Manitoba Hansard — 18 July 1991 (Sitting 91, 35th Legislature, 2nd Session)

35-2-91

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Sess ion - Thirty-Fifth Legislature ofthe Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HAN SARD) 40 Elizabeth II Published under the BUihorlty of The Honourable Denis c. Rocan Spssker VOL XL No. 91 ·1:30 p.m., TUESDAY, JULY 23,1991 Printed by ltMJ Offloe of ltMJ o.-s Printer; �of ManllobB ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislatur e LIB - Liberal; ND - New Democrat; PC - Progressive Conservative NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON , Steve BARRElT, Becky CARR, James CARST AIRS, Sharon CERIL LI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMI AK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CUMM INGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY , Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FIN DLAY , Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHA MMER, Harold, Hon.

HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R. HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LA THLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWA Y, Jim MANNESS, Clayton , Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON , Eric, Hon.

STOR IE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington Crescentwood River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage Ia Prairie Ste. Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur -Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St.

Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Flin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River PARTY. LIB ND ND LIB LIB ND LIB ND PC PC PC PC ND ND PC PC PC LIB PC PC ND ND PC PC ND LIB PC ND PC NO LIB ND PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NO PC ND PC PC PC PC ND PC ND PC PC ND ND

51 64 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, July 23,1991 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to allow the photographer to enter and take the official photograph? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: That is agreed. Also, after the photographer is done with his photo, we will recess for approximately 10 minutes to allow him to remove all his paraphernalia. We will give a two-minute warning bell, at which time we can re-enter the Chamber. *** The House took recess at 1 :39 p.m. After Recess The House resumed at 1 :47 p.m.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of L. Anderson, D. Anderson, Irvi n Hil de brandt and others, requesting the provincial government to withdraw provincial funding for The Pines project. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: To the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen). I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member, and it conforms with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Mr.

Clerk (William Remnant): To the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba The petition of the undersigned citizens, of the province of Manitoba, humbly sheweth: THAT the Winnipeg International Airport is vital to the economic health of the city of Winnipeg, and the project known as "The Pines," in its current location, will jeopardize the future of Winnipeg International Airport. THAT to risk the jobs of the hundreds of people who are employed at the airport is not in the best interests of the community. THAT "The Pines" prOject will inhibit riverbank access to the general public.

THAT the strip mall portion of "The Pines" project will give a foothold to commercial development which is incompatible with the residential nature of the neighbourhood. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba may be pleased to respectthe wishes ofthe neighbourhood by requesting the provincial government to withdraw provincial funding of "The Pines" project. AND as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray. PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Mr.

Jack Penner (Chairman of the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations): I would ask to present the Third Report of the Committee on Industrial Relations. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Your Standing Committee on Industrial Relations presents the following as its Third Report. Your committee met on Thursday, July 18, 1991 , at 10 a.m. and 7 p.m.; Friday, July 19 at 1 p.m. and Monday, July 22 at 9 a.m. in Room 254 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred. Your committee heard representation on: Bill 59- The Workers Compensation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act ; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les accidents du travail et diverses dispositions legislatives as follows: Ms. Buffie Burrell - Manitoba Government Employees' Association Mr. Yvon Dumont- Manitoba Metis Federation Mr. William Laird - Manitoba Professional Firefighters Association

5165 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 1991 Mr. Harvey Levin - United Steelworkers of America, Local 5442 Mr. Robert Watchman- Manitoba Chamber of Commerce Mr. Craig Cormack- City of Winnipeg Mr. Gervin Gressley - Winnipeg Construction Association Mr. John Huta - Private Citizen Mr. Bob Sample - Canadian Union of Postal Workers Mr. Garth Whyte - Canadian Federation of Independent Business Mr. George Croft - Canadian National Railway - General Claims Mr. Bruno Zi mmer - United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 832 Ms. Debra Ram - Injured Workers Association Mr.

AI Harris- Manitoba Trucking Association Ms. Judy Cook - Manitoba Federation of Labour Occupational Health Centre Mr. Richard Kerylko - Private Citizen Ms. Sandra Oakley- Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1063 Mr. Lend Wheeler - International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Lodge 484 Mr. Bob Hykaway - Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1505 Mr. Michael Chuchmuch - Private Citizen Mr. George Provost- Canadian Manufacturers Association Mr. Harry Mesman - Manitoba Federation of Labour Mr. Albert Cerilli - Canadian Brotherhood of Railway Transport and General Workers Mr.

Kelvin Dow- Canadian Auto Workers Mr. John Irvine - Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 500 Dr. Allen Kraut - Private Citizen Mr. Glenn Michalchuk - International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Lodge 122 Mr. Robert Olien - Private Citizen Mr. Howard Raper - Communications and Electrical Workers of Canada Mr. Allen Ludkiewicz- Canadian Pacific ltd. Mr. Ted Dempster- Private Citizen Mr. Kenneth Emberley- Private Citizen Mr. Robert Ross- Private Citizen Mr. Wayne Bell - Private Citizen Written Submissions: Mr. W. E. (Newton) Thomson- Private Citizen Ms.

Cecile Cassista - Canadian Association of Industrial, Mechanical and Allied Workers Mr. Robyn Singleton - City of Brandon Ms. Shelley Morris - Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce Ms. Irene Giesbrecht- Manitoba Nurses' Union Mr. Winton Newman - Mining Association of Manitoba Dr. Roger Rickwood - FETCO WCB Subcommittee Mrs. Jeannette Breman - Private Citizen Your committee has considered: Bill 59- The Workers Compensation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modiflant Ia

Loi sur les accidents du travail et diverses dispositions legislatives; and has agreed to report the same with the following amendments: MOTION: THAT the proposed clause 1(3)(b}, as set out in subsection 2(3) of the Bill, be amended by striking out the French version and substituting the following: (

b) les membres de Ia famille de l'�mploy.eur ou de l'administrateur d'une corporation qUI: (

i) sont employes par l'employeur ou Ia corporation, (ii) vivent avec l'employ eur ou l'administrateur a

titre de membre de sa maisonnee, a moins que Ia Commission n'approuve, en vertu du paragraphe 74(4), une demande de l'employeur ou de Ia corporation; MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 4(3}, as set o.u� in subsection 5(1) of the Bill, be amended by stnkrng out •wage loss benefits and medical aid are not payable for three weeks following the accident." and substituting the following: (

a) wage loss benefits are not payable forth �ee weeks following his or her loss of earnrng capacity; and

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 66 (

b) medical aid is not payable for three weeks from the day the worker requires medical aid. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 9(7 .1 ), as set out in subsection 8(2) of the Bill, be amended by striking out "that is register ed or required to be registered under that Actw and substituting "by a person other than the employer of the worker or a worker of tha t employe�. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 30( 1), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "subclause 29(1 )(a)(ii)" and substituting "clause 29(1)(a)". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 30(3), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "subclause 29(1 )(a)(ii)" and substituting "clause 29(1)(a)". MOTION: THAT the proposed clause 40(3)(a), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "basic personal exemption and exemption for dependentsw and substituting "basic personal tax credits or exemptions, and tax credits or exemptions for a person who is a dependent of the worker, under the Income Tax Act (Canada)". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 40(4), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "and exemption". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 45(3), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "the worker was learning a trade" and substituting "the worker was an apprentice in a tradew. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 45(4), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "sumw and substituting •averagew. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 49(2), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by adding "or special additional compensation under subsection 40(2), as that subsection is immediately before this sectio n comes into force,w after "permanent disability". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 49(3), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be amended by striking out •, or special additional compensation under subsection 40(2), as that subsection is immediately before this

section comes into forcew. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 49(5), as set out in

section 21 of the Bill, be struck out and the following substituted: Time of adjustments under subsections (3) and (4) 49(5) The adjustments referred to in subsections (3) and (4) shall be made at the end of the month that is two years after the date on which this

section comes into force, and at the end of that month in each year thereafter. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 60.8(7), as set out in

section 27 of the Bill, be amended by adding "up to bur after •pay costs or. MOTION: THAT

section 30( 1 ) and (2) of the Bill be struck out and the following substituted: Subsection 67(4) amended 30 Subsection 67(4) is amended (

a) by adding "affecting entitlement to compensationw after "in respect of a medical matte�; and (

b) by adding "before a decision by the appeal commission under subsection 60.8(5)" after "the board, in writingw. MOTION: THAT the proposed clause 77(3)(b), as set out in

section 37 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "sumw and substituting •averagew. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 77(3.1), as set out in

section 37 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "sumw and substituting •averagew. MOTION: THAT the heading preceding subsection 53(2) of the Bill be amended by striking out "(1.6)" and substituting "(1.7)". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 101(1.1), as set out in subsection 53(2) of the Bill, be amended:

51 67 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA July 23, 19 91 (

a) by striking out "who requests a reconsideration of a decision or appeals" and substituting "who is a party to a reconsideration of a decision by the board or an appeal"; and (

b) by adding "respecting the claim of the worker or the dependenr after "possession". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 101 (1.2), as set out in subsection 53(2) of the Bill, be amended by striking out "who requests a reconsideration of a decision or appeals" and substituting "who is a party to a reconsideration of a decision by the board or an appeal".

MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 101(1.5), as set out in subsection 53(2) of the Bill, be amended by striking out "co nclusive." and substituting "conclusive except where a panel, in hearing the main appeal, determines a document to be relevant to an issue in that appeal, in which case the person referred to in subsection (1.2) may examine and copy the document." All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Penner: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourabl e member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), that the report of the committee be now received. Motion agreed to. * (1350) *** Mr.

Jack Reimer (Chairman of the Standing Committee on Private Bills): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the First Report on the Committee on Private Bills. Mr. Clerk: Your Standing Committee on Private Bills presents the following as its First Report. Your committee met on Monday, July 22, 1991 , at 3 p.m. in Room 254 of the legislative Building to consider bills referred. At that meeting, Mr. Reimer was elected Chairperson. Your committee has considered: Bill 32- The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act; loi modifiant Ia

loi sur Ia "Mount Carmel Clinic"; Bill 66- The Winnipeg Canoe Club Incorporation Amendment Act; loi modifiant Ia loi constituent en corporation "The Winnipeg Canoe Club"; and has agreed to report the same without amendment. Your committee agreed to not proceed with Bill 67, The Salvation Army Grace General Hospital Incorporation Amendment Act; loi modifiant Ia loi constituent en corporation "The Salvation Army Grace General Hospital", pending receipt of a legal opinion, and recommends to the House that this bill be held over and considered at the next session of the House.

Your committee recommends that the fees paid with respect to the following private bills be refunded, less the cost of printing: Bill 32- The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act; loi modifiant Ia

loi sur Ia "Mount Carmel Clinic"; Bill 66- The Winnipeg Canoe Club Incorporation Amendment Act; loi modlfiant Ia loi constituent en corporation "The Winnipeg Canoe Club". All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Reimer: I move, seconded by the honourable member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Vodrey), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. *** Mrs. Louise Dacq uay (Chair man of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for Emerson (Mr.

Penner), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABUNG OF REPORTS Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Ninth Annual Report for the Manitoba Energy Authority. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Te nder Process-MHRC Building Government Polley Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the tendering process is one of the most important actions that the government undertake on behalf of the citizens of the province. In fact, the tendering process was one of the important parts of

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 68 a scandal, in fact, the scandal in building this Legislative Building at the tum of the century. This government and the people of Manitoba have been involved in issues related to the tendering process with the infamous awarding of the federal Progressive Conservative Party to the CF-18 contract to the province of Quebec, contrary to the merits for purposes of the Manitoba bid. So it is incumbent upon us in this Legislature to deal in good faith with all persons Involved in a tendering process at all stages of the tendering process.

We have an Auditor's report that states clearly that the second proposal call from the provincial government did not follow government policy and made a number of negative comments about the second proposal call in dealing with the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation building, something that was raised in this House previously.

I would ask the Premier: In light of the fact that he is chair of Treasury Board, which approved, according to the Auditor, all decisions that were made in the first and second process-- the first process where the one company was 14 and the second process where that same company, principals of which are Mr. Shenkarow and Mr. Kozminski, became No. 1- will the action of the government in not following government policy open up the province to future court action?

Secondly, what action will the government take to ensure that we are indeed following proper government policies on both the first and second stage of any tendering process? *

(1355) Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question.

I was hopeful that he might show a little integrity and get up and apologize for the accusations that he wrongfully made in this House on April 2, 1991 , when he said, and I quote, in his question to me: "Was he the one, as head of Treasury Board, who changed a nine-m onth open public tendering process to a nine-day closed bid process, and why did he change that, given the fact that Manitoba of course has had problems with tendering before?" He concluded and said: "and I would suggest very strongly that documents indicate Treasury Board made that decision, and the Premier is head of Treasury Board." Mr.

Speaker, that accusation of political interference was addressed by the Auditor. He said: "We found no evidence to suggest that there was any influence from any source, political or otherwise, on either the evaluation process or the selection decision." He might also be interested in knowing what Judge Kennedy said in his response to this, and I quote from Judge Kennedy, who also reviewed this: From the media coverage alone, one might have expected that the applicant believed that there was political interference by the government in awarding the contact. The applicant does not make any such allegation.

Indeed, it is the applicant's position, et cetera. Mr. Speaker, I would have hoped that the Leader of the Opposition might have had some integrity in apologizing for alleging political interference in the decision. The fact of the matter is that we will ensure in future that the Department of Government Services and indeed all departments of government will follow proper procedure. I know that it is no excuse to say it, but the department felt that, given the circumstances of the event, the taxpayer was entitled to the savings which did accrue ultimately $1 million in saving by virtue of the retendering.

The error that was made was indeed that they did not readvertise it, but they did not show any favouritism. There was no political or other interference in the matter, and they did an honest mistake, which we will correct by virtue of ensuring that the tender practices are properly followed. Michael Bessey Involvement Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the OpposHion): Mr. Speaker, this is the oldest, slimiest trick in the book. Misquote what the Leader of the Opposition said, and then use an Auditor's report to refute it. The word political interference was not in my question.

The question was: Did Treasury Board-read it again-authorize the process that changed it from an open bid to a closed bid? Quote from the Auditor's report: The Treasury Board, by minute, March 5, 1991 , did change the process. If you are going to quote, quote straight up. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Doer: The Treasury Board minutes are right there for everybody to see, and if the members opposite are happy with the fact that the Auditor said that the handling of the second or restated proposal

51 69 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA July 23, 19 91 call was not in accordance with stated policy because It was not publicly advertised, if the members opposite are satisfied with that kind of process, then we will leave them to that tainted process. We believe in a process that is consistent from the beginning to the end, and we stand by that position as well. I have a further question to the Premier. The question is-the Premier is head and chair of Treasury Board. Mr. Bessey is secretary to Treasury Board. Did Mr.

Bessey contact any of the principals who were unsuccessful in the bidding and have any discussions with those principals, pursuant to the failure to award the tender to other proponents for the bid? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): The answer to that question is no, and I want to quote, talking about slimy responses, from the Auditor's conclusions and recommendations: "The proposals received on the second request were not open publicly.

Except for this, the process by which the lease was Issued and the procedures followed by the staff and officials of the Department of Government Services in the Manitoba Housing Office Space leasing project ... were considered to be generally appropriate. • So there is -(inte�ection)- Yes, Mr. Speaker. Aside from the second request not being opened publicly, all other procedures were considered to be generally appropriate. So talking about slime, let him not put on the record that there was any undue influence or any unethical process. That is the kind of innuendo that does not serve anybody well. * (14 00) Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): The Premier just read Hansard, and the statement that he alleged to have come from me in Hansard was not there. So now he has to find some other side issue in the Auditor's report which is totally unrelated to our concern that we raised in this House about an open public process for nine months and a closed process for nine days. That is what we raised. That is what the Auditor has commented on. We have been very consistent on this issue. I have a further question to the Premier.

He has denied that the secretary to Treasury Board has contacted the principals of some of the companies that were involved in the tendering. I would ask the Premier to go back and check with Mr. Bessey whether he called the two principals of Continental properties, the low bid on the first occasion, because we have had it confirmed on a number of occasions that Mr. Bessey indeed was involved with those companies, Mr. Speaker. I would ask the Premier for the purposes of the record to take a second chance, to go back and check with his staff.

Secondly, I would ask the Premier, if in fact this is true and we are asking the question, will he tell the House and the people of Manitoba in what capacity was Mr. Bessey contacting those companies, given the fact that the Premier has stated very clearly the role of Treasury Board and the role of the Government Services in this matter? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will gladly respond to that, and I will openly acknowledge that the president, or whatever his name was, of Continental Equities called me about the process.

I asked the secretary of Treasury Board to respond to him so that I would not- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Fllmon: You asked if he contacted them. He called them in response to a phone call to me, and so that I would not be accused of political interference in the process, I asked the secretary of Treasury Board to call them and respond to those people. Yes, I did, Mr. Speaker, not to interfere and not to influence him, but to respond to their concerns. Core Area Initiative Bilateral Replacement Agree ment Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr.

Speaker, we learned today of a bilateral agreement for a federal-provincial strategy for Winnipeg's economic development. The most striking aspect of this is that the federal government has said that there will be no new federal money. What we are seeing here is an elaborate and cynical shell game With our own money. First of all, the federal government walks away from the ACCESS program, from ESL programs, from the Winnipeg Education Centre. It abandons the people of the inner city, and I choose my words carefully , Mr.

Speaker, but those of us who represent inner-city ridings know very clearly that suffering is increasing. The federal government response is to take money from existing programs already announced to and agreed to by Parliament and to repackage them as new programs for Winnipeg.

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 70 My question for the Minister of Federal/Provincial Relations is: Why is he prepared to accept this kind of a deal from a federal government which has deliberately and consistently, by cabinet decision, transferred jobs and money out of Manitoba? Will he go back to Ottawa and insist that new federal money must be on the table? Hon.

Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): As I have indicated to the House on a number of occasions in the past, we have been having ongoing discussions with respect to a new agreement dealing with the needs of the core of the city of Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker, what appeared in the newspaper today was a preliminary draft submitted to the provincial government by the federal government. We have not had discussions as of yet with respect to that draft. As I have indicated, we have had and are continuing to have discussions with respect to renewed programs for the Winnipeg core. Ms. Friesen: Mr.

Speaker, my second question is for the Minister of Urban Affairs. Given that tri partitism is possible in rural Manitoba-and we know today that Jake Epp is meeting with the mayor of Steinbach and is in agreement with the rural development department-will the minister, in those continuing discussions, ensure that the City of Winnipeg, which has already committed $5 million to a new core area agreement, is part of a new agreement for the economic and social programs in Winnipeg? Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, as I have also indicated in past days, that very obviously, the City of Winnipeg will be involved.

The city of Winnipeg's problem areas are the ones that are to be dealt with under any cost-shared arrangement. We will ensure that the City of Winnipeg has an active involvement in that process. Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see that the minister is in agreement with the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), who believes that it makes no sense, no sense for the City of Winnipeg not to be involved in this. Proposal Tabling Request Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): My final question is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.

Stefanson), who, I understood, chaired this committee dealing with the federal government. I would like him to table the proposal that we now have to learn about from the newspapers. In spite of the fact that we have asked repeated questions in Question Period, repeated questioning in Estimates, we still have to learn about this kind of thing from the Winnipeg Free Press. Will he Indicate, in tabling that, which provincial monies are being committed and how this affects existing programs and people in Winnipeg- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated in the response to the member's first question, the fact of the matter is, what was advanced to us was a preliminary draft document submitted by the federal government. We have not agreed to it. We are in discussions with the federal government with respect to ongoing funding arrangements to deal with problems in Winnipeg's core area. Mr.

Speaker, when we have an agreement that is satisfactory to both the federal government and the provincial go ver nment, when we have an arrangement put in place so that the City of Winnipeg is involved as well, then we will table those agreements so that all members of the public will have full knowledge of what is proposed. To table draft documents at this point, I think, serves no useful purpose. Core Area Initiative Bilateral Replacement Agree ment Mr. James Carr (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, every once in a while, every once in a long while, we agree with the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness), and we certainly did last week when he said to the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), in response to a question on care of Core Area renewal: "we really believe that you cannot have any type of an agreement unless the municipal government, i.e., the City of Winnipeg, is very much involved. "So just to have the two senior levels and not the city, it makes no sense." Now we have the Minister of Urban Affairs saying he has a draft agreement with just the two levels of government. What is the policy of this government on Core Area renewal? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr.

Speaker, as I have indicated already today in response the question from the member for Wolseley, the fact of the matter that the City of

5171 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 Winnipeg must be involved in this process is evident, I think, for everyone to see, and that will occur. City of Winnipeg Involvement Mr. James Carr (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, if there is a draft agreement already on the table between the Government of Canada and the government of Manitoba, what involvement did the City of Winnipeg have, by the way, the only level of government that put its money on the table already, some $5 million a year for renewal of the core? We now hear that the federal government wants to reshuffle some old money.

We do not know what the commitment is from the province. My question to the minister is: Since there is a bilateral agreement on the table, what involvement did the City of Winnipeg have in its construction? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, the same that the provincial government had-none. What was advanced by the federal government is a preliminary document, a preliminary draft, Mr. Speaker, of an outline, and that is all that it is. It was advanced by the federal government to the province. The province has not yet responded.

As I indicated, discussions are ongoing, and when a finalized document is finally put in place, we will make that public. Bilateral Replacement Agreement Mr.JamesCarr(Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, in press reports today, it says that the so-called bilateral agreement was negotiated with Federal /P rovincial Relations officials of the government of Manitoba. Now, is the Minister of Urban Affairs saying that information is incorrect, and if so, what kind of bilateral agreement can you have if only one side is negotiating? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr.

Speaker, as I have indicated, and I will indicate it again, and perhaps I will speak a little more slowly, the fact of the matter is that this document referred to in the press report of today was in fact advanced by the federal government to the province, Fede raVProvincial Relations officials, and that is as far as it has gone to date. It was not jointly drafted at all. The Rotary Pines Proj ect Te nder Process Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): The Provincial Auditor has found serious flaws in the government's tendering process on the new Manitoba Housing building.

He condemned invitational tenders because the procedures are so different from the public proposal call, and he said the financial analysis was not consistent. In view of the Auditor's report and that the Premier has promised that Rotary Pines will be publicly tendered, will the Minister of Housing now assure the public and all building contractors that Rotary Pines will proceed by public tender, since we are talking about $4.6 million of public funds and not by invitational tender or as a turnkey project? *

(1410) Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I just want to correct for the record the inaccurate

preamble of the Member for Burrows. This is what the Auditor said: "The proposals received on the second request were not open publicly.

Except for this, the process by which the lease was issued and the procedures followed by the staff and officials of the Department of Government Services In the Manitoba Housing Office Space leasing project ... were considered to be generally appropriate." He goes on to say: "We concur with the rankings as determined by the Department of Government Services." He goes on to say: "We found no evidence to suggest that there was any influence from any source, politic al or otherwise, on either the evaluation process or the selection decision." He does not say it was seriously flawed, and the member ought to withdraw that remark, Mr.

Speaker. The Rotary Pines Project Cancellation Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, in response to the Premier's comments, two of the lines that I made were direct quotes, and it was my conclusion that the process was-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. This is not a time for debate. The honourable member for Burrows with his supplementary question. Mr. Martindale: Will the Minister of Housing admit that Rotary Pines will not now proceed since it does

July 23, 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 72 not meet the conditions as announced by Manitoba Housing in April of requiring 86 tenants to sign up for the $30,000 entrance fee by July 1? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, the process is ongoing. When and if the Rotary Club meets the conditions set down by the Department of Housing, the project will proceed. If they do not meet the conditions, it will not proceed. Mr. Martindale: Why will the minister not follow the conditions for funding as announced by Manitoba Housing communication staff on April 14, 1991?

Quote: When they show they can fill the 86 suites we will give them $20,000 of second-phase funding, since Rotary Pines is advertising that they are only 40 percent occupied and the Manitoba Housing staff have admitted that they already have the further $20,000 assistance. Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, let me say, first of all, that the member is incorrect in his assertion. PDF funding comes in two phases. The first phase, $10,000, when they have a 50 percent expression of interest. When they have a 90 percent expression of interest, then they get second phase.

They had well in excess of that at 1 04 signed, paid-up deposits. What we are now in is the process of funding the full $30,000 commitment that is required from each of the tenants. They are at about 50 percent at the moment and are continuing to market their program. Once that is completed and they have 90 percent of the units fully paid for, then the project will proceed. 811191 Proclamation Ms. Judy Wasylycla- Lels (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, a year and a half ago, this government gave its enthusiastic support to Bill 91 , our antisniff legislation.

Six months ago this Minister of Health said he had to review the matter. Two months ago this Minister of Health said he had to study the enforcement aspects of the legislation. Still nothing, no proclamation and with every month that passes, more and more young lives are being destroyed. I would like to ask the minister today, before this session concludes: Can the minister tell us the results of his review and his studies and when Bill 91 will be proclaimed into law? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, whether this session ends in the near future or not, my commitment remains to my honourable friend that, when I receive advice from the legal expertise who are so providing that advice as to whether the existing act is enforceable as written hence will be proclaimed, no need for further discussion.

Should, however, the legal opinion uncover difficulties as written, I have indicated and committed to my honourable friend that I will share those concerns with her so that we can take immediate remedial action to make Bill 91 enforceable and appropriate for the goal envisioned when all members of this House passed that legislation, that being legislation which will assist in curtailing the abuse of over-the -counter intoxicating products. Mr. Speaker, I have not received that opinion to date.

My commitment remains to my honourable friend that, when I do, I will share the results with my honourable friend, which will result in either proclamation or a discussion on how we can make the legislation enforceable and appropriate. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr. Speaker, that is the same line we have heard week after week, month after month from this minister. In the meantime, more and more young people are seeing their lives and health destroyed. I would like to table, for the minister, some evidence of the damaging impact of this government and this minister's inaction. Some Honou rable Members: Oh, oh. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please; order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns, kindly put that down. The honourable member knows that contravenes the rules. The honourable member for St. Johns, kindly put your question now, please. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would apologize for anything unparliamentary I have done, but we have tried everything to get the minister's attention, and nothing is working. Mr. Speaker: Question, please. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Since what really is out of order is this government's inaction- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I will remind the honourable -(interjection)- Order, please.

I have recognized the honourable member for St. Johns to put her supplementary question. The honourable member, kindly do so now.

51 73 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Will the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) agree to join me right after Question Period and observe the 1 00-or-more Lysol cans that I have outside the House and help me understand- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. I would ask the page to help the honourable member for St. Johns to remove said objects from the Chamber. The honourable member for St. Johns, with her question. Ms.

Wasylycla-L els: I would simply ask the Minister of Health if he would agree to join me outside the Chamber right after Question Period to observe the serious consequences of inaction on the part of this government when it comes to solvent abuse? * (1 420) Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, some 18 to 20 months ago, wh en my honour able friend presented legislation to this House, had my honourable friend taken the due diligence to assure that it was properly written and enforceable before bringing it to the House, had she put that kind of effort- because we had that assurance from my honourable friend when she presented that legislation. That did not exist. Now I am left with the job of- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (OpposHion House Leader): The government was so concerned previously about the rules, I would also point to our rules against reviving debates.

This is reviving a debate that occurred two years ago. By the way, it was passed, Mr. Speaker, by this party, this government, as well as all members of the Legislature. The minister supported that bill. We are asking for action on it now. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable opposition House leader does not have a point of order. *** Mr. Speaker: The honourable Minister of Health, to finish his response. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I simply say to my honourable friend the member for St. Johns (Ms.

Wasylycia-Le is), had she put as much effort into drafting enforceable legislation as she put into her theatrical display today, children right now would be saved instead of the inactivity that we are forced into because she did not take the time to assure that legislation presented at this House had a chance, and a semblance of enforceability. Legal Opinion Request Ms. Judy Wasylyc la- Lels (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, this Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), who said on March 1, 19 90, we have to have legislation like this-it is a matter that we have- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please.

The honourable member for St. Johns, kindly put your question now, please. Ms. Wasylycla- Lels: I would like to ask the Minister of Justice, since he felt that this was good legislation and he had done this study and came with a formed opinion, has he been asked by the Minis ter of Heal th for a legal opinio n on enforceability, and what advice is this minister giving to this Minister of Hea hh, and when will we see action for children and young people in- Mr. Speaker: Orde r, please. The question has been put. Hon.

Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): As I have indicated to my honourable friend consistently, when the advice is received by myself, I will share that advice with my honourable friend. I hope my honourable friend will put the same kind of diligence into making any corrections that are deemed necessary to make the legislation enforceable. If my honourable friend does not wish to do that, then my honourable friend is more interested in theatrics rather than in resolving problems. Free Trade Agreement-Mexico Minister's Support Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, the Mulroney- Reagen Free Trade Agreement is a bad agreement, and it has been hurting Manitobans and indeed all Canadians. Yesterday, Carla Hills once again decla red that cul tur al indu stries that were supposedly protected in the Mulroney- Reagan Free Trade Agreement are now up for grabs in the new trilateral agreement. My question is for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism. On July 16 , the minister said that his government's support for Mex ican free trade

July 23, 19 91 LEGISlATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 74 negotiations was dependent upon six conditions, the first of which was that trilateral negotiations would not in any way open up the current Mulroney-Reagan deal. Given that, and given the statements of Carla Hills, will the minister today withdraw his support and that of his government for the trilateral negotiations as he told last week he would do if any of his six conditions were violated? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Just to clarify the government's position, we have indicated that we do not support a Canada-U.S. -Mexico agreement unless the six conditions are met. I did have the opportunity at the Trade minis ters' meeting last wee k to put Manitoba's position clearly on the record. Mr. Wilson has gone on record in the past as not supporting the op ening of the Canada -U.S. agreement as it currently exists. That is certainly the position of the government of Manitoba. We have conveyed that position very clearly.

We will continue to do so, and we do not support the opening of that agreement which would lead to the changes in the cultural industry, so our position is very clear. Up till now, Mr. Wilson has indicated that he, as well, supports that position. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr. Speaker, the reality is that the chief negotiator for the United States is saying very clearly that cultural industries are on the table and that they want to open up the Mulroney-Reage n Free Trade Agreement in order to get all the restthat they did not get from us the first time round.

Can the minister tell us today if he has, as a result of Miss Hills' most recent commentary, written to the Minister of Industry at the federal level and told him that Manitoba will have nothing to do with these trilateral negotiations? Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, immediately after presenting our ministerial statement here in the House, we forwarded a copy of that to the federal government. I had, as I have already indicated, the opportunity not only to present the written text but to present it verbally at the meeting of Trade ministers from across Canada.

I could not have been any more clear in terms of outlining the importance of not opening the Canada- U.S. agreement and the importance ofthe cultural industries to Manitoba and to Canada. Mr. Wilson, to date, has clearly supported and does support that position. The honourable member has indicated this is a process of negotiations. The next meetings, I believe, take place in approximately mid-August. August 17 , I think, is the date. Clearly, Mr.

Wilson will be going to that meeting with his agenda and the agenda of Canada, which will not necessarily agree in every instance with the government of the United States, Mr. Speaker. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr. Speaker, we know what happened to us the last time round. We were outnegotiated. We were outdealed. We now have, in the clearest possible terms, the American negotiator saying our cultural industries are on the table.

It is important for this province to give a very clear statement, as of today, that they want nothing whatsoever to do with these trilateral negotiations, and that is not the position of this government. The position of this government is that they will accept it as long as the six conditions are met. One of those six conditions has been violated. Mr. Speaker, will this minister, in conjunction with the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs.

Mitchelson), letthe minister atthe federal level know today that we retract our statement of last week, and we will have nothing whatever to do with these trilateral negotiations? Mr.Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, I am not so sure ifthe honourable member is having difficulty hearing or comprehending what I am saying, but clearly we have indicated. We have indicated it in this House. We have indicated publicly. They have a copy. The federal government has a copy of our position.

I have indicated it verbally to the federal minister responsible for trade for Canada, to other Trade mi nis ters from across Ca nada what the governmenfs position is. Clearly, it is not that we do not support the opening of the Canada-U.S. agreement, which in part provides for the kind of protection that the honourable member is in fact requesting. We cannot be any more clear. Our position has also been, Mr. Speaker, that we do not support any agreement. We are not saying we support an agreement "if." We are saying we do not support any agreement unless the six conditions are met.

The very first condition is that there is no opening of the Canada-U.S. agreement providing the kinds of protection which the honourable member has outlined here today. I do not see how we can be any more clear on our position than we have been to date.

51 75 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 Oak Hammock Marsh Mismanagement Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson}: Mr. Speaker, this government is making it clear that old-style politics and out-dated notions of econom ic development sacrifice the natural environment. Bill 38 and the DU complex at Oak Hammock Marsh illu strate this clearly. For the first time in eight years, one of the holding cells at Oak Hammock Marsh has been drawn down so the water level goes down. The result of this is that over 200 grebe nests have been destroyed as well as wetland nests for a variety of other birds, including ducks.

This holding cell is near the site for the proposed development. My question for the Minister of Natural Resources is: Did he authorize this poor management in his department? Is he aware ofthe number of birds that have been destroyed? Hon. Harry Enns (Minis ter of Natural Resources}: Mr. Speaker, I am aware that Ducks Unlim ited , in con ju nction with staff of my department, have managed that resource we refer to as Oak Hammock Marsh so successfully since '7 4, when they built it, that it is being acclaimed internationally as one of the wildl ife management jewels that we should take care to protect.

I am not prepared to acknowledge at all that there has been any mismanagement. I would assume those same management practices that have been exercised today or in this instance have been the ones that have made that wildlife management area so successful. I am aware, as the Minister of Natural Resources, that all kinds of things happen in a natural state. There are indeed, from time to time, thousands of birds that we lose as a result of outbreaks of botulism at times of drought. There are times that nests are disturbed under natural reasons. We are simulating natural reasons in drawing down the water shelves.

I am not about to take over the management of Oak Ham mock Mar sh personally. Ms. Cerllll: Mr. Speaker, it is clear thatthis minister only listens to whom he wants to hear. I would ask the minister, how can he, as the minister responsible for wildlif e, ignore the environmental concerns that have been raised and have been warning us about this? How can he allow this kind of destruction in wildlife management areas? * (1 430) Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, firstly, let me assure her, I will certainly undertake further investigation of the issue that she raises.

In doing so, let me not for a moment acknowledge that this House now starts to become wildlife biologists and manages these kind of wildlife situations on a daily basis, nor does this minister. We have well-paid, professional wildlife biologists on the staff of the Department of Natural Resources. Ducks Unlimited Canada has professional biologist staff who do their very best, and who, I might say, have done an excellent job, or else why the concern, why the uproar that honourable members have expressed with respect to Oak Hammock Marsh?

Oak Hammock Marsh is a tribute to the dedicated work of the professional biolo gists of Ducks Unlimited Canada and of the Department of Natural Resources. Ducks Unlimited Headqua rters Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson}: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary is for the same minister. Will this minister come to his senses, and will he withdraw Bill 38, move the Ducks Unlimited building out of the marsh and not sacrifice the reputation of his department and the reputation of Ducks Unlimited to fulfill his own interests? Hon. Har ry Enns (Minis ter of Natural Resources}: Mr.

Speaker, never wishing to predict the future, particularly in the business of politics, but knowing that the health of this government is secure, I am convinced that, in the lifetime of this government, we will create at least four more Oak Hammo cks : the Grassy River marsh in the Gladstone area; the Turtle River marsh at Dauphin Lake; and in the Rat River area in the southeastern part of the province. There will be four more Oak Hammock Marsh jewels created by this government and by Ducks Unlimited Canada because we care about the environment. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired.

Nonpolitical State ment Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimll}: Mr. Speaker, do I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement?

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 76 Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Gimli have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Leave? It is agreed. Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, next month the Teulon Cardinals will represent Manitoba as the western region entry in the Canadian National Baseball Championships. The Teulon Cardinals earned the right to play in the nationals by first winning the Red-Boine Senior Baseball League featuring teams from Portage Ia Prairie, Elmwood, St. Boniface and Transcona.

Next, Teulon Cardinals went on to win the western region championship in Brandon and next month they will compete in the six-team round-robin tournament, August 22 to 25, in Rimouski, Quebec, for the national crown. Mr. Speaker, I rise with pride today to congratulate the Teulon Cardinals on their accomplishments. I know that all members will want to join with me in wishing them success as they represent our province and western Canada at the nationals in Quebec. ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, on House business first of all, I would like to announce that the Standing Committee on Law Amendments will sit at three o'clock to hear Bill 65. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable government House leader for that information. Mr. Man ness: Also, at this time, Mr. Speaker, I am wondering whether or not there is leave of the House to consider three bills at Report Stage, firstly Bill 59. I do not have the name in front of me, but it is the Workers Compensation bill. The other two, if there is a will of the House, would be the private bills 32 and 66. Mr.

Speaker: Is there leave of the House to allow the honourable government House leader to have Report Stage on Bill 59 and also Bill 32 and Bill 67? Is there leave ? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Yes, it is agreed. REPORT STAGE Bill 59-The Workers Compensation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik), that Bill 59, The Worker s Comp en sation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in. Mr.

Speaker: It has been moved, by leave , by the honourable government House leader, seconded by the honourable Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik), that Bill 59, The Worker s Com pen sation Amendment and Consequential Amendm ents Act ; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les accidents du travail et diverses dispositions legislatives, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in. Agreed? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is that Bill 59, The Workers Compe ns ation Amendment and Consequential Amendmen ts Act ; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les accidents du travail et diverses dispositions legislatives, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in. All those in favour of the motion, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: On division. Bill 66-The Winnipeg Canoe Club Incorporation Amendment Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), that Bill 66, The Winnipeg Canoe Club Incorporation Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Private Bills, be concurred in. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved, by leave, by the honourable government House leader, seconded

51 77 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA July 23, 19 91 by the honourable member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), that Bill 66, The Winnipeg Canoe Club Incorporation Amendment Act ; Loi modifiant Ia Loi constituent en corporation "The Winnipeg Canoe Club", reported from the Standing Committee on Private Bills, be concurred in. Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. Bill 32-The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act Ms. Ju dy Wasylycla- Lels (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), that Bill 32, The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act ; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia "Mount Carmel Clinic", reported from the Standing Committee on Private Bills, be concurred in. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved, by leave, by the hono urable member for St. Jo hns (Ms. Wasylycia-Le is), seconded by the honourable member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), that Bill 32, The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act ; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia "Mount Carmel Clinic", reported from the Standing Committee on Private Bills, be concurred in. Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. House Business Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, ! understand I had to ask for leave of the House for the Standing Committee on Law Amendments to sit at the same time as the House. I am wondering whether or not you may ask the House for that leave. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to allow the committee to stand at the same time? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Yes, to sit. Yes, it is agreed. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Speaker, I would also ask you to ask the House whether or not there might be leave to waive private members' hour. Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House to waive private members' hour today? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Yes, it is agreed. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, the number of hours remaining in Estimates might cause us to sit past six o'clock for some period of time, a short period of time, I gather. I wonder whether or not there might be leave of the House to sit beyond six o'clock tonight to conclude the Estimates review. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the will of the House to sit past the hour of 6 p.m. in order that we can conclude the Estimates? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speak er: That is agreed? Okay. That is agreed. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I believe I have covered all the business at hand. I would therefore move, seconded by- * (144 0) Committee Change Mr. Speaker: Prior to recognizing the honourable government House leader for his Supply motion, 1 will recognize the honourable memberforGimli, with committee changes. Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimll): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. Vital (Mrs.

Render), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendmen ts be amended as follows: the member for Nlakwa (Mr. Reimer) for the member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer) . Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. *** Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General (Mr. McCrae), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself Into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for the Department of Family Services; and the honourable member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay) in the Ch air for the Department of Hi ghways and Transpor ta tion, and the Dep artm ent of Co-operati ve, Consumer and Corporate Affairs. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY-FAMILY SERVICES Mr. Deputy Chairman (Marcel Laurendeau): Order, please.

When this committee last sat, we were considering item 3.(a)( 1) Salaries $1 ,16 2,300 in Income Security and Regional Operations.

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 78 Mr. Reg Alc ock (Osborne) : Mr. Deput y Chairperson, I would like to just ask the minister a few questions about the policies surrounding special needs and exceptional special needs. Can he first just review for me the amounts available in the special needs, how long it has been since they have been at the level they currently are at, and generally what they are to be used for? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Deputy Chairman, just to read you a very brief excerpt here from the brochure on the social allowance programs.

Special needs funds are available for essential items not specifically covered by other parts of the social allowanc e program. These funds are normally limited to $1 50 per household in any fiscal year; however, this limit may be exceeded in exceptional cases with special approval. Special needs funds are often used to purchase or repair house hold items such as appliances, furniture, bedding and school supplies. That amount of $1 50 has been there since the early 19 60s, I am told. Mr.

Alcock: During the last Estimates, the minister had agreed to have a copy of the policy manual for Income Security maintained in the Legislative Library with appropriate updates. Has that been done? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am informed that the Income Security administrative manual has been in the Legislative Library for quite some time. Updates to the manual have been forwarded regularly. The last update was in the spring of 19 91 .

Staff of the Legislative Library have indicated that once preparations are complete, the document will also be placed in the Legislative Library Reading Room, Room 260 of the Legislative Building. I am further told that a former colleague, a former MLA for the constituency of St. Vital, had requested this particular manual and was sent the letter dated May 10 , 19 89. • (1 450) Mr. Alcock: Yes, the request though in the Estimates was that one be placed in the Legislative Library to be available to the public.

When that was checked last week, I was told that yes, the manual had been indicated as being added to the stacks, but as of yet the material was not available to the public. That was some eight to nine months after the minister had agreed to have it there. In fairness to the minister, the library did indicate that they were preparing to do so, but it had taken a rather long period of time to get it into a condition that made it easily accessible to the public.

I would like, though, just on the question of special needs, when you talk abo ut expenses that are over and above what would be considered normal expenses, would that include repairs to one's residence? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am told that is done out of another appropriation call ed minor repairs. Further to the administrative manual, I am told that we checked yesterday and the copy is there, and further, upon request of the honourable critic of the official opposition, forwarded a copy to her on December 11, 19 90. Previous to that, a former critic for the opposition requested and received one on March 6, 19 90.

So these are available, and I am told that there is one upstairs, and staff were informed of that yesterday. Mr. Alcock: With regards to the special needs, if a person then had-in this particular case it is a plumbing repair. The minister is saying that should not come out of the special needs, but that should come out of something called minor repairs. Do I understand the minister correctly? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am informed that is the appropriate process. We have indicated here before and to others that if individual cases want to be addressed, that staff are available to work with Individuals.

I know from letters that I receive that there are many occasions where the staff have done follow- up on specific cases and provided service to recipients. Mr. Alcock: Has it been the policy in the past for MHRC to claim against recipients' special needs? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am told that is not the case. Mr. Alcock: So can the minister assure me that has never been the case, that MHRC has not claimed for repairs to units occupied by recipients, specific claims for repairs that have been applied against their special needs? Mr.

Gllleshammer: We are not aware of any case where that occurred, but if the member is bringing forth the experience of a specific individual who has indicated that, we would be pleased to work with both the critic and the individual to look at the background of that case and find out the voracity of that information.

51 79 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 Mr. Alcock: I will bring forward-! think I have got four now-1 will bring them forward and we can go through them. I do not need to deal with that just here except with this final question on this. If a recipient of income support had a problem such as a repair to a plumbing fixture or replacement of a door or something like that, then it is the policy of the department that not be taken out of special needs but that come out of some other fund? Mr.

Gll leshammer: If the recipient is a homeowner, they can receive support out of the home repairs portion of the program. If the recipient is in rental accommodation, that responsibility would lie with the owner. Mr. Alcock: Would that be true if the owner was MHRC? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes. Mr. Alcock: So that if MHRC was billing recipients for repairs to their properties, that would clearly be a violation of policy? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am told that staff are not aware of cases where that has happened.

If, again, ther e are specific cases that need some investigation, if the client or the member wants to bring forward the information, we would be happy to check into it. I point out that across the provinces we do have something in the order of 26,000 cases on average per year. Obviously staff are not conversant with all of the day-to-day problems that clients face, but there may be some misunderstanding, and we would be pleased to be involved to clear that up. Mr.

Alcock: Yes, I am much more interested in the policy, and I think the minister has been fairly clear about the policy of the department, which is that recipients should not be charged for repairs to property even if the landlord is MHRC and, if they were charged with repairs, those monies should not come from their special needs. That is really the clarification I was asking for, and I believe the minister has provided it. Mr.

Gllleshammer: One of the possibilities, and I guess we are speculating here, is that there may be some damage that occurs to rental property that individuals become responsible for, but there is also a damage deposit, and I would suspect with 26,000 cases that there may be times when the tenant may want to have something repaired that was caused by a member of the family that was a result of willful damage or whatever.

So I recognize that there may be a lot of exceptional circumstances, but basically the policy is indicated in the brochure that is available, and we would be pleased to look at any exceptional circumstances. Mr. Alcock: Okay, well, I will make those cases available. I think also we might involve the Minister of Housing's (Mr. Ernst) office. I have already given some of the information to him because it does involve MHRC. I think we can leave that for now.

Can the minister talk a little bit about the 55-Plus program and wha t led the depa rtm ent to recommend the changes that have now been implemented? * (1 500) Mr. Gllleshammer: The 55-Plus program Is a program that has been in place in Manitoba since the 19 70s. It has a history of sometimes remaining at a constant level. In 19 86, I believe, it was indexed, and this particular year a decision was made to maintain it at its current level.

In the budget discussions across government, departments were responsible for examining the business they do and the programs they have, and all departments brought forward initiatives that would Increase spending. At the same time, we looked at areas where we could spend less across government. Some departments remained at the same level of income as they had in previous years. We have talked earlier In this session about grants in some departments that were cut and done away with.

In the Department of Family Services, in a year where our incomes were flat and we were not accessing new revenue, where we were not prepared to incur a large, large, deficit, as some neighbouring provinces chose, where we have a commitment to maintain taxes at the current level, some difficult decisions had to be made. All departments were faced with that task. Some departments did more in terms of budgetary controls than this department. In fact, I think I have stated once before, and I will state it again, that we had the largest increase across government with an increase in our budget of 6.9 percent.

Ther e are many, many dem ands on this department to expand funding and I think critics can take some responsibility and some credit for bringing to the attention ofthe department areas that they feel require additional funding. It is easy to find those needs, whether it be in Child and Family Services, whether it be in income support, the rehab

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 80 and community living, the student programs for student employment that we talked about this morning. There is no shortage of places to spend money, so in order to increase spending in a number of areas, we also had to look at areas where perhaps we could remain at the same grant level and the same spending level as the previous year. One of the initiatives was to maintain the expenditures in 55-Plus at the expenditure level of the previous year, and that was announced some time ago.

I can recall appearing on a local television show with the critic for the official opposition and others to discuss this, and certainly we have heard from segments of the community that this had a negative impact, and recipients, I think, were faced with the prospect of $1 .60 a month less than what they would have accessed if there had been an indexing. These are difficult decisions. We wish that we had more flexibility in terms of accessing income, and dur ing a good part of the 19 80s when government income was high, there was expansion of programs and expenditures made.

In this particular year, with the massive debt charges that we face and the high demand for services and funding, we had to make decisions and one of the decisions was to retain the 55-Plus at last year's level. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Deputy Chairman, I note the reference in the supplement on page 61 to 55-Plus. It is a $1 , 11 0,000 difference from the previous year, with a portion of that indicated to be caseload decreases and a portion of that to be the loss of indexing, or the maintenance of benefits. Can you split that out for me 7 How does that $1 , 11 0,000 divide? *( 15 10 ) Mr.

Gllleshammer: The reduction is as a result of a lower than anticipated caseload for 199 0-91 and an anticipated caseload decrease in 19 91 -92 . 1 think we talked about this last year, that the caseloads with the elderly who were accessing this seemed to be on the decline, and I think it reflects the other programs that are in place: the Old Age Security, the Guaranteed Income Supplement, the Canada Pension Plan. Both with 55-Plus and CRISP there is a decrease in the number of people accessing the program. As a result, that line is printed at a lower number. Mr.

Alcock: Was this decreasing uptake part of the reason why the department chose to use that as an area to reduce expenditures as opposed to some other area? I mean, was there an analysis done that suggested that this would be the least harmful? Mr. Gllleshammer: The research that is available to the department indicates that in recent years there would seem to be a shift in the poverty from the elderly to the single parents and, as a result of the maturing of some of the programs that are available for income support, the uptake with 55-Plus in particular is noticeably down.

We are also aware that there was a cost avoidance factor by maintaining the program at last year's levels. Mr. Alcock: I am just in tere sted in how the maturation of income support programs for people who are basically targeted at people 65 and above, how does that have an impact on people 55 and above? Mr. Gllleshammer: The majority of the clients involved in the 55-Plus program are 65 and over. Mr. Alcock: Now I have in the senior component of 55-Plus in '89-90 , the last annual report tabled , I have an indication of some 18 ,000 recipients in what they are calling the senior component.

Is that the 65-plus component? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes. Mr. Alcock: So has there been a steady increase in the junior component? Mr. Gllleshammer: The junior component would reflect some increase, and in the senior component there is a decrease from almost 21 ,000 in 19 86-87 to an estimated uptake of about 15 ,000 in 19 91 -92. Mr. Alcock: The question has come up, and it has been discussed several t imes about the impact of the recession on the need for income support. As other benefits are exhausted, there is a lower capacity to employ people.

Has the department noticed any impact on the recipients in the junior portion of the 55-Plus program? Mr.GIIIeshammer: There has been some change. I would point out that the 55-Plus is described as an income supplement, and the most demand we have is on Income Maintenance. Mr. Alcock: The minister also made some comments about CRISP. Has there also been a declining demand for CRISP? Mr. Gilles hammer: Yes, there has been a decline in the CRISP caseload as well from a high of almost

518 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 9,500 in 19 86-87 to an estimated caseload of about 7,500 in 19 91 -92 . Mr. Alcock: In determining benefit levels or supplement levels in 55-Plus, are there levels upon which the people receive the full supplement? Are they indexed? Do they rise each year? Mr. Gllleshammer: They have been in past years; this year they were not. Mr. Alcock: Perhaps, then, we can move on to Regional Operat ions, and I would like to speak a little bit on the Rehab, adult.

I noticed we left children's family services or Children's Special Services open, so perhaps, if the minister would like an opportunity to prepare himself, I would like to ask a few questions around those areas. First, just on Regionai- Mr. Gllleshammer: I am having trouble hearing. You want to deal with Children's Special Services and Rehab and Community Living? Mr. Alcock: I want to talk about Rehab and-1 am sorry, I do not have the book open In front of me-particularly the Manitoba Developmental Centre. I would like to do that with the Children's Special Services people available. Mr.

Gllleshammer: So we are done with Income Security at this time? Mr. Alcock: With the exception of regional services which is part of that line I notice. Mr. Deputy Chairman: We will jus t ask the minister to introduce any new staff who are coming forward then at this time. Mr. Gllleshammer: Joining us at the table is Tannis Mindel!, the Assistant Deputy Minister for Rehab and Community living; Steve Bergson, who is the Director at MDC and in Portage; Brian law , who is Director of Children's Special Services; and, on the end, Bryan McTaggart, Executive Director, Regional Operations. Mr.

Alcock: On the provincial and regional operations, did Regional Operations escape entirely the cuts that wer e made in staffing across government this year? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Deputy Chairman, there were some changes in the regional employment services, and there were some minor changes there which led to a staff reduction. Mr. Alcock: How many positions, or was that a staff? Mr. Gllleshammer: There was a reduction of 10 .26 staff in the regional employment services offices in a number of locations across the province. .. (1 520) Mr. Alcock: Can the minister tell me how many positions in which locations? Mr.

Gllleshammer: Yes, I can do that. In the Churchill office there was a reduction of 1. 26 staff; in Thompson, there was a reduction of 2; in The Pas, a reduction of 2; at the lim estone office, a reduction of 1 ; in Dauphin, a reduction of 1 ; Brandon, a reduction of 1; Teulon, a reduction of 1; and Steinbach, a reduction of 1, giving a total of 10 .26 staff. Mr. Alcock: Were any current departmental staff affected by the decentralization? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am sorry, did you say by decentralization? Mr.

Alcock: I know there were proposals around certain sections in this department to decentralize staff from the city of Winnipeg to other areas. How many staff were decentralized? Mr. Alcock: The decentralization initiatives within this department have not been completed at this time. There will be some offices that are relocated into rural Manitoba, and in anticipation of that there have been some staffing changes, but the offices that are being decentralized are still in process. Mr. Alcock: So have any staff been moved? Have any staff relocated as of today? Mr.

Gllleshammer: There have been staff changes in anticipation of decentralization, and I believe there were three decentralization initiatives indicated from within this department involving CRISP, 55-Plus, and Vital Statistics. At this time those offices still remain in the city of Winnipeg, but there have been staff who worked within those areas of the department who have taken some transfers or found other employment as part of their decision to remain in the city and, in many cases, to remain within the department or other departments.

The CRISP and 55-Plus are targeted for Killarney and Carberry, and the date at which we anticipate those offices will be operating in those communities is October 1 . Mr. Alcock: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I thank the ministe r for that information. Moving on to Rehabilitation and Community living, I would like to

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 518 2 talk a bit about the progress at the Manitoba Developmental Centre. Can the minister tell us what the current population is? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes, I am informed that the current population is 574. Mr. Alcock: My somewhat failing memory tells me that is a decrease over the previous annual report? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Deputy Chairman, I am told that the last year's Estimates showed 583. The annual report reflects the same number. Mr. Alcock: I thought that was the case. Can I be assured that none of the residents at MDC are children? That is still the case?

Mr. Gllleshammer: I am informed that there is one person just about to tum 18 who is at MDC. Mr. Alcock: And how long has that person been a resident at MDC? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am told that this is a tong-term resident who has been there by parental choice. Mr. Alcock: Parental choice, in that the parents live nearby and they are more accessible? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes, I am advised that the parents are from the central region. Mr. Alcock: And there is no more suitable accommodation, group home, foster home, and the like, in the region to accommodate a child rather than placing her with 572 adults? Mr.

Gllleshammer: I am told that was the preference of the parents. Mr. Alcock: On the question of the St. Amant Centre then, can the minister tell us currently the total population and the breakdown between adults and children? * (1 530) (Mr. Bob Rose, Ac ting Chairman, in the Chair) Mr. Gllleshammer: The St. Ama nt Centre, in July of 19 91 , has a population of 259, that being 11 7 children and 14 2 adults. Mr. Alcock: Th at-ag ain, co rrect my memory-from the previous period, 117 children and 14 2 adults? What was it in the last annual report? Mr.

Gllleshammer: The most recent annua l report, '89-90, showed a population of 257, and the number of children was 13 3. Mr. Alcock: Adults? Mr. Gllleshammer: The adu lts would be the difference between 257 and 13 3. Mr. Alcock: I would just like to maybe ask- well, for the sake of time, let me put it this way. It strikes me that a number of things have occurred over the last number of years that would reflect, or at least appear to reflect, very positively on the activities of the department and the community that chooses to provide support to handicapped individuals.

H I understand what these numbers are telling me, as far as the ability to provide services to children, that the department has been quite successful in providing alternative services, that is, alternative to institutional or residential care. Am I assuming too much to note this decline? If we go back in time at St. Amant, I think we see that the period in time when that institution was almost totally children-alt hough, I think, there always were a few residual adults in there awaiting transfer-to a point now where it is less than 50 percent children.

Now does that reflect a decline in the number of handicapped people in the community, or does that reflect a greater ability on the part of the system to respond to the needs of handicapped children? Mr. Gllleshammer: It appears that the number of childr en accommodated in the community is steadily rising. In 19 85-86, there were 783 children in the community. In '86-87, there were 849. Then we can skip ahead to 19 90-91 where there were 1, 275 and the estimated figure for 19 91 -92 is 1 ,305 and at the same time the number of children at St. Amant has declined. Mr.

Alcock: Has the increase in adults maintained in the community followed a similar pattern? Mr. Gllleshammer: The number of individuals at MDC has remained relatively constant for the last few years, and we have attempted to accommodate more adults within the community. The ability to set up group homes and accompanying day programs for age-of-majority children and those whom we have the ability to deinstitutionalize is limited, and we are able to increase that by a small amount every year. Our numb ers of adu lts that we are accommodating is on the rise, but very slowly. Mr. Alcock: Is the minister counting St.

Amant as a community placement? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am not sure just what you mean, but I was referring to our ability to fund new group homes and new facilities.

518 3 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 Mr. Alcock: I thought I understood the minister to end by saying that there had been a small increase in the number of adults being accommodated in the community. He started his comments talking about the decrease in the numbers of people at MDC and then spoke about a relatively small increase in people in the community, and one notes a rather significant increase in the number of adults at St. Amant. Mr. Gllleshammer: I was not referring to the placement of adults or the reaching the age of majority of individuals at St. Amant.

I am saying our ability to fund and create group homes in the community has proceeded at a pace slower than I would li ke to see. Some of these are very expensive. We have provision this year for in the neighborhood of 600 adults in the community in official residences and I believe that is an increase of 25. Two years ago there were 580 or so, so the ability for us to access new group homes and fund new group homes is a slow process. Mr.

Alcock: Am I to infer from that, then, that the tremendous increase in the children accommodated in the community has largely been the result of children being accommodated in foster care? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes, it would be a combination of foster care and children being accommodated in their own homes. Mr. Alcock: So that figure of 1 ,275 children that the minister gave us for '90-91 includes children in foster care, presumably some children in small group care and children being supported at home? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Acting Chairman, that is a combination of a number of factors. Mr.

Alcock: Of that figure, how many are accommodated in foster care? Mr. Gllleshammer: I am told that the 1 ,305 that is projected are children accommodated in their own homes. The children accommodated in foster homes show up elsewhere. That number is in a line that we have already passed under the Child and Family Services. * (1 540) Mr. Alcock: By accomm odated in their own homes, we are talking about provision of respite services, day programs and the like then? We are not talking about residential care? Mr. Gllleshammer: That is correct. Mr.

Alcock: For someone who has not chosen to place their child who then becomes an adult into the care of the province, either in MDC or In one of the group homes, are the support policies available to them the same as the ones that are available to the people who are parenting children? Mr. GIIIeshammer: lfthey are in care and in group homes, we pay the cost of their accommodation and programming. If they are being maintained in their own homes, we pay some of the costs that are involved in some of the areas that the department can assist in. Mr. Alcock: Mr.

Acting Chairman, I am going to raise a specific case name right now because I have been asked to do so by the people involved. This is the Horton family in Brandon. I am sure the Minister is aw are of this, because he has written to them just recently. They have for 21 years been caring for their daughter. They have expressed signi ficant frustration at an inabil ity to receive significant respite. The child, now adult, has no day program. Why does a situation like this arise now? Mr.GIIIeshammer: Mr. Acting Chairman, I will ask staff in a minu te to provide some additional information.

Yes, I am aware of the Horton family, and we have corresponded. I know your Leader has corresponded with me in reference to this case. We have the situation where the department has been involved with this family for a number of years, and it is a very difficult situation. Some options have been presented to the Horton family that I believe does not satisfy them. We have a limited number of group home spaces available. I believe there is a waiting list whereby the department makes certain assessments. I believe that they do access respite and some of the other supports that the department can offer.

The department has been in contact with the family on a number of occasions. I think it is fair to say we have not satisfied the demands that the family have of us. The option that has been suggested does not satisfy them. We will continue to work with the family. We will continue in the years to come to, I am sure, have the ability to access some additional options. We have to be mindful of a process whereby service is identified to people in the area. We have indicated to the tam ily that staff will continue to work with the family.

I think rather than go into more specifics in this venue, that I would commit staff to

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 84 providing some more specifics outside of this committee room. Mr. Alcock: That is fine. I would appreciate an opportunity to review that with staff. Mr. Acting Ch airman, the final qu estion I have-and maybe I can just preface it so we can deal with it expeditiously-involves the Society for Manitobans with Disabi lities and the recen t decision. Now the re has been some confusion, I believe, about just where particular decisions wer e made and how they were arrived at.

I think after some study, it is fair to say that the department may not be responsible for this. It is the question of the reduction in funding for the preschool program at SMDI which I understand was a management decision of that organization rather than a government decision, that the government in saying to the agency how much support they had in the coming year had not conveyed to them any in dica tion of how th at sup por t shoul d be apportioned, but had simply said this is how much su ppor t you are going to have. Then the organization made some decisions about what programs and services it would cut.

Is that a fair statement of the circumstances surrounding the decision to reduce support to the preschool? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Acting Chairman, the picture the member draws is largely correct. We have maintained our level of funding to SMD. We are one of the funders. Decisions that relate to program are made by the management and the board of SMD. We indicated to them as early as possible that the funding this department would be providing for SMD would remain at last year's level. Mr.

Alcock: The subsequent decision by SMD to reduce support for the preschool program wa s solely a decision of the management of that organization? Mr. Gllleshammer: That is correct. Mr. Alcock: Has the minister had an opportunity to meet with some of the parents affected by the decision of that management? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes, I am jus t trying to remember now. I did meet with some parents in my office. I believe I met them also at the annual meeting. I do not suppose the names are of importance.

They talked about programming at SMD and decisions made at SMD and gave information about the type of assistance and programming that was available. We had a goodly discussion with them. I think I met additional parents at the annual meeting as well. We have discussed that with them and with members of the board. • (1 550) Mr. Alcock: A final question, did that result in any changes or has management continued to insistthat this group not receive the service they were previously receiving? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Acting Chairman, I last received word from them, I believe, in early July.

They were making some decisions at that time. I guess I do not feel comfortable indicating decisions they may have made in recent times. Those decisions are clearly the responsibility of the board of directors and the management. I know they were being lobbied, let us say, by some community members to spend more here or less there. I would have to-o r the member, I am sure, could contact the board or the executive director to see what changes have taken place. Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Mr.

Acting Chair, in the area of Commu nity Living and Vocational Rehabilitation Programs, External Agencies, which is found on page 73 of the supplem entary Estimates, the figure for support of the External Agencies is the same for '91 -92 as it was last year, '90-91 , which is su bstantially less than the estimated figure, if I am reading my last year's Estimates properly. The figure I have for the Estimates '90-91 for External Agencies under Commu nity Living and Voc Rehab was $9,228,200 and the Adjusted Vote was just over $7 million. That figure remains the same for this year's Estimates.

It has actually gone down substantially from the '89-90 Estimates, which was almost $1 0 million, which was substantially underspent in '89-90. Again the '90-91 Estimates were substantially underspent by over $2 million, according to my figures. I am wondering if the minister can explain the decline in this amount of money. Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes, I am told that the $2 million as reflected on page 73 under Financial Assistance, I believe it relates to the Pelican Lake Training Centre. I am not sure if that satisfies the member or not. Ms.

Barrett: The honourable member for Wellington is not sure if that satisfies her or not either.

518 5 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 Mr. Gllleshammer: Well, we have many, many hours left to look at this, and maybe if you asked the question in a different way we could get you an answer that is more satisfactory. Ms. Barrett: Mr. Acting Chair, I did have a question on the-1 am looking now at the Order-in-Council No. 41 7 of this year, where the $7,064,300 is allocated to these external agencies, and the sanitorium board of Manitoba Pelican lake Training Centre, under this Order-in- Council, is given a grant of $20,000.

I wondered about that and wondered if there is another spot where additional funding is given to this agency and if that is what the minister is saying, that that would explain the discrepancy. Mr. Gllleshammer: The majority of the funding flows to the institution through the per diems. I believe that $20,000 that the member is referencing in an Order -in-Council was for some capital improvements. Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Acting Chair, in effect, when I look at the line External Agencies and compare it year over year, actual estimate, the fact that the dollar figure has steadily declined is not something that one should worry about because that money is appearing somewhere else? Mr. Gllleshammer: With the Pelican lake Training Centre, I can assure the honourable member that we have maintained that at the same level as last year. Ms. Barrett: I appreciate the minister's clarifying that for me.

I do have a series of questions in areas of concern regarding this portion of the Estimates that I would like to spend some time talking with the minister about. Could the minister explain what, if any, follow-up support there is to this supp orted employment, which I understand is now working for approxima tely 250 people? Is there follow-up support for that program? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Acting Chairman, the employment programs are offered in a number of different ways. One that I visited was the Sturgeon Creek Enterprises Incorporated.

They do some follow-up with the individuals that they place in the job market. I recall visiting with staff, an employee that worked at The Keg on Portage Avenue-a nd the support staff from Sturgeon Creek Enterprises Incorporated, I believe, visited there once or twice a week to do follow-up as the individual was moving into a more permanent form of employment. It is an area that I guess I would say is not well served by the supports that are out there, and it is certainly an expanding area in trying to find employment for people who have taken these training programs.

Now I am told that the department has completed its research and has examined options to implement follow-up goods and services on a pilot basis using existing resources. Follow-up goods and services are consistent with the department's direction in vocational and day programming, which suggests a timely and moderate shift from sheltered workshops to supported employment in community-based and integrated worksit es. So this is an area where progress has been somewh at slow, but an area that I think we need to put more financial and human resources into as we have the ability to do so. Ms.

Barrett: Is there the possibility of VRDP cost sharing for such programs? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes, I am told there is. • (1 600) Ms. Barrett: In the mi nister's response just preceding this last response, he talked about pilot projects. I am not clear, are there pilot projects un derway in the planning stage, or has only research been done on the possibility of some day potentially initiating a pilot project? Mr. Gllleshammer: It is still in the research and planning stage, but it is an area that we wish to proceed with as we are able to. Ms.

Barrett: Does the minister have any Idea when his department may feel that they are ready to do some pilot projects or access some federal funding? Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Acting Chairman, I guess the member is looking for some time lines on when some of these initiatives can be launched. It is a matter of us identifying resources from within that we can spend on initiatives that would be cost shared. I would hope by the time we meet again in the Estimates process that we would be able to report some progress to the member. I can tell you it is an area that is of special interest to me.

At the same time, we have to satisfy the many demands that are brought forward by people involved in the system, and by the critics who urge us to spend, spend, spend on a variety of issues. We can find many vulnerable people who would benefit from program expanision. I do not know whether in the mind of the critic she would have a

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 518 6 list of priorities where she may urge the department to spend, or perhaps areas where she would urge us to discontinue programs so that we can redirect some dollars into helping those who are more vulnerable. It is an interesting exercise in going through the budget preparation to identify the needs and the dollars and the programs that are out there, but we are aware that there are needs in many areas of this department, and we will address them as we are able to.

We are going to review our priorities for the coming year after we complete the Estimates and do more work on the Commu nity Living area. I have indicated that this is of interest to me, but we have to balance these interests and priorities with the funding levels we have. I know , while the member has not applauded our 6.9 percent increase in funding in Family Services, I think in her own quiet way she is very pleased that we are able to access that sort of support, and probably before the Estimates are over the critic will recognize that. Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Acting Chair, in my own quiet way, I will categorically deny that I am going to recognize that. Again , I do not want to get into the basic philosophical difference that provides a major gulf between how you perceive your position and how I perceive what I would like to see your position as; but I do think that in this area in particular, in the area of follow- up, it sort of appears to me to be at the other end of the continuum from prevention.

We need to have prevention services; we need to have services that deal with situations that are in a crisis, or are here and now; and it also is important that we have follow-up services so that in the follow-up side we do not lose the positive benefits of the programs that we have put resources into. I understand-! do not agree with-the minister's basic assumption thatthere is no more revenue, and we have had this discussion before. I appreciate and applaud the statement that the minister is looking at the priorities and that he does care about these kinds of programs.

I look forward to seeing a beginning made in providing follow-up in this area, so that, as I said, we do not lose what we have been able to achieve with these individuals and families. Also, I think that it is incum bent upon the provincial government in all areas to access as quickly as possible any existing federal monies because they appear to be decreasing and evaporating quite rapidly, and I would urge the minister to look very carefully at any programs that have the possibility of cost sharing.

Moving on again, I understand there is a Red River Commun ity College development services worker course that is currently available and there is an intake in that program every second year of 25 students. The suggestion has been made that perhaps that development service worker course could happen every year, instead of every second year. Is the minister aware of this program and has he talked to his colleague, the Minister of Education (Mr. Derkach) about the possibility of increasing the uptake in that program? * (1 61 0) Mr.

Gllleshammer: Just before we get into that, the member indicates that we can Increase revenue. I am wondering if her preference would be to increase the deficit or to increase taxes. I would be really interested to know whether she subscribes to the Ontario model of finding additional funding or if she would prefer the increase-in-taxes route. As far as the program at Red River Commun ity College, I have not personally spoken to the minister about it, nor has anyone that I recall brought to my attention that we need to increase the number of graduates there.

It is an emerging area in many ways, and I was very impressed with the staff I met with at Sturgeon Creek Enterprises. I have also visited at Versatech and, as with any service delivery, the more qualified and committed people who are available, the better we will be able to serve the public that we serve. Ms.

Barrett: Just very briefly, to respond to the minister's comments about the preferable model that I would follow in generating more revenue--! would just say that time will tell which province comes out of the recession ahead of which other province, and many financial institutions are predicting that the province of Ontario will be far ahead of the province of Manitoba in coming out of this recession. I think, again we will agree to disagree and let events unfold as they will. I would like to ask the minister another question in this area, if I may.

Could he provide us with a regional breakdown of the placements in industry as created by the Voc-Rehab staff, the provincial department staff?

518 7 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 Mr. Gllleshammer: We will see here in a minute what statistics we have for you. I would just remind the member that when you drive that deficit up, as we saw in the early '80s, you create that long-te rm debt. I mentioned that cheque for $551 million that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) writes out before we are able to provide any services, any programs, any new initiatives, any old programs and old initiatives, and it does impair us from bringing forth new initiatives at a time when it would be good to have those new initiatives.

So the short-term gain of the high-deficit spending is going to impact on another government another day in the sister province, and it is going to have a negative impact when that province attempts to bring forth new initiatives in the latter part of the 19 90s. We do not have a breakdown by industry. Perhaps there are some numbers we can share, or maybe we can have the department staff do some further work on that and provide you with those figures another day. Ms. Barrett: Yes, that would be more than adequate.

I understand, given the time constraints that these requests are often not able to be handled at the time that they have been asked for. I wonder if the minister has any information about the numbers of people in the institutions at Ninette and Portage and St. Amant who, if there were commu nity-based programs available for alternate living arrangements, would be able to utilize those alternate living arrangements? Mr.

Gllleshammer: The in stitutions that the member references are all different, and the needs of the children and the adults that we talk about are very different too and, in some cases, there are really high needs and specialized individuals who would require very extensive care. I do not know whether the member has visited any or all of those institutions. At MDC we have had a transition unit for the last couple of years with I believe 23 individuals involved in the transition unit who possibly could live in the community.

Unfortunately, in the real world that we live in we have to talk about the ability to provide not only the residential facility, but the programming and the supports, and it is a simplistic view that you simply could transfer 23 people from a large institution into the community and transfer the costs with them. Possibly the simplest part of that equation would be the staffing and staffing adjustment but, at the same time, you do not reduce the very substantial costs in running a large institution like that.

Unfortunately, we have to look at the funding area of it, but there are 23 people who have participated in the transitional unit, and those were deemed at a particular point in time to be the individuals most ready to be deinstitutionalized, if you like, or put into the community. Now, at the Ninette training centre we have more higher functioning individuals. We have a total of 70 people who reside there. Again, it would take some program expansion in terms of setting up the living accommodations and the day programs for them, but those are probably the individuals with the higher level of functioning.

Now, in looking at St. Amant, there has been a transition from, as the other critic referenced, the number of children to those reaching age of majority there. Many of them are profoundly handicapped, and the expansion of programs for those individuals proceeds on a very, very limited basis. We do have some diffi cu lty in providin g the appropria te accommodation and programming for them, and progress there has been very, very slow. I suppose in a perfect world, where we could access the funds we need, we could move much faster.

Again, it is important that we keep working at this and trying to find solutions so that we can have more of these individuals living in the communi ty. Ms. Barrett: Yes, I am well aware of at least the major issues involved in the whole concept of deinstitutionalization. I understand that there are groups in the commun ity who are very clear in their perspectives. Those groups do not necessarily always agree, one with the other, on the need for institutionalization, on the range of programming that is available.

I guess what I am trying to get at is, what I hear the minister saying is that now there does not appear to be a large number of people in those institutions who, in the minister's view, or in the staff's view, are ready to be deinstitutionalized if resources in the community were available. I know the min ister stated earlier that those community resources were very expensive to put into place, and I know he has talked in this little division about-at least, I am assuming what he was referring to was the need for overlap spending.

You just cannot take $1 00 and take it out of MDC and put it into a community program. You have to have transition costs, and that $10 0 will not completely

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 51 88 transfer. Is this what the minister is saying that, given the situation, there are numerically not very many people from those three institutions who would be ready to participate in the community, and is that one of the reasons why he is not putting additional resources into that? * (1 620) Mr. Gllleshammer: Until you made the last comment, I was going to substantially agree with you. The individuals who have been placed in the community in past years were certainly ones that were the easiest to place, and that makes some sense.

I know, in talking with my colleague in Saskatchewa n, he took some pride in being able to move large numbers of individuals from institutional care to community-based care, and it has been quite successful, but that got him down to the 600 or 700 that are more difficult. I think, in the past, and certainly with the transition unit at MDC, the individuals who were involved in the transition unit were the ones who were deemed to be most ready to live in the community. There would be out of the 70 at the Pelican Lake Training Centre probably 15 or more who would be deemed the most ready out of that group.

I do not have similar figures for MDC, but as we move along this path of having individuals move out of institutions and in the community, it becomes progressively more difficult because the ones who are most ready have al ready been dealt with. It bec omes, unfortunately, increasingly more costly as you have to put additional supports into the residential as well as the day programming, and at the same time you are not saving the incremen tal costs on the institution side that would allow you to do that.

So there are problems there, but that will not deter us from making our best effort and attempting to show progress in that area. One of the other complications, of course, is children as they reach the age of majority and those individuals who are living at home with aging parents who are looking down the road. I have spoken to some of these in my office; they have come to see me and lay out the case that, as they grow older, they wish to have permanent relief from the responsi bil ities of caring for high-needs youngsters and young adults.

So we have to balance the needs of the clients and the cost of services, but, in principle, we would like to see as many as can be accommodated in the community. Over and above that there are a variety of individual cases. The critic for the second opposition party raised a specific case, and I tried to answer that in a general way. It is very complex and the department has worked very hard on that, and it is sometimes, I think, the responsibility of opposition MLAs who take their job seriously to analyze and make decisions on specific cases.

It can be too easy to take up the cause without a full understanding of the background and the issues and the solutions. We have other cases where the family, by and large, prefers to look after that child who has grown to an adult, and will do so. The family will do so as long as they can, and in some cases personal care homes will eventually be the resolution of the problem. So there is such a variety of individual cases.

We have families who would prefer that perhaps we pay them wages to care for a child, and we have to be careful in certainly promising and delivering fair treatment to all Manitobans that we do not, in our efforts to resolve individual cases, start making new policy whereby we are going to expand the program because we have accepted some exceptional circumstances in one case. So the resolution of many cases can be very case-specifi c. I might just add one other thing while I have the floor and before the member starts her questioning again.

I have such a concern over groups who want to start something with one-year funding, or two-year funding, and then not have the solution for year three, four, five and beyond. Often it is too convenient to come back to government and say: Well, we got it started; now you fund it and keep it going. While we try and work as diligently as possible and find those solutions, sometimes we simply do not have the resources to do it. Ms.

Barrett: I would like to ask the minister one last question on this particular area about-he talked earlier about the 23 individuals who possibly could live in the community and yet they were in the transition unit at MDC. Then, I believe, he stated that there were approximately 15 individuals in Ninette who were "most ready.w Does the minister have any information about when any or all of those individuals would be able to go into the community? I quess that is the second part of the question. The first part of the question is, how long have those individuals been in those most ready kinds of

51 89 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 living conditions and, secondly, when might it be anticipated that they could actually move into the community? Mr. Gllleshammer: For the second part of your question, I do not know. We do not have immediate plans in place to do that. It is an area that we continue to work on. The transition unit at MDC has been in place since the Welcome Home Program, and this particular transitional unit, I am told, was started in April of 19 88. Ms.

Barrett: I would like to ask a couple of questions about people in sheltered workshops and at MDC who are working currently for minimum wage. Actually, I guess, I would like to ask if there are individuals either at MDC and/or in the sheltered workshops who are currently working for minimum wage-less than minimum wage ? Mr. Gllleshammer: The answer is yes. * (1 630) Ms. Barrett: Can the min ister ex plain who authorizes that, under what programs those are developed, and under what regulations? Mr. Gllleshammer: Ther e is an ex emp tion provided under The Labour Relations Act which allows for that. Ms.

Barrett: I am wondering if the minister can give a bit of detail on what that exemption states? Mr. Gllleshammer: Is the member asking for a copy of the act or just some clarification of it? Ms. Barrett: No, not a copy of the act, Mr. Acting Chair, but just a clarification of the rationale for the exemption. Mr. Gllleshammer: I am told that this has been a part of that act for a long time, so it has some history behind it. Probably, one could understand why that was put in place and why there is an exemption.

In terms of day programming and in terms of providing programs for individuals, it is certainly accepted that if there is work, an activity, that is available for individuals, it can be beneficial. By the same token, I expect, in some of the workshops that I have seen and some of the work experience that I have seen, the job market is not prepared to pay full salaries to people who are trained to do certain types of work. We are sort of caught, I suppose, on the horns of a dilemma here to access some aspects of the job market.

There either has to be some form of subsidies, or there will have to be the opportunity for employers to pay less money. Ms. Barrett: I think horns of a dilemma is probably not an overstatement about the concern here. Is the minister aware of any concerns that have been raised by groups or individuals about the possible exploitation of individuals who are working under these conditions? Mr. Gllleshammer: We are aware that there are concerns, and the rationale for the wage exemption is that a number of these handicapped people would not have any acts as to employment if there was not a reduced wage level.

I mean, that is the dilemma that we are faced with, and we have to work with the Department of Labour in looking at that. That exemption, I think, has been in place for some time. If you try to remedy that exemption in what might be a spirit of fair play, you might also do away with the employment opportunities that are there for many of these individuals, so more work has to be done on that with the Department of Labour and our department. I am not sure there is a ready solution, and you have to weigh what is more important in making that decision. Ms.

Barrett: I am certainly the last person to say that there is a ready solution to the problem. I would suggest, however, the first step is identifying that there is a problem. The second step is commitment to trying to come up with a solution and then working toward that. It appears that the government has at least taken the first step of recognizing there is a problem, and I hope that the later steps follow along.

The argument that these individuals would not have access to employment if there were not a reduced wage level sounds very similar to the argument used to try and put into place reduced minimum wage for youth. I do not like either argument, and I understand the financial restraints that the current situation finds itself in, but I would hope that the government makes some effort to stop this situation, if at all possible. I do believe there is, at the very least, the opportunity if not the actuality of exploitation of these individuals, so I want to just bring that to the minister's attention.

I have a final question in this area, for the final set of questions. I assume there will be more than one. I would like to know what the status is of the Working Group on Commu nity Uving.

July 23, 19 91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 90 Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Acting Chairman, just in reference to previous comments, what you are saying is you recognize there is a problem, that you do not have the solution but you would like us to fix it. I say that quite honestly. If I. have that wrong, maybe you could correct me but there is a dilemma there, and I thought the member indicated that she did not have the solution but that she would like to have it fixed. I would also point out that the supp orted employment places people in real jobs at a minimum wage.

I do not know if the deputy critic from the official opposition wants to make comment on that but we have a dilemma, and if there were solutions, we would be pleased to hear from you on that. I think it is important that we make every attempt to move in the direction of supported employment as an option because then we can get away from that dispensation that we have under the Labour Act, if in fact we can move quickly in that area, but I do not think we can. So we have to continue to struggle with that and try to find the solutions.

Again, if the member has ideas that she would like to put forward , we would be pleased to work with her on that. I believe the question had to do with the Working Group on Community Living. They are nearing the end of their work and recently provide d a submission to the human resources committee of cabinet and have brought some proposals forward to government that we will be looking at in the near futu re. The presentation was an extre mely interesting one.

There are suggestions in there, I believe a suggestion for a pilot project that we will have to try to focus on and see if it is something that is achievable. It did bring together a number of Manitobans from across the spectrum of service providers and people involved with individuals who access support from this area of the department. We are at that stage now where there is an initial report and it has been brought to government and we will be looking at it in the coming months. Ms. Barrett: Is this the final report of the working group? Mr. Gllleshammer: That is correct. Ms.

Barrett: It has gone to the human resources committee of cabinet. Is that its only presentation to cabinet? Does it then go into the department for whatever will happen to it then? Mr. Gllleshammer: Yes, it is something that now comes to the department. We just had that presentation in early July and as we have been very busy within the department getting ready for Estimates and so forth, we do not have sort of an analysis of it yet, but it is something that-it is one of the challenges that is before the department in the coming months, and we will be making a response in due course. *( 164 0) Ms.

Barrett: I would be interested to hear what that response will be. Will the government be making comments on the recommendation-! do not know what the report, even the format looks like, but I am assuming there is a series of recommendations. Will the government be saying, yes, we approve Recommendation 1 and we will start right on it and, no, we canno t do that righ t now to the recommendations? Also, will the report be made public at any point in time? Mr. Gllleshammer: I guess I do not have an answer tor the memb er. We have just barely received it.

I am not even sure the department has had a chance to review it at this point. It is some very important work done by this working group on community living. We will be taking forward to some initiative from their recommendations. As soon as we have made decisions on it we would be making some announcement to the commun ity, because there was community input and community work done on the report. Certainly the expectation is that government will look at the recommendations and come forward with something. Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Acting Chair, I am certainly not trying to suggest that the government should have a statement imme diately, especially since the government has not had a chance to look at the report in depth. I would like to ask the question again. At some point, will the report be made public in its entirety? Mr. Gllleshammer: I would reserve comment on that until we have a chance to take an in-depth look at it. We were presented with it I think something like two weeks ago in a committee meeting. There were excerpts of it used in the presentation.

I think we would have to take a more thorough look at the report before making that decision. Ms. Barrett: There is the possibility that this report, which has been months in the making, may never see the light of day, so the public at large might not have the opportunity to take a look at the report and measure the government's reactions in light of what

5191 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 23, 19 91 the public, both the in terested parties, the significantly interested parties to this area and also the public at large may not have a chance to say, yes, the government has done a reasonably good job in trying to address some of these issues and here are other issues where the government still needs some additional support and encouragement from the community.

Many of the reports that come to government are made public, and the recomm endations are available, so we all can look at them in light of actions and in light of changing circumstances, which we all agree is a part of our late 20th Century North American context. I think it is important that these kinds of recommendations, these kinds of reports are best utilized when they are made available to the public. Mr. Gll leshammer: I woul d give serious consideration to the comments of the member. Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Acting Chair, I would like to leave a fair bit of time for the critics to discuss the Minister's Salary and to make closing comments. I have lots of other questions, but I will not take any more time in this area. I would like to ask a question, however if I may, under the Family Dispute Services section, If that is deemed to be in order. The Acting Chair man {Mr. Rose) : The honourable minister, is that agreeable? Mr. Gllleshamrner: Yes, we will just take a few minutes to change some of the staff here and proceed with that. (Mr. Deputy Chairman In the Chair) Ms.

Barrett: In a procedural matter while the staff is being changed, I am wondering if it would

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-2-91
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 2nd hansardpdf 91.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0160b83b4fe22033f16aa299056c4246c3669607

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).