| 59 | 60 | ||||||||
| 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 |
| 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 |
MR. SPEAKER: O Eternal and Almighty God from Whom all power and wisdom come; by Whom Kings rule and make equitable laws; we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our Province; grant O Merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy Will; that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the Glory and Honour of Thy Name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
Presenting Petitions
Reading and Receiving Petitions
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees
Notice of Motion
Introduction of Bills
MR. S. JUBA (Logan): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Osborne that leave be given to introduce Bill No. 54, an Act to amend The Winnipeg Charter, 1956, and to validate By-Laws No's 17959 and 18073, and that the same be now read and received the first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. D. M. STANES (St. James): I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for River Heights that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 61, an Act to amend an Act respecting The School District of St. James No. 7, and that same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. STANES: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member from River Heights that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 62, an Act to amend the City of St. James Charter and that same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
HON. GEORGE JOHNSON (Minister of Health and Public Welfare) (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Provincial Secretary that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 24, an Act to amend the Old Age Assistance Act and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote, declared the motion carried. ]
HON. STERLING R. LYON (Attorney-General) (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable, the Minister of Labour, that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 37, an Act to amend The Manitoba Evidence Act and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
HON. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable, the Minister of Labour that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 36, an Act to amend an Act to amend The Election Act and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
HON. JOHN THOMPSON (Virden): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable, the Attorney-General, that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 4, an Act to amend the Department of Labour Act and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
HON. MR. THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable, the Attorney-General, that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 17, an Act to amend The Labour Relations Act and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. SPEAKER: Committee of the Whole House.
HON. ERRICK F. WILLIS, Q.C. (Minister of Agriculture) (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair and the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole to consider the following proposed resolutions, two by myself and one by the Minister of Health.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. SPEAKER: Would the Honourable Member for St. Matthews take the chair?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is the Committee ready to receive the resolutions? Resolution No. 1, Mr. Willis.
MR. WILLIS: His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, having been informed of the subject matter of the proposed resolutions, recommends them to the House.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Resolved that it is expedient to bring in a measure to authorize the reimbursement of certain Municipalities for amounts paid for bounties on Predatory Animals.
MR. WILLIS: Mr. Chairman, this is the usual annual motion where municipalities have failed to make application for the bounties on time and it pays out to about four municipalities small amounts of money.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall the Resolution be adopted?
ASSEMBLED MEMBERS: "Aye."
MR. CHAIRMAN: Resolution passed. ... Resolution No. 2, Mr. Willis. Resolved that it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend the Community Seed Cleaning Plant Loans Act, by providing for an increase in the amount that may be loaned from the Consolidated Fund for the purpose of assisting in the establishment of community seed cleaning plants.
MR. WILLIS: Mr. Chairman, the Government policy is to make loans to Seed Cleaning Plants. The original amount loaned was to be $20,000, but in building the very first plant they discovered that the cost was going to be about $60,000. All this does is to change the amount from $20,000, to be loaned to $30,000, to be loaned.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall the Resolution be adopted?
ASSEMBLED MEMBERS: "Aye."
MR. CHAIRMAN: Resolution passed...Resolution No. 3. Resolved that it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend the Child Welfare Act by providing among other matters for certain payments by the Director of Public Welfare in respect of neglected children.
HON. MR. JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman, this resolution provides for the bill an Act to amend the Child Welfare Act, Section 2, which provides for those amendments which transfer the responsibility for payment of ward maintenance costs orders from the municipalities to the Provincial Government. While provision is made for this in the Social Allowances Act, it is also necessary to make a similar provision in the Child Welfare Act.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall the Resolution be adopted?
ASSEMBLED MEMBERS: "Aye."
MR. CHAIRMAN: Resolution passed. Is it the pleasure of the committee to rise and report?
ASSEMBLED MEMBERS: "Aye."
MR. CHAIRMAN: Will you call in the Speaker?
Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole has adopted certain Resolutions and directed me to report the same.
MR. W. G. MARTIN (St. Matthews): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Roblin, that the report of the Committee be received.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
HON. MR. WILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 31, an Act to authorize the Reimbursement of Certain Municipalities for amounts paid for Bounties on Predatory Animals, and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
HON. MR. WILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 30, an Act to amend The Community Seed Cleaning Plant Loans Act, and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote, declared the motion carried. ]
HON. G. JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I wish to move, seconded by the Provincial Secretary, that leave be given to introduce a Bill, No. 46, an Act to amend The Child Welfare Act, Section 2, and that the same be now received and read a first time.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.
MR. CAMPBELL (Leader of the Opposition) (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders
of the Day are proceeded with, I would like to express a very cordial vote of thanks to the Honourable, the Minister of Agriculture, for once again reminding us of the great day that this is. To Honourable Members who have not been in the House for sometime, they may think that the generosity that is displayed here is just another case of the Government giving practically everything away that they can think of, and that this is just in keeping with the Speech From the Throne. But I must remind them that the fact is, that the Honourable, the Minister of Agriculture, has been doing this for a great many years -- a great many years -- even when he was a member of my Government. And here we have today the fact that the members' desks and those of the officers of the House and the Press Gallery are once more adorned with the floral emblem of the Emerald Isle.
It is a real pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to once again convey the cordial thanks of our group to my Honourable friend for this nice gesture. It is one of the pleasant things that we have in this House, and it serves to remind us that, even when we have some little differences of opinions at times, that we are all good friends, and those of us who happen to have an ancestry similar to my Honourable friend remain generous and courtly even when some of the rest of us have some other ideas.
Now, for anyone who thinks that I don't place a lot of confidence in the Honourable, the Minister of Agriculture, he knows that I do, because he is aware of the fact that for a great many years that I have placed confidence in him and he has never yet let me down, in this regard. He knows that I have an Irish wife and he knows that her birthday comes, unfortunately, not on St. Patrick's Day, but just a day before - and he knows that it has been my custom through the years, ever since he has been in this House, to depend upon him to present us with this little token so that I can take it home to my wife and I don't have to get her a birthday present. And I can assure my Honourable friend that taking the many years that he has been in the House, that it's been a great source of comfort to me and, of course, even though it is a day late, each time my wife is very glad to know that something is coming to mark that occasion.
But this year, this year, just to show the characteristic generosity of the Government, not only does the Honourable, the Minister of Agriculture, come through in his usual handsome fashion, but the Honourable, the First Minister, right on the day, puts on a little party for my wife. And I must say that we appreciate those little evidences of courtesy from the Opposition.
Well, now, as I said last evening, seriously, let me say to my Honourable friend, this is a little touch that we have to come to look forward to through the years. It's a very pleasant one. It's very kind of him to call attention to the fact that this is St. Patrick's Day and if there is anything that should promote peace and harmony and amicability in the House, certainly it would be the thought of that peace loving people who are so determined to have peace that they are willing to fight all the time in order to get it. That's something like the House, too -- and we do appreciate the gesture of my Honourable friend. Thank you very much.
MR. LLOYD STINSON (Leader of the CCF Party) (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, the Honourable, the Leader of the Opposition, has spoken in his usual good form and with his fine sense of humour. He has explained that he is always a day late in providing his good wife with a token of his appreciation on her birthday. I would like to suggest that, in that respect, he acts more quickly than usually.
Now, Sir, I must confess today that I miss my old friend, Jack McDowell. And let it be understood that McDowell and I were never real enemies. It would appear to be that way, but this House is not the same without Jack and I'm inclined to think I will resign from the House unless somebody takes on the character of Jack McDowell so that we can have a little fun around here.
Now, I must apologize for not having a green tie. Some light fingered Irishman walked off with the tie that I usually wear upon this day, and there were occasions formerly when Jack McDowell had a spare tie which he gave to me. That's one of the reasons why I miss him and that's one of the reasons why he was in some respects a useful member, because he did, among other things, supply green ties, as well as a bit of colour.
Now, Sir, my ancestors were all Irish. On my father's side they were as Irish as Paddy's pig, but on my mother's side there was a little element of respectability which crept in in 1690 when a man called Hazelwood went over to Ireland with King William and he stayed there, so that there is a strain of English in my ancestry which perhaps may explain why at times I do appear to be somewhat respectable.
Now, Sir, I want to thank the Honourable Minister who has presented us with this annual token of appreciation. My wife always appreciates having it and we certainly in this group want to thank him most heartily for his annual generosity.
HONOURABLE DUFF ROBLIN (Premier) (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, in the times gone by I used to regard this as a very light-hearted occasion. I used to listen to the speech that the Honourable Leader of the Opposition was so good enough to give us on such occasions with real pleasure and interest. But I must say that I now have come to that sober realization of what a serious and important anniversary we celebrate today.
My Honourable friend opposite was congratulating me on having a tea party on the day on which his good lady has her birthday and linking it up with celebration that we had here today. Well, I want to assure him that there was nothing haphazard about that arrangement, because since he and I last met across cups of tea, I have acquired an obligation in the form of a wife myself, and I am forced to relate to the House that while up to this point, I kept completely clear of any taint whatsoever of St. Patrick and his merry men, I find that my wife is half Irish and that has really torn it, and from here on in, you can expect me to be as devoted a follower of St. Patrick as can be found anywhere. Because like my Honourable friend opposite -- and he often gives me credit for learning fast -- it has taken him some time, I think, to learn about these things -- I have learned in the last seven or eight months that it pays to follow the lead given by one's spouse in matters of this sort. The tie that I am wearing, Sir, -- I don't know whether I should mention this -- some people have given me credit for wearing an Irish tie today -- I must confess though that it belongs to the other half of my wife's family because it's the MacKay tartan, and so I think, I've got both sides of the deal covered at the moment.
But I would like, very much, to congratulate my Honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture for his customary courtesy and to say how much we enjoy this pleasant interlude in our serious affairs.
MR. F. L. JOBIN (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, I think it is regrettable that from this side of the House from our party that an uncivilized Scotsman has risen to thank the Minister of Agriculture, and so I think it behooves me as a Christian Irishman to stand up and say a word of thanks on behalf of our group as well. You know, Mr. Speaker, we have in other years had better men more capable of thanking the present Minister of Agriculture. I refer to such stalwart Irishmen as Alex Turk, but war has temporarily depleted our ranks, and for the time being I must do a little pinch hitting. But like the irish, you can't keep us down, we'll be back next year with better spokesmen of the type that I mentioned previously. But in the meantime, I do say thanks for those of us who are true Irishmen on this particular side. And while we've linked this bit of thanks for yesterday's tea, I would like to thank the First Minister and his wife for the excellent tea yesterday. It's a pleasant practice that has been instituted over the years and it's a practice that has been followed out in the eight or nine years that I have been here, midway during the session, and I'm wondering if there is any significance in the fact that the tea yesterday was held but four days after the Throne Speech.
HON. MR. WILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I desire in the first instance today, to make a confession, because the wife of the Leader of the Opposition is not only Irish, but she is also a Conservative. I didn't know any other way in which I could make a presentation to her without rousing the ire of her Scottish Liberal husband. And having succeeded in those tactics, I tried the same on the Leader of the C.C.F. Party, knowing also that his wife was Irish, and a Conservative. And so in this subtle manner, I hope, I am able to make these presentations and I don't even get in trouble with my own wife in regard to them, because indirectly on these days I make presentations to eighty different girls in and around the building. It makes it very simple that way. I've had no difficulty in regard to my own wife, because, as you would have expected, I married an Irish girl as I ought to have done, and therefore, there is no difficulty there.
I do want to confess too, though, that last year when I did present these shamrocks, I did get from the wife of one of the Liberal Cabinet Ministers, this necktie which I am glad to display today. And, of course, she gave it to me and said, "but please don't tell Ron about it," and so, of course, I didn't tell him about it, but I was very glad to receive it and to wear it today.
The Irish are getting rather few around since Alex Turk left and, therefore, we must,
I think, keep up the tradition to keep before you the people of Ireland who have done so much in so many parts of the world. And if I had the time I should continue for probably the next half hour and give you my usual Irish speech, but today you will be pardoned and relieved to know that I don't intend to make my Irish speech this afternoon, because I will be listening to one this evening. For your kind remarks -- thank you very much.
MR. R. PAULLEY (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, while we are in the process of giving honour to Erin and her sons, I would like to draw to your attention, and to the attention of the House, that today in the Town of Transcona, there is a colleen of Irish descent who is observing her 100th birthday. I refer to Mrs. Henrietta Margaret Aiken of the Town of Transcona, who was born in Bethel in the county of Hamilton in Ontario - just 100 years ago.
And while, of course, she can't claim such a longevity as that of Erin, I'm sure that her achievement is remarkable in the annals of we humans. And I am sure, Sir, that we are very proud of the fact that when any of our fellow creatures reach the mature age, that we are thankful and grateful to the Almighty for the preservation of such a person.
Mrs. Aiken, up until January the 6th of this year, was in exceptionally good health for a person of her age, and was looking forward, in full command of all her faculties to this day. But unfortunately on January 6th, Mrs. Aitken had a slight stroke and is not able to partake in the celebrations. Mrs. Aitken left Ontario and came here to the west in 1882. She resided in Springfield constituency and I'm sure that my Honourable friend, the Member for Springfield, will be glad to know that one of his former constituents, even though she left there in 1931, is still with us. She had four sons and two daughters; three of the sons and the two daughters are still in excellent health. So, Mr. Speaker, while we are celebrating St. Patrick's Day in 1959, 100 years ago in the wee town of Bethel in the county of Hamilton, there was born one of my constituents. And I'm sure, Sir, you and members of the House, would join me in extending her every best wish for the future.
HONOURABLE GURNEY EVANS (Minister of Mines and Natural Resources) (Fort Rouge): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I wish to lay on the table the report of The Board of Internal Economy Commissioners for the fiscal period ending the 31st day of March, 1958.
HON. STEWART McLEAN: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I wish to lay on the table of the House the report of the Board of Governors of the University of Manitoba for the year ended March 31st, 1958. And, Mr. Speaker, I wish also to lay on the table of the House the report of the Department of Education for the year ending June 30th, 1958.
HONOURABLE MARCEL BOULIC (Provincial Secretary): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I wish to lay on the table of the House the Report of the Manitoba Civil Service Commission for the year 1958.
HON. GEORGE JOHNSON, M.D.: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the Annual Report of the Department of Health and Welfare for the calendar year 1958.
MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to direct a question to the Honourable, the Minister of Education. When might the House expect the balance of the report of the Royal Commission on Education?
MR. McLEAN: I have no knowledge of when the report may be in. I understand that the Commission is meeting regularly but there has been no indication of when the final report will be available.
MR. J. M. HAWRYLUK (Burrows): Mr. Chairman, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to direct a question to the First Minister. Could he give us some idea as to the possible danger of any flooding in the Red River Valley this coming year?
HON. DUFF ROBLIN: A survey of the situation in the Red River Valley is underway at the present time. This will be the second survey that has been made this year. The first one was made a few weeks ago and the information obtained from that was that there was no danger of flooding in the Red River Valley this year. However, these are merely estimations of what might happen in a rather unknown combination of circumstances. Consequently, the Government keeps as close an eye as they can on developing trends in this matter. Consequently, we get several series of reports keeping us abreast of the course of nature in this matter. As I say, the first report was one that gives no cause for alarm. I expect a second one shortly and it will be made public as soon as it is in our hands.
MR. D. ORLIKOW (St. John's): Mr. Speaker, I would ask the First Minister when we
might expect a report on Indian and Metis.
HON. DUFF ROBLIN: I rather think that my colleague, the Minister of Agriculture, should be the one to whom that question is addressed but if he doesn't object, I think I may tell the House that is, is now in the hands of the printer, and as soon as the printing is completed, it will be tabled in the Legislature.
MR. E. R. SCHREYER (Brokenhead): Mr. Speaker, before we proceed with the Orders of the Day, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Education. In cases where legal disputes arise between school districts and individuals as to legal and titled ownership of land on which the school site is situated, does the Department of Education assume any share of the cost of settling such disputes, especially in those cases where the Department of Education has been in some way or another directly connected with the difficulty?
MR. McLEAN: Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member gave me notice of the question, for which I thank him. The answer to the first question is - no, the Department of Education does not take any part in the settlement of legal disputes concerning title to school lands; and the second part of the question, which is more extensive on the document he gave me is again - no. And since I know he has in mind the School District of Cromwell, I might tell him that the School Board took over the operation of the affairs of the district on June 25th, 1958, and the construction of their building was commenced in late July or early August of 1958, at which time the problems concerning their title were well known to the members of the Board.
MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. Orders for Return. The Honourable Member for Inkster.
MR. M. A. GRAY (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. John's, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing the total amount of butter, and the total amount of margarine consumed in Provincial Government institutions during the year 1958.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved by the Honourable Member for Inkster, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. John's, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing the total amount of butter and the total amount of margarine consumed in Provincial Government institutions during the year 1958. Are you ready for the question?
HON. ERRICK WILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I desire only to say that this is rather a difficult question but we will do our very best in regard to it.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared it carried. ]
MR. GRAY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move, seconded by the Honourable Member of Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House, do issue for a Return showing: a) the number of the old age pensioners in Manitoba; b) the number of old age pensioners whose income do not exceed the present pension allowance; c) the number of pensioners, if any, who have been granted supplementary payments and the amount of such payments.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote, declared it carried. ]
MR. GRAY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Brokenhead, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: a) Full costs of construction for the new Home for Girls; b) The date when the home will be ready for occupation.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved by the Honourable Member for Inkster, seconded by the Honourable Member for Brokenhead, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: a) The total costs of construction for the new Home for Girls, b) The date when the home will be ready for occupancy. Are you ready for the question?
MR. WILLIS: Mr. Speaker, before the question is put on this Order, I desire to inform you, Sir, that it will be impossible at the present time to answer the Honourable Member's question insofar as "a" part is concerned, by reason of the fact that notice of tenders has only recently been published in the paper, and to date I do not know what answer has been received in respect to that advertisement. Similarly, insofar as the "b" part of the question is concerned, that as well will be dependent to a large extend upon the calls that we receive to answer this notice for tenders. So, in effect, the information is not available at the present time. I could undertake to give the Honourable Member the information as soon as we have it ourselves.
MR. GRAY: Mr. Speaker, before asking permission to withdraw the motion, I just want to say one word, that I think the delay is not too encouraging. I beg leave to move, with the consent of the House, the withdrawal of this motion for return.
MR. SPEAKER: Permission to withdraw the motion? The Honourable Member for Inkster.
MR. GRAY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Kildonan, that an Order of the House do issue for Return showing: a) The number of banquet permits issued to individuals, and b) The number of banquet permits issued to organizations during the year 1958.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote, declared it carried. ]
MR. GRAY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Radisson, a Return of the items shown on the Order paper.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared it carried. ]
MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Radisson.
MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Fisher, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: a) The fees or charges made to persons, private or public corporations, and other fees for service or publications, which have been changed since July 1st, 1958, by regulation; b) The date on which such changes were made; c) The old rates and the new rates; d) The annual additional revenue anticipated as a result of such changes.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote, declared the motion carried. ]
MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: a) The number of new employees engaged from July 1 to December 31, 1958, who are not subject to the provisions of the Civil Service Act; b) The position held by each such employee and the salary being paid, with other terms of employment; c) Whether or not the positions were advertised; d) How are the positions filled, if not advertised.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote, declared the motion carried. ]
MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Brokenhead, that an Order of the House do issue a Return showing: a) The total number of tenders awarded for road construction from July 1st to December 31st, 1958; b) The number of tenders awarded to the lowest bidder; c) If tenders were awarded to other than the lowest bidder: (1) to whom awarded; (2) Place of construction; (3) The price of all tenders submitted in each case and (d) What changes, if any, hve been made since July 1st, 1958 in the specifications for road construction.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote, declared the motion carried. ]
MR. SPEAKER: Proposed Motions. The Honourable Member for Inkster.
MR. GRAY: Mr. Speaker, with the kind consent of the House I would like to have the matter stand.
MR. SPEAKER: ...The Order stands. Proposed Resolution. The Honourable Member for Fisher.
MR. P. WAGNER (Fisher): Mr. Speaker, I beg the indulgence of the House to let this matter stand.
MR. SPEAKER: Order Stand. The Honourable Member for Elmwood.
MR. S. PETERS (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, I beg the indulgence of the House to let this matter stand.
MR. SPEAKER: Order Stand. The Honourable Member for Assiniboia.
MR. D. SWAILES (Assiniboia): I'd like to have this stand, too.
MR. SPEAKER: ... stand. The Honourable Member for Rockwood-Iberville.
MR. R. W. BEND (Rockwood-Iberville): Since it seems to be the habit, could I too have the same privilege?
MR. SPEAKER: ...stand. The Honourable Member for St. John's.
MR. ORLIKOW: Mr. Speaker, could I have this matter stand?
MR. SPEAKER: Stand. The Honourable Member for Radisson.
MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I don't want to be a piker, so I beg the indulgence of the House to allow this to stand, too.
MR. SPEAKER: Stand. ... Adjourn debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable Member for Roblin for an address to his Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor in answer to his
speech at the opening of the Legislature, and the proposed amendment of the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. The Honourable Leader of the C.C.F. Party.
MR. STINSON: Mr. Speaker, at the outset I should like to convey to you our good wishes and congratulations. You appear to be in the best of health and we hope that you continue that way. You and I are old friends because we have been in this House for many years together. You know that when I say that we wish you well that I mean it in a genuine way.
I'd like to congratulate the mover and the seconder of the address and reply. I think that they did their job well. They were under a bit of a handicap on that particular day but they certainly did a workmanlike job.
I would like also to congratulate the Honourable, the Leader of the Opposition, upon the speech which he made last night. The "old pro" did very well. As a matter of fact, I -- (well, in this House my Honourable friend is certainly senior to the rest of us in service, and in case that word was misunderstood -- it was 'pro'.) I wanted him to make a good speech -- not for political reasons -- but for the sake of our profession, which is in the main - politics. And he used everything that he could to his advantage in that particular address, including the statement made by the Honourable, the First Minister.
I was somewhat amused by the protest of the Honourable Member for Flin Flon, although I can understand his indignation. His memory perhaps is a bit short because I can recall a particular year when his leader, then the Premier, attempted to pull the rug from under both groups on two days in succession by similar statements. Only I think that he had, upon that occasion, something a little more substantial to offer than promises and good intentions.
I was interested in another thing that the Leader of the Opposition said. He gave credit to the First Minister for ability and hard work, and he said it sincerely -- but then he walloped him by saying that it was very fine to have ability and to work hard, but when you were on the wrong track it made it just that much worse. Now there may be a lesson in this for some of the newer members and that is that whenever you pay a compliment to your political opponent, then you want to allow him at the same time. Now the Honourable, the Leader of the Opposition took a little time to say something about the Minister of Agriculture, saying that he had never paid much attention to Agriculture, and that perhaps this was the reason for his appointment to that portfolio, because he would not be encumbered by any pre-conceived ideas. I might add that this is the first time in the history of Manitoba that we have had a Minister of Agriculture who farms from 117 Girton Boulevard, Tuxedo. Incidentally, the Leader of the Opposition aslo farms from a location in Tuxedo. So, I hope that another city slicker may be permitted to say something about agriculture. Victor Borge once bought a chicken farm in the State of Connecticut. He was asked what he knew about raising chickens and he said, "Nothing, but the chickens do!" Now, the farmers know something about farming, so I take my advice from them -- that is the next best thing to being a farmer.
Recent history would indicate that the western farmer is not regarded as being of much importance politically, particularly in the city of Ottawa. This came as quite a shock, I am sure, to the eleven hundred farmers who went on the march last week. The biggest disappointment these men suffered was the treatment that they received from their Conservative Western M.P.'s. The feeling among the farmer, generally, was that the eastern members of Parliament were more interested in their problems than were the western members -- with the exception of Hazen Argue, the Member for Assiniboia. Indeed, they felt that the western members of Parliament had done nothing to educate their eastern colleagues regarding western problems. One delegate, upon returning, told me that he was particularly disappointed in the members for Portage-Neepawa, Marquette, Provencher, and Lisgar. He said they were quite unsympathetic. But in the case of Dr. Fairfield of Portage-Neepawa, he was not only unsympathetic, but downright rude, and he told the farmers that if they didn't like what he had to say or didn't like his actions, they could put him out of office at the next election.
Now, another farmer 'phoned me this morning after reading the newspaper, and he said it would appear that the Manitoba Liberals want to get on this bandwagon. He said "You know, there wasn't a single Liberal down at the station to see us off when we left; there wasn't a single Liberal at Ottawa to meet us when we arrived; and they wouldn't meet with us when we wanted to have an interview with them as a group." Now that was the information that came to
me this morning. [Interjection by Mr. Juba. ] There was a Liberal to see them off?
MR. JUBA: Yes, my Deputy Mayor.
MR. STINSON: Who's your Deputy Mayor? Who is he? Well, does he live in Tuxedo? Does he live in Tuxedo?
Now, Sir, the attitude of the Manitoba Government is interesting in this connection. These disciples of John Diefenbaker are torn between loyalty to him and to their party on the one hand, and their intense desire to hold on to their jobs. If they had endorsed the march on Ottawa it would have been embarassing for John -- but if they failed to support the farmers then they would not gain more votes in rural Manitoba, but lose them. And it is there that lies their only hope of making gains -- at the expense of the Liberal Party. So, when the First Minister finally got around to saying something about this march, he made the statement that it was a proper thing for the farmers to do. I thought that was rather characteristic of my Honourable friend that he would say that it was the proper thing to do.
Last night we heard about the 'wishy-washy' telegram so I need not go into that. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable gentlemen opposite really love their work. They are so anxious to occupy the front benches to your right that they will do almost anything to win votes, and if anyone breathes a word of criticism of them, it sounds to them like high treason. I thought that the old Government used to treat us with a certain amount of disdain, but so far as the new Government is concerned, they are showing a kind of arrogance that is unbecoming to them. Just give that little fellow in the centre over there a majority in this House, and he will be insufferable. Mr. Speaker, this is his weakness; this is his Achille's heel; this is where he is vulnerable -- he can't take criticism, and you can't blame a political opponent for taking advantage of that fact.
Now Sir, it has been said that the farmers are not getting their fair share -- they are not getting their fair share of the national income, and the figures that are used, as a rule, are those taken from the material prepared by the farmers who went on the march to Ottawa, which indicate, as the Leader of the Opposition did last night, that western farm costs have risen by 50% in the last ten years, while the price of wheat at the farm has fallen almost 21%. So bad has the situation become, that the farmer finds his whole way of life being threatened by what is now called vertical integration as practiced by the big corporations. No doubt, Sir, automation in agriculture will come just as it has in industry, but we must do everything possible to maintain the family unit on the family farm. So that I think we must endeavour to promote co-operative enterprise and do everything else within our power in order to prevent the big corporations from taking over. I think Premier Douglas put it very well on February 25th in the Saskatchewan House when he said, "Farmers must face the fact that there will be a planned agriculture and they must decide now whether it will be planned by the big corporations or by the people themselves". Now Sir, what will the Tories do for the farmers of Western Canada? Judging by last week's experience, substantially nothing. Certainly not deficiency payments, certainly not parity prices. Tories, in spite of the fact that they endeavour to appear to be progressive are essentially the spokesman of big business in this country. Big business corporations pay their bills at election time, and he who pays the piper calls the tune.
And yet John Diefenbaker in 1957 and 1958 posed as the greatest champion that the farmers ever had. All they had to do was to throw Jimmy Gardiner out and put him in and everything would be all right. And so they put into Jimmy's department a man by the name of Harkness and a more antagonistic man could not have been found if John had scoured the country to find him. He is the man who thought the farmers didn't know the difference between gross income and net income figures. Now what did this great champion of western agriculture say in 1957 and 1958? Well, so far as the record goes it would appear that he did promise deficiency payments, if we can depend upon the newspapers. More than one newspaper carried the story March 15th, 1958, that at Moose Jaw, Mr. Diefenbaker promised that sympathetic consideration would be given to making deficiency payments. But in the House of Commons on January 16th, 1959, the Prime Minister is recorded in Hansard as saying -- 'that at no time, did I say that I would give sympathetic consideration. I made it very clear, consideration would be given to the question.' You will find that on Page 68 of Hansard. And Mr. Hamilton's statement is on the same page.
Now it would appear, Sir, that everything hinges upon one word; that word is sympathetic. Mr. Diefenbaker seemed very indignant in Parliament when Mr. Argue had made reference to sympathetic consideration, and he said that 'I have never promised sympathetic consideration, only consideration'. So Mr. Diefenbaker has changed his tune quite a bit. We no longer hear that ringing phrase -- 'Parity, not Charity'.
Now Mr. Speaker, we are glad to note that in the Speech from the Throne there is reference to Crop Insurance. But wasn't the Honourable, the Minister of Agriculture, overreacting a bit when he said the other day that it would be ready for this year's crop? There is at least one solid reason against this, that is the fact that it hasn't even been presented in the House of Commons at this date and it always takes a good deal of time to have a major bit of legislation of this kind put through there, and I would take it that ours would be complimentary legislation. But it's not unusual for my Honourable friends over the way to overreach.
The Tories in this country always overreach and that's why they never last. People lose faith in them. It happened in the 1930's when R.B. Bennett was going to blast his way into the markets of the world. He talked so convincingly that people put him into power. Five years later the Tories were thrown out lock, stock and barrel. Now history does not always repeat itself but it very often resembles itself. The career of Mr. Diefenbaker will most likely resemble that of Lord Bennett. John Diefenbaker soared into power in 1958 to a position of unprecedented authority in this country. In 1962 or 1963 he will come down like a falling meteor just like a flash in the sky. The same fate will overcome this government, because they are overreaching now. They are boasting too much. They are talking bravely of providing greater services and at the same time holding the line on taxes. They are so anxious for power that they will say almost anything if they think the people will believe it.
And now Sir, I want to turn for a moment to Dominion-Provincial relations. It is now almost twenty years since the Rowell-Sirois Commission made its report, -- and that was a very important and far-reaching document. The provinces in return for benefits received should give up their right to income tax and succession duties. The benefits were to come back in the form of national adjustment grants. And in those days we heard the phrase 'fiscal need' at all times. Now the recommendations of that great report have never been actually implemented, but this has been the general idea that the Federal authorities would collect personal incorporate income taxes and succession duties, compensate the provinces by means of grants arrived at through negotiations. And in these discussions the Federal Government always has the advantage over the province; they have the whip hand. As you know, the last tax rental agreement was signed in 1957 and it runs for five years. You know the formula at that time was 10-9-50. Ten percent of Federal individual income tax, nine percent of taxable corporate income, and 50 percent of Federal succession duties. And it proved to be so unsatisfactory that Mr. Diefenbaker used it as one of his best vote-getters in the election of 1957. He promised to call a conference to see what could be done to help both the Provincial and the municipal governments and after some prodding that conference was held in the fall of that year. But it failed to settle anything and there was a stalemate.
According to a report in the Ottawa Journal of April 26th, 1957, Mr. Diefenbaker said this -- 'we believe the provinces and municipalities must have the financial resources to carry out those responsibilities. We intend to form a government to immediately convene a Dominion-Provincial conference to bring about a settlement of these problems, not in the spirit of arrogant domination as displayed by the present government, but in the spirit of unity and amity and with mutual tolerance and respect.' Then on June 7th, 1957, Mr. Fleming is reported as saying - 'only by electing a Conservative administration can Canadians expect to receive relief in the field of municipal and provincial taxation.' And then after forming a minority government Mr. Diefenbaker did call that conference I mentioned a moment ago, which ended really with nothing having been accomplished.
Then it was in January of '58 that the Federal Government informed the Provincial Governments by telegram that the formula had been changed from 10-9 and 50 to 13-9 and 50 so that 13 percent of personal income tax would be earmarked for the province. And oddly enough this didn't turn out to the advantage of the province, certainly not to the Province of Manitoba, or, to the Province of Saskatchewan. It was estimated that we should have received $35,755,000.00 for 1958-59. The money that came in was $33,202,000.00, a difference of $2,553,000.00. So much for the promises of '57. Now what about the promises of 1958? Well it would appear that Premier Frost was chief spokesman in this connection in 1958. He is recorded as saying -- 'that a Dominion-Provincial tax conference is inevitable before the end of the summer.' Well, Sir, the summer of 1958 has come and gone and we are nearing the end
of a long cold winter. Mr. Fleming in the House of Commons on June 11th, 1958, said this -- 'If there is one subject upon which the people of this country spoke with a clear voice on the 31st of March, it was on the subject of the position of this government with respect to the provinces of this country.' And then Mr. Frost was still optimistic on January 14th of this year, said that probably the Dominion-Provincial conference would be held in February. He said this in January, and his words were that the conference will be held next month. Well that was last month, -- next month may never come so far as this matter is concerned.
And this brings us to the Premier of Manitoba who said in an interview on January 14th of '59 that he and other provincial premiers had written Ottawa requesting a conference and he suggested that it be held before the end of February. It would appear that Duff has lost his influence with Dief. My contention is that Dief is deaf to Duff, if I may be allowed to coin a phrase. What is the situation now? The situation now is that we have the status quo, and the proof is to be found in Hansard of this year, page 831, where we find a resolution set down by the Minister of Finance asking for a continuation of the 13 percent so that the status quo remains. And in that resolution, there are rather interesting words, "and to continue active co-operative study of fiscal and economic matters by the continuing committee." What does active co-operative study mean? I came across not long ago something called a "glossary of glibness," and I thought this was rather interesting. A long list of definitions with respect to what governments mean by certain phrases. For example, we use the word consideration a great deal in this House. We ask the Government to give consideration to the advisability of doing certain things. While according to this glossary, under consideration, means, "Never heard of it", under active consideration means, "We're looking in the files for it". To negotiate means, "To seek a meeting of minds without a knocking together of heads," and a conference is, "The substitution of conversation for the dreariness of labour and the loneliness of thought".
My Honourable friend is asking for a definition of sympathetic. It's not in this particular glossary. I think you'll have to go to John Diefenbaker for information on that subject. We find the Prime Minister nowadays is a changed man. For example, in October of '58, on page 820 of Hansard you will find these astonishing words -- "It should be realized if average income after income tax is deducted is considered in its relationship to the total of real property taxes, it will be found that real property taxes are now on the average across Canada, about four percent of personal income, compared with about 5.8 percent immediately before the war. Therefore, although I have no doubt the situation varies widely in particular cases, municipalities have on the average achieved a relative reduction in the effective burden of real estate taxes." It means that Mr. Diefenbaker is no longer sympathetic to the provinces and the municipalities -- that's what it means. Before he was elected Prime Minister, the provinces and the municipalities were hard done by -- but this would all be fixed up if he managed to gain election. For example, on May 31st, of '57, he said this, "A Progressive-Conservative Federal Government would give the provinces and municipalities a larger share of the national revenue. They are poor but the Ottawa Government is rich."
Now, Sir, that is how the modern Tory talks nowadays. Flamboyantly and aggressively he shouts his promises across the Nation at election time, and then spends the next four or five years, trying to explain why he can't carry them out.
Reminds me of the definition given by Sir Winston Churchill about the qualities essential in a politician. He said it's the ability to foretell what will happen in the future, and then to explain afterwards why it did not happen. Mr. Bennett talked this way in the 1930's, but John Diefenbaker has outdone the great R.B.
While this is going on, what are the provincial premiers doing? Well, it would appear to me that Premier Douglas of Saskatchewan is the only champion of the provinces left. Alberta and British Columbia don't seem to care very much, and the rest of the country is controlled largely by Conservative Governments. There are too many Conservative Governments in Canada. They are wearing themselves out 'salaaming' and 'kowtowing' to the Prime Minister, to the Great White Father at Ottawa so they haven't enough energy left to fight for the province. And I say to this government, can this government be depended upon to fight for the rights of the province? We need a government that will work vigorously day in and day out for a better deal for Manitoba. And the least that Manitoba can ask for is the 15-15-50 formula, and for
the first time in this House, the First Minister announced last night, that his government is prepared to go along with this particular formula. A year ago when we had a vote on this particular issue the Conservatives, then in opposition, voted against the motion. And this, Sir, is a matter of very great importance because it amounts roughly to about 40 percent of our provincial revenue, - this revenue that we get from the tax rental agreement. And the change in the formula to 15-15-50 would according to the statement presented at the last Dominion-Provincial conference by the then-Premier of Manitoba, indicated that it would mean a gain of $19 million for this province. And how we need that $19 million! It's essential to the welfare of this province that we have a government that will fight for this $19 million. Perhaps now it would be more. And I say to you, Sir, that this is the most important issue facing the Province of Manitoba at the present time -- because it involves an agreement that provides, as I said a moment ago, roughly 40 percent of our provincial revenue. It is our most important issue and it is being neglected by this present government. I can just imagine how vociferous our Premier would be if some other party held office at Ottawa, and I say to him that regardless of party affiliation, it is his duty to the people of Manitoba that a real fight be put up for the $19 million that should be ours, according to the 15-15-50 formula.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to, very briefly, say a word about labour legislation. For many years the labour legislation in this province has been a disgrace. We fall behind most of the other provinces in providing security for the working man, and I'm glad to see mention made in the Speech from the Throne that certain measures are going to be put before the House. For many years our C.C.F. group in the House has fought for improvements. Some have been made, but generally both of the other parties have opposed what we have presented here.
I want to make three points very quickly: One concerns wages. Winnipeg is the fourth largest city in Canada, but in terms of wages paid, employees are 22nd on the list among Canadian cities. At present Manitoba's minimum wage is 60¢ an hour for men, and 58¢ an hour for women. Nobody can live a decent life on wages of that kind. Organized labour is asking for a minimum wage of $1.25 - $1.25 an hour. The members of this party support that request. Manitoba's vacations-with-pay lags behind. Almost all civilized countries now provide at least two weeks vacation after one year -- but not in Manitoba. We have presented bills and resolutions on this year after year, only to be voted down by the other parties. Saskatchewan with a C.C.F. Party leads in this particular field. They have legislation which provides for two weeks after one year, and three weeks after five years. Three weeks after five years! That, Sir, is the policy of the party that I have the honour to represent. Workmen's Compensation is deficient as well. Manitoba widows receive $65.00 a month, children $25.00 a month, and orphan children $35.00. In Saskatchewan these figures are $75.00 a month for widows, $35.00 a month for children, and $45.00 a month for orphan children. In Manitoba the ceiling of $3,500.00 on which compensation will be paid is much too low. They have realized that in our sister province, and the ceiling there is $5,000.00 on which the compensation will be paid.
Now, Mr. Speaker, Honourable Members will be glad to know that I have only one more subject and that is Health Insurance. Again, I'm sorry to say that Canada lags very far behind in this particular matter. We lag behind such countries as Great Britain, New Zealand, and the Scandanavian countries. Health Insurance is not a new idea by any means. As a matter of fact, Bismarck introduced it in Germany about 70 years ago. In Britain they have an over-all plan inaugurated in 1948 by the then-Labour Government, which was the result of almost a hundred years of gradually building a health services plan. Now they have this great plan which is a 100% health service, providing every kind of medical, dental, optical and hospital service to every man, woman and child in the United Kingdom regardless of their income. Specialist care is available to everyone. The cost is being borne by all of the people instead of just by the sick. One of the most remarkable features of it is the large measure of freedom that prevails. Freedom that the doctor has, and the freedom that the patient has. They are free to use one part of the service, and not another. They have complete freedom to choose the doctor whom they want. So the people of Britain are completely sold on the idea of their Health Service. The doctors on their side are free to be part of the scheme, or to remain outside of it. They are free to have both health service and private patients. As a matter of fact there are 600 out of 24,000 general practitioners who make a living in the United Kingdom
entirely from private practice, so that there is a very large measure of individual freedom. So successful has this plan been that 97% of the people are participating in it -- 39 out of 42 million people.
Earl Atlee once said that the aim of the National Health Service was not just a glorified poor law, but a full health service for all the people. This, Sir, has been achieved in the United Kingdom. The London correspondent of the Winnipeg Free Press said on July 29th of 1958, that medical research and specialist services are as good as ever in Britain, and he concludes a very laudatory article with these words, "whatever its hidden faults, the National Health Service is certainly popular with the electorate. No Tory or Labour government is ever likely to abandon it for the old system again".
What about the cost? The New Statesman in its July issue of 1958 says that since 1939 the percentage of the national income spent on medical care has only gone up by one percent. 75 percent of the cost is paid for out of the general treasury. The New Statesman goes on to say, "the real financial effect of the National Health Service was not to create a large increase in expenditure on medical care but to transfer the burden of paying from the sick to the fit." Whatever the cost, it is worth it. I am sure that those of you who saw the latest issue of McLean's Magazine would be interested in some of the facts presented there. In the United Kingdom deaths during maternity are down 55 percent to .47 per thousand; the latest Canadian figure being .62 in 1956. Still births are down ten percent. Death rates for children under four was nearly nine of every thousand in 1948; now it's fewer than two, -- in Canada 7.6. Life expectancy at birth up about two years, is now slightly higher than Canada. And here is a question that was put to a spokesman of the British Medical Association: "What has been the biggest boon of the National Health Service in the United Kingdom?" And he said, "Better preventive care for youngsters". And surely that must be the real test of any health service.
In New Zealand, they operate along similar lines. Sickness benefits form an important part of the New Zealand Health scheme. They operate in exactly the same way as unemployment insurance. Anyone who cannot work because of illness or accident and thereby has suffered loss of wages, salary or other earnings, is entitled to a sickness benefit on the same basis as unemployment insurance.
Thus in New Zealand they not only have complete medical and hospital coverage, plus drugs and appliances, but they have sickness insurance as well. Why are they 20 years ahead of us in Canada? Because for many years they had Labor Governments in power. (The Labor Party is back in office now, with Hon. Walter Nash as Prime Minister.)
I am sure that the Canadian people want a system of this kind. Canadians want to have health services and a system of health insurance just as up-to-date and just as comprehensive as they have in Britain and New Zealand, or in Norway, Denmark and Sweden, to mention some other countries where they have been giving top priority to the health of their people.
What is holding us back in Canada from establishing a proper system of health insurance? Well, to put it bluntly, the kind of governments we have been electing to office. The Liberals and the Conservatives have been putting roadblocks in the way of Health Insurance.
The Liberals played around with this idea for almost 40 years. They promised what they called "sickness insurance" at their national convention in 1919 when Mackenzie King was elected leader of the Liberal Party, and they kept promising it at every election after that until their defeat in 1957. I think their most specific promise was made in 1953.
In 40 years all they managed to do was to inaugurate the hospitalization scheme which is now in effect. This is, of course, a beginning, but a rather lame beginning.
As for the Conservatives, they have never had any use for health insurance at all. They have paid some form of lip service up to the idea at election time but they have never had any enthusiasm for it and they have never done anything about it.
During the last federal election campaign, Mr. Diefenbaker promised to improve the Hospital Services Plan by including T.B. and mental illness, -- which they have not done. This is one of those famous unfulfilled promises. And the provincial Conservatives have no place in their thinking for Health Insurance. Do you ever hear the First Minister, or any of his Cabinet, talk about this subject or give a lead in any way with respect to Health Insurance? No -- and for a very good reason. They say nothing about it because they don't like it and they don't believe in it. They don't like the idea of state hospitalization and neither do the Liberals.
I was interested in a report during the last election campaign of a meeting in Charleswood, when Mr. Fennell, the Liberal candidate said this, "The Liberal government here never wanted it and did its best to stay out". Boy, that's a true statement if there ever was one! The Liberal government here never wanted it and did its best to stay out. And then the Conservative candidate, the Honourable the Attorney-General who apparently has disappeared, said this, "The Liberals have saddled us with this programme and we'll give it a fair trial, but private enterprise could have done it cheaper". What nonsense! Private enterprise would not do it at all, let alone do it more cheaply. A comprehensive medical or hospital services plan simply must be a government plan if it is to include all the people. But there is better evidence of this than newspaper reports. There is the voting record of these parties in the Legislature.
For years beginning with 1952 we presented resolutions in this House on the subject of Health Insurance -- either upon Health Insurance or on the subject of hospitalization, and every year from 1952 onward, our resolutions were defeated. The other parties were solidly against any proposal that we made in this connection. And then in the seventh year, in 1958, in a desperate effort to avert defeat at the polls the Liberals introduced the Manitoba Hospital Services Plan which is now in effect. They did it reluctantly. They didn't like it. The didn't believe in it, but they were caught up in the course of history. They couldn't stand out against it any longer. There comes a time when a government has to act. They can stall no longer. Then when they did bring it in they went into it in a headlong fashion and brought it in six months ahead of time creating so many administrative difficulties that the department is still trying to figure out how to run the plan.
Saskatchewan with a C.C.F. government has had a good workable hospital service plan operating for 12 years. They have not only an efficient up-to-date hospital services plan, they have gone as far as they can in the field of Health Insurance as far as a provincial jurisdiction can go -- with their free diagnosis and treatment of cancer; with their air amublance service; with their many other improvements and reforms in the field of health services.
Now it would appear to me, Sir, that the Liberal party is split right down the middle on this subject. I think that the Hon. Paul Martin, for example, is in favour of implementing a Health Insurance plan, and I think that Mr. Pearson might have to go along with him. They are now undergoing a terrific battle within their ranks as to whether they should agree with the C.C.F. or agree with the Conservatives because they have no policy of their own. Mr. Pearson votes with a C.C.F. motion calling for social and economic planning one day, and the next he is indulging in double talk to the western farmers. Mr. Pickersgill has pretended to be the great defender of liberalism until the Newfoundland loggers forced him to put up or shut up. And what did Mr. Pickersgill do? He joined Joey Smallwood, planting his feet firmly in the 19th century.
No doubt the Manitoba Liberals are divided. There are the Conservative Liberals led by their leader and by the Honourable Member for Rockwood-Iberville, the former Minister of Health and Welfare -- but then there are some other individuals who are more inclined to be progressive. Some of them are outside of this House, but there may be some of them here. The Honourable Member for Selkirk is an independent sort of Liberal. I don't know just what he thinks about Health Insurance. The Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell has been known to bolt his party upon occasion on an issue of this kind. The Honourable Member for St. Boniface once spoke in support of a resolution of mine which called for comprehensive social security -- while he spoke more in support of it than against it -- he voted against it. But we might be able now in this connection to bring him along with us. He gave us verbal support upon that former occasion, so I am inclined to think there may be a number of liberally-minded individuals who have been calling themselves Liberals who would be prepared to support our request for Health Insurance, and would go along with us when we ask this government to take some initiative and give some lead in this particular field. I don't know just what will happen in connection with the Liberals so far as this question is concerned. Some of them treat me with a certain amount of consideration. While I was coming to this building this afternoon a Liberal organizer who could have run over me, put on the brakes, and did not. I want to thank her for her consideration. [Interjection] Oh! That's rather ungrateful I think of my Honourable friend.
Now, Sir, Health Insurance would pull risks and ease the burden of the less fortunate
members of society, and we invite the support of liberally-minded members of this House for a sub-amendment that we propose to move. We challenge the Liberals to take a stand. Are they progressive or are they reactionary? We not only challenge the Liberals to take a stand, we challenge the government to take some initiative in this matter. They claim now to be progressive. Let them demonstrate it by moving forward in this all-important field of Health Insurance. We also challenge the people of Manitoba to do something about this. We challenge the people to demand what is their right. They can do this in many ways, one of which is to support the C.C.F. in its struggle to win a greater measure of security for every person in the Province of Manitoba.
And that, Sir, is the challenge that I throw out in this House this afternoon. I challenge the liberally-minded people that are in the Liberal party to support this idea of Health Insurance. I challenge the government to give some leadership, to take some initiative in promoting the idea across Canada, and I challenge the people of Manitoba to support a party that is prepared to put forward ideas of this kind. So now I wish to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Assiniboia, that the following words be added. This is an amendment to the amendment. "We further regret the failure of the government to take the initiative in promoting a comprehensive Federal-Provincial Health Insurance plan".
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved by the Honourable, the Leader of the C.C.F. Party, seconded by the Honourable, the Member for Assiniboia that the following words be added to the motion: "We further regret the failure of the government to take the initiative in promoting a comprehensive Federal-Provincial Health Insurance plan". Are you ready for the question?
HON. ERRICK F. WILLIS, Q.C. (Turtle Mountain): ... by the Minister of Education that the Debate be adjourned.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved by the Honourable, the Minister of Agriculture, seconded by the Honourable, the Minister of Education, that the Debate be adjourned.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Speaker, I have two messages from His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Manitoba.
MR. SPEAKER: The Lieutenant-Governor transmits to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba estimates of a further sum required for the services of the Province for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1959, and recommends these estimates to the Legislative Assembly.
The Lieutenant-Governor transmits to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, estimates of sums required for the services of the Province for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1960, and recommends these estimates to the Legislative Assembly.
MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable, the Minister of Agriculture, that the messages of His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, together with the supplementary estimates and interim supply estimates accompanying the same, be referred to the Committee of Supply.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved by the Honourable the First Minister, seconded by the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, that messages of His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, together with the supplementary estimates and the interim estimates accompanying same be referred to the Committee of Supply. Are you ready for the question?
MR. CAMPBELL: Mr. Speaker, I would just enquire at this time of the First Minister as to when it is his intention to set up the Committee of Supply? I don't rise to oppose the motion because I realize that we are getting close to the end of this month, and the end of this month of course is the end of the fiscal year, and I can understand the position that the government is in, -- but I just wish to enquire as to when it is proposed to establish the Committee of Supply and consider the estimates in that Committee.
MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Speaker, rising to the point of order, I thank my Honourable friend for the question because it was my intention to raise this point at the next step in our proceedings, but there is no reason why it can't be raised at the present time. There are two alternatives before us. One is to ask for suspension of the rules of the House and proceed to Committee of Supply today, and it was my intention to consult the wishes of the House on that particular point. The other plan that is open to us of course is to move for Committee of Supply to meet tomorrow which would be in accordance with ordinary procedure, and if it meets better
the wish of the House, then I would be quite prepared to move the latter resolution.
The reason why I might suggest consideration of suspension of the rules and proceedings to Committee of Supply at the moment is connected with the point my Honourable friend raised, namely, we are close to the end of our fiscal year, but it also is more influenced by a second consideration, which although after the speech we have just listened to from the Honourable Member of the C.C.F. party may not be quite the probability that it was before we heard him speak, there is always the possibility that the government may receive an adverse vote on the first sub-amendment being a want of confidence one on the Throne Speech which would normally come up for vote on Friday. We thought perhaps it would be advisable in view of the fact that it is entirely possible for the government to be defeated on this first vote on Friday, that we should give some consideration to proceeding with these estimates just as rapidly as possible to make sure that they were before the House, and if the House wished to pass them, were fully considered before that Friday deadline comes along.
One part of the message from His Honour, the first message from His Honour, is a relatively routine item, namely the supplementary estimates. The second one on interim supply will, I trust, provoke some discussion because it requires an explanation at least on my part, of some of the details that are in it. And I do suggest that perhaps, that if the House wishes we could consider the motion that we suspend the rules and go into Committee of Supply now, which would give me an opportunity this afternoon to make my explanations in connection with these two messages from His Honour, and then if it was thought that we should not proceed farther this afternoon it would always be open for someone to adjourn, and we could consider it again tomorrow. If we take the usual course it means that my explanation will be given tomorrow and perhaps not the same opportunity for consideration that we might have. However, I am perfectly open on the matter and I know that in the two leaders of the opposition parties we have experienced parliamentarians. This may be a relatively novel matter to some of the newer members of the House, but I would be quite content to hear what my Honourable friends opposite think about the situation. If they are willing to proceed today that is fine with me. If they think on the contrary, that we ought to proceed tomorrow, well I will certainly be guided by their views.
MR. CAMPBELL: Mr. Speaker, I am afraid that perhaps I am transgressing the rules to some extent to speak again on this motion, so that if the House will permit me, I would suggest that we should defer consideration until tomorrow because I noticed that even in the supplementary estimates that the amounts are substantial, and I think my colleagues and I would wish to give them some consideration. So, our preference would be to defer consideration until tomorrow.
MR. ROBLIN: I would be very happy to do that, Mr. Speaker.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources, that this House will on Wednesday next resolve itself into a committee to consider of the supplies to be granted to Her Majesty.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. ROBLIN: I beg to move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the Honourable, the Minister of Education that this House will on Wednesday next, resolve itself into a committee to consider of ways and means for raising of the supplies to be granted to Her Majesty.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. ]
MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable, the Attorney-General that the House do now adjourn.
[Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. Mr. Speaker delcared House do now adjourn till tomorrow afternoon at 2:30. ]
Page revised: 21 September 2009
