a 36 even in excess of what is in that estimate. This percent reduction over the next six years is government took that as a best-case scenario; that requiredin GATT. In thelast two federalbudgets, is,their best guess at theworst possi ble obligation. they have already eliminated 15 percent. The federalminister is absolutely wrongon this.It does Thisgovernment did it on the basisof one thing not require the elimination of theWGTA subsidy and one thing only, that the revenues to to meet the GATT.