COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

(Concurrent Sections)

HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Mike Radcliffe): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order.

This afternoon, this section of the Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 254, will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Highways and Transportation.

When the committee last sat, it had been considering item 2. Highways and Transportation Programs (d) Transport Compliance (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits on page 88 of the Estimates book and on page 41 of the yellow supplement book.

Item 2.(d) Transport Compliance (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,967,700.

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Under Activity Identification this is the last one: Provides highway condition information and issues permits for movement of goods, et cetera.

I had some difficulty the other day getting highway condition information. It was with regard to a forest fire and the road was obscured. That is the news I got, and I had real difficulty finding any information. I did get the odd phone line that said, you push button 1 and this happens, and if you push button 2, this happens, but is there nobody on standby emergency?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Chairman, if the member is referring to the weekend with smoke conditions on the road, no, we would not have anybody on call to answer those kinds of calls.

In the flood situation we did. In regular hours, of course, we would have, but not on the weekend in those circumstances. It would be deemed to be an EMO response or a Natural Resources response as opposed to a Highways particular issue. Is the member saying that we should have had?

Mr. Jennissen: No, I am not saying you should or should not have. I just wondered, you know, if you really need information in a hurry, there did not seem to be any place to go. I phoned the RCMP and they suggested, well, they had other things to do,phone Natural Resources or Highways, and I kept sort of going in circles. It was not a major issue. It is just that I would have hoped for the province that there was one phone line you could always tap for information.

Mr. Findlay: Well, thank you for the member's input. Before we proceed, I will just hand out to the member a map that shows the districts that we talked about last night, the five districts of the province and some of the issues that were raised yesterday on the worksite inspections, environmental monitoring and then hours of operation of the various weigh stations in the province, some additional information for the member.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe) Having no further questions from the honourable member for Flin Flon, item 2.(d) Transport Compliance (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,967,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $484,200--pass.

Item 2.(e) Regional Offices (1) Eastern Region Office (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,080,300.

Mr. Jennissen: The question I have about the regions--I am thankful that the minister did give me a map of the five regions. Do we also have head offices--well, we have offices, but what are the exact locations of those offices in those regions?

Mr. Findlay: The regional offices are in Steinbach in Region 1, Portage in Region 2, Brandon in Region 3, Dauphin in Region 4 and Thompson in Region 5--basically the largest population centre in each of the regions.

Mr. Jennissen: I am sorry, I did not get the second region.

Mr. Findlay: Portage.

Mr. Jennissen: Under Activity Identification, the fourth one down: Prepares project proposals and priorities within the region.

I guess I can understand that within the region. What about all the regions, like the province? I am very naive about the process. How do you prioritize? How do you say road A gets attention before road B? I know it is a highly contentious issue, so I am just asking.

Mr. Findlay: You would like to know how the eventual prioritization ends up?

Mr. Jennissen: Yes, how does it end up?

Mr. Findlay: The member recognizes that it is a contentious process. I will say contentious probably from the standpoint that you can only fulfil, just to use round figures, about one-sixth of the requests or demands that might be in front of the department for capital activity in any given year. The process, although it is fairly involved, I think structurally over the course of time works reasonably well.

The department, through the regions, comes forward with roads and information, a wide variety of information on roads, condition, rideability and a projection as to whether this road should be done or another road should be done. Then the department as a whole looks at that information involving all regions and considers such things as standards, economic activities with those roads, looks at the comparable maintenance cost for that road, whether the maintenance cost is now so high, it should be pushed forward toward upgrading.

That information flows into the deputy's office and into mine, and we also receive considerable input, particularly from municipalities. Just to give the member some understanding, when UMM had their annual meeting last fall, we had over 30 meetings in that three-day period, as the Minister of Highways and Deputy Minister of Highways, with different municipalities or groups of municipalities, all lobbying for certain activities in our department primarily to do with upgrading of roads of interest to them. So we get a lot of information from them. It also gives us the opportunity to give them some feel for the difficulty we have to prioritize everything that they have on their list.

We certainly receive input from industry, particularly the trucking industry, as to whether we should be putting more effort into the major roads. Certainly industry that gets affected by weight restrictions in the spring is constantly pressuring that roads be built to an unrestricted status where they have to use it in the spring. We certainly get input from MLAs, rural MLAs obviously, who also get input from their municipalities. Then we get citizens at large making requests directly to me or to MLAs which get relayed to me. Ultimately I make recommendations to cabinet who makes the final decision of what the program will be for that year and the year ahead.

At any given time in front of us we have about--take this year's budget, we will have programmed or announced approval for about 1.6 times the budget. There is always a large flow of projects ahead of us. We can only do 60 percent of that amount at any given time. An announcement, say for this past spring, may not get tendered till the spring of '96, so it keeps a lot in front of the industry to know that there are projects coming, and while a project is in the approved program but not announced for tender, the department is doing the final bit of document work on what the tender will consist of.

* (1510)

It is open to an awful lot of input, but ultimately decisions have to be made and the criteria we might use evolve over the course of time. The demands on us will continue to be very large. Whether we can continue in the future to do everything we have done in the past is very much an open question, but we must be sure that we maintain the major roads to the best possible standard for citizens and for the carrying on of commerce in this province.

Mr. Jennissen: Yes, I certainly concur with that, but northerners especially seem to feel that the criteria are always weighted in favour of the south. I guess one of the arguments they tend to use is volume, that the decisions are based on traffic, like a lot of volume on a road obviously demands that road be upgraded and fixed and so on. They feel that should not always be the criteria for the more disadvantaged portions of the province, specifically the North, because you have a very sparse population.

The other factor they like us to take into account I guess is the production of wealth. Not only do they pay taxes, but you know the minerals that come out of the North and the pulp and the paper and so on, and specifically hydro--if we are talking in terms of dollars, there is a lot of money coming out of the North. If we base the prioritization of fixing and building highways just on volume, then the North will always get short shrift. The argument is we have to take into account those other factors very strongly, otherwise we will never have the roads that we really feel we need.

Mr. Findlay: I certainly understand what the member is saying about the North. Many communities have only the one road in and out. There is no alternate route as there is in many locations in the south. Probably the biggest problem we have in the North is a lot of those roads were, almost for lack of a better word, thrown in, built in a hurry to a pioneer standard, so the base is not as good as a base built in the south. Hindsight says they should have been built to a better standard initially. The cost of upgrading or bringing them to the so-called standard that they want today is a very costly process and also through some very tough and rough terrain in there.

The member talks about traffic volumes. Yes, it is a consideration, because the more volume there is the more wear and tear there is on the road, but clearly it is not used as a criteria in detriment to the North.

I have the mileage here, you know, the various regions. Region 1 has 19 percent of the network; Region 2, 21 percent; Region 3, 26 percent; Region 4, 20 percent; and Region 5, 13 percent. Region 5 has the smallest percentage of total miles.

In last spring's program, we recognized very strongly that there was need for what we will call more than normal allotment to the North and particularly gravelling on 391, 99 kilometres worth. We identified projects on 391, 280, 373 and Highway 6, which made up, as I recall, around 14 percent, 15 percent, 16 percent of the spring program went to the North in recognition of severe problems that had occurred, a lot of it to do with adverse weather conditions. Wet conditions a year ago caused deterioration of the road and bad travelling conditions and we responded, as we did respond in the Swan River area three years ago--no, '89 we had the big flood in Swan River, responded significantly there.

Clearly this year there was consideration that we had to respond big-time in the Assiniboine Valley area where the flooding was. After everything was all over and done, our costs associated with road repair after that flood were marginal compared to what was initially thought to be--very small.

We do respond where emergencies happen, and we recognize that the North needs greater attention than maybe it has had recently, but the demands come from all over. With the same argument the member just said, well, we pay taxes; we want our appropriate amount of taxes collected at all the various means in our region dedicated to our region. If that principle was used, the haves would get more and the have-nots would get less.

We try to almost set that issue aside in terms of the amount of taxes paid in a particular region and address the roads on a priority basis that allows everybody to have something every year to keep moving towards a better standard of roads in total right through all regions of the province. We cannot dedicate everything to one region for a year or two or prioritize one region for a year or two. It is just not fair in the bigger picture, nor can we consider, well, you pay so much taxes you get so much consideration. You cannot do that.

Mr. Jennissen: I wonder if the minister would consider just treating all the regions as one group for now because some of my honourable colleagues will ask questions. I would like to save the North for last, so I wanted to talk about that or ask questions. Some of my colleagues have some questions.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague for letting us go ahead because we want to get into another part of our Estimates that we have to be in. There are several roads that I would like to talk about which fall within Region 4, but I also have a couple of questions that deal with policy. We may have passed that line, but I will check on the questions and if we have not gone past, if it is possible to have them answered, I would appreciate it.

I want to start out with just the whole general area of the Parklands Region and the change that we are going to see with increased traffic next fall with Louisiana-Pacific coming in. We are going to see a lot of wood moved to that plant.

* (1520)

I see stakes along the site of the plant where there are plans being made to provide an access road into the plant, which is very important, but I wonder if an analysis has been done on what the impact is going to be on the roads in that region and whether the department has done any forward planning on how they are going to upgrade those roads. When I talk to people who work within the Department of Highways, I am told that as regards the No. 10 Highway, for example, the pavement on it is quite old and will not withstand the kind of traffic that is going to be put on. There has to be some thought given to how that road is going to be maintained as we see the increase of traffic.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, the department certainly tried to do some planning, as the member is talking about, about roads that Louisiana-Pacific may well use, but the department still does not have the information as to, okay, where are the forest cuts going to happen in the next two or three years. So what roads should we be focusing on, whether it is Highway 10 or PRs, what are the appropriate roads that they are going to actually be using? In regard to Highway 10, the actual status of it, generally speaking it has a fair bit of capacity of wear yet before it will be considered a road that is designated for upgrade in terms of the comparative criteria used across the province.

With regard to the actual location, the access road to the plant, we will be constructing turning lanes at that point, redoing the intersection obviously, at a cost of $570,000. That project is reasonably close to being ready for tender. The design has been done, and there is a further stretch of 800 metres to the plant which also needs to be upgraded as part of it. Some of which, I understand, has already been done by the municipality. It is, technically, a municipality responsibility. But our design for the first 200 metres from the centre of the highway is done and will be tendered and, as I say, over half a million dollars of cost right there. That would bring it up to a paved unrestricted status.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chair, with respect to the access road going south off No. 10 Highway into the plant, will the government have any responsibility or will the government be picking any cost up on that road or is it going to be the government doing the design and the R.M. paying the cost? Is that road going to be surfaced as well?

Mr. Findlay: The department has done the design for the road right to the plant. Last week I met with the reeve, and so the issue of who is paying for what the rest of the way is under discussion. I understood they met the next day with the new individuals involved up there with Louisiana-Pacific about what level of responsibility they felt they had to at least consider the paving of the road.

You know, from an operational point of view probably a gravel surface road is adequate, but there is desire to have it paved. I think Louisiana-Pacific maybe has some responsibility to share some cost here because they will be the benefactors with regard to the kind of service at least that is there. So there is a discussion going on.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for that information. I want to say that I agree with him that the government has done the design and that the company also and the municipality has some responsibility. The company in the end is going to be the main benefactor out of this, and they should also be picking up a share of the cost. I would hope that they would be held to that responsibility.

I have several roads in the region that I want to talk about, and a couple of them I mentioned to the minister at some point in the House. I had indicated this spring that some of the roads were in terrible condition and in fact not accessible.

One of the roads that I talked about is Highway 271, which is east of Pine River, and that construction has been going on now I believe for two years. One year the contractor ran into some terrible weather and got delayed, but there are real problems in that area, 271 and 489 is in the same area. There were people in that area who could not get out, and it was a real problem for some people, particularly one family which had young children. At one point they did not know what they were going to do; they were considering going to stay in Dauphin until the roads were fixed up because of the health of a child. In this day and age I do not think that is acceptable.

I would like to see the roads in that area fixed up, but if the minister could give some indication as to what the problem was, why it got so bad, why that road has been so badly neglected.

Mr. Findlay: The spring.

Ms. Wowchuk: Yes, but it has been ongoing, it has been a couple of years now. This spring I know the weather was against them, but it is, I feel, a road that has been badly neglected. It was a road that was scheduled to be surfaced at one time. Now the department says, well, there is not enough traffic on it. There is not enough traffic on it because nobody can go there. So it is six of one or half a dozen of another, and the people in the area are losing. We should not have those kind of roads, and it has to be improved.

So I would ask the minister if he could give some indication of what kind of plans are there for that area? What kind of hope can we give to the people of that area so that next spring they are not going to face the same kind of problem? I realize it takes a while to fix them, but surely to goodness this is the third year they are facing that. In fact, on 489 it has been longer than that, but those areas are very badly neglected.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, the member has identified clearly in 489, a very low volume of use of road. The recorded volume of traffic is 50 vehicles a day, clearly it is low volume; 271 is a little higher volume, but a grade and gravel had been done on that in the past and we understand that during the course of the construction there were some climatic condition problems. In other words, wet road, wet conditions that made the project difficult to do. There are 20,000 identified for spot grade improvements on 271 currently.

* (1530)

I guess if we are going to get wet springs, this problem of trying to have the road maintained during those wet conditions is a tough job. It is probably in pretty good shape today in terms of it is dried out and has been maintained but come next spring, if it is wet conditions again, we cannot promise it will be an awful lot better. The ability to go in and do what the member might like is very expensive. It would be at the expense of other projects in the province. So we will do the best we can from a maintenance point of view and spot improvements, but to think that we could commit to a major reconstruction is just unaffordable at this time.

Ms. Wowchuk: What the minister is saying, then--it was my understanding that at one point that road was scheduled for 271--

Mr. Findlay: 271--work was done.

Ms. Wowchuk: We were under the impression that it was going to have a surface put on it because all of the roads going across from No. 10 to 20--267, 269--they have an oiled surface on them, and it was my understanding that 271 was going to be upgraded to a level where it would also get a surface on it of some kind, not necessarily pavement but an oil of some sort. But from what the minister is saying now, there are no plans to upgrade that road to a level where it would be equivalent to, say, 269, which has an oil surface on it.

Mr. Findlay: The member talks about 267 and 269 having an oil surface. Yes, it is asphalt surface treatment. It is called AST. It is thin, and it is always subject to spring restrictions. Those surfaces, the lifetime of them is certainly in doubt--subject to somebody going down there with a big load, getting away with the trip but damaging the road--very costly to maintain. It is nice in terms of not having dust, but for about six weeks in the spring we get complaints from farmers: I cannot haul my grain; I cannot get my fertilizer in; I cannot get my cattle to pasture.

That is because we put that dust control called AST on. So you restrict commerce when you do that, and the deputy and I had talked about this just a few days ago, where it looks nice, makes you feel good, but from the standpoint of being able to conduct commerce, it significantly restricts mobility. To go to any greater level of depth of pavement, now we are talking big-time cost, and we cannot afford it.

Ms. Wowchuk: I can appreciate what the minister is saying about costs and about things looking good, but I can tell you that those people would be quite happy to have--I mean, all the region is restricted with load restriction in the spring, but the kind of road that they have now and the inaccessibility of that road, and this is not the first spring that that has happened. It is a road that gets very rutted up, and you cannot go on it with a truck anyway, whether there are restrictions or not. You just will not get through it.

So I can assure the minister that the people in that area would be very happy with that kind of a surface on it and have restrictions during the six to eight weeks in the spring. They would be more than happy, and I know that that road at one time was being considered, and I would hope that the minister would, again, give it consideration. It is a road that provides access to a large area. It is a school bus route, and what we had this spring was not acceptable, and we have to look at ways to improve it, so I would hope that the minister would reconsider that.

Mr. Findlay: I thank the member for that input, and I am sure we will get the same input continually from the municipality involved.

Ms. Wowchuk: Yes, I am sure you will.

Mr. Findlay: It is always on the long list of activities that people would like us to consider, but when there is a soft road, even putting an AST on it, it is not going to hold in the spring even under routine car traffic. If you are going to put a surface on, you have got to have a reasonably good subgrade to hold the surface, no matter what kind of surface it is. So there are limitations to what we can do, but I respect what the member is saying, and I can appreciate if you live on 271, you look down at 267, 269--they have got a surface treatment, and we would like the same. Human nature.

Ms. Wowchuk: And I realize that the base has to be fixed up, but that is one of the ways, if you start pushing to have the surface put on it, you are going to have the base fixed up, and maybe eventually we will have a good road in the area. So it is what we want for the area. It will improve tourism, it will improve everything, and I can assure the minister that if that road was upgraded, you would see the amount of traffic on it increased tremendously.

The community of Pine River, for example, is suffering very badly because of it because the trading patterns have changed in the area because people cannot come in down that road.

Another road that has been on the agenda for some time is in the Swan River area. It is 487. It is a road that goes to Thunder Hill, to the ski hill, and I am sure the minister has met Mr. Joe TerHorst from the area who has lobbied every Minister of Highways over the years to have that road fixed up, and I do not blame him. I think that he is very committed to project, as are some other people, and I believe a Mr. Vern Vopni called the minister just recently.

Again, that is a road that there was a commitment made on that there would be a surface put on it, and I think the indication was that it was not wide enough. There were problems with the bridge. Though the road was widened out, it seems to have been neglected now. Can the minister tell me where it is on the list, and what kind of answer he can give to the people of that district who have long been waiting for a better way? That is an area, a good farming area, where there is lots of grain that has to be moved out, and they very much want to see that road.

I understand that that is one of the very first roads that was built in the Swan River Valley. The Thunder Hill area was once some of the first opened land, and yet it is one of the roads that has fallen behind quite a bit, but has been on the minister's agenda for some time, so if we could find out what is happening with that.

* (1540)

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, 487 has traffic counts that range anywhere from 180 to 250, so it is in a category of much higher volumes than the previous roads the member mentions. The 11.6 kilometres received grade and gravel in 1989-90, and we have a clear indication from the R.M. of Swan River that it is a priority for them, so it is in due process. Base and AST would be next.

Ms. Wowchuk: What is due process?

Mr. Findlay: It is in the works towards next project or next program whether it is this fall or next spring, as are many.

I cannot give a commitment, a year and a half out, or two years out, or anything like that. Everything comes up on an annual basis, but Swan River is pushing for it, and Swan River continues to push this as a No. 1 priority. We want to do something in every region of the province every time we do projects. All I could best say is that the member has brought it to our attention. She has raised it as a priority for her area. Her municipality has raised it as a priority. So that bodes well for it in the future.

There is a structure on 487 at Lobstick Creek, a $170,000 structure that is in the approved program at this point.

Ms. Wowchuk: It has to be done?

Mr. Findlay: It has to be done. One must always remember that the weakest link in most roads is the bridges. You go over in a split second, but they determine what goes on the whole road. The structure needs to be done.

Ms. Wowchuk: Can the minister indicate, he said that road is now on a list that is up and should have--is it on a priority list? I can understand what the minister is saying, but I have a question that constituents have asked me that I cannot answer, and I want to know, how can--it deals with a road into the park, 366, up to Wellman Lake. That road is being upgraded. So I would like to know what other work is scheduled for 366 up into the Wellman Lake region into the park area, and how a decision is made to prioritize a road into a park versus a road, for example, 487, when 487 is needed by the people in the area for economic development. I am looking for some information on how a decision is made to choose a road such as the road into a park that not everybody uses, and it is not for economic development, whereas, as I said, 487 is one that is needed for the economic viability for the area.

What kind of scale is used to justify one road? Is it the fact that somebody has lobbied harder for that road, or how does that kind of decision come about?

Mr. Findlay: The member asked, how would you decide to do that? Well, I guess one of the criteria is we have received a lot of lobby from the R.M. of Minitonas wanting to see that road upgraded. We have traffic counts here that vary from 1,100 up by Minitonas down to 260, 130, 170 going into the park. These are year-round traffic counts. There is an awful lot of tourist traffic going in there at this time of the year and the traffic volumes will be much higher than this. Therein lies a requirement or a pressure from park goers from the R.M. of Minitonas saying this is a road of considerable importance. I guess some people call it economic activity, in other words, tourism activity to and from Duck Mountain.

There are people pressing for it. There are municipalities pressing for it. There are high use periods, very high use periods.

Ms. Wowchuk: Can the minister indicate then how much money is budgeted to be spent on that road? Is there work to be done on that road this year? There was work done on it last year, I believe, and there is work being done on it again this year. How much money is being spent?

Mr. Findlay: There are 22 kilometres of grade and gravel for $325,000 is the project in front of us. We are just looking up to see if it has been tendered yet or not.

We understand it has already been tendered.

Ms. Wowchuk: The minister said it is tendered for gravelling. Are there any plans to put any surfacing on that road of any kind or is it just going to be--what is it going to be upgraded to, or is it just going to be a gravel road?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, I am sure the member is aware that 366 is surfaced. It is a narrow road with the surface down to the park boundary. The grade and gravel we are doing is wide enough to support future surfacing, but future surfacing is not planned at this stage. It is just grade and gravel to bring it up to a good rideable standard.

* (1550)

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chairman, as we were out, and all of us were out an awful lot on roads this last spring, we got to see some of the very bad roads and hear the concerns from many people. In particular, there are a couple of roads that--one road that affects a Northern Affairs community and two roads that are access roads, one into a Northern Affairs community and a reserve and the other one into a reserve. I have written to the--I do not mean I have written to this minister--previous minister with respect to the roads into Pelican Rapids and Indian Birch, and we have got responses back that, well, if the band is prepared to spend some of the costs on this road, then we are prepared to cost-share it.

These roads are not on the reserve. They are roads that provide access to all people, and I do not think it is fair to say that, well, we will build this road if the band would contribute, because you do not say that in other areas. When a road is needed, it is needed. The two roads, as I say, one is into Indian Birch and there is no number on it, and I am looking at an older map, and the other one is into Pelican Rapids.

The one into Pelican Rapids, there was a commitment made to have calcium applied the whole length of the road. I think that commitment was made about three years ago, and then that was never fulfilled. Those roads are in poor condition and they are the only access. These people do not have any other way that they can go. We were talking about the condition of the road in Pine River. Those roads were in bad condition, but at least there was another road that people might have been able to get out onto, but in these areas there is nothing. It is either that road or you stay at home. There were a lot of cars--mufflers coming off cars, and things like that.

I want to ask the minister what his position is when it comes to providing access to people who live in any Northern Affairs communities or on reserves and there is no other access available other than the roads that are there, and whether he can give any indication of whether these roads are dealt with differently and what kind of plans there are to repair them.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, I presume that the road that she got the response from the previous minister on the cost-sharing was the road to Pelican Rapids. Both that road and the one to--what did you call it, Indian?

Ms. Wowchuk: Indian Birch.

Mr. Findlay: Indian Birch. They are both main market roads, but the one to Pelican Rapids was initially built on 50-50 cost-sharing with the federal government. So that is why we still like to see them share in 50 percent of the cost of upgrading. We do 100 percent of the maintenance on the road, on both roads we do 100 percent of the maintenance. On the one to Indian Rapids, that is 100 percent ours, main market road.

So there is a different history on the two roads in terms of who paid for them initially. You know, I hope the member would support us if we would try, from anywhere possible, to get as many dollars from Ottawa as possible to help us in the overall cost of roads. So that is a different history.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chair, I appreciate the minister's remarks. For clarification, I was not trying to get the federal government off the hook. If it is a 50-50 share with the federal government, so it should be. I have to look back and talk to the band again, as my understanding was that we are sort of saying to the band, okay, you find the money and then we will put in the money. If it is lobbying the federal government to put their share in, if it is a 50-50 road, then so it should be.

That does not quite answer the question. Let us look at the Pelican Rapids. If it is a 50-50 road, is there anything being done and whose responsibility is it to go after the federal government to try to get some additional funds to upgrade that road? Is it the minister's responsibility to say we want this road fixed up, or is it the bands and the community council from Pelican Rapids to go after the federal government to say we need this road fixed up, give us money so that we can go after the province to get their money? So who starts the ball rolling here to get this road fixed up?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, the department's analysis is that the road is of adequate standard at this stage in terms of structure, in terms of gravel, and we do put on calcium, three-kilometre strips, every 16 kilometres, for passing zones on the road. If the member or the band or the community council wants to do something further, I would think that they have responsibility to get some commitment from the federal government, then come to us with that commitment for us to proceed.

Ms. Wowchuk: Then on the road to Indian Birch up to Swan Lake there, the minister had indicated that is 100 percent--it is a main market road--provincial responsibility. That road is not in good shape either. Are there any funds allocated in this year's budget to fix up the road in there?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, I certainly acknowledge the member's comments that the road is not in good shape, classed as a worn-down road, many sharp turns in it. Any upgrading in the future would require straightening it out and obviously improving the roadbed. Though it is in the category of main market roads, and we have quite a few main market roads scattered throughout the province, it is for future consideration. The member might want to talk to me later about her level of priorities on the various roads she has raised--she has to appreciate we cannot do them all--and, over the course of time, where this one sits relative to some of the other priorities she has identified.

* (1600)

Ms. Wowchuk: I will take that opportunity another time to raise those issues with the minister. But can the minister clarify something? He said that the road into Pelican was a 50-50 road, and this one is a main market. Now, just for clarification, what other roads does the federal government contribute to? Is there a certain class, like, for example, the No. 10 Highway or main roads? Does the federal government contribute 50-50? Where does the cut-off point come for what the federal government contributes to, and what strictly is the responsibility of the provincial government? I would imagine then, we get to municipal roads, and there is a sharing there. So if you just give us a quick overview of what is 50-50.

Mr. Findlay: Well, it is a fairly wide-sweeping question the member has asked, and we could talk for a fair while, but I will keep it short. As I mentioned in my opening comments last night, the federal government collects $5.5 billion in fuel tax on the road system right across this country and contributes very little back to the system. The road we are talking about, to Pelican Rapids, it was initially negotiated for construction as 50-50. But other than that--and the road through Riding Mountain, which is over federal ground, it is their total responsibility--beyond those specific cases like that, it is a hundred percent provincial.

We have been falling behind, to put it bluntly, in terms of keeping up with the wear and tear on roads and demand, of which the member has brought some to the table here today. We need road upgrade, and we have a lot of tax dollars leaving the province for other uses that we contend should go back into the road system. Because pretty well a hundred percent of the dollars we collect from road taxes, from fees, from driver's licenses, and all of that, goes back into our travelling infrastructure in one form or another, whether it is roads or airports or whatever it is. So we are putting our money in. We are not getting very much from the federal government. Their basic position is today they will not contribute anything more in the future in any kind of arrangement or circumstance like this.

I think the member can appreciate we feel that First Nations people are a federal responsibility. They have a responsibility to cost-share, at least, in terms of infrastructure for them, and there has been success, occasionally in the past, in that context. I would say today they are instantly going to say no. It would be very hard to get us to change their minds because they are just saying that we are out of this; we are offloading it onto you. The citizens of Manitoba come to us first, and they will never accept the fact, well, we cannot do it because the federal government has said no. They expect us to do it a hundred percent.

So we have had some success in the past, but the ability to get success today is very, very limited. Even though they collect a lot out of the system, it goes to supply other services for Canadians, maybe not in Manitoba.

Ms. Wowchuk: I thank the minister for that information because we just were not quite sure, and I was not here for the comments last night.

The minister touched on another issue about federal offloading. They have reneged on a lot of their responsibilities, I believe, in agriculture. The whole change to the transportation subsidy is going to see major changes in, I believe, how the grain and farm products are moved with the change. We will see the shifting of traffic away from railways and onto the roads, and this is going to have a tremendous burden on our roads and an impact on the transportation budget, I think.

So I would like to ask the minister whether his department has done any analysis of what this change is going to do, what the impacts on our roads are going to be, and what kind of additional costs the province is going to have to end up with, or whether there is going to have to be additional allocations into the Department of Highway's budget in order to upgrade the roads. So basically I am wanting to know whether or not any studies have been done of what this is going to have, and if there have been studies, whether the minister would be prepared to share those with us with respect to what his department sees as which rail lines will be abandoned and what the transfer cost is going to be to the province as we start to pick up the extra road costs.

Mr. Findlay: Clearly, the member raises a very big topic. There is no question at all; there is going to be dramatic change in what farmers produce and where it goes to market and how it gets there. I have certainly raised this in municipalities in discussions over the past year and, more recently, in the last few months with delegations that come in to see how it works. I am going to have to give consideration to how you most efficiently use your capital dollars within your municipality to those roads that are going to be of greatest need for the commercial movement of grain, livestock, inputs into the farm and any other products that come away from the farm.

We are currently doing some analysis on impacts on roads. Nobody has a grand plan yet as to what is going to happen. Elevator companies are part of this equation. Where are they going to close elevators, where are they going to build big ones, and how is our road infrastructure going to integrate with that? I think the member will remember that over the last approximately 30 years there has been a lot of change in how commodities are moved into and out of the rural communities.

* (1610)

I can remember 30 years ago pretty well everything that came into a town came by rail--your machinery, your fuel, your mail, your fertilizer. It all came by rail. Most of that today comes by truck, even fertilizer. Although it may travel from Alberta or Minnesota, it comes by truck instead of by rail. That highlights the fact again that I mentioned last night: 40 years ago 70 percent of bulk commodities in western Canada travelled by rail; today it is 28 percent. A dramatic shift has occurred, and rail abandonment has occurred also over the last 30 years. Percent of the network that was abandoned approximately 20-25 years ago was, I would only be guessing, but it might be 30-40 percent of the total network.

A lot of communities went through a lot of tough analysis and rationalization when that happened. A lot of the hue and cry we heard from communities at that time, a fear of the future, did not really necessarily materialize, but still the commodities went to the road. Municipalities and the provincial governments in western Canada have tried to meet the challenge in terms of keeping the roads at an adequate standard, and there is certainly a constant demand in front of us as you have identified in your region for roads that maybe are not up to a fully acceptable standard.

The next three to four years are going to be very interesting in terms of responding to the changes that are going to happen, the directions the commodities are going to move; and, with more incentives out there to attract grain, for instance, to different elevators or processing locations, you are going to see grain going in Manitoba like this. You are going to have trucks getting a backhaul across Manitoba, hauling grain one way to a price and the opposite way, a back load, going the other way, and maybe the same grain going to another economic opportunity on behalf of the farmer.

In the broad picture, when you look at locations of farms, the amount of tonne-miles that will be hauled on municipal roads probably will not change an awful lot. The amount of tonne-miles hauled on provincial roads will expand dramatically because farmers want to get to a provincial road to haul the next 50 or 60 or 100 miles. They may have gone five miles down that road to an elevator in the past, which is no longer there. Now they are going to go 50, 60, 100, 200 miles on a provincial road. The increased wear and tear of extra miles hauled with the same load is primarily on provincial roads.

To give examples, we have not had as much co-operation as we might have liked, particularly if an elevator company is aware of building its big terminals, in terms of giving us some advance information as to how it is going to be drawing volumes towards a particular point in the future, or to even build appropriate access off those highways to allow the turning actions to get to that large elevator.

It is difficult for us to plan when we do not get enough advance information of what particularly the elevator companies are going to do in terms of where their major locations are going to be in the future. The minute you build one of those inland terminals, you draw semis from all directions to that point, and they will travel many, many miles.

We will try to work with the municipalities to decide what roads require priority consideration, to allow farmers to get their product to that road for the longer haul. I think it is definitely going to mean that more and more north-south routes are going to become important, whereas primarily if you look at the map an awful lot of our road network is focused on east-west movement. Of course, in the Interlake it is already north-south, but I am thinking of the broader picture of across southern Manitoba.

A lot of thought is going to have to go into when you do work on roads in the future and which ones should get priority. A lot of people have to have input, particularly municipalities, elevator companies, and any other interested groups.

Ms. Wowchuk: We have heard the federal announcement about the change to the transportation, the abandonment of the Crow, and in that there was a transition budget of about $300 million that is going to be used, and a lot of people are lobbying for that money. Farmers are lobbying for it for pooling and various things.

Can the minister indicate very simply whether or not his department has been doing anything to get any of that money? I hear there is a certain amount of it that is supposed to be proposed for transition into transportation and for municipalities and roads. Can the minister indicate whether his department is lobbying for that money and what the status of that is?

Mr. Findlay: Certainly the member again has identified a lot of--it is an issue that has a lot of ramifications to it. The whole Crow, I have contended from the beginning that the Crow was always intended to offset farmers' costs. It was not for anybody else. It was simply to allow the farmer to get his grain to export positions so he could compete with the rest of the world.

Manitoba is further from salt water than any other part of the world, so I will always contend that the Crow money is always farmers' money. I call the transition money part of the same package, that the farmer has first priority, and, maybe, should have the only priority to that money. We argued that the pooling impact was much larger for Manitoba than was the loss of the Crow itself in terms of additional transportation costs that the farmer will pay.

It initially identified that the farmer was paying $10 a tonne, just round figures, for freight, and then once the Crow went it jumped to $20, and then once pooling went it doubled again. Now we see published figures from the Wheat Board that would indicate that for different crops there will be different freight deductions. So the full impact of pooling will not happen on all grains, but it clearly will happen on barley, and, to a large extent, on bread wheat. But durum and bulk barley are considered going to different markets, particularly south, so the freight deduction will not be quite the full impact of up to $40 a tonne.

We have argued that money, the whole $300 million, should go first and foremost to dealing with the pooling question. Without any official information, I hear figures floated around that they are only going to get $100 million to $120 million to do a pooling for both Manitoba and eastern Saskatchewan. It will not anywhere near offset the impact--that they may identify another $40 million for the dehyd industry. So now we have got half the money gone for sure, half of the $300 million.

Municipalities in the three provinces have lobbied for consideration for road impacts for them, and the three provincial governments, I am sure, have all done the same. Certainly we will say, okay, if there is money not used towards dealing with farmers' impacts, then we should all be treated equally from the standpoint of the provinces and municipalities in terms of some portion of that money towards maintaining and upgrading roads.

So, yes, we are arguing for some, but I want the member to understand very clearly, we should be second in line behind dealing with the farmers' impacts, because if he does not survive, you do not need the road anyway.

Ms. Wowchuk: I am pleased to hear that the minister does want the money to go where it was actually intended. I hope we are successful in getting the federal government to understand the impact these changes have made, and, in fact, if they become too drastic, we will end up losing farmers and lots of those roads we will not need.

I have a couple of roads that I want to raise on behalf of my colleague from Dauphin who is in a different department of Estimates and has asked me to ask about them.

I will list both of the roads. One of them is the road in the Makinak area. Part of the road to Makinak was upgraded, as I understand, and south of Makinak it was not done. That is 480, and that road is not in very good condition between Makinak and Laurier.

I wonder if the minister can indicate what the plans are? Are there going to be any improvements made to this road this year, and if not this year, where is it on the priority list?

The second road is a road south of Waterhen which is also in poor condition, a short road there that has been in poor condition--if there are any plans to improve that. That would be 276.

Mr. Findlay: To answer the member's first portion of her question, on road 480 from Makinak to Highway 5. It was reconstructed in '87 and is in the queue for base and bituminous pavement, so that is top quality road. It is in the queue for further consideration for future highway projects or highway programs. It is a distance of 8.2 kilometres. The grade and gravel has been done but the surfacing is reasonably ready but not programmed.

* (1620)

The other road was 276. Was the member referring to from, more or less, Waterhen north?

Ms. Wowchuk: No, he had indicated it was a section of the road south of Waterhen, but when I look at this map--south of the Waterhen Reserve.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, a short stretch just south of Skownan on 276 has been surfaced very recently. I think the member is really referring to the next stretch from there all the way down to 328. It has gone through the grading process and is for future consideration for surfacing. Traffic numbers here are somewhat higher than some of the other roads the member talked about.

Ms. Wowchuk: Thank you and I will pass that information on to my colleague, and if he has further questions he can contact the minister.

The next question I have to do is with a policy question. I think you have passed policy but I will ask it, and if you cannot answer it now I will approach the minister later. If there are people within one region and another region that for some reason wants to transfer employees perhaps for family reasons or whatever, if there are two people with equivalent job skills and can make arrangements that they want to transfer, what is the policy? What would the process be and is there any reason why they could not transfer?

For example, if there was somebody in Swan River and somebody in Area 1, and there were two people with similar skills but wanted to exchange jobs, and they could still do the same job, there would be no additional cost to the department. Would it be possible and what would be the process for that to happen?

Mr. Findlay: Well, as a department we would have no difficulty. If two people agree in two different locations and they want to swap locations, the same job set, same skills, same classification, provided there is no cost to the department, I would just ask them to raise it with the director of their region through the appropriate ADM to bring the process forward. We have no restrictions on it, provided there is compliance or agreement by both parties involved. The member obviously has a specific issue in mind.

Ms. Wowchuk: Yes, the minister is right, I do have a specific situation in mind. I would ask, then, if the minister would just indicate who it is that I would go to. Do I take this to the minister to look at or is there someone, he indicated a deputy minister--

Mr. Findlay: Assistant deputy minister.

Ms. Wowchuk: Assistant deputy minister--if you could tell me who that is, then we will handle it there rather than putting it on the record here.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, the deputy has offered that he would do it through his office. If the member would like to bring it forward to the deputy's office, he will follow through with it.

Ms. Wowchuk: I appreciate that because it is a situation that has been dragging along for some time, and I would like to see it resolved.

I have one more question, and I want to thank my colleague our critic for Highways for allowing me this much time. This is an important area in my constituency, as it is in all rural constituencies, to have their particular roads put on the record. One that I would like to ask the minister about, and I think I asked about it last year, and he probably knows--I want to know what the status is of the Lenswood Bridge.

We hear about the Lenswood Bridge so much. It was promised back in the election, I think, in 1988. My opposition talked about it in this election. We thought it was going to be in this year's road program. During the election we were told it would be another five years before it was built. If it is five years, no, I am sorry, three years, if that is the case, I am really disappointed because this is something that has been going on for 20 years.

It is a real hardship for the farmers in that area and the minister understands that. He is a farmer, he knows how equipment has changed. Tractors are bigger, farm equipment is bigger, and there are farmers who are travelling some 20 miles extra to get around this bridge to get to land on the other side of the river.

In my opinion, that is unacceptable, and this is a bridge that, as I say, should not be used as a political football being pushed back and forth over the years. I would ask the minister to let us know what the status is of that bridge and let us know whether he can fulfill the commitment that his government has been making now for many years, to have that bridge rebuilt so that we have proper service for the people of that area.

* (1630)

Mr. Findlay: The honourable member left the best one to last. Basically we have got good news for the member. I think you used the term three years and five years, they are totally off the table. It is not going to be that long. Both the grade and gravel, which is $900,000 for the 2.6 kilometres, and the structure, the bridge itself, another $900,000, so you are talking $1.8 million for the total cost here, has already been approved for programming.

(Mr. Frank Pitura, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair

The land has been acquired, the design is done, both will be tendered in the very near future. I would suggest that probably you will not see construction activity until '96, even if it is tendered this year. So it is an approved program, $1.8 million total cost, that includes everything. So it is ready to go.

I understand what the member is saying. I have seen the bridge. It is narrow. Big machinery cannot go across it, and the alignment is not great at all. So the realignment, straightening it out--and I understand a fair bit of timber haul will undoubtedly happen over that road too.

So it is a priority from both farming and from a lumbering point of view, and both the grade and gravel of the new alignment and the bridge are in the approved program. So it is in the chute, but I would suspect '96 is your most probable time to see action.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for that information because I have to say when I heard that it was going to be three to five years I was really disappointed, as were the people of the area. I will continue to lobby the minister if we see that it is not going to--he says it is an approved program. So we will continue to press on this because it is very important for the people of that area, and as I said, they have been waiting for some 20 years for it. It is long overdue. So I want to thank the minister for the answers that he has been able to provide. There are many other areas that I could ask questions on, but those are the main ones, and I will be in touch with his deputy minister to address the particular issue that I have raised. Thank you.

Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Mr. Chair, firstly, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for the opportunity to be able to bring to the Minister of Highways' attention some concerns that we have in the Interlake with roads and other issues. Firstly, the minister, of course, made comment to my honourable colleague from Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) about the north-south connection in the future in some of the areas.

As the minister is well aware, I think, that Interlake constituency is primarily looking at an east-west improvement with their roadways and then some north-south. There has to be some improvement to the north-south but basically the east-west connection. Coming back from Eriksdale this afternoon from a UMM meeting I took No. 6 going up and it reminded me of all the curves, you know, how many curves Highway 6 has got.

Before I continue with my specific issues, I want to say that I am very pleased, very pleased, at the taking away of the curves on Highway 8 from around the Winnipeg Beach area--those curves that are being taken out and straightening out--I am very pleased to see that. I travel that road, of course, many times and other constituents do, and I do want to say to the minister that I am pleased and I think a lot of my constituents in the Interlake are also pleased with that.

Having said that, of course, the question comes up of, well, they have widened the shoulders on Highway 8 up to Winnipeg Beach, up to Gimli, they have improved the corner at Fraserwood-Gimli corner, they are taking the curves out, what is in store for Highway 8 north of the boundary line?

Mr. Findlay: Which boundary line?

Mr. Clif Evans: The constituency boundary line. What is in store for Highway 8, first of all?

Mr. Findlay: There are two activities of acquisition of right-of-way on Highway 8. From 229 north, more or less, to Camp Morton, there are 23 kilometres for acquisition of right-of-way, and then north of 231, all the way up to 68, another 29 kilometres, there is survey and design being done on Highway 8. So that is the stretch the member is more interested in, is the almost 30 kilmometres from Highway 68 south that is going through survey and design for future activity.

Mr. Clif Evans: Future activity, perhaps widening and any other improvements that could be made to that road.

Mr. Findlay: Whatever comes back as recommended activity, whether it is further grading, shoulders, surface. It is going through survey and design.

Mr. Clif Evans: Can the minister indicate a time frame for those?

Mr. Findlay: It will be done this year. The standard that Highway 8 will be upgraded to will be the same standard seen in the south, so that standard will be moved north in the process of consideration of future highway programs.

Mr. Clif Evans: I want to express my concern about Highway 8 and tying into, of course, going up to Hecla Island and then Highway 234, taking off from Highway 8, heading up to the Mason Island-Pine Dock area that we have had some work done on. I want to indicate the fact that there is potential development in that area north of Riverton. There is potential economic development for the area, and I would think and hope that as that comes into play that it would be so important, especially with the type of economic development that they are looking at there, that the road improvement for highways 8 and 234 become one of the top priorities within the constituency of Interlake. So I want to make the minister aware of that.

* (1640)

From what I understand, one of the potential future developments will create a lot of truck traffic back and forth from the States right up and back, and not small trucks but large trucks. So I would hope that the minister and the department will be considering these. Now whether it would be that potential development or even, as the minister is well aware, that there are negotiations re federal park for the Hecla area also.

So there are two very serious items, and along 234--the minister is aware of it--the development of Northway Aviation's expansion for tourism and whatnot. So just to make the minister aware that Highway 8 from that boundary road and as far north, I will hope and will keep pushing that it will be a priority for the minister's department.

Having discussed Highway 8, if I can just ask the minister on dust control. Now, there have been letters sent to him and copied to me. I have brought it to the minister's attention. Can the minister outline for me exactly what is the criteria for any type of dust control put on any provincial road free of charge, you might say?

Mr. Findlay: Somebody pays.

Mr. Clif Evans: Well, somebody pays, that is true. But what I mean is, what is the criteria that people can request to have the calcium deposit put in front?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, the member asked for the criteria that the department would use in deciding what roads or what areas would get dust control for no cost to the citizens. I know the member is aware that if a particular residential person wants it on his stretch, for $150 he can have it put on. The locations where we would put it, on long roads, we will do every 16 kilometres a three-kilometre passing strip or passing area. We will put dust control treatment on. For safety reasons, we will do it at curves, where it is deemed for safety reasons that visibility should be good on the curves at all times, at intersections, stop signs, railroad crossings. We will do it in instances where traffic volumes are high. One of the reasons that traffic volumes are high on certain roads is the high volume of tourist traffic that is going through at different times of the summer or the week.

Where there are a lot of, particularly, gravel trucks operating, ofttimes it will be a requirement in the contract that the contractor do dust control on the road in the area where he is making the haul. There are a few other reasons why, but we focus on safety for the travelling public on the road.

Mr. Clif Evans: Would health be one of them, one of the criteria, health of people living along the road, asthma, children's health?

Mr. Findlay: Well, as I already said to the member, we concentrate on the road, on safety on the road. Now, if a person is concerned about their health, living along the road, they have the option of having us put the material on at a charge or having somebody else put it on. Our cost can be focused on the road and safety of the travelling public on that road. You know, it does not give the member the answer he wants, but if we responded to somebody saying, well, I cannot stand dust, where do you draw the line? If the person cannot stand dust, he has options opened to him or his area to have the dust control put on.

Mr. Clif Evans: No, the minister is not telling me what I want to hear. It has only come up once or twice, but it has to do with small children, young children that have an asthma problem or who are ill. It was brought to my attention, and it was supposed to be supplied with a letter from a doctor as backup for the request. I am just wondering whether that, at all, would fall in any which way, if it was detrimental. I am sure there are other cases too throughout the province. I want to get an idea of that.

Mr. Findlay: I would just answer further that we cannot get into that as the Department of Highways. There is such demand for our resources for road maintenance, road upgrading. You have been here and have heard a lot of requests from one region, and you have a lot of requests in your region. We have to concentrate our dollars most effectively and efficiently on the road as opposed to other amenities that people believe is important to them. The concern he is raising is a very valid one.

Yes, I know there will be people that dust is a problem, and the doctor may say it is a problem. The remedy for it will have to be at their expense or if some other department of government wants to get involved, but our focus is roads, roads, roads and safety on those roads. It is another jurisdiction to worry about, whether the public should contribute to the health and safety of that individual who is off the road, in other words, living in a residence close by the road.

Mr. Clif Evans: What the minister has told me about dust control and some of the criteria, then I would think, without seeing the situation myself in the last little while, the two requests that I brought to the minister's attention, one was from a letter from some constituents on the Hodgson line at 325. I am wondering whether that has been addressed. Also on 233 north from 329, if I might say those two are about the only specific issues when it comes to safety or how bad the dust is throughout the constituency since the program has been dropped by the government. I would then think the minister would seriously consider these two areas for safety because there is an enormous amount of grain truck, gravel truck travel on these two stretches of road, 325 east of Hodgson and 233 north from 329.

* (1650)

There is a stretch of about 11 kilometres where there are approximately 11-20 people living, households, and I have not had so many calls as I have this year and last year just specifically from these two areas, 233 especially but 325 has become a serious concern for a certain stretch since there was another north-south road put in, and they are also bus routes. I am wondering whether the minister can tell me today what kind of response there has been to these two requests for some dust control in the areas for safety.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, the member is probably aware that we do dust control on 234 north of 325 to Beaver Creek. There is a stretch there that we do. As an example I mention that, but over the course of analysis of roads that should or should not receive dust control, the two roads you mention have not been deemed high enough traffic volumes to warrant dust control. Both of the roads that you mention run around 200 vehicles per day. Well, we are prepared to look at it further in terms of whether they should qualify or they should not, but at this point the decision has been that they do not.

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Chair, well, the minister got a letter with 10 names on the letter. The letter to myself, they cite the fact that three school buses travel this particular portion of 325. I guess they are talking about approximately a six-mile strip from the pavement, which is where the Peguis road meets east, and their letter to you requests that, due to the gravel trucks, the road is in terrible condition and they feel it is dangerous, has become very dangerous due to dust conditions.

I would ask that the minister have his department--appreciate if the minister's department people went out there and took a look and talked to the concerned people there and see and let them know specifically yes or no. The same I feel along 233; 233 there have been requests. I have letters from the municipality about 233, and it is an ongoing thing. We have brought these roads up and the conditions and the upgrading for four and a half years, I have, and I know the previous minister was sort of fed up with me bringing these up all the time, but I think four and a half years, that we could start seeing something being done in some of the areas and especially--the minister and I discussed this--in upgrading and improving the conditions. I do not know if anybody is basically--sure they are all asking for pavement and then asphalt right from coast to coast to coast of the Interlake, but I would like to see--

Mr. Findlay: Right to the doorstep.

(Mr. Mike Radcliffe, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

Mr. Clif Evans: Right to the doorstep too, I would appreciate that. But this is where the situation comes in and people start throwing it back at me as far as the safety features and problems that are occurring. The minister has received letters from Bifrost municipality, resolutions about 233. The 325 dusting issue has just been something that has come up this year, and I would appreciate if the minister and his department would respond to these people and take a look for themselves just whether the criteria meet what the people are requesting.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Chairman, I will now commit to the member that the department will communicate with the individuals and investigate the two circumstances he has raised to see whether it warrants further or different action from what is currently happening. We will commit that to you.

* (1700)

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for that, because in our previous conversation, which I will not put on the record, I am not very pleased at some of the things that have occurred. I like the people to be told what is what in the situation when they request it, the facts, not ideology or anything else, so I would appreciate that.

Staying with 233, and I know that there have been requests to--233 is like any, I guess, rural road that the rocks have started to come up through the grade, and the stretch I am specifically talking about is, if you have the map in front of you, where your hardtop of 329 and 326 tie in, meet and go a little bit north. That is the north part I am talking about of the dust situation. Then it takes a left, and it has got a big curve. That has been also a long-standing issue with the communities of Arborg, R.M. of Bifrost, and LGD of Fisher. There is a lot of traffic on that road, a lot of traffic: the grain between Fisher Branch and Arborg, construction, just regular travel of constituents to and from those two communities, your business travel, your shopping travel between the two communities.

The new grain elevator that was put up just last year is situated at the far west end of 233. It is headed just before Fisher Branch, about two and a half miles before Fisher Branch. It is a curvy road in certain spots, but travelling it at certain times of the year you see more of the rock, boulder situation, than you do of any other problem on that road. It has a good base, and I think that it could probably be also very seriously looked at, as I said earlier, as an east-west connection in the Interlake, and that is one of them. I wonder if it is on the books at all in the minister's department, if it is in the books at all for any upgrading.

Mr. Findlay: There are no plans at this point on 326. There are no plans for any further activity on 326 at this time, but, again, it is one of those roads that the member has brought to our attention. It is obviously a reasonable priority in his mind. As the department develops future plans, it will be one that will be given consideration.

Mr. Clif Evans: The minister can probably slap my hands for this, if he would like, in his response, but because of failing eyesight, looking at the map, and I do apologize. I am sorry, it is the 226, Mr. Minister; it is my mistake. It is the 226 portion that is paved, and the extension of that 233. You see it becomes 233 after 329; it goes through Sylvan and into Fisher Branch. That is the portion that the communities and--

Mr. Findlay: So it is the actual portion of 233?

Mr. Clif Evans: Yes. My apologies for the mistake, but I would like the other one done, too.

Mr. Findlay: With the stretch of 233 that the member is talking about, a survey and design has been done, and it is deemed that no further acquisition of right-of-way would be needed for any future upgrade, basically, on the existing alignment. So that is as far as it has got. It is not in the program. It is not projected to be in the program in the near future. The member believes it is a road of high, high significance in his area. He would like to promote it, and it is open to him to continue the lobby, but at this stage there are no plans.

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Chairman, well, as the minister well knows, and I have told him before, priorities in my constituency are each and every road that needs work on. So I will certainly be discussing further, and the minister will get, I am sure, the resolution and form from the R.M. of Bifrost and from the LGD of Fisher--

An Honourable Member: Important.

Mr. Clif Evans: Yes--to look at that. I would request that the minister's department seriously look at that portion of the road, as I mentioned earlier, about the condition that it is in as far as the boulders, the rocks, the grading. If we can work on getting it some AST or upgrade it even further for that in the next little while or the next year or two, then that would be fine. I think that is one of the problems, the communities there and the people along the road are saying that--and I travel it quite a bit--it is very bad as far as boulders and rocks that are sticking out, in my opinion, and, of course, in the constituents' opinion. I would like the department to consider that.

* (1710)

Mr. Findlay: When there are roads that have rocks protruding and this sort of thing, there is a Sandvik blade that can be used in the maintenance to, you know, shear them off, and the department will commit to looking at the condition of the road and whether the appropriate type of maintenance is going on, given what the member has said, for future consideration of how maintenance will be carried out on the road.

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for that because I feel strongly about that, that is one of the PRs that I think, if it were looked after under the maintenance program a little more, you and I would not be hearing--

An Honourable Member: Demands for upgrading.

Mr. Clif Evans: Right. So I would appreciate the department looking at that, certainly.

I would like to touch on another road that has, again, been another long-standing issue in the constituency and that is 325 from Highway 17 going west. I believe it has gone through some of the hoops that are required. I was talking to the LGD council today in Eriksdale. They were just about all over there. They and I, especially, but they, more, would like to know, when is construction starting?

Mr. Findlay: On which stretch?

Mr. Clif Evans: On the new portion from Highway 17 west. I believe it is 10 miles.

Mr. Findlay: Something like that, yes.

This has been an issue that has been going on for some time and I think the member realizes there is maybe not 100 percent agreement as to what should be done here. The survey as to the new alignment, which he is referring to, the survey has been completed, but the acquisition of property has not commenced yet. In new alignment the property has to be acquired. That is a process through Government Services Land Acquisition branch that is yet to take place.

Mr. Clif Evans: I wonder who is pulling my leg then. I was again told today that there is no problem with the land acquisition--we have discussed this before. I understand from councillors that there is no problem to acquiring that land and it should have been acquired some time ago. There was at first, perhaps, a little bit of a problem acquiring it. I might even venture to guess maybe nine months that there that there has not been a problem. We have always been told that has been the holdup to get things going. I am going to further look into that, but I do not know how much of that I want to take in good faith as far as if there has been no action taken on it. On one side I am being told there is no problem, and on the other side I am being told that we are waiting to do anything because of it. Where is the balance? Who is at fault?

Mr. Findlay: I do not think anybody is at fault. I am just saying it has not taken place yet in terms of land acquisition. We cannot build a road until the land is acquired. I am not saying there is a problem. I am going to remind the member I have heard that many times and then the land buyer moves in and all of a sudden you get people who suddenly have a different opinion about the value of what their land is.

I take the member's word. Obviously the council said to him that there is no problem acquiring that. The Land Acquisitions branch needs to get on with the process of acquiring the land. We do not say there is a problem, just that that has not happened yet. It is never a guarantee that land acquisition is easy. It often runs into an obstacle and I get far too many requests for expropriation arriving on my desk and I do not like that, but it happens with the very best of intentions sometimes. I would ask the member to take that comment with a grain of salt that there is no problem. We need to get on with the process of acquiring the land, that is for sure. Let us hope it goes according to his expectation, but until that is done, nothing more can be done in terms of programming it for construction.

Mr. Clif Evans: I understand the minister's feelings on expropriation. I am well aware of that. Who are we waiting for, then? Are we waiting for Government Services to go ahead with the final completion of the acquisition, or is it something that the minister's department should be requesting of them? How can we get the process moving then?

* (1720)

Mr. Findlay: I will not say there is any problem anywhere other than that the process needs to get started, but I received the member's input. Yes, it needs to get going, and I hope that what you say is right, that there will be no problem in the acquisition process. It could well get going in the next very short period of time.

Mr. Clif Evans: The minister knows me well enough, too, to know that if I am being told something--

Mr. Findlay: Take it at value.

Mr. Clif Evans: --I take it at value, but then it better come out to be the way I was told, also. But the point that I do want to make is that once we get this land acquisition over with, is the department, have they confirmed the fact that the construction of that road, the new construction of that road, will start at Highway 17? Once the process is duly finished, the acquisitions, whatever has to be done yet, are we starting at Highway 17? Has the department indicated to the LGD that the beginning of construction will begin at 17 going west?

Mr. Findlay: If I understand the member's question, he is asking about whether the construction should start at the east end or the west end of the stretch?

Mr. Clif Evans: I am not asking that.

Mr. Findlay: You are not asking that.

Mr. Clif Evans: I am not asking whether it should start--either/or.

My question was specific. When the construction starts on that new road and once everything is done, is it starting? Is it going to be starting? Has the department indicated anything different to anybody? Is it starting at Highway 17 and proceeding west? That is my question.

Mr. Findlay: Is there any problem with starting at 325 and proceeding east? The member has a problem. I want to know it. I mean, if you are going to build a road from here to there, does it matter which end you start at? In terms of when the project is tendered and the contractor wins the tender, given climatic conditions, he probably will decide which end would be most appropriate to start at. If it is a matter of which portion you do first, if that is the question, or is there another question the member is asking here?

Mr. Clif Evans: The concern is the numerous amount of letters and petitions, resolutions that have been circulated in the last couple of years to begin that construction, not only to have the construction done, but to begin it at Highway 17 and proceeding west. If there is any problem otherwise, then I would hope that there would be an indication either from the contractor or from the department, stating why it cannot proceed from Highway 17 going west and the reasons for that. But I have seen nothing nor heard anything specific about going any other way but from 17 west, on the new construction. I have not been shown for any other reason it should be any other way. Nobody has indicated that to me.

Obviously, the people who signed a petition and/or have been working with this to get this done have their reasons, and I have seen nothing otherwise. Mr. Chairperson, 17 west is the desire in the letters and the petitions that I have seen. So I am asking the minister, can he indicate to me today and to the community that that is where the construction will begin?

Mr. Findlay: Is the member playing a little politics between Ashern, Hodgson and Fisher Branch, or is he caught up in the politics of there?

I will tell the member, and I think he has probably heard that Ashern Co-op has talked to me and said they want to build a fertilizer location there, I guess close to the vicinity of 233 and where the new road would intersect. And as I said earlier, the project is of such a size that you would undoubtedly tender it as one project. You would not do pieces, so what I said earlier was, you tender the project, the whole stretch.

Now that portion between 233 and 17 is considered to be a little boggy, a little low. If it happens that it is tendered at a time when that is wet, I would think the contractor would want to work on the portion west of 233 first as opposed to the portion east. But it would be a contractor's decision. I mean the fact of whether you work one stretch or the other stretch, it is part of the whole project, one project, not split into pieces. Either stretch is really too small a project to get an attractive tender on. You do it all as one. So it does not matter which end you start at. You are out there to do the whole thing. So I do not understand why that is not sufficient. I am not going to order the contractor to start in the boggy part, if it is more cost-efficient for him to start at the west end and work east.

Mr. Clif Evans: I am not sure what the minister is indicating or trying to indicate whether there is the type of politics being played. I think he is well aware of the situation there. I hope that he is also well aware that the portion west from 325 to Ashern was very conveniently fixed up while there were a couple of ministers coming out for pancake breakfasts. So if we want to play politics, then I have indicated to the minister before that that is not where I want to come from and that he has agreed with me on that.

All I am asking is, if there are reasons and you can provide them to the communities for where it should start, they are asking--the minister is well aware of it. His office has been phoned many, many times about it. So I am asking on behalf of what they are asking. Where are we going to start with this road?

I have seen nothing from Ashern east, nothing in resolution form, letter form or any indication from anybody to me or copied to me, addressed to you, indications coming from the west side, from the Ashern side. And that road, yes, that portion of 325--of course, I would like to see that done too, and we have talked about it. I would like to see that 325, right from 17, be totally upgraded. It is going to become a very vital link between the Ashern-Moosehorn area, the Fisher Branch area and the Arborg area, very vital, and Riverton area. So it is something for down the road that I would like to see come across.

* (1730)

My question is, the only thing that I have seen on the books, as you call it, is that portion of 10 miles or 11 miles between 233 and 17, or 17 and 233. I have seen nothing else on any books. The minister has not indicated anything else to me, so that is where I am coming from. I am asking.

Mr. Findlay: I do not see that there is an issue here. I mean the project will be done, when it is tendered, as a complete project, to do the whole stretch. Whether it starts at the west end or the east end, I do not think it is a material component. If the member has some really particular reasons, we can talk about it later, as to why one favours the other, but I do not want to tie the contractor down. We want to get on with our acquisition of property, get on with the tendering of the project--that is the priority.

Mr. Clif Evans: I appreciate that, but I just indicated to the minister unless he can show me within the department books that there is something from Highway 6 heading east towards 233 junction on Highway 325, anything from any municipality, from any--

Mr. Findlay: Upgrade on the western portion.

Mr. Clif Evans: Yes. There is not, so then we are concerned right now just with that 11 miles in the middle.

Mr. Findlay: We are arguing over nothing.

Mr. Jennissen: Some concerns have crossed my desk about roads and not necessarily from my area. I hope you do not object to me just dealing with them. One of them is from a person who is concerned about what he calls St. Andrews road; he lives in Lockport. It is called River Road, I believe, six to eight kilometres. He felt there is a lot of red tape and hassles trying to get this road fixed. He says it is very dusty, and they would like to have a sealed road. Part of the reason is that his child suffers from asthma. The argument this person advances is that apparently, whenever that road is sprayed for dust, the rain washes that away very quickly, although there has not been much rain lately. The total cost for dust control for one year, he claims, again, I do not have anything to back this up, was $46,000. He thought that money would be better spent in making a sealed road or creating a sealed road. I believe that cost would be around $300,000. I would just like the minister to comment on that.

Mr. Findlay: I am just looking up the average daily traffic counts on this road. They are fairly high. They run from 600 up to 2000 so it is a fairly busy road, and even more busy in the summertime with tourist traffic going around that stretch.

We have program slope stabilization at the north end right along the Red River. Before we can do any upgrade on the road, the slope, from the department's point of view, needs to be stabilized. There is a three-quarter of a million-dollar job there to do the slope stabilization. That program will happen within the next year, would be my projection. The cost of the base and AST--two and a half million--is the cost for the road surface work plus some improvements to the base, as well as the gravel and pavement. It is a fairly expensive venture but it is in the chute in terms of happening.

I will just give the traffic numbers to give the member some idea that there is a fairly significant traffic volume there. You get two and a half million plus three-quarters of a million, we are talking here over three million in total. The savings in terms of not doing the dust control at 46,000 is rather small in comparison to the total project cost. If we did not do the dust control there would be complaints this year and next year before the thing was done.

Mr. Jennissen: In terms of volume traffic on that road, the person that actually contacted me took the trouble to stand in the dust, I guess, and count cars for an hour, and he said there were 209 so there must be a fair bit of volume.

I would like to turn the mike over now to my friend and colleague from Rupertsland for some questions.

* (1740)

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): I do have a couple of questions for the honourable minister. First of all, I think this matter concerns communication that the minister and I had dating back to a letter that I wrote to him on December 7, 1993 concerning the upgrading of PR 304 between Pine Falls and Bissett. The minister indicated to me in a letter that he wrote back to me concerning my letter of inquiry that the portion of the road between Pine Falls and Manigotagan was completely reconstructed and surfaced between 1975 and 1985.

The portion that I was inquiring about in my letter was between Manigotagan and Bissett. I think that the minister and his staff, and perhaps a lot of Manitobans, are quite aware of the condition of PR 304 between Manigotagan and Bissett. I wonder if the minister would be kind enough to give us an update on the extent of upgrading that the road has received to date.

Mr. Findlay: The member has asked what is being done, what is being proposed for that particular road. We have done some clearing projects, some brushing along the road. Contracts have been let to people in the communities of Manigotagan and Bissett. We have done some spot improvements on the road. Traffic volumes are not high on the road. Costs of a major upgrade to the road are very, very high because of the nature of the terrain there. We did some brush clearing and some spot improvements. That is all.

Mr. Robinson: I would just like to seek clarification. I thank the minister for his response. One of the things he indicated in his letter to me dated January 25, 1994, as an interim measure, the department embarked on a program, as he indicated, for brush clearing and that these contracts would be done with community councils of Manigotagan and Bissett using local residents. Each contract, valued at about $39,500, provided for the clearing of 16 hectares, 39.5 acres of brush. I am wondering as to whether or not, indeed, that was fulfilled, and whether or not it was, in the opinion of the minister, beneficial as to upgrading 304 between Manigotagan and Bissett.

Mr. Findlay: In our recollection, in the winter of 1994, two contracts were done of clearing, and in 1995 one contract. The member has asked, do we think that has improved the road? Well, in terms of visibility on curves, I would say, it should have, and in terms of giving opportunity for the dust to clear away, you know, more open space, it should have improved the safety of travel on the road.

Mr. Robinson: I just have one question related to Highway 304, and I would like to ask a couple of other quick questions on some other areas. There has been a lot of concern expressed to myself, being a representative of that area, with the number of incidences that have occurred travelling on that road with broken windshields, flat tires, and things of that nature. I am just wondering what kind of work is ongoing? I fully appreciate the minister's remarks that it is, indeed, the type of terrain that makes it a very difficult road to upgrade, perhaps, but I am just wondering about the ongoing work and the ongoing upgrading of Highway 304.

Mr. Findlay: The department is doing annual grading and spot gravel improvements of traffic gravel, and that is being carried on. On any gravel road there are, undoubtedly, going to be stones flying with regard to windshields, and if there are stones protruding, in terms of the normal maintenance, staff are to deal with that in the grading process.

Is the member saying that the maintenance is not up to an acceptable standard? In terms of your comments, are you saying that the degree of maintenance that the department is doing is not leaving the road in an acceptable travelling standard?

Mr. Robinson: It has been pointed out to me on numerous occasions by people travelling that road between Manigotagan and Bissett particularly, and people that travel it daily have experienced the things I have described earlier, windshields and flat tires. My recommendation to them was that they do an assessment of these things that the people are experiencing and forward that to your department, the department of the minister. I believe that, in some cases, particularly during certain times of the season, the road is, indeed, very dangerous to travel on, and a monitoring process of advising people that it is, indeed, dangerous to travel on perhaps may be in order.

Mr. Findlay: Well, I certainly thank the member for his comments on the road. The deputy has driven the road so he is personally familiar with some of the comments you are making.

Mr. Robinson: I have a matter concerning Berens River, and I have communicated with the minister and his department on this. The road in Berens River, as you know, is designated as a provincial road even though there are no stop signs. Maybe there are as we talk now. There are no stop signs; there are no signs to indicate a turn or a curve coming up. We have roughly a little over 20 miles of road that has been designated as a provincial road in the community of Berens River. The problem we have there is, some of it falls within the jurisdiction of the Northern Association of Community Councils or within the Department of Northern Affairs. However, the reserve and the First Nations community of Berens River has asked us to ask this department, the minister's department, if that responsibility of maintaining that portion of the road in Berens River could be transferred over to the First Nations community of Berens River.

I am wondering, as well, if there has been any correspondence that has been forwarded, aside from my letter to the minister, from the First Nations community or perhaps the southeast regional development corporation with respect to the situation that the First Nations of Berens River has outlined to us.

* (1750)

Mr. Findlay: This is a Northern Affairs road. It is not a Department of Highways road. So the Department of Northern Affairs does whatever they do on the road. They may even be contracting with Berens River to maintain it, but it is not a road under our jurisdiction. It is under the jurisdiction of Northern Affairs.

Mr. Robinson: Mr. Chairperson, let me get this clear. The road in Berens River is designated as a provincial road, but it is not the responsibility of the Department of Highways and Transportation but rather is the responsibility of the Department of Northern Affairs. Am I correct to assume that, based on the minister's reply?

Mr. Findlay: Well, the interpretation the member has made is right. What I said is, although it is shown on our map, and it is showing its designation as other roads, it is not a road that is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Highways. It is a road within the province, but it is under the jurisdiction of Northern Affairs. It is classed as a Northern Affairs road.

Mr. Robinson: Mr. Chairperson, I am confused. I did not know there was a difference between a Northern Affairs road and a provincial road. I am quite familiar with roads on reserves. We call them trails, but we do travel on them with vehicles. Based on what the minister has told us here, I wonder if he would advance that information to the Berens River First Nations and the Berens River community council.

Mr. Findlay: You want us to transmit that information to Berens River--no problem.

Mr. Robinson: One final question on my part here, and that is the construction of the right-of-way and the utility revisions related to the Churchill spaceport development road in Churchill. Of course, we anticipate a lot of activity in Churchill, and we read with great interest the government's release of March 20 that there was going to be indeed some expenditures related to the potential development of the spaceport in Churchill. I am wondering at what stage of the planning this department is. With the development of the road, what local resources, particularly manpower, will be utilized from Churchill?

Mr. Findlay: With regard to this stretch of road, which is some 19 kilometres from Churchill going east towards the spaceport, survey and design have been programmed as well as acquisition of right-of-way along the 19 kilometres and some utility revisions along the stretch. That is what has been programmed so far. Any actual construction is yet to be programmed. The expected cost of that construction is around $8 million. So it is a fairly significant project. Whether that is proceeded with is clearly dependent on whether the Akjuit projects successfully keep moving along, and my understanding is they are out raising funds right now towards their capital expenditures. If they are going to proceed on that, then naturally we have to get on with the road. So the construction of the road is yet to be programmed and is somewhat contingent on successful capital raising by Akjuit and then committing to their capital projects on the site.

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Chair, just alluding to something that my honourable friend from Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) talked about, the Berens River road, the minister indicated it was Northern Affairs' responsibility. Can the minister then tell me whose responsibility is the portion of road from Dallas north to Jackhead Reserve?

Mr. Findlay: That is a main market road. It is our responsibility.

Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Chair, has the minister received any request or any correspondence from Jackhead First Nations chief and council with respect to upgrading that road in the last two years, if he is aware?

Mr. Findlay: Yes, part of the long list of requests.

Mr. Clif Evans: Well, I will be seeing chief and council in the next couple or three weeks and will certainly indicate to them that you are more than willing to meet and discuss the road from Dallas to Jackhead.

Mr. Findlay: It is a long road.

Mr. Clif Evans: Yes, it is, and it is also a very, very rough road. Is there a maintenance program at all for that stretch of road to just upkeep it?

Mr. Findlay: There is a structure on 224 just east of Dallas, a bridge that is under construction right now, and on the road you are referring to there have been spot improvements, but maintenance, gravel as necessary, is certainly applied to the road. I think you were asking for a larger consideration in terms of, I am sure, a great improvement.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe): The time is now 6 p.m., committee rise.