Manitoba Hansard — 15 May 1991 (Sitting 44, 35th Legislature, 2nd Session)

35-2-44

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Fifth Legls lature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XL No. 44 -1:30 p.m., WEDN ESDAY, MAY 15, 1991 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. Province of Manitoba ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature LIB - Liberal; ND - New Democrat; PC - Progressive Conservative NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARR, James CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CONNER Y, Edward CUMMINGS, 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. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MclNTOSH, 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. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Well ington Crescentwood River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage la Prairie Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Rus sell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas lnkster The Pas St. Norbert Elm wood 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 ND LIB ND PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC PC PC PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC ND PC ND PC PC ND ND

2120 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, May 15, 1991 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Mr. Jerry Storie (Flln Flon): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a matter of privilege. Mr. Speaker, a matter of privilege is a very serious occasion, and I believe this is my first opportunity, given some information which came to light this morning, to raise this matter. Mr. Speaker, over the past number of weeks at least, the Minister of Housing (Mr .

Ernst), in responding to questions about the approval of an application under the RentalStart program for a seniors project at the Rotary Pines, has been, to say the least, contradictory and on many occasions, I believe, deliberately misleading. The claims of the Minister of Housing have been contradicted by numerous groups who have made applications under this program. They have now been contradicted by the minister's own staff, and I believe that it is a matter of privilege that members of this Chamb er dese rve to be told in a straightforward fashion the facts. That has clearly not happened. Mr.

Speaker, the mi nister on May 2 acknowledged providing misleading information to this House. Today we learned that the allegations that have been made by my colleague for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), by my colleague for Transcona (Mr. Reid), by members of the public were, in fact, true, that this minister deliberately cleared the decks of the RentalStart program to give preferential treatment to a political friend of this government. Mr.

Speaker, that in itself is a serious breach of the integrity of this government, but the way in which misleading and false information has been provided publicly on the record to members of this side is, I believe, a breach of our privileges and my privileges as a member. Mr.

Speaker, this is a serious m attar, and I believe it is time that this Chamber looked into the awarding of this contract and the minister's conduct in awarding this contract in the interest of fairness to the groups who have been left in the cold, in the interest of the groups who have done their homework and applied in good faith to a government program they believed they were eligible for. They hav e been un dermine d in tentionally an d deliberately for political motives by this minister. * (1 335) I therefore move, seconded by the member for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale), that the awarding of the contract of Rotary Pines under the Seniors RentalStart program and the matter of the minister's conduct in awarding that contract be referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections so that committee may report back to this Chamber at the earliest opportunity. Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious allegation, and as soon as I attempt to see the motion-I do not know whether there is a printed copy com ing to me or not. I refe r you to Beauchesne

Section 31 (1 ) where it says: "A dispute arising between two Me mbers, as to allegations of facts, does not fulfill the conditions of parliamentary privilege." Mr. Speaker, in my view, you have to make your ruling on the basis of that historic precedent of the rules with respect to a matter of privilege. Nowhere in the member's allegations, in the member's introduction of his privilege, does he bring forward one shred of evidence, one fact.

He is indulging in pure political innuendo, and I say to him that it is a most unfortunate way to conduct his own affairs and, I would say, it puts into question his own integrity. Mr. Speaker, the member, our Minister of Housing (Mr. Ernst), as he has said many times in my presence, has stated over and over again that he fully welcomes a discussion on this matter once his Estimates come forward. I am led to believe that could occur as early again as Thursday this week. This whole issue needs a full airing, and certainly one will be given during the Estimates, and the minister wants to do that.

2121 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 For the member to rise in his place today without any evidence and call, as he says in his motion, that the contract be referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections and that the comm ittee repor t back to the Chamb er at the earlies t opportunity, in my view, does a disservice to himself and does a disservice to the House. I ask you to rule his motion out of order. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): A matter of privilege of this nature is a very serious issue, Mr.

Speaker, and I would sugges t to you that there is importance for government ministers to bring facts to the Chamber so that the members in opposition are better able to represent their constituents. Mr. Speaker, there are gu idelines thro ugh different programs that allow members to advise their constituents in terms of what programs governments have to offer. What the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) has brought up is an issue in which there are guidelines that are in place on the service. Through the minister's own comments, it appears that those guidelines have been violated.

Those very same guidelines were not violated for other members of this Chamber's constituencies, in particular the member for Flin Flon. I think what the member for Flin Flon is rec ommen ding, an independent inquiry, if you will, into the whole affair, would be a just solution to ratify the problem. • (1 340) Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, a matter of privilege is indeed a serious matter, and this is a serious matter. We repeatedly, over the last several weeks, have seen examples where misleading information has been brought to this House.

It is not a question of a dispute over the facts. The minister, himself, rose on a matter that was indeed raised in a subsequent matter of privilege by the memb er for Bu rrows (Mr. Martindale) and indicated that he had brought forward misleading information to the House. This is not a dispute over the facts. The facts are clear. We have had one project that has received favoured treatment. We have had various projects that had been told that money was not available when indeed it was.

We have asked questions repeatedly in this House as to the background of the awarding of that particular contract on a favoured basis and the information that was given to the other groups, and we have been told, as members of the Legislature, information that has been misleading and was indicated as being misleading as late as today. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that the fact it is misleading and the fact that the information that we have received, as opposition members, just today satisfies our condition of a matter of privilege, that it be raised at the first opportunity.

The key question has to be whether it is a contempt, which indeed is considered a matter of privilege, and for it to be a matter of contempt, the ruling has to be based on whether there was a deliberate attempt to mislead. Were this the first incident where there was a misleading statement made, we might perhaps, Mr. Speaker, accept that there was an error made on behalf of this minister and this government, but it is not the first time that we have been misled as members of this House.

That is why I would ask you to take that into account and take into account the fact that essentially you are dealing, as Speaker, as to whether there is a prima facie case. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to put yourself in the position of people watching what has been happening with this matter over the last several weeks. I think every member of the public in Manitoba would support what this motion would do, which is point to the misleading information, and point to a remedy, a referral to the Committee on Privileges and Elections that will ensure a full and open hearing. In conclusion, Mr.

Speaker, I want to stress that it is not a dispute over the facts. The facts are clear. This gove rnmen t has been misleading the opposition and members of the House about the Rotary Pines project, and the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) and all members of the opposition want that cleared, and the only way to do that is to accept this matter of privilege. Mr. Speaker: A matter of privilege is indeed a very important matter, and I would like to thank all honourable members for their comments. I will take this matter under advisement and will report back to the House. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr.

Speaker: I have reviewed the petition, 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? An Honourable Member: Yes. Mr. Clerk (Wllllam Remnant): To the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Manitoba

May 15, 1991 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 2122 The petition of the undersigned residents of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that: WHER EAS the provincial government has removed the indexing provision from the Seniors 55-Plus program; and WHERE AS 55-P lus is an income su pport program aimed at seniors suffering the greatest economic hardships; and Mr. Speaker: Dispense . Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Oppos ition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, we do not want to dispense. We would like to hear the petition. Mr. Speaker: The Clerk will continue. Mr. Clerk:

WHEREAS the Filmon government is unfairly placing the burden of economic hard times upon seniors below or near the poverty line by deindexing 55-Plus; WHEREFORE these petitioners request that the government of Manitoba consider reinstating the indexing of the 55-Plus program. PR ESENTING REPOR TS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Mrs. Lou ise Da cqu ay (Chairman of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted a certain resolution, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for Fort Garry (Mrs.

Vodr ey), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPO RTS Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table copies of the 19 91 Report of the Western Finance Ministers as presented to the Weste rn Pre miers' Conference in Nip aw in, Saskatchewan, yesterday. I also have copies of the comm uniques which were issued at that conference. Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I would be pleased to table the Annual Report for 19 89-90 for the Department of Northern Affairs.

INTROD UCTION OF BILLS Biii 42- The Publlc Schools Finance Board Amendment Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Education and Training (Mr. Derkach), I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 42, The Public Schools Finance Board Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Commission des finances des ecoles publiques, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a firsttime. (Recommended by His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.) Mr. Speaker, I also table that message of the Lieutenant-Governor. Motion agreed to. Biil 19-- The Local Authorities Election Amendment Act Hon. James Downey (Minister of Rural Development): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), thatBill 19 , The Local Authorities Election Amendment Act, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

At Introduction of Bills, we generally introduce bills for first reading. The honourable minister inadvertently introduced a bill for second reading. Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, as has long been the practice of this Assembly, I used the document that was on my desk. If it would be the desire of the House that I should do it through another system, I would hold the bill until it has the other process. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable minister. * (1 350) Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon from the Warren Collegiate fifty Grade 11 students. They are under the direction of Mr. Jake Wiebe and Mr. John Smith. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon.

2123 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 15, 1991 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Seniors RentalStart Program Pines Project Application Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, day after day and piece after painful piece, the publi c's per cep tion of fairnes s of this government in dealing with the Rotary Pines is coming into disrepute. Mr. Speaker, the government has approved a program for one developer and one project after it suspended the same project and program for a number of other developers and community-based groups that had applied for it in October of 19 90.

Then the government received an application from the one same developer, the Rotary Pines, reported by the staff of the minister's department, on February 11, 19 91 , one day after the minister was sworn in as Minister of Housing. Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Housing is: Who informed the developer, the one developer, that this project was now not suspended anymore? Who made the decision not to inform other community-based groups that this project was now available? Why did this group apply on February 11, one day after the minister was sworn in, on this project? Hon.

Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, first of all, I was sworn in on the 11 th of February at about three o'clock or thereabouts in the afternoon of that day. Prior to that time, I was away, out of the country on a vacation for the week prior to that. Mr. Speaker, as well, what is in error is the fact that the program was not, as quoted in the recent newspaper

article today, reactivated. It was never deactivated. I am advised by the staff of the department, because these things predated my becoming the Minister of Housing on February 11, that the budget for the department was approved in December by this House and following that, the program was available within the department. Pines Project Funding Suspension Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): The question, Mr. Speaker, that I asked the minister is, why did this one project reapply whether it was reactivated or suspended or not suspended or in a state of suspended animation?

Why did the one project reapply, the Rotary Pines project? Why were the other community-based groups not told that this thing was-and the minister said it was not reactivated but back on statu s wher e the government could approve it. My question to the Premier is: Given the fact that public fairness dictates that all people are treated in the same way by their own provincial government and given that this project clearly knew that the funding was available again and nobody else knew, will this Premier (Mr.

Filmon) now suspend the decision to publicly fund the Rotary Pines project and have all the groups reapply in a fair and equitable way, so that merit can be the determining factor for the projects that will go forward on co mmu nity non profit proje cts for Sen ior s RentalStart, so every project in Manitoba can be treated fairly as opposed to the situation we have now where only one project knew about the re-entry application, only one project applied and all the others did not because they did not know about it? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Mr.

Speaker, one of the quotations that was not used in the newspaper

article today, quoted by the member of the staff of the Department of Housing, was the fact, given all of the projects that have been raised in the public mind over the past while, which one was the best? That staff member said clearly the Pines was the best project, best from a wide variety of perspectives in terms of need, in terms of ability to meet seniors dem and and so on. From an un der wr iting perspective, it was the best project.

I think, from that point of view, we should have all the facts on the record and all the quotes on the record before the member for Concordia decides to quote selectively from individual situations. * (1 355) Mr. Doer: There is no doubt that this project would be the best. It was the only one that reapplied and the only one considered. It is one out of one, Mr. Speaker. Given the fact that his own Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr.

Driedger) has been opposed to this project, the Chamber of Commerce has been opposed to it, the federal ministers of transportation have been opposed to it, many other community-based groups are opposed to it, how can the minister now say it is the best? How can the Premier (Mr. Filmon) stand by and allow a system of fairness to go on in this province that people in Manitoba believe is unfair?

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2124 Would the Premier now suspend all of the funding to the Rotary Pines project and have every other project apply in the same way at the same time and be considered on the same merit base that the Rotary Pines project was considered, because the Pr emier then kn ows tha t transportation considerations would then mean that other projects would move ahead of the Rotary Pines and this insane projec t could be cancelled by the government? Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speak er, the Leader of the Opposition did not listen to my first answer.

The question was asked of the staffperson in the Department of Housing: Of all the projects that have been raised in the public mind in the past while, of all of those projects, including the Pines, which was the best? He clearly said, from an underwriting perspective, from a risk perspective, from a needs perspective, all of those perspectives, that clearly-and I did not say that; it was done by a memb er of the staff-i ndicated that it was the Pines that was the best project, and for that reason it was approved. Pines Project Site Usage Mr. Doug Martindale {Burrows): Mr.

Speaker, there are so many problems with Rotary Pines that it is absolutely scandalous that it was approved. They were the only applicant invited to apply in February 19 91 . Four applicants were diverted to ano ther pr ogram in 19 90. They wer e not incorporated at the time of application. They have no registered interest in the land on the title. It is opposed by the provincial minister of transport. It is opposed by two federal Ministers of Transport. It is opposed by Winnipeg International Airport. It is opposed by the Chamber of Commerce.

Why is this minister approving this development when everyone knows that it only occupies 13 percent of the site, evidence of which I will table, and that the real reason for the rezoning was to permit luxury condominiums and 35,000 square feet of strip mall on the other 87 percent of the site? Hon. Jim Ernst {Minist er of Housing): Mr. Speaker, we are dealing here with a Housing department program, Seniors RentalStart program. It has to do with 86 units in a nine-s torey building on a site on Portage Avenue. That is what we are dealing with.

Whatever else happens on adjacent lands is not of particular interest, nor do we have any involvement in those particular events. With regard to all of the allegations, however spurious they are, I would be pleased to go into it in detail, all of those things, when we get to the Department of Housing Estimates. Housing Projects Minister's Approval Mr.

Doug Martlndale {Burrows): Will the minister tell the House if there is a new policy in his department or a new policy of his government that because of the Rotary Pines precedent that, in future, their Tory developer friends need not apply for program approval to Manitoba Housing but directly to the minister? Hon. Jim Ernst {Minist er of Housing): Mr. Speaker, I am shocked, quite frankly, that the member for Burrows, a man allegedly of the cloth, would make statements like that in a public forum, but let me say this.

Interest in the Seniors RentalStart program was initiated by the Rotary Club of Assiniboia in February of 19 89. That is fully almost two years before I became the minister of the department. Mr. Speaker, from a wide variety of perspectives, these programs and projects under these programs are going ahead, fall back, go forth with the department on a wide variety of issues. Some proceed; some never do. It is a question of dealing with those individual applications and dealing with them on an appropriate basis until they reach a point where they can proceed to construction.

Until all the criteria are met, until all of the i's are dotted and t's crossed, no funds flow. * (1 400) Minister of Housing Apology Request Mr. Doug Martlndale {Burrows): Mr. Speaker, applications go back and forth, and there are four applications that should have come forward in February of this year and they did not. Will the Minister of Housing apologize to this House, since he has repeatedly claimed, including on Thursday, May 9, that the Rotary Pines has 10 4 expressions of interest

whereas an applicant was told on Friday last by Mr. Roy Lev that there are 88 expressions of interest-s ince this is the second time that the minister has misled the House? Hon. Jim Ernst {Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, I have not misled the House. When the

2125 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 application form was filed for PDF funding, they provided evidence to the Department of Housing. There were, in fact, 10 4 paid deposits for that project, but I am not surprised that because of what has gone on over the past two or three weeks and allegations made by members opposite over a whole variety of things, that, in fact, people have withdrawn their applications from that project. That does not surprise me in the least. Pines Project Publlc Inquir y Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) earlier called from his seat today for evidence of wrongdoing on this project. Well, that evidence comes now from two ministers in his very own cabinet. The evidence continues to mount about the favouritism involved in approving $4.7 million in grants and loans to the Pines project in St. James. In a burst of openness yesterday, which we applaud, the Minister of Housing said he, too, is concerned about the application process in his department, and he agrees it is in need of review. Mr. Speaker, we agree, but we would go further than that.

My question for the Premier: Will he now order a public independent inquiry into the Pines affair, so that public confidence can be restored, as he alleges it should be, in this government's ability to deal fairly and openly with applicants under this program and any oth er program tha t this government cares to run? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Yes, indeed, I did say that procedures that had occurred in the department were not the best quality. That is something that I will be looking into as minister of that department, so that-( interjection)- Mr.

Speaker, the Rotary Pines project, as I indicated earlier is the best project that the department had before it, and it had more than one at the time that the Pines project was brought forward. There were two projects before the department at the time, so clearly the Pines was the best project. It me ets the needs of the people of St. James-Assi niboia, who incidentally have the third lowest seniors to seniors housing ratio in the city of Winnipeg-the other two areas, one is Tuxedo and the other is Old Kildonan. Clearly the St. James community is in need of seniors housing.

This project met the maximum in terms of underwriting requirements. It is clearly the best project and, Mr. Speaker, for that reason it was approved. Seniors RentalStart Program Applicants List Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, again the minister has relied exclusively, as this government has in its defence of this project, on the alleged large number of paid-up subscribers to the project. Will the Premier (Mr.

Filmon), who has yelled consistently from his seat in defence of this project, stand up today and give this House what proof his government has of who signed up for this project, how much money they put down and when? That is their defence. Will they have the courage to show us the evidence of that defence? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, at the time the application for PDF funding-the first phase of the funding in Seniors RentalStart, the first of three phases-a t that time the department was provided with evidence of 10 4 signed applications and deposits paid. Mr.

Edwards: Mr. Speaker, we keep hearing conflicting numbers but we never, ever see proof. We never see that proof. The public demands it. The members of this House demand it. Pines Project Public Inquir y Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, finally forthe Premier (Mr. Filmon). The Minister of Housing, given his admissions yesterday that the whole process was not very good in this case-both the federal Minister of Transport and the provincial minister of transport have publicly condemned the project-h ow many more cabinet ministers are going to have to turn on this project?

How many other more deserving projects are going to have to come forward? How many more failings of this applicant are going to have to be exposed before the Premier- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, I think it has been made amply clear in answers earlier today that from an underwriting perspective, from a needs perspective, the Pines

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2126 project in St. James-Assiniboia meets the test in those particular qualifications. This is an excellent project. It will meet a demand, Mr. Speaker, of the seniors community in St. James-Assiniboia. For that reason, the project was approved and should go forward. Health Care System • Natlonal Western Premiers' Communique Ms. Judy Wasyl ycla-Lels (St. Johns ): Mr. Speaker, the Premier has some fine words when it comes to national programs, calling them the cornerstones of our Confederation and absolutely key to national unity. We appreciate those words, Mr.

Speaker, but actions speak louder than words, and the actions of this Premier and this government are the opposite of those fine words. Why does this Premier say one thing one day and then sign a communique , Communique No. 3 to be precise, from the western Premiers instructing their Finance ministers to examine the additional transfer of tax points to finance health and higher education when that measure will indeed end our finest national program, medicare? Will the Premier square his actions with his words? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, I noted in my absence, while I was at the Western Premiers' Conference, that the member for St. Johns called a news conference to announce for the fifth time in the last year the demise of medicare. I think, like Chicken Little, the media are finally going to get a little tired of coming forward and going into those kinds of statements, Mr. Speaker. This is what the Communique 3 says.

After lamenting the fact that the federal government has consistently now since 1982 reduced its transfer paym ents to the provinces for health and post-secondary education, the communique says, and I quote: Premiers stress that as a result of these reductions, provinces find it increasingly difficult to finance adequately health, education, social programs. Premiers reaffirm their support for comprehensive and accessible health care and quality education. Mr. Speaker, that is the whole rationale behind it. This province has made its commitment to health care and post-secondary education.

Despite a reduction of $32 million in EPF cash transfers to Manitoba this year, we are raising our spending in health care by $90 million. What we are saying is that the federal government cannot be left off the hook, cannot be left to starve the provinces for the programs in health care and post-secondary education that are the most important and vital programs to the people of Manitoba. We are out there making sure thatthe federal government's feet are held to the fire, that we can get the funding that we need for health and post-secondary education. Ms.

Wasylycla-Lels: I would rather be raising the sound bells every time this government does something to erode medicare than sitting back and letting our most treasured national program die. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier, on the basis of his response to my question because what they are, in fact, doing with the proposal to study further transfer points is sitting back and letting the federal government decide the agenda, is letting our national program, medicare, die, how does the Premier square this statement, this communique from the Western Premiers' Conference with his commitment to the House of December 5 that this government was not, clearly not, looking at a further transfer of tax points in lieu of federal transfer payments? *

(1410) Mr. Almon: Mr. Speaker, I want to quote again from a communique of the Western Premier s' Conference. "For this reason, the four western Premiers believed a new financing system should be sough t, and they feel that among other alternatives, consideration should be given to a mechanism under which the federal government would transfer corresponding equalized income tax points to the provinces in exchange for the provinces' assuming full responsibility for program financing.

They believe that this could be done in a way which is consistent with the maintenance of national standards and ready access to services." An Honourable Member: What date was that? Mr. Fllmon: Now that, Mr. Speaker, was a communique of the Western Premiers' Conference of April 29, 1976. The person who signed that communique was the Honourable Edward Schreyer. Mr. Speaker, as a result of that communique and that decision, in fact, EPF program became a transference of tax points to the provinces as of the 1st of January 1.977, resulting from that communique, advocated by New Democratic Premier Edward Schreyer.

2127 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 Now, Mr. Speaker, I have to tell you that this cheap political gamesmanship that is being played by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) and his colleague, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) is not becoming to New Democrats or anybody in this House. I knew Ed Schreyer. I know that Ed Schreyer was a man of integrity, and I tell you there is no integrity across the way when we play this cheap politic&- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. Johns, with her final supplementary question. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr.

Speaker, we are not talking about former governments. We are talking about a current- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: -and a Premier who when asked on December 5 if this government was considering the further transfer of tax points, he said, and I quote: No, Mr. Speaker-and he signs a document that looks at only one option, the transfer of tax points. I want to ask the Pr emier: Wher e is the communique calling on the federal government to restore EPF financing? Where is the option of a renegotiated transfer payment system?

How can this government negotiate with only one option that happens to fit the federal agenda? Mr. Fllmon: Mr. Speaker, let me quote again from a communique of the western Premiers, April 29, 1976: "The four western Premiers share the view that provincial governments should be permitted greater flexibility to alter their income tax structures under the national income tax collection system in line with their responsibilities and priorities in this field.

They feel greater flexibility could preserve, rather than detract from basic uniformity in the national income tax structure in that it would encourage provinces to remain in this national collection system." They referred to new more flexible financing arrangements which recognized differing provincial priorities and regional requirements. They referred to greater flexibility in health insurance financing, Mr. Speaker. An Honourable Member: Have you got any answers? Mr. Fllmon: That is the answer that Ed Schreyer came up with, so, Mr. Speaker, we are talking about honesty.

We are talking about integrity, and we are talking about protection of the medicare system in this country. Mr. Speaker, I believe, just as Ed Schreyer concluded, tha t when you have federal gover nmen ts-L ibe ral, Conse rvative or New Democrat-atte mpting to offload funding costs onto the provin ces, that you have to examine all reasonable alternatives to protect health care for the people of Manitoba. That is precisely what Ed Schreyer said, and that is precisely what New Democrats would do in the same position. An Honourable Member: Here comes Mr. Sleaze. Point of Order Mr.

Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) from his seat said, here comes Mr. Sleaze. It is the second time he has used that term today. He used it previously in reference to the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) rising on a matter of privilege. I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to have that member withdraw that unparliamentary statement from his seat. Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. I sit as close to the Minister of Health as the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton).

I certainly heard no comments in the House. Beyond that, just because the Leader of the opposition party (Mr. Doer) has taken a tremendous bruising, a verbal bruising, over the last three answers, it does not give him any rise or licence to stand in his place and try and detract from the answer given to his .... Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Speaker did not hear the remarks as alleged by the honourable opposition House leader. Therefore, I cannot rule on the matter. Therefore, the honourable member does not have a point of order. Northern Health Care System User Fees Mr. Jerry Storie (Fii n Flon): Mr.

Speaker, this First Minister (Mr. Filmon) is gaining a reputation of not having his actions match his words. It is no more the case than with reference to health care. A few moments ago, he was belittling my colleague the member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) and the

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2128 critic of Health for being concerned about the demise of our health care system. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) and the First Minister (Mr.

Filmon) are in possession of two letters, one from the City of Flin Flon, the other from the Town of Snow Lake, who both urged this government to abandon the introduction of a $50 user fee, the first user fee of its kind certainly of that magnitude in the medicare system, ur ging them to abandon the introduction of this user fee so that Northerners will have access to the same kind of health care without exorbitant charges as other Manitobans. Mr.

Speaker, will the First Minister now stand up and make his actions meet his rhetoric and suspend the introduction of this $50 user fee for the people of northern Manitoba? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the ambulance service is not an insured service under the Canada Health Act. Manitobans throughout the length and breadth of this province pay for their ambulance costs either out of their pockets or through insurance purchased from such organizations as Blue Cross. There is one exception to that, Mr.

Speaker, in that the Northern Patient Transportation Program has provided something that no other Manitobans have and that is absolutely free access to medical services via Northern Patient Transp ortation warrants, air ambulance, which is entirely paid for by the Province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, what we are introducing is a modest contribution like all other Manitobans are making towards their ambulance service.

It applies to no emergency service because the air ambulance will still be provided absolutely free to Manitobans living in northern Manitoba, and all Northern Patient Transportation warrants will be provided absolutely free for chemotherapy and for other essential services. We are talking elective procedures only, the same status that every other Manitoban must face. Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Health really believes those remarks about absolutely no cost, then he does not deserve to be Minister of He alth because it is absolutely and totally misleading and untrue-tot ally.

My further question is to the First Minister, if he has the intestinal fortitude to answer, or the Minister of Health. I have a constituent by the name of Cindy Jorgensen- Point of Order Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, this is the member's second question. He is not supposed to have any

preamble. He has already provided a postamble to the answer. Now he is wanting to have a new supplementary question. I say call the member to order, please, and ask him to put his question immediately. Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On the same point oforder, Mr. Speaker, I do believe that if members of the government, particularly the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), would not engage in debate and would answer questions directly, the government House leader would not have this problem in terms of follow- up questions.

The member was only clearing up the record from statements made in debate by this Minister of Health-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. This is not a time for debate. The honourable member for Flin Flon, kindly put your question now, please. *** Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, will this minister tell this House and the people of northern Manitoba how he expects a woman by the name of Cindy Jorgensen, who lives in my constituency, who is required to see a specialist on a once-a-m onth basis, can afford the extra $600 in user fees she is going to pay because of this government? •

(1420) Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, if that individual lived in my honourable friend's home town where he gr�w up, that individual would pa y the ent ire transportation cost to see that specialist if that specialist was in the city of Winnipeg, as would that individual pay the entire cost if they lived in Swan River and came to a specialist in the city of Winnipeg. That is why, for instance, the Standing Committee on Medical Manpower has been actively working with communities in northern Manitoba for the recruitment of specialis ts to northern hospital service.

That has had some success, particularly in the city of Thompson where a number of specialists are now in practice and there is no need for any transportation other than to the hospital in

2129 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 Thompson or the clinics in Thompson from whence those individuals practise. That is the overall goal of providing equitable access closer to home that this government has successfully engaged in, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Storie: Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister of Health then explain to the people who live in Brochet, who can only get into and out of the community on a three-day basis, how they are expected to cover their hotel and their accommodations and this $50 user fee every time they have to see a doctor for post-cancer treatment, for leukemia, all of which examples I have today? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in earlier answe rs , any patient coming from north ern Manitoba for the receipt of chemotherapy in the treatment of the disease cancer is not subject to this fee, period and paragraph.

This is for elective procedures for which there is a choice. Anyone who is receiving chemotherapy treatment will not be subject to any assessment, and my honourable friend ought to know that, should know that and, in fact, does know that. Health Care System - Natlonal Western Premiers' Communique Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, the communique the Premier has quoted coming out of the Western Premiers' Conference, does not ease the fears of those who are worried about the demise- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. James has the floor. Mr.

Edwards: Mr. Speaker, that communique does not ease the fears of those who are concerned about the demise of a universal health care system. Quoting from that communique, it is indicated that Premi ers rea ffirmed the ir su ppor t for comprehensive and accessible health care. The Canada Health Act has five, not just two, five principles. One of them is universality. Universality was conspicuously absent from this communique.

Can the minister tell the House whether or not this was an intentional oversight to not cite all five of the principles of medicare as set out in the Canada Health Act which includes universality? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, the intent of the western Premiers was to ensur e that we called attention to the successive offloading of support for health care that has been going on since 1982 when the Trudeau government began re ducing tr an sfe r and equalization payments to the provinces so that we had less fiscal capacity to pay for our health care needs.

The intent was to put, in very simple language, our committed support for the highest standards of health care that this country needs and wants, Mr. Speaker. In so doing, we identified, over a space of a decade, how that offloading has taken place to the extent that this year Manitoba will have a reduction of cash transfers under EPF of $32 million. Despite that, we, in Manitoba, are spending $90 million mor e for health care.

That is our commitment and that commitment remains strong, remains the strongest commitment in this entire country despite any of the kinds of obfuscations that may be put forward by members opposite. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, I am simply quoting the same docum ent the minister quoted and the docum ent the ministers signed. The federal Minister of Health today was quoted as saying Ottawa must have the guts to seek changes, and he is going to be summoning provincial ministers to Ottawa in June of this year.

We know this government knows the intentions of the federal government with respect to universal health care. Mr. Speaker, why did the western Premiers not have the foresight, the conviction to include universality as one of the principles they ascribe to in this document? They selected two out of five of the principles. They left out universality. Why? Mr. Fllmon: Mr. Speaker, we have said that our intention is to fund medicare to the fullest extent that we can possibly fund it, and in so doing, we do not just talk empty words like members of the Liberal Party.

It was the Trudeau administration, the Liberal administration, that beganthe offloading, the successive offloading in terms of hundreds of millions of dollars of reduced transfer payments from Ottawa to the provinces for health care. They can talk all the sloganeering, all the empty sloganeering they want, Mr. Speaker. What we are doing is putting $90 million more in Manitoba than we did last year into health care, despite having $32 million less transferred to us from Ottawa by way of EPF cash transfers.

That is our commitment, and we are committing to these standards of health care, to this high quality health care system because we

May 15, 1991 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 2130 believe it is essential to the people of Manitoba and the people of Canada. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, the Premier has just called universality "sloganeering." He has called it an empty word which did not deserve to be put in this communique. Will the Prem ier tell us whether or not the universality aspect of our medicare system, which is critical to it in the eyes of all Manitobans, whether or not it was discussed, why it was not included, why they selected two of the five words out of the Canada Health Act- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Fllmon: Very simply, because universality is a part of our health care, our medicare act, and we do not intend to diminish it. It is not part of our agenda whatsoever, and there is no sense in even talking about it because it is there. As far as we are concerned, it will remain there, Mr. Speaker. Income Tax Reglonal Collectlon System Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance.

After a year's study, along with the other western provinces, Manitoba is seriously considering entering into a western provincial income tax collection system. Establishing an independent system would be a drastic move for a have-not province such as Manitoba. In fact, it verges on insanity. The government has no idea of the extent of increased costs of administration. It has no idea of the possible loss of hundreds of federal jobs related to regional income tax service. It has no idea of the amount of federal transfer payments that would be lost.

Can the Minister of Finance tell this House what possible advantage is there to the Province of Manitoba, a have-not province, in collecting its own income taxes? *

(1430) Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I am going to relish giving a response to this question. In 1976, I believe the member for Brandon East was in the cabinet at that time with Mr. Schreyer, and Mr. Schreyer said this on tax collection agreements, or at least was part of a joint statement of western Premiers: "The four western Premiers share the view that provincial governments should be permitted greater flexibility to alter their income tax structures under the national income tax collection system in line with their responsibility and priorities in this field.

They feel greater flexibility could prese rve rather than detract from basic uniformity in the national income tax structure, in that it would encourage provinces to remain in this national collection system." The member was there then. He knows what the issue was at that time. He knows what the issue is today. It is greater flexibility. That was Manitoba's preference then; it is Manitoba's preference today. An Honourable Member: He had a 50-50 . ... An Honourable Member: That is not what he said. He said an independent system. The honourable member said he was there. Yes, I was there.

We did not say we would set up an independent •... Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. An Honourable Member: We are not that crazy. We had 50-50 funding and that was the 1970 s. This is the 1990s. They are silly, absolutely silly. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, has this minister or has the government really any study on the negative impact of going into an independent income tax collection system on the number of federal jobs in the regional income tax service?

In other words, does this Minister of Finance have any idea of the hundreds of jobs that may be lost by closing down a regional income tax system in Manitoba? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, in the member's tirade just a few moments ago, it is obvious that he feels something has gone wrong, there has been a problem and that there should be a villain sought, and he admitted he was there, so ergo he must be the villain. Mr.

Speaker, that analysis has not been done because this government will attempt, as it has over a period of year s-as a matte r of fact my predecessor, a colleague again of the Treasury bench of the member opposite who asked the question, would be fully aware that the former Minister of Finance also sought greater flexibility in the joint federal-provincial tax collection system, i.e., particularly tax on taxable income. Nothing has changed. Western provinces have not seen the federal government being prepared to

2131 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 move very quickly in that area and so have held this out as an option. If the federal government is not going to provide the increase, as was requested in 1976 by the Schreyer government of the day and, indeed, as was requested by his colleague Mr. Kostyra, Mr. Speaker, nothing has changed. All we have said is we put the same words to print, indeed, as Premier Schreyer did years previous. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, the minister is playing around with words. There are two issues and he has them in his speech.

One issue is flexibility, but the other is investigating the feasibility of alternative tax collection arrangements including separate provincial administration. That is the issue and that is idiocy on the part of this government. My question to the minister is: Has this minister, has this government any study or any estimates of the negative impact on future revenue transfers from the federal government resulting from going into an independent income tax system of collection by the Province of Manitoba? In other words, does this minister have any idea- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Mr.

Manness: Mr. Speaker, obviously the member is not happy with my response, but I tell him, as he fully knows, Quebec administers its own personal income tax system and, of course, it gives far more flexibility to implement tax changes. That is exactly what not only western provinces, but all provinces in Canada have sought, greater flexibility under the existing provincial national tax collection system. Failing the provision of that greater flexibility by the federal government, there is some desire to study whether or not in a regional context there were any economics behind setting up a single tax authority.

I want to indicate to the member opposite that is not Manitoba's preferred route. I want to indicate to the member opposite that we are-after the 1991 federal budget release, there is some recognitio n of the problem in Ottawa. They indicated that they are prepared to dialogue in a greater fashion to provide that greater flexibility, and that is wha t Manit oba will hold the feder al government to the course of over the next number of months. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDE RS OF THE DAY Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, would you call the bills in the following order, please: second readings, 36, 19, 38, 43, 44, 45. Time permitting, we will then go into debate on second readings, and I would ask you to call the bills in the order 5, 6, 8, 12 and 20. SECOND READINGS Biii 36-- The Legal Aid Services Society of Manitoba Amendm ent Act Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I move , seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), that Bill 36, The Legal Aid Services Society of Manitoba Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Societe d'aide juridique du Manitoba), be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Mccrae: Mr. Speaker, Bill 36, The Legal Aid Services Society of Manitoba Amendment Act is essentially a technical bill to establish the legal basis to permit the society to make certain changes that the society's board of directors has recommended to the government. These changes will streamline and enhance services provided by Legal Aid to those Manitobans who are not in a position to retain private counsel.

Since this is a technical bill, I will make my remarks very brief and indicate the main thrust of the changes. A complete explanation of the provisions of the bill in the form of a comparison of the existing provisions with the provisions as they will read should this bill be passed and an explanation of the reasons for the changes has been prepared by department officials. I will provide that spreadsheet to the opposition Justice critics. The most significant change proposed in this bill is an expansion of the circumstances in which Legal Aid can be provided.

At present, Legal Aid is restricted from recovering its full costs even in circumstances where the society is aware that the client will be able to meet those costs eventually. For example, a person may be simultaneously faced with a break-up of a marriage and the loss of a job. Equity in the family home, while it is sufficient to meet the total legal bill that will be incurred, is not readily transferable into cash that the person can use to pay private counsel. Legal Aid regulations

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2132 require that this kind of equity can and should be taken into account in the furnishing of legal Aid and setting the recovery period. The bill makes two major changes to the policy currently in place. The first is to eliminate the requirement that Legal Aid can only have a partial recovery in order to permit a full recovery. The second is to introduce a streamlined procedure allowing Legal Aid to register a lien against property to secure the recovery of its fees.

The government believ es that these two provisions balance the commitment to provide affordable legal services with our responsibility to the taxpayers of Manitoba to ensure that their tax dollars are used wisely and efficiently. In recent years the legal Aid board has faced a small number of cases in which the current right of an applicant to choose his or her counsel has created difficulties. This occurs primarily where the parents of a young offender refuse to provide their child with legal counsel even if they have the means to retain private counsel.

In these circumstances the board has adopted a policy of using a staff lawyer specializing in youth work because that lawyer can usually provide the same services for the young offender at a lower cost to the society. To eliminate all doubts that the society's policy is appropriate, a limited right to assign counsel is being given to the society. There have also been cases of Legal Aid lawyers being provided where no application for legal Aid has ever been made.

This occurs primarily where a judge feels that separate representation of a young person is essential to deal with the entire court case because there is some conflict in the interests of the parents and the young person. Recently at the request of the government, legal Aid has been providing certain services that simply were not contemplated at the time the act was originally drafted. For example, legal Aid now acts as trustee of the funds for Foster Parents' Association and provides counsel for foster parents charged with offences.

When this bill gets to committee stage, of course, members will receive full explanations of how the provisions of the bill me et these changed circumstances and permit the board to provide Legal Aid in these extended circumstances. At this stage I trust honourable members will agree with the principle that the Legal Aid Services Society, which operates essentially at arm's length from the government, is the appropriate body to provide representation in these cases, and we should make the necessary adjustm ents in the governing legislation so that no one can question legal Aid's authority in these matters.

Finally, I draw the attention of honourable members to one final matter of principle that they should consider. At present The legal Aid Services Society Act provides no restriction on the number of applic ations that can be made for the same circumstances nor on the number of appeals that there can be when a person is denied legal Aid. A person whose application for legal Aid has been turned down is entitled to a full review by the area director, then by the executive director and finally by the entire board.

Nevertheless, there have been cases where the unsuccessful applicant has simply filled out another application without any change in facts or circu mstances. At present, such an application must be dealt with in the normal way. The entire process must be repeated in some cases on several occasions. At the request of the board, the government is introducing a provision that will allow these matte rs to be dealt with more expeditiously and avoid the time and expense involved in dealing with applications that have no merit. Mr.

Speaker, the rest of the items in the bill are of a technical nature and I look forward to explaining them to members when the bill goes to committee. I commend this bill to honourable members. Thank you. Mr. Dave Chomlak (Klldonan): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), that debate on Bill 36 be adjourned. Motion agreed to. *

(1440) Biil 19- The Local Authorities Election Amendment Act Hon. James Down ey (Mi nist er of Rural Development): I move, seconde d by the honourable Minister of Culture, Heri tage and Citizenship (Mrs. Mitchelson), that Bill 19, The local Authorities Election Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur !'election des autorites locales), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented.

2133 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 Mr. Downey: Bill 19 proposes a number of amendments to The Local Authorities Election Act pursuant to a request received from elected and appointed municipal officials and from members of the general public. General municipal elections are held every three years in Manitoba and, with the next general election scheduled for October 19 92, now is an appropriate time to make the desired amendments to legislation which specifically gover ns those mu nicipal elections.

Some of the amendme nts , such as those governing the preparation and revision of electors' roles, the filing of nomination papers and the handling of ballot boxes will simply streamline the election process and remove annoyances to voters, candidates and election officials. Other amendments, such as the establishment of hospital polls and moving polls, are intended to improve ease of access for voters and bring The Local Authorities Election Act in line with the provincial Elections Act.

The bill also proposes some new legislation governing political activities on voting days, which has been requested by the municipal associations and is consistent with the provincial Elections Act. In addition to the amendments providing for streamlining of the election process, ease of access to polls and consistency with the provincial Elections Act, Bill 19 proposes a number of amendments to del ete refe rences and language found to be offensive to members of the disabled community in Manitoba.

As a result of concerns raised through the Manitoba Human Rights Commission, we have undertaken to delete all such offensive language and references prior to the 19 92 general municipal election. I am pleased to bring forward these amendments, not only to improve electoral procedures at the local government level, but also to recognize concerns raised by elected and appointed officials as well as by members of the general public. Mr.

Speaker, I commend this bill to the Legislature and would ask for the support of all members of the Assembly in this important electors act, which I think will assist the people of rural Manitoba and throughout all of Manitoba in greater access in the election process. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): I move, seconded by the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), that debate on Bill 19 now be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Biii 38-The Wlld llfe Amendm ent Act Hon. Harry Enns (M inis t er of Natural Resources): I am pleased to move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Labour (Mr.

Praznik), that Bill 38, The Wildlife Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la conservation de la faune), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, in moving second reading of the amendments to The Wildlife Act at this time, let me say at the outset that all of the honourable member s-perhaps some of them, not all of them-may consider this to be

an act of some significance. It is, of course, merely housekeeping changes to the act. Mr. Speaker, The Wildlife Act is a very much used act. It is up for amendment, firstly, every session. I had amendments to it last session. It is much like my colleag ue, the Minis ter of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger) with his Highway Traffic Act. It is a living act. It governs a great deal of activity of wha t happens throughout the landscape of Manitoba having to do with wildlife matters. Changes to the regulations occur quite frequently. Mr.

Speaker, perhaps I could deal with the sections of the act-and I appreciate that at second reading we deal in principle in the act-w ith those items that I know that honourable members will be wanting to support enthusiastically. I deal with the item that is contained in the bill that, for instance, provides more formal protection to the polar bear. Mr.

Speaker, in Manitoba we have some 1600 of these beautiful and noble animals in the region of Churchill and surrounding area, and although the polar bear has been on the protected list for a number of years, that is that we issue no permits for the hunting of the polar bear, the act does require that it be formally named in The Wildlife Act to provide that protection. That is what we are doing in this act and just for good measure and to give, perhaps, the honourable member for Radisson (Ms. Carilli) something to get her teeth into, we also put on that same list the plains

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 2134 spadefoot toad that we list in that formal recognition for pr otecti on. The plains sp adefoot toad- Scaphiopus bombifrons is, I think, the Latin name for it. Mr. Speaker, that, I am sure, will meet with the general approval of honourable members. Another

section of the act deals with-members will recall last summer that there was considerable concern expressed by, I think, all of us and certainly by my department and this minister, about the plans that came forward out of my region of the province, the Interlake, of what was called the Big Buck Hunt and what I considered, and certainly from the letters that I got from the expressions of concern that I received from wildlife interested groups, that the amount of cash prizes offered for the winning team in this hunting derby were excessive.

They were in the range of $20,000 and we just felt within the branch that was not the kind of hunting that we wished to introduce in Manitoba. It was not-in fact could lead to poor conservation practices inasmuch as that hunters with that kind of a cash prize in the offing, you know, would be tempted to keep on hunting until he thought he had the best rack or the trophy head that he was hunting for. *

(1450) I found, to my concern, that nothing in the current regulations enabled a Minister of Natural Resources to prevent that from taking place. So, Mr. Speaker, there is a small measure in this act that simply makes that possible in the future for the ministry of Natural Resou rces to intervene when in their judgm ent they believe something that is not desirable is taking place in this area of concern.

Members will note that it is general, because the department does not wish to interfere in the many different fish derbies and other, you know, events that take place in the province that are well within the realm of practice, tradition and acceptability. So, those two items that are in the act, I think, honourable members will be pleased to see as further measures for the protection of our wildl ife throughout the province, and indeed, that the recreational hunting be carried out in a manner that is by and large acceptable to most Manitobans. Mr.

Speaker, for some time the department has been involved with an activity that also is not specifically covered by regulation, and that is in the sale of animal parts. The honourable members will note that the bill has a

section that deals specifically with the selling, the buying, the trading or barter of wild animals or the parts of wild animals. Again, there is nothing specific in the current regulations and in The Wildlife Act that enables the Ministry of Natural Resources to exercise some degree of control or prohibition. It requires, you know, the permitting of any of this kind of activity, and the intent here being simply to enable the department staff (

a) to get a better understanding of the extent of this activity that is perhaps taking place in the province, and I want to make it very plain, to intervene, if need be, and to prohibit, if need be, any kind of activity that from time to time the minister is advised ought not to take place in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, I come to the first amendment in the act, and that has received some attention by honourable members opposite. That is in respect to the greater definition of what constitutes the wildlife management areas, indeed what can take place in wild life managemen t areas .

Also it provides, I think, an opportunity, a needed opportunity, because there is a misunderstanding of what constitutes a wildlife management area of the different kinds of land desi gnations that the department from time to time feels necessary to place on certain lands for better conservation, for the better management of our wildlife resources. Honourable members will note that we speak about the capacity of designating registered trapline districts, of special trapping areas or animal control areas, game bird refuges, managed hunting areas, wil dlife refuges. There is a host of different designations.

That is not new to the practice of the department, and the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohma n), who is a former mini ste r of the department, the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), who is a former minister of the department, knows that there is a host of different designations the department applies based on sound biological advice as to the kind of hunting activity that can or cannot be permitted within a designated area. We have an area just to the west of the city, the Grants Lake marsh, where there is a very controlled managed hunt available.

Nobody can hunt unless they check in and the numbers are controlled, stations are controlled. This is done in co-ope ration with the local landowners, adjacent and surrounding landowners. That works well for that particular area of the province.

2135 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 We have other areas. I might cite my farm, for example, which some prudent government many years ago placed in an upland game bird refuge, where absolutely no hunting of game birds are allowed, ducks, geese , pheasants or grouse, but where, because of the population and because of the feeling of the surrounding area where we do allow deer hunting, for instance, big game hunting in that portion of the Interlake. What I am trying to demonstrate, Mr. Speaker, is that the designations that are available to the department vary.

A wildlife management area is one of the more inclusive designations which takes in, in some cases, very substantial acreages. As a matter of fact, we have in Manitoba set aside some 7 .5 million acres. That is a sizable proportion of our landscape, in what we call wildlife management areas. They range in size from relatively small areas, a few thousand acres, to many tens, twenties, thirties and hundreds of thousands of acres. I say, Mr.

Speaker, that we have some very large wildlife management areas in the North, in the Churchill region, that encompass such places as the rocket site, as part of the town site of the proposed hydro-el ectric dam at Conaw apa. We have management areas, in other words, of many different sizes and descriptions. I want to reiterate, it has always been the understanding and the practice that a range of different activities can take place in wildlife management areas. A wildlife management area is not to be confused with a no-hunting wildlife bird refuge, for instance, where absolutely no activity can take place.

It is not to be confused with those lands that we set aside. We are accumulating increased acreages of areas in this province that we set aside under The Ecological Reserves Act, for instance, where for specific reasons of the ecology of the land or some other unique features of the land very stringent controls are placed in these areas. That legislation is now a little older than a decade, but it is growing. I do not have the exact acreage at my fingertips, but I know that several hundreds of thousands of acres have been so designated, Mr. Speaker.

In the wildlife management areas, by their very nature we have to-m inisters and governments preceding me have made and used the authority granted to them under regulation to provide for certain activities to take place. Mr. Speaker, I simply want to have this clearly and fully understood by honourable members and to put it on the record that, for instance, back in 1982 my friend the current sitting member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) passed a regulation that is worded very much the same as the amendment to the act that I am now proposing.

He passed a regulation on February 13, 1982, a re gulation under The Wildli fe Act that says, notwithstanding subsection 1, which is the

section that deals with the wildlife conservation aspect of our wildlife management area, the minister may grant, subject to such terms and conditions as he may prescribe, a permit to undertake certain activities or things, across , wit hin, or into any wi ld life management area, Mr. Speaker, clearly giving the minister total and full responsibility for approving measures that he deems are acceptable. That is what Mr. Evans had to say, and his signature is on that regulation on February 13, 1982. A little later on, on December 17, under the signature of one Mr.

Mackling, who was also a Minister of Natural Resources under the New Democratic Party government, he passed another regulation. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) You see, I suppose there was always some concern about when the government was-and this very often happened when a new wildlif e management area was created. I had the privilege of creating a new wildlife management area very recently, the last month or two in the constituency of my deskmate and good and honourable friend the young, brilliant Minister of Labour (Mr.

Praznik) of this province, which we called the Mars Hill Wildlife Management Area. His constituents wanted that wildlife management area created. His municipalities wanted that wildlife management area created. His wildlife interest groups wanted that wildli fe management area created and, most importantly, he wanted that wildlife management area created.

He only wanted it created, they all collectively only wanted it created if we would continue to allow a private company to conti nue extracting gravel from that wildlife management area until that gravel pit had been cleaned up or mined out, and then the permit, in this case the permit that I am providing, that the minister of the day, in this case Mr. Mackling, gave him said that when the last of the gravel is gone, then we in fact had conditions attached to it that they had to

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2136 clean up the site, do some reclamation of the mined out gravel pits, but in the meantime my officials at the department could better manage the wildlife in that multithousand-acre site. * (1 500) Mr. Acting Speaker, for that reason this troubled ministers in the past as it is troubling me today, that they successively passed regulations to authorize their exem ptions of these kinds of activities in wildlife management areas, so that on December 17 , the then Minister of Natural Resources, Mr.

Mackling, amends the regulation once again just a year after the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) had amended this regulation by stating that notwithstanding anything contained in this regulation, the minister may grant, subject to such terms and conditions as he may prescribe, a permit to undertake certain activities across, within or into a wildlife management area. Again, specifically for the purpose to authorize the minister of the day to authorize those things that he found necessary to take place within a wildlife management area. Well, then, Mr.

Acting Speaker, we come a little further along with the progression of events and we find that on-here we hav e-w ell, pardon me, I missed one. I missed an earlier one here. By Mr. Evans again, the then Minister of Natural Resources in '82 . It says that the min ister may grant authorization for the grading, clearing of roads and trails, gravelling, clearing, bulldozing, draining, blocking of man-m ade or natural waterways, bridging, haying, grazing, construction or burning. All in a wildlife management area, the minister of the day can do that. Now, all of these things are necessary from time to time.

I am prepared to concede that the former ministers, whether it is the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) today, whether it is the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) today, even though, for instance, they do not have a great agricultural background, but they responded in times of drought to open up management areas to allow farmers to get some badly needed fodder out of the wildlife management, which otherwise are not permitted in wildlife management areas.

They recognized that only was common sense, that was only prudent good public policy, and so they authorized, under their signature, activities to take place in a wildlife management area that some are suggesting today should never be allowed, can never be allowed. Some are even suggesting, Mr. Acting Speaker, that this little minister, this little modest, Mennonite minister is somehow assuming unto him the kind of powers, authority that are untoward or that have never been exer cised or practised by other Ministers of Natural Resources. Well, now, I see the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) comes in.

I do not want to leave him out of my presentation on second reading because by the time-A few years went by and then we come to-Th is is an updated one. This is in November of '88. Hey, that is pretty close, is it not? November '88. This is what the then Minister of Natural Resources asked this Legis lature to approve November of '88. An Honourable Member: No, no. November it was us. Mr. Enns: Whatis thatdate? My eyesightfails me. I am but weak. See if you can help me with that. An Honourable Member: January. Mr. Enns: January. Okay. I am sorry. Mr.

Acting Speaker, even with the aid of these glasses, I-but it was January, and the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) will surely acknowledge he was still the minister at that time. He again felt the need-Now I do not know, and again I am not making any suggestions.

I want you to know that I am citing former Ministers of Natural Resources simply to indicate and to put to rest the idea that honourable members are propagating that I am assuming unto myself some authorization or some powers that have not in fact been the practice of at least three successive NOP Ministers of Natural Resources that I am now citing and putting on the record. Mr.

Plohman, pardon me, the member for Dauphin on January of '88, not in the far distant future, put this further amendment to The Wildlife Act that said: Notwithstanding anything contained in this regulation, the minister-the minister, nobody el se-may gr ant, subject to such terms and conditions as the minister may prescribe, a permit to undertake certain activities across, within or into any wildlife management area.

In other words clearly establishing now for the third time by a New Democratic Party government that they believed it was necessary for the minister to have the authority from time to time to grant a permit to do certain things.

2137 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA May 15, 1991 Now, Mr. Acting Speaker, whether that permit-I do not know why this minister required a still further renewal of this regulation. Maybe it was because they had received an application from an oil company to enter a wildlife management area to drill and construct oil wells in the Pier son Wildlife Management Area. It is interesting because the Pierson Wildlife Management Area was established about the same time that the Oak Ham mock Marsh Wildl ife Management Area was established back in the early 1970s, 1972 or '73.

I have the correspondence that just prior to the minister bringing in this regulation, a letter from the Home Oil Company came to the Minister of Natural Resources' desk, or office-I should be fair, to his department-to his department asking permis sion for them to enter onto a well -established wildl ife managem ent area to explore and to drill oil wells. Well, I note that in a relatively short period of time -(i nterjection)- I can give you the-here is the progression. Let us do this proper, just for the record. On December 15, 1987, a Mr. Scott A.

Reed, land agent for the Home Oil Company writes a letter to one Paula Eyler- An Honourable Member: Ah, I remember that name. Mr. Enns: You remember that name. Her husband used to sit in this House-who is in my Lands branch, writes a letter to Madam Paula Eyler. Dear Madam: Home Oil Company Ltd. hereby requests that your office consent to conditions to construct and drill the above-captioned well-site. In this regard we ask that your office issue a surface lease covering the described land,

Section EE 8-2-29W West. Your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Now then, that was on December 15. An Honourable Member: Was there a copy to the minister or not? Mr. Enns: Now on-here is an internal copy of a memorandum from Mr. Bowles, a resource planner, Habitat Management to a Mr. Degner, to the Crown Lands branch that acknowledges that the land in question is situated within the Pierson Wildlife Management Area.

The memo goes on to say, the Wildlife branch will permit Home Oil to enter, construct, and drill on the above site, providing an agent of the company contacts our wildlife resource person, Mr. Bidlake, who by the way is still there in the southwestern part of the province, now the southwestern regional wildlife specialist in Brandon, and agrees to habitat disturbance limitations and mitigation for any undue habitat destruction. •

(1510) Well, then, Mr. Acting Speaker, a little later, on January 5, '88, the Home Oil Company gets a letter from the department that says, your Crown land permit application has been approved for the purpose of oil well drilling and construction. Then it gives some following conditions. Mr. Acting Speaker, just four days before that on January 1, 1988 this minister, the then Minister of Natural Resources, refurbishes the regulation that makes it very clear- An Honourable Member: On New Year's Day? Mr. Enns: Tell me again, is that New Year's Day, January 1? An Honourable Member: January 1 is New Year's Day. Mr.

Enns: Well, Mr. Acting Speaker, the 30th of January. Anyway, maybe because he just wanted to make it very clear or perhaps, although I listened, maybe because he got a great deal of opposition at that time, maybe the Manitoba Naturalists Society were threatening him with court action or something like that, he felt moved to bring in this regulation that again emphasizes the minister's right to authorize and to provide a permit for this kind of activity. In any event, I think that I have tried to make the point that -(in terjection)- Well, no, the issue is here.

I am asking the Legislature so the future Minister of Natural Reso urces and so the intent of the legisla tion is clea r, that that same wording essentially will be embodied into The Wildlife Act. That is the nature of the act, what in fact has been the practice, as I have demonstrated, by three previous ministers and by a previous administration, that that be embodied in the act. That makes it clearer and unequivocal, because I do not wish to unnecessarily cause other interest groups to expend their time and energy and money in court cases and court challenges.

I think it is a responsibility of government, at least I accept that responsibility, to make it very clear what the government's intentions are. That does not preclude anybody from raising their objections, anybody from raising court challenges to any under taking of this government or any other government.

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2138 Mr. Acting Speaker, what I think is important, and my responsibility, is that the legislative intent and the Legislature be clear and not be ambivalent, not be ambiguous, not be lacking in clarity so that particularly nonprofit, well-in tentioned organizations such as the Naturalists Society expend a great deal of time and effort and costs in court trying to make clear what the legislation says or what it does not say. I am doing it very openly, very publicly, making it clear what the intent of this government is with this respect.

I have also demonstrated what in fact the practice, the tradition has been by the former New Democratic Party Ministers of Natural Resources. It is that position that I am putting forward to honourable members of the Legislature to consider. I would ask them to give it their consideration. I think the bill is worthy of relatively speedy passage, and I would ask their co-operation in having this bill come before committee at the earliest time possible. Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): I wonder if the minister would agree to a question. Mr.

Speaker: Is there leave of the House to allow the honourable member for Dauphin to ask a question? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, I will not get into the paper trail and issues that the minister referred to regarding previous amendments to the act. I will certainly attempt to find all of that in my records to determine exactly the time line for that. The minister knows that amendments take many times months and even years to generate within the department, and the coincidence of two days is rather unlikely insofar as initiating or being the cause of an amendment that was brought in.

I would like to ask the minister a question regarding the sale of wild animal parts, or export. The minister is mentioning that in this act, Mr. Speaker, he is for the first time putting in a provision that would require a licence forthat purpose, in other words, make it illegal if it was done without a licence. I will recall, and the minister probably does, the program that was done on television, a major investigative report, and I believe one Mike Bessey was a key person in providing some information and some testimony on that issue.

I ask the minister whether in fact at that time there was no provision to penalize wide scale if there was-and it was deemed that it was not wide scale in Manitoba, it was in Onta rio and other provinces--but there would not be any recourse of the province up to this point to deal with this issue? Is that what the minister is saying or is he simply saying that it is under federal acts, such as the Criminal Code, and perhaps export licences and so on that would have been violated perhaps by these people who are engaged in this practice as opposed to a provincial act? Is that what the minister is remedying here?

Mr. Enns: The paper trail of amendments by previous ministers that I was referring to were changes in regulations not amendments to the act. It is just a matter of clarity there. The real change is that I am taking those regulations and putting it into the act. That is the amendment to the act. On the member's more serious question, the simple fact of the matter is the answer is no. Neither Canada nor the province had specific regulations and provisions that could effectively police and stop that.

Since that point of time, Canada-in fact, this was a subject of some discussion at a Wildlife Min iste rs' co nfe rence that I attended nationally-has acted under their federal licensing capacity to prohibit the exporting out of Canada of some of the exotic parts that people trade in. Again, specifically, one sometimes assumes that there should be or ought to be regulations or a law against something but there simply is not.

This really is the first introduction of giving the capacity under The Wildlife Act to make such provisions of control of licensing and, indeed, I do not hesitate to use the words "outright prohibition" of certain of these activities. Mr. Plohman: Am I permitted one other question? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Dauphin have leave to ask the honourable Minister of Natural Resources another question? (Agreed) The honourable minister still has seven minutes remaining. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, the minister is saying, then, that no licences would, in fact, be granted under this

section by the province. So, in other words, it would be prohibited, the sale of certain parts would be prohibited. Is that what the minister is saying, because that is what I gathered from his last comment, prohibition of this practice.

2139 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, it simply means that the trading, selling, buying of animal parts will become regu lated and controlled by the de partment requiring the permitting or licensing. When you institute the capacity to control, that, in my estimation, also means you have the capacity to prohibit if it should become desirable. Ms. Rosann Wowch uk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) that debate on this bill now be adjourned. Motion agreed to. * (1 520) Biii 43-The Workers Compensation Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister responsible for and charged with the administrati on of The Workers Compensation Act): Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to move, seconded by my very learned colleague, the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) that Bill 43, The Workers Compensation Amendment Act (2); (Loi No. 2 modifiant la

Loi sur les accidents du travail), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Praznlk: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to introduce for second reading Bill 43, The Workers Com pens ation Amendmen t Act (2). These amendme nts provide for increases for those receiving long-t erm statutory benefits under the act. They are established according to the full amount of change in the consumer price index.

The people entitled to these particular increases include approximately 4,000 pensioners who have been permanently or physically disabled, as well as app roxima tely 500 widows or widowers and dependent children of workers who have died in workplace accidents in Manitoba over the years. Under the provisions of these amendments, pensioners who had an accident prior to January 1, 19 88, will receive an increase to their pension of approximately 9.5 percent, while those whose accidents occurred after January 1, 1 988, but before January 1, 19 89 receive increases of approximately 5.4 percent.

A number of other benefits under the act, such as the minimum pensions and allowances for dependent children and surviving spouses are also increased by the full 9.5 percent. It is my hope that this particular legislation will be able to pass the House quic kly and become effective for July 1 of 19 91 . I would indicate to members of this Assembly that this particular amendment bill is usual in this Chamber approximately every two years to increase the statutory amoun ts of pensions for those pensioners that I have described.

This particular piece of legislation, The Workers Compensation Act, in general was initially passed by the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba in 19 16 , long before it became normal in practice to index benefits. Consequently, over the last two decades the Legislature has had to review benefit entitlements under this act on a biannual basis and update them by way of statute. In the recommendations for legislative change coming from the steering committee on legislative change, one of their recommendations is to move towards an annual indexa tion of Worker s Compensation benefits.

I am pleased to inform the House that some time in the' very near future I will be bringing forward that particular reform package to this House, which if passed by this Legislative Assembly will make this type of biannual amendment bill redundant and, of course, no longer necessary. I would hope that this Assem bly will give consideration to this bill in a speedy process and allow it to pass through in such time as to have those increases for WCB pensioners in place for July 1 of this year. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): I move, seconded by the member for Kildonan (Mr.

Chomiak), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Biii No. 44-The Public Utlllt les Board Amendment Act Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Aff airs): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), that Bill 44, The Public Utilities Board Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Regie des services publics), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present for the consideration of this House Bill 44, The

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 214 0 Public Utilities Board Amendment Act, which grants authority to natural gas utilities operating in Manitoba to discontinue service to delinquent commercial and residential customers. Prior to 19 87, Mr. Speaker, gas utilities in Manitoba had the ability to disconnect a customer's supply if that customer failed to meet obligations to pay the utility for services rendered. In April of 19 87 the Manitoba Court of Appeal ruled that in the absence of specific statutory provisions, gas utilities could not disconnect service for nonpayment.

After the court decision in 19 87 the arrears of Centra Gas, which had been identified as being $700,000 in March 19 86, grew to over $1 9.5 million in March 19 91 . That is almost $20 million. To date, these arrears represent approximately an additional $29 per year on each customer's gas bill. It has been suggested by members opposite that this legislation is to help our corporate friends. Mr. Speaker, I can tell the members of this Chamber that it was not our corporate friends who appeared before Public Utilities Board of Manitoba hearings and supported this legislative amendment.

It was not our corporate friends who have called my office and consistently recomm ended to me that legislation of this nature be amended. Mr. Speaker, it has been for Manitobans who work hard to meet their financial commitments that I have heard. These Manitobans do not feel it is right for them to carry the burden of debt created by customers who have not paid their bills. As I have noted before in Question Period, this is not exclusively a residential customer issue. Of the 48,000 customers in arrears at the present time, some 6,000 are commercial customers. This legislation is right and it is proper.

With the introduction of this legislation, Manitoba natural gas consumers will no longer be asked to carry the financial burden of customers who have not paid their bills. We feel this legislation strikes a balance in providing fairness to consumers who dutifully pay their bills and providing protection for those who legitimately cannot afford to pay. This legislation is not, and I wish to emphasize, not an unconditional right to disconnect service for nonpayment. Given Manitoba's clima te, an unconditional right would be, to say the least, overly permissive.

So we have provided safeguards for customers who are genuinely unable to pay their bills. We have required that gas utilities obtain the Public Utilities Board's approval prior to implementing a disconnect policy and procedure. The Public Utilities Board will have direct supervisory powers over the company's actions, including the power to negate a disconnection in process or to order the restoration of service if, in the view of the board, such restoration is in the public interest. In other words, Mr.

Speaker, in every case where there is doubt as to an individual's safety the gas service will be turned back on, and the Public Utilities Board, which will be kept apprised of the status of disconnected premises, has the authority to order the utility to reconnect. Furthermore, all disconnection policies or procedures must meet the conditions set out in the legislation, including that there will be no dis connection of residential properties from October 1 to May 14 of each year. All customers must receive proper notice before disconnection occurs.

All customers will be advised of social agencies that may be able to provide them with assistance as they work out suitable payment arrangements with the gas utility. Prior to the start of each heating season, the gas utilities must provide an extensive report to the board stating what actions have been taken with the customer or by the customer, and the board will take this information under consideration in determining whether or not to make an order to reconnect supply.

The steps to be taken prior to determining whether or not to reconnect the gas in October if the bill has not been paid by that time are tightly detailed and extensiv e and include provisions for the customer to be referred to appropriate social agencies, if required, for assistance, and, where necessary, as far as the public trustee through those social agency referrals, if such action is deemed to be appropriate. • (1 530) Natural gas will not be turned off to tenants of apartments where the landlord has not paid the gas bill.

The gas utility will notify the Landlord and Tenant Affairs, who will subsequently take in and take over rent collection. In fact, an actual disconnection will not occur. In our view, Mr. Speaker, the process envisaged in this legislation is paramount and exceeds anything done in other jurisdictions to protect the public interest. I have today received from the Public Utilities Board of Manitoba a copy of a draft disconnect

2141 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA May 15, 1991 policy and procedure. I have copies for the critics of the two opposition parties, if they wish them, which I would be pleased to share with them. The details outlined in there, I think, will address some of the concerns that have already been raised by the member of the official opposition as to one particular

section regarding tenants and landlords. The procedures in this

section outline the reference to The Residential Tenancies Act, which was introduced and passed in January of this year. It is The Residential Tenancies Act that will permit the Rentalsman to step in and collect the rent from tenants in order to obtain the outstanding account from the gas bill. Mr. Speaker, there were many people involved in the pre paration of the dr aft for the policy.

Consultations were held with a number of interest groups, including the City of Winnipeg, the City of Brandon, the Department of Family Services, the Income Security Division of that department, the Manitoba Society of Seniors, the Consumers' Association of Canada, the Landlord and Tenant Affairs, Centra Gas Manitoba Inc. and a vast number of other groups who responded in writing as to their concerns and offered valuable input into the preparation of this legislation and the subsequent policy prepared by the PUB.

The board has attempted to ensure that the conditions of these groups have been incorporated in their final draft. Mr. Speaker, we will have opportunity for debate on the details of this bill, and I look forward to them in the days ahead. I would urge all members of this House to allow early passage of this bill to provide sufficient time for the legislation to work while in the nonheating season. To do otherwise would only compound the problem and increase the financial burden currently being carried by the good, paying customer. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Biii 45-The Securities Amendment Act Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Affai rs): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), that Bill 45, The Securities Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les valeurs mobilieres), be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Speaker, this bill has three purposes. Firstly, this bill amends The Securities Act by increasing the number of members appointed to the Manitoba Securities Commission from five to seven. Except for the full-time chairman, the commission members are all part time. Problems can arise in ensuring that a quorum is always available to hold a hearing, particularly in light of the trend toward more challenges of commission's authority and impartiality in securities matters.

Secondly, The Securities Act will be amended to remove one part of the exemption from registration for trading in securities that has been available to banks, trust companies and insurance companies. These financial institutions will hereafter be required to be registered in Manitoba for securities activities such as marketing their in-hous e mutual funds. This amendm ent will place all persons and companies in the same position relative to trading in secur ities in Manitoba.

This bill will bring our province in line with the other Canadian jurisdictions that have required these financial institutions to be registered. The regis tration of the companies and their empl oyees is an effective way to ensure that persons dealing with the public are meeting the proficiency standards established for trading in secur iti es, inclu din g the completion of the educational requirements. The national firms doing business in Manitoba recognize this firm is also in the broader interest of uniformity among provinces. The third purpose of the bill, Mr.

Speaker, is to amend two incorrect references that occurred when the act was re-enacted in 19 88. Any technical issues requiring further elaboration can be fully discussed in committee. I call upon the members opposite for their assistance in bringing this bill into force and for their comments during the upcoming debate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Jerry Storie (Flln Flon): I move, seconded by the member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) , that Bill 45 be adjourned. Motion agreed to.

May 15, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2142 DEBATE ON SECOND READI NGS Biii 5-T he Mental Health Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), Bill 5, The Mental Health Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la sante mentale), standing in the name of the honourable me mber for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia- Leis). Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? Leave. Agreed. Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to enter into the debate on Bill 5, The Mental Health Amendment Act, a very important piece of legislation, introduced earlier this session by the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard). There are a number of comments to be made on this particular bill.

The attention is certainly good, and as I read through the minister's speech it would seem to me that he is quite satisfied that this is a move in the right direction. Having said that, there are members in this Legislature who have some concerns about the legislation. Indeed, these concerns have been expressed through various individuals outside of the Chamber who are concerned about mental health in the province of Manitoba. I am pleased to see that there are some fundamental-- there are some basic changes being made but there are also a series of miscellaneous amendments. There are 58 amendments in all.

Many of them are housekeeping of course, but there are some which have more substance to them and have a bearing on the rights of patients in terms of involuntary admission to mental health facilities. • (1 540) As I understand it, to put this into some historical context, the existing Mental Health Act which we have been working with was amended and received Royal Assent on July 17 , 19 87. There were some difficulties with certain provisions of that act around the rights of patients with regard to involuntary admis sion. These were challenged, as I unde rstand, and indeed found to be unconstitutional.

At any rate, there has been a great deal of discussion in the mental health community. The minister has discussed this with various people. There have been various committees, and I understand there is more than one committee working on this suggesting various ways by which the legislation on mental health could be improved. There were two committees specifically. Two committees were established, one dealing with the miscellaneous inadequacies of the 19 87 act. This was referred to as the Minor Amendmen ts Comm ittee chai red by the Chief Provincial Psych iatrist, Dr. Dan Rodger s .

This was a comm ittee dealing with minor and technical amendments, but it did not change the intent or philosophy of the legislation, the minister advises us. What it did do was, through better legal wording, reinforce some of the provisions of the legislation. These amendments from the Minor Amendments Committee were proclaimed on December 20, 19 88. There has been discussion in this House about these amendments since that time.

The debate, I believe, primarily dealt with the role of the Public Trustee in terms of the Public Trustee's ability to help people who suffer from mental disease or who are mentally ill and incapable of looking after themselves, particularly their financial and their personal affairs. The second committee was set up in 19 88, referred to as the Major Amendments Committee. It dealt with some of the other inadequacies, one of which was to do with external representation. It was assigned to recommend on some of the more significant changes that could be brought forward. Mr.

Speaker, it did hear from a number of individuals who represented a fair cross

section in the mental health community, and I would congratulate the government for consulting with many of organizations. For instance, I un de rstand the Man itoba Association of Rights and Liberties was one of the interest groups who became involved in the major amendments committee. There were others. The Manic Depression Society had some impact. There was represe ntation from the Canadian Mental Health Associ ation , Manitoba divisio n and representation through Dr. Pat Whiteman of the Univ ersit y of Manitoba Faculty of Medi cine Department of Psychiatry.

Concerns and views of various community hospitals were brought forward by Dr. Dane Hershberg, because some of these community hospitals do have the capacity to deal with people who are suffering from mental disorders. Then there was the Manitoba Schizophrenia Association represented, I unde rstand, by Mr. Verne Mccomas. The in volv e me nt of the department was through Dr. Dan Rodgers, who is the Chief Provincial Psychiatrist.

2143 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 15, 1991 So the committee, as I understand, received a number of representations from the various groups and individuals, and this legislation is supposed to represent some of these ideas and some of the concerns.

I guess the critical area has to do-certainly one of the most important areas has to do with the principle of patients rights, the rights of the individual who is suffering from mental illness, on the one hand, and the obligation, on the other hand, of society to ensure that those individuals, because of their mental disorders or mental illness, the society who has to take responsibility to care for them and ensure that they are treated. It is a compromise solution that one must seek. Questions have to be raised with regard to the possibility of the personal physical well-being of the mental patient.

We have to be concerned whether the mentally ill person may in fact endanger his or her own personal physical well-being. We have to ensure, of course, that we provide some protection for members of society at large but, nevertheless, we have to in the process place a lot of trust in individual professionals who have decisions to make in the system. Mr.

Speaker, what I understand then is, the amendments being proposed will try to provide the balance of enhancing the individual rights on the one hand under The Mental Health Act so that that individual has some opportunity to question why he is being given a certain treatment and why he is being retained in a particular institutional setting. Therefore, I appreciate what the minister is trying to do, enhancing the individual rights but, at the same time, ensuring that the interests of society at large and the interests of the individual, who may not be able to jud ge for himself or herself, are also protected.

As I believe people in our province would support, there is provision for more family involvement than under previous legislation, so that the family could be involved in providing consent or not providing consent in the treatment of a mentally ill family member. There are questions as to how this exactly will be able to be put into imp le men tation, particularly when you consider that some relatives of the mentally ill person may not be available.

There are other questions with regard to exactly which relative should be sought after, who is the nearest relative who is in a position to enter into some kind of decision-making, to either give his or her consent or to deny that consent. There are other pieces of the existing legislation where the patient is on a certificate of leave from the facility and where the attending physician may cancel the certificate if the patient has failed to report as was required.

Oftentimes, the mentally ill person may not show up back at the institution on schedule, not because of a problem with his or her mental illness, but rather because of some extraneous situation, some situation that prevented him from get ting bac k, say, mi ssin g a bus, missing transportation connections, being ill with some other kind of disease, maybe having the flu or something. As I understand it, the bill gives the patient more ability to have some freedom here in that he or she would not be penalized because of not coming back within the scheduled time due to no fault of their own, virtually.

I see there is another part of the legislation where some attempt is being made to improve the appeal process where an individual, a mentally ill person, can appeal his or her detention to a review board. The remedy that is being proposed is to make this board more functional by allowing for a roster system whereby people can come and go from this particular board. Again, the process can be speeded up and virtually enhanced. * (1 550) Generally speaking, Mr. Speaker, these are admirable amendments. These are admirable objectives.

Nevertheless, I believe that there are flaws in this particular legislation, flaws that have been pointed out by the Canadian Mental Health Association. That association appreciates the fact that this bill is aimed at strengthening the rights of the men tally ill. At the same time, they are concerned that some patien ts may still be com mitted without the righ t of appeal . The legislation may give patients no way of challenging an involun tary committal in cases where the province's Public Trustee has been appointed to lo ok after the patient ' s affairs.

Under this legislation, as I understand it, the Public Trustee would be put in the position to make decisions about committal and treatment in cases where no family member was available to make decisions on the patient's behalf. Of course, that occurs in many instances, because we live in a very mobile society. We live in a situation where some mentally ill are here in Manitoba hundreds, if not thousands, of

May 15, 1991 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 2144 miles away from their family. They have come to Manitoba to work or for whatever reason moved into our province and simply do not have a family member present. There are other cases, I know, at the Brandon Mental Health Centre, where you have some psychogeriatric patients, people who are aged and who, indeed, may have outlived all of their close relatives. As such, they too are in a position where a family member is not available to make a decision on their behalf.

So, I think, the Manitoba division of the Canadian Mental Health Association may have a point that the provincial Public Trustee may still have more power than he should. The bottom line, I guess, is this legislation should be at the committee stage, should be presented so that members of CMHA, the Canadian Mental Health Association, would have an opportunity to bring forward their views. In fact, it would even be preferable, Mr. Speaker, if the CMHA would be able to provide their views even before it goes to the legislative committee.

In fact, they are on public record as saying that they want more consultation before the bill goes to the legislative committee for clause-by-clause review. This concern over the right of appeal in cases involving the Public Trustee is only one of several concerns that the CMHA has. They have other questions. For example, they have concerns about a provision allowing a patient to be detained for up to 72 hours before a psychiatrist confirms his commitment. This is another major concern that they have. The legislation, Mr.

Speaker, does continue to ban doctors involved in the patient's treatment from considering a patient's appeal against a psychiatrist's decision. The association is concerned here because the association wants to ban doctors who work in the same institution. Of course, that may not be a problem, unfortunately, in some of our institutions such as the Brandon Mental Health Centre which has difficulty in obtaining psychiatrists. I know the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) at one point said he was going to do great things and bring psychiatrists into the Brandon Mental Health Centre because that institution has been short for many a year. I do not think the situation has substantially improved whatsoever, Mr. Speaker. For whatever reason, we still do not have sufficient psychiatric talent and services available at BMHC. At any rate , the Canadia n Me ntal Hea lth Association is concerned that a patient could be detained and treated for up to 21 days before his appeal is heard.

At the present time there is no time limit, but the new legislation would provide a limit, which is fine. I believe they are concerned that this time period is simply too long. Twenty-one days is too long to detain a patient for reasons of mental illness or would-be mental illness without an appeal. At any rate, we believe that it would be in the public interest not to proceed quickly with the legislation, but to give various groups such as the Canadian Mental Health Association time for further consultation with the government.

Certainly we would look forward then to the minister bringing specific amendments to this legislation. Mind you, he could withdraw the legislation and bring it back again in an amended form. Failing that, we would expect the minister to present amendments in the committee. Indeed, if that does not happen, there is a possibility that our Health critic, the member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis), would be prepared to introduce these required amendments. Mr. Speaker, regrettably, mental health problems are with us in a very serious degree. Unfortunately, mental illness is an illness that is not disappearing.

It is an illness, in fact, that may be growing. If you look at some of the statistics available in the minister's own Annual Report of the Department of Health, you see where there does not seem to be any let-up, for instance, in the number of admissions to some of the mental health centres. For example, I look at the Brandon Mental Health Centre, where the admissions went up quite sharply. In fact, the admissions in 19 84 were shown to be 382 people. They have gone up steadily; '85-86, 379; and 19 86-87, 486; '87-88 , 523; and '88-89, which are the latest figures we have, up to 584.

That is a substantial increase in the number of admissions at the Brandon Mental Health Centre. The same is true for the city of Selkirk, Mr. Speaker. The mental health institution in the town of Selkirk, you see the admissions going up in the same period every year. They seem to be increasing. In 19 84, adm issions were 14 5, and by 19 88-89, the admissions were 272. Again, if you look at other statistics, it would seem that we have a growing number of people who seem to require the services of these institutions.

The one point that one might say, though, is that patients in the major centres such as Brandon and Selkirk who require care less than a year, we see that the average length of stay has been declining.

2145 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANIT OBA May 15, 1991 This is a good sign. In 19 84, the average length of stay in Brandon Mental Health Centre was 70.8 days. This has come down, not regularly, not every year, but it has come down so that by 19 88-89 the average length of stay was down to 57.0. Similarly, in Selkirk there has been a dramatic drop in the average length from 83.0 days in 19 84 to 48.2 days in 19 88-89. Of course, these figures do not tell the whole story. We are only talking about two mental health centres. The fact is that there are all kinds of activities going on in the community.

Community mental health indeed probably carries on the greatest amount of service. Community mental health is recording cases at year-end of 19 88, '89 of 4,068. So in comparison with the mental health centres, perhaps they are dealing with more patients. On the other hand, I have to point out that the mental health centres at Brandon and Selkirk do deal with a lot of outpatients. In fact, the total outpatients in these two centres in '88, '89 were over 2, 10 0. Indeed, if you take other contacts, total contacts, you are dealing with approximately 16 ,500 contacts.

So there is a great deal of outpatient activity that is provided by the two centres. The point is that there is still a great deal of mental illness with us. The question arises, Mr. Speaker, what can be done by way of more prevention? Maybe some members of the Legislature might not agree with this, but I would suggest that if we did more to alleviate unemployment in this province, we could help reduce the amount of mental illness. • (1 600) There is no question about it that unemployment is a very sad experience, a very frightening experience for a lot of people.

It leads to a lack of self-estee m, particularly if the unemployment is chronic. Unfortunately, we have too many people unemployed in this province. We have too many instances of people who have had good jobs, safe jobs presumably, steady jobs presumably, who have seen their companies close or their operations go out of business or even small-business people, small-bu siness persons, having to close up shop and end up being unemployed.

This phenomenon of unemployment which I believe now is approximately at the 53,000 level-I believe for the month of April of this year, there are approximately 53,000 people who are unemployed. I dare say that many of those people are among the mentally ill in this province. So one way to help prevent mental illness is to have a positive economic policy aimed at creating jobs rather than creating more unemployment as the present budget that we have from this government is wont to do. Along with that, we have the problem of farm failures. We have the rural economic crisis.

There have been many stories in the newspapers, magazines about farm families, after a lifetime of effort, having lost their farms, many of whom suffer from mental illness or suffered from mental illness even before they lose the farms, with the amount of stress that is involved. Again, progressive, positive farm policies at the federal and provincial level would go a long way towards alleviating the rural farm crisis and a long way therefore, Mr. Speaker, in alleviating mental illness that can be forthcoming from that type of economic disaster. Another way we can alleviate mental illness in this province, Mr.

Speaker, is through better social support systems. The various programs that we have in the social service field can be much enhanced, in our opinion. We do not believe that Manitobans are being cared for adequately in the Child and Family Services area. There are still so many difficulties.

When you hear of cutbacks or freezes in funding, when you hear of various Child and Family Services agencies having to curtail their services, again, I think we are paving the way for more mental illness so that we find we have other problems, other costs to society, costs involved in looking after these people in an institution or, indeed, through a community psychiatric health program. Nevertheless, there is a cost. There are other costs, of course, that occur as well, costs which may result from

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-2-44
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 2nd hansardpdf 44.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	021039e2caa5c626b0bad1f6a10a77621d87a39e

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