Manitoba Hansard — 27 May 1992 (Sitting 73, 35th Legislature, 3rd Session)

35-3-73

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 39-40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honoursble Denis C. Rocsn Spesker VOL. XLI No. 73-1:30 p.m., WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 1992 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. Province of Man/lobs ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thlrty·Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOM IAK, Dave CONNERY, 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, Ciif 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 McALP INE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCH ELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZN IK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rose mary, Hon. WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage Ia Prairie Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin- Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossm ere 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 Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP Liberal NDP PC PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC NDP PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

3842 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, May 27,1992 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Ms. Becky Barrett (W ellington): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of David Verwey, K. Galbraith, J. Jorgensen and others requesting the gov ernment show its strong com mitment to dealing with child abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Florence Elkie Giroux, Barbara Diduch, Joyce Sutherland and others urging the gov ernment to consider establishing an Office of the Children's Advocate independent of cabinet and reporting directly to this Assembly. Ms. Jean Friesen (W olseley): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Dorothy Sollosy , Tony Sass, Fred Neale and others requesting the gove rnment consider restoring the former full funding of $700,000 to fight Dutch elm disease. Mr. Leonard Evans (Br andon East): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Helen Barbara Fredrickson, Margeurite J.

Wareham, Onalea Dawn Wareham and others requesting the gov ernment consider reviewing the funding of the Brandon General Hospital to avoid layoffs and cutbacks to vital services. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), and it complies with the privileges and practices of the House and com plies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the pro vince of Manitoba, humbly sheweth that: The Brandon General Hospital is the major health care institution for southwestern Manitoba; and The citizens of Brandon and southwestern Manitoba are deeply concerned and disturbed about the do wnsizing of the hospital and view it as a threat to the quality of health care in the region; and The Manitoba government has chosen not to review the current budget to ensure that cutbacks to vital services do not occur; and The administration of the hospital has been forced to take drastic measures including the elimination of the Palliative Care Unit and gynecological wards, along with the layoff of over 30 staff, mainly licensed practical nurses, to cope with a funding shortfa ll of over $1 .3 million; and WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the gov ernment of Manitoba consider reviewing the funding of the Brandon General Hospit al. *** I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr.

Dewar), and it complies 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? The petition of the undersigned citizens of the pro vince of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS the Human Resources Opportunity Office has operated in Selkirk for over 21 years pro viding training for the unem ployed and people re-entering the labour force ; and

WHEREAS during the past 1 0 years alone over 1 ,000 trainees have gone through the program gaining valuable skills and training; and

WHEREAS upwards of 80 percent of the training centre's recent graduates have found employment; and

WHEREAS without consultation the program was cut in the 1992 provi ncial budget forcing the centre to close; and WHER EAS there is a growing need for this program in Selkirk and the program has the support of the town of Selkirk, the Selkirk local of the Manitoba Metis Federation as well as many other local organizations and individuals.

3843 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the legislature of the Province of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gi lles ham mer) to consider a one-year moratorium on the progr am. * (1 335) MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Harry Enns (Minis ter of Na tural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Natural lands and Special Places Workbook.

This strategy is the fifth initiated under land and Water, and joins the Soils, Minerals, Water and Forest Workbooks already prepared. Our government has endorsed the World Wildlife Fund's Endangered Spaces Campaign. This program is aimed at prot ecting 12 percent of each natural region in Canada from commercial logging, mining and hydro development. As part of our commitment to this program, the province has indicated its intention to update our Provincial Park lands Act. This workbook addresses these commi tments and a variety of other issues related to our significant natural, cultural and heritage resources.

The strategy will apply to all of Manitoba, including our urban environments where there are significant but limited areas which deserve our attention. This is not simply a wilderness strategy. It is more comprehensive, involving the areas of historic and cultural sites and buildings, wildlife reserves, pro vincial forests, parks, ecologic al reserves and even undeveloped or abandoned road and railway lines. You will note that in addition to prote ction, the use and development of Natural lands and Special Places is considered.

Resource allocation in pro vincial parks, including the specific issues of Jo gging and mining, will be looked at. This examination will be done within the context of the principles and gui delines of sus tainable development to meet our environmental, social and economic objectives and goals. Given the breadth of this strategy, both locally and pro vincially, every attempt has been made at resolving many of the present concerns facing us. A process of anticipating conflicts and prov iding processes for preventing them in the future are also propos ed.

Issues of prov iding services to people in our parks, for example, are also considered, including how we may finance these services given our present fiscal constraints. The

section on Park lands Act Review suggests changes consistent with these policies. The workbook will now be distributed to the public throughout Manitoba. Beginning in mid-June, informal consultations will take place with various key stakeholders respecting the finalization of the public consultation process. The public workshops themselves will be held early this fall in various commu nities throughout Manitoba. I urge all of my colleagues in the legislatu re, as well as all Manitobans, to become involved in the development of this exciting strategy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Cllf Evans (Interlake): I appreci ate the opportu nity to respond to the ministerial statement that we have before us here today . We all know sustainable development has been an issue in this pro vince and throughout Canada for many years in the past, and for many years to com e. I am rather pleased in somewhat of a way to see finally [applause] Well, Mr. Speaker- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. * (1 340) Mr. CIH Evans: Howeve r, I have not finished. Mr. Speaker, we have, with great anticipation, been waiting for the government's report on sustainable development and this workbook.

The min ister ind ic ates programs and commitmen ts t�at are within the policy here that we have before us. The minister and the government in place have, over the last couple of years, spent an enormous amoun t of finances to put such a book toget her, and yet there are certain things that we on this side are concerned with, Mr. Speaker, as to whether they are going to be fol lowed . The minister talks about the fact of providing services and parks for people, where in the last budget, in this budget, in previous budgets and the future budgets, we are going to see a cut.

We have seen a cut in park services throughout, privatization of campgrounds, Mr. Speaker, and such. Mr. Speaker, the government in place must if they are going to maintain or receive the 12 percent that this government has introduced in the campaign

May 27, 19 92 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3844 that they have put forward in this pro vince to maintain a 12 percent Endangered Spaces Program when at present right now we only have approximately 6 percent of the pro vince protect ed.

So on this side, we hope that this is not just again a smoke-and- mirrors type of a-{interjection) When we have an important part of this pro vince, this pro vince and this gove rnment should in fact, as they have stated and indicated, proceed towards their 12 percent, and we will see whether there will actually be the consultation from the people In this pro vince and whether there will be actual pro vincial and people input to this. So until we do receive better and more, we will be very skeptical. Thank you. Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, the Premier just took the water right out of my mouth. We have a situation in which we have had a policy in the past similar to the one that has been enu nciated today with respect to the form ulation of a water strategy in the pro vince of Manitoba. We have been awaiting with great interest a provi ncial water policy, but we do not have as yet a pro vincial water policy. So it is not the process that we have any difficulty in addressing today. We think the process that they are engaging in is one that is very worth while.

Where we find fault, however, is because the strategy does not seem to result in positive action. It does not seem to result in provi ncial laws which will ensure that we have a policy for the pro vince that cannot be infringed upon without certain rights and obligations on the part of the citizenry and a part of gov ernment, and that is what is failing here.

To just produce more brochures to engage the public in more debate and more discussion will, of its own, not result in the fundamental changes necessary to en sur e tha t we do have a pro vince-wide recogniti on, that we have a natural land and water which is to be prote cted, and that indeed Manitoba is a very special place to live in, and its special places, as a result, must be protected .

So we suggest to the govern ment today that the process they have not put in place is valuable, but it will only be as valuable as the ultimate decisions they make as a govern ment to introd uce legislation to give effect to the strategy that they have announced today . Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure of tabling the Annual Report for 1990/1991 of the Manitoba Intercultural Council. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I wou ld like to table for members of the House the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation study on Maternal Demographic Risk Factors and the Incidence of Low Blrthweight, Manitoba 1979-1 989. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 93- The Mental Health Amendment Act Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I would move, seconded by the Minister of Highways and Transporta tion (Mr. Driedger), that Bill 93, The Mental Health Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia sante mentale, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable member s to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon Mr. Arnold Brown , the for mer member for Rhineland. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoo n. Also with us this afternoon, we have from the Rosenort School twenty-two Grade 9 students, and they are under the direction of Grant Plett.

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness). Also from the Robert Smith Scho ol, we have twenty-eight Grades 5 and 6 students, and they are under the direction of Paulette Symesko. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon . * (1 345)

3845 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Economic Growth Government Polley Performance Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): In the 19 90 el ect ion, the Pr emier was prom ising Manitobans jobs and economic oppor tunity. When he was not bashing the Liberals in terms of their economic policies of spending, he was promising Manitobans that industry task forces and othe r me ans would be developed to develop new busine sses and new job creation, promised task force economic opport unity. Shortly thereafter, Mr.

Speaker, in this House, he promised that Manitoba would have better than the national average in terms of economic performance , better employment rates, better growth rates, better private sector rates, and Manitoba was building a solid foundation under the Tory majority gov ernment that was elected in 1990. Well, Mr. Speaker, today we have received the Conference Board report, and it speaks of the recor d of the Cons er vative Tory majorit y gove rnment since their opti mistic promises that were made to the people of Manitoba in 1990.

Manitoba's decline in growth was in last place of all provinces in Canada from 1990 to 1992, including the predictions for some positive growth in 1992. In fact, Manitoba's decline in growth was predicted by the Conference Bo ard of Canada in actual terms from 1990 to 1992 to be a decline of 2.1 percent, a greater decline than New Brunswick, Nova Scotia , Quebec, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Canada, P.E.I. , Alberta, Newfoundland and British Columbia. I would like to ask the Premier why we are in last place since he received a majority vote from the people of Manitoba . Hon. Gary Fllrnon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, I know that the Leader of the Opposition really relishes bad news for Manitoba. He is the master of doom and gloom, the prince of darkness, who goes throughou t this province telling Manitobans that they are bad people and that this is a bad prov ince. It is that kind of attitude, of course, that is so destructive to this province and its opportunities for future grow th. I have before me the Conference Board's revised forecast which says that for 19 92, they are predicting that Manitoba's growth rate will be above the national average.

They are suggesting that fo r next year, Manitoba's growth rate for 1993 will be 3 percent, which is higher than their original forecast was for 1993. This is consistent with three banks that have forecast within the last month that Manitoba will be in the top four in terms of growth rate in Canada of ail the pro vinces for 1992, 1993 and 1994. So ail of the things-{interjection] Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you would ask the member fo r Ain Aon (Mr. Sto rie) to control his enthusiasm, to please-(inter jection] Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr.

Fllmon: Each one of these banks that has reported within the last mo nth has said that for 1 992, 1993 and 1994, we will be in the top four pro vinces, national ly. Mr. Speaker, that is the kind of good news that I believe we should welcom e. The fact of the matter is, we have been through difficult times.

I have said openly anywhere in this province that 1991 was a tough year, and we are glad that we have it behind us, but by the things that we have put in place, by keeping taxes down , by ensuring that we have a strong economic base for future grow th, we will ensure that we do have the kind of investment and growth that we are looking for. That is what the banks are saying, and that is what the Conference Board is saying for '92, '93 and '94. .. (1 350) Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, Manitobans will want to know why every time we get to a quarter in our economy, the Premier talks about the next quarter in the economy and the next quarter and the next quarter. Mr. Speaker, the Premier wrongly says that 1991 is behind us. It is not behind us when you have the worst economic perform ance of any pro vince in Canada.

Your economy starts off at a lower base; it starts off with lower investment, lower jobs, lower opportu nities, and that is why that even when we look at the positive predictions up until'93, Manitoba will be in second last place, even with these positive predictions the Premier just made. The question is: Why are we in last place? Why are we performing so poorly? What destructive policies has this governm ent implemented to give us these destructive bottom -line results?

Can the Pr emier not accept any responsibility for being in last place last year, for being in last place since he got a majority go vernmen t and implementing the

May 27, 19 92 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3846 policies that he now chairs as head of the eco nomic comm ittee of cabinet? Mr. Fllmon: Mr. Speaker, this government could well have followed the policies of the former gov ernment, which was to drive up taxes so that they were at the second highest level in all of Canada, and by driving up taxes, creating the public money to stimulate the economy. That spending of public money in the economy has a very large toll on our economic prospects. Indeed when you drive up taxes, fine, if you are spending someone else's money, Mr.

Speaker, and that is what New Demo crats do. They raise taxes every time they are in govern ment, and they use those taxes to create artificial grow th, artificial growth that ultimately taxes and restricts the future growth opportunities and the attractiveness for investment. We will not do that. This government has consiste ntly, for five straight budgets, kept taxes down, has refused to go along with New Democr atic demands to raise taxes in order to stimulate the economy. That is not the answer.

That is a solution that ultimately drags down all of the people, all of the busines ses and any opp ortun ity for futur e investment, and we are not going to fol low that plan, Mr. Speaker. Employment Decline Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): The Premier, yesterday, tried to deal with this issue by stating Manitoba was fourth in terms of disposable income, and he is right. We have been fourth for the last 20 years. The disposable income in Manitoba has declined since 1990, and the Premier should know that as a percentage in Canada. He knows the facts.

More importantly, everywhere we go, we know peopl e and families that are either losing their jobs or afraid to lose their jobs. We know every time you sit down with a cup of coff ee, with people at a social event or last night at some other event with people in the pro vince, there are people and sto ries that are very scary, Mr. Speaker. In terms of Manitoba, the most important economic indicator is employment. Manitoba's em ployment growth declined, second last in Canada, 4.3 percent.

Only Newfoundla nd declined more since this Pr emier received a majority gove rnment from the people of Manitoba, since this Premier was paddling a canoe and promising us prosperity . Why are we paddling backwards in the province of Manitoba? Why are we going back and down in terms of economic performance and job creation in the pro vince of Manitoba? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member knows full well that this province still has the third best une mployment rate In the country.

The member knows full well the answer that he is projecting is to spend mor e public taxpayers' dollars, spend more tax dollars, raise more taxes for short-term effect. Mr. Speaker, we could spend that public money to create short-term jobs, to create the kind of temporary economic growth that he is talking about, and all we would do is do what the former gov ernment did, and that is saddle the people of this pro vince with the second highest overal l tax rate in the country. That is not the way to economic growth . That is not the way to solid investment opportunity.

That is only the way to make life worse for the people of this pro vince, and we will not follow that route , Mr. Speaker. * (1 355) Government Polley Performance Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, September of 1991 , after one year of dismal economic perform ance, the Premier, in a commu nications strategy, had a press confer ence, shuffled some of his deputy ministers and said at that time he was creating this economic commi ttee of cabinet: The mo st impor tant thing our gov ernment is doing is to tackle, in the next 18 months, the economic renewal of this pro vince, putting all of our emphasis, perhaps even my political future on the line by saying that we are now going to turn all our efforts to econom ic development.

I would ask the Premier: After two years, close to two years since his majority government, why are we expecting a decline in employment at 2 percent in 1992 under the Conference Board's predictions, and why are we performing in a last-place way with all other provinces of Canada under his economic stewardship? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, that same Conference Board's forecast suggests that in

3847 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 1992, Manitoba's GOP will increase above the national average, that very same forecast. They are suggesting that this pro vince will be perfor ming at better than the national rate in terms of GOP growth. The fact of the matter is, this gover nment has structured the Econom ic Development Board . The Eco nomic Developmen t Board has gone out and met with people and has enc ou raged investment, and some responses are already coming in.

He knows full well that Apotex, who has lauded this government for being proactive for going out and attracting investment, has made a commitmen t of $50 million, creating many, many jobs, that Medox Corporation again last fall, from London, England, said that they were coming here and setting up headquar ters for Nor th American distribution leading up to a hundred jobs, a number of these companies that we have talked about-Versa tile, has had the opportunity. We met with their parent firm in England to have two-wheel-drive tractor manufacturing moved from Ghent, Belgium to Manitoba, happening later this year.

Those job s will be created, those opportunities. Those are the kinds of things that are happening. That is why the Conference Board is suggesting that our gross domestic product will grow greater than the national average in 1992 and that in fact three banks recently have forecasted that we will be growing at greater than the national average for '92, '93 and '94 . Those are the things that we have been working on, and those are the results that are coming, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, if you sink 100 feet in the water and you go up 50 feet, you are going to have a high percentage increase, but you are still down . The Conference Boar d of Canada said what Statistics Canada said last week. It said we were in last place in gross domestic product of all pro vinces in Canada. Now when will the Premier start accepting respo nsibility for that? He blames it on the national recession. He blames it on the international recession. He blames it on this person today , that person tomorrow . When is he going to accept respo nsibility?

Will he take some measures to get Manitobans working again, or is he just going to surrender to a 2 percent decline in employmen t for 1992 as he did in 1991 ? Mr. Fllmon: Mr. Speaker, I repeat that we will not follow the advice of the Leader of the Opposition, which is to raise taxes on people so that you can stimu late short-term growth based on public spending. That will drive further into despair Manitobans who will not appreciate the added tax load .

That is the answer of the New Democrats both here and in other pro vinces in this country, and that is their answer to grow th, to simply tax more so they can spend more so that they can create short-term growth. That will not work in the long run. We will ensure that we follo w the kinds of economic development initiatives that we have been talking about, that are taking place with respect to companies like Medox Corporati on, like Versatile, like Trimel, like Apotex, like companies who are investing in a major way in this economy and creating long-term job opportunities.

That is the way for the future, and that is why the Conference Board is suggesting that our growth rate will be above the national average this year, and that is why three banks in the past month have suggested that such will be the case for '92, '93 and '94, Mr. Speaker. • (1 400) Employment Creation Strategy Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is that the economic policies put in place by this Tory majority gov ernment are 1 0 out of 1 0 in Canada, last place.

In every one of the areas, examples the Premier mentions, we could mention five or six other places that have clos ed, unfortu nately. The question has to be asked about the bottom line. Disposable income in Manitoba has gone down since he won a majority government. It was fourth when he took offi ce. It is still four, but it has gone down. Well, the Premier shakes his head. It has gone down from 1990 of 91 percent of Canadian income down to 89.9 percent. My question to the Premier is: What corrective action is he going to take, because we have now surrendered a 2 percent decline in employment in 1991 ?

The same people are predicting another further 2 percent decline in employment in 1992. Surely, that is not the result the Premier wants. That is not the result anybody in this House wants. Will he take some corrective action on behalf of the 2 percent decline in employment on behalf of the tho usands of people who want job s and

May 27, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA 3848 oppor tunities and want to stay in Manitoba to keep their families in Manitoba with ...• Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Oppositi on, of course, does not want to listen. The statistics that he is quoting are based on last year. The results that we are seeing are based on the action that has been taken.

The fact that taxes have been kept do wn, the fact that the deficit has been kept down has led to the fact that for '92, '93, '94, three banks within the past month have said we are going to have growth rates that are amongst the top four in the country. The Conference Board is suggesting for '92 we are going to be third best in the country in growth rate. That is the result of the actions that have been taken by this government. That is the information that the leader of the Opposition refuses to accept and refuses to acknowledge, Mr. Speaker. Education System Vocational Programs Funding Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): During the election campaign in 19 90, the Pr em ier said and I quo te : The educational system does not respond quickly enough to the needs of business; we have to become more responsive to the need for new skills in the business community. I agree with that statement. Mr. Speaker, on February 10, 1992, the Premier said at a First Ministers' Confer ence: We must strive to ensure that our work force is well trained and well educated. I also agree with that statement.

Therefore , I would like to ask the Premier why, between the 1990-91 school year and the '91-92 school year, there has been a decrease in 13 school divisions in real dollars of 19.4 percent in voca tional education and in 14 school divisions there is no budget for vocati onal education at all. Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I would like to explain to the memb er that we do have now a new Education finance model.

Within that Education finance mo del, students may now take a single vocati onal edu cation credit, and under the old model, the difficulty was that students had to register in a complete vocati onal program . So this is in fact a very strong improvement which allows students who are studying at the seconda ry level to experience vocati onal education and also perhaps take part then in co-operative education programs and have an opportunity to see first-hand what that kind of training and work experience is like. Exceptional Student Programs Funding Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, the reality is, there is less money being spent on vocati onal education than there was being spent on vocational education just one year ago. The other area where we see noticeable changes is in the area of exceptional students, which includes the whole range from those with special needs up to the gifted you ngsters within our society. In that area, we see a decline in expenditures of some 9 percent on average for 23 school divisions.

Can the Minister of Education explain why there are fewer initiatives out there to ensure quality education for those with special needs and the gifted in our communi ty at a time when her Premier says this has to be a No. 1 priority ? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, well, this govern ment has increased its funding and the funds available for special needs students within this pro vince. In addition, we also have a task force looking at programs and education necessary for young people in the gifted and talented area.

There has been a recognition by this gov ernment that young people may be gifted. They also may be talented. We have to look at the full range of students' needs across this provi nce, and we are doing so. Student Achievement Levels Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Well, Mr. Speaker, while the Minister of Education says she is looking at the full range of needs in every single objective criteria of evaluating progr amming, there are cuts being made. There are fewer dollars going into vocati onal education.

There are fewer dollars going into exceptional children, and there are fewer dollars going per pupil for support for all students in real dollars being spent in our educational system. Can the Minister of Education explain to this House how she is going to ensure an improvement in the quality of our test results and, therefo re, our student achievement levels which are among the

3849 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 worst in the country when school divisions are proportionately spending mor e mo ney on instructional resources for youngsters? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): We certainly are very concerned about the educational needs of student s in Ma ni toba. We are concerned about their educational needs, that they become engaged in a school process, that we are also able to support those students who are po tentially at risk so that those young people can remain within the school system. We are looking at curriculum evaluation.

The math curriculum, which was part of a recent set of test results, is actively being evaluated by math teachers and by people working in the field so that we are currently looking at trying to develop the most excellent school system within this pro vince. Business Relocations Government Discussions Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Last night a news report indicated that a major company had located its service

section in Monct on, New Brunswick, after looking at the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, hundreds of jobs are at stake. My question is to the First Minister. Did the Economic Development Board of Cabinet or any of its representatives meet with this company when it was reviewing the pos sibility of locating hundreds of jobs in Manitoba? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, when we got word of the particular announcement, which I believe is more than a year old, I phoned the president, Mr.

Steve Snyder, personal ly to see if we could be involved in this, and he said that they had not looked at Manitoba. I do not know whether the story is accurate, that their decision had been made based on a proposal and a direct intervention by the Premier of New Brunswick, and it was too late because the decision had been made and Manitoba had not been considered prior to the decision. I spoke to Mr. Snyder more than a year ago. Mr. Storie: Perhaps that answer from the Premier is indic ative why there is no development in Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, Piper Aircraft is the same kind of situation, where the minister's own members have criticized the department for a lack of activity. Economic Growth Employment Creation Strategy Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, my question to the First Minister is: Given the fact that we have lost 25,000 full-time jobs since this government got its majority, can the minister indicate why his strategy of st anding aside is not worki ng, why companies like Cameo and Piper and hundreds of others are not flocking to Manitoba to create jobs here? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, as a matter of fact, it was because of that experience more than a year ago that we made the decision to set up the Econ omic Development Board of Cabinet with myself as chair. As a matter of fact, it has been effective because since that time we have been able to attract the investment of Apote x, we have been able to attract the investment of Medox, we have been able to attract the mo ve men t of two-wheel-drive tractors from Ghent, Belgium, to Winnipeg, Manitoba, by Versatile.

We have been able to move the distribution headquarters for The Northwest Company here that was going to be going to North Bay. We have been able to intervene on a personal basis and on a direct basis. In addition to that, there are a number of other companies that I might say had been looking at New Brunswick, that we have been able to get involved with so that now decisions are pending that we believe will be favourable towards us.

It was as a result of that kind of experience that we decided to have the Economic Developmen t Board of Cabinet put togeth er so that there could be an involvement of everybody right up to the Premier in promoting economic development for this pro vince. • (14 1 0) Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, we will certainly accept the Premier's word that he is promoting econ omic development. The people of Manitoba want to know how this mi nister is going to be held accountabl e. My question to the First Minister is- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mr.

Fllmon: We will be held accountable when we run for re-election next time around, and people will compare the record of this go vernment that has not raised major taxes in this province versus the record of the New Democrats who raised personal taxes 138 percent in just six years when they were in

May 27, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 3850 gov ernment versus the record of every other New Democratic gove rnment in this country, which is raising taxes and raising taxes and raising taxes. They will make their judgment based on who is interested in protec ting the people, who is interested in pro viding for the people a high quality of life without raising taxes the way New Democrats do. Regional Development Corporations Funding Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Sw an River): Mr. Speaker, this gove rnment is very good at making prom ises.

Since 1988, they have been prom ising busi nesses were going to get started in rural Manitoba. We were going to see business growth , we were going to see tourism and we were going to see jobs. What we see is fewer people living in rural Manitoba , no jobs and, for the first time, food banks in rural Manitoba. I want to ask this Premier why this gov ernment has not kept its comm itment to start busines s developm ent offi ces in the regional development corpora tions, som ething that will help businesses get started in rural Manitoba instead of cutting back on funding for regional development. Hon.

Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I think the member for Swan River should be embarrassed to ask that question. Every place I go in rural Manitoba, people tell us that they are very pleased with the kind of economic development initiatives that they are getting-$55 mill ion being com mitted in Flin Flon for the redeve lopment of the smelter and zinc reduction facility in Ain Aon.

We have over 500 jobs tha t have been decentralized out of Winnipeg to various rural centres throughout Manitoba, places like Brandon, places like Portage Ia Prairie, places like Winkler, Altona, places like Morden, all throughout rural Manitoba -Dauphin, I was in Dauphin for an opening of the Native Education branch, Mr. Speaker, on and on and on. We have the Rural Economic Development Initiative that is helping people throughout this pro vince. We have the rural Grow Bonds program that is helping throughout this prov ince.

We have $90 mil lion being spen t in the Southern Development Initiative to improve the in frastructure of so many rural communi ties in this pro vince. Everywhere I go, people say, these are the kinds of programs that we have been waiting for , that we never got under the New Democrats. Decentralization Relocation Statistics Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (SWan River): Can the minister explain, then, if he is so proud of the decentralization program, why there are fewer civil servants working in rural Manitoba than there were when this gov ernment came into power? How can you say that there- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

The question has been put. Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Decentralization): Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with the

preamble of the member for Swan River. I can assure yo u, Mr. Speaker, that this government and its decentralization of some 500-and-some jobs to rural Manitoba-and I gave to the member for Brandon East (Mr. leonard Evans) the other day who gave up, who said he did not want to hear any more of the good things that we are doing in rural Manitoba.

I can go through the list again, if the member wants me to: the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corpora tion to Brandon, with 20-some jobs;the rural library services to Brandon; the Crown lands branch to Neepawa and Minnedosa with probably some 20 to 30 jobs; Dauphin with some several jobs. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker, our rules are very clear, and that is that answers should relate to the matter raised. The minister was asked very clearly why there are fewer jobs in rural Manitoba overall under this gove rnment, despite their decentralization.

I would ask him to answer that, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. Hon. Darren Praznlk (Deputy Government House Leader): On that point of order, Mr. Speaker- Mr. Speaker: Order, please . The honourable member does not have a point of order. I have already ruled on that. The honourable minister, to finish his response .

3851 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 27, 19 92 *** Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, I do not accept the numbers that have been pro vided. I do not know why the critic for Rural Development did not raise the issue in one whole evening of Estimates. The question was not even raised by the critic when we were going throu gh Estimates and now uses the optics of Question Period to raise it. Regional Development Corporations Funding Formula Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Sw an River): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a chart so that the Pr emier (Mr.

Filmon) will have true facts about how many people really are working in rural Manitoba, and the fact is we have not done decentralization in Estimates yet. I want to ask the minister respons ible for Rural Development or the deputy minister why this government has changed the fo rmula for funding RDCs so that they now not get as much money as they used to, and the RDCs are saying that they cannot oper ate under this form ula. Is this your commi tment to development in rural Manitoba? Hon. James Downey (Acting Minister of Rural Development): Mr.

Speaker, I can assure the member that there were improvements made to the funding of the RDCs under this gove rnment. In fact, there has been one new ROC added to the whole program this year for rural Manitoba. I do not know where the member is getting her facts, but I think she should review them . Ther e have been meetings taking place with the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) and an expression of satisfaction from those organizat ions. Health Care System Reform Nursing Education Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

One of the ways to improve the health reform process is to have co-ordination between the Department of Education and Department of Health, but that is not happening yet. In this reform report, page 59, it says that the long-term decision for the nurses cannot be made yet. At the same time, the Department of Education has put a morat orium on the LPN education at Red River College. We also know there is a doubt about the LPN education at St. Boniface Hospital . Can the Minister of Health tell us, on page 60 of his report, it says clearly that the new pro vincial nursing adviser will be implemen ted.

Can the minister accept this idea, another one, that that adviser should also repor t to the Minister of Education to have proper co-ordination so that at least the decision which will help the reform process can be taken in a more co-ordinated fashion? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, a couple of points of clarification for my honourable friend, which I have pointed out to him before . In terms of nursing education, a number of issues sur faced approxi ma te ly around year -end.

Subsequent to that, the ministry, through my deputy minister, is in the process of surveying all employers of nursing personnel in the provi nce to determine current staffing patterns and to have those same employers in the system give us a projection of where they anticipate their staffing patterns, hence their staffing needs to be five years from now. With that kind of background informati on, we expect to be able to provide very accurate and very good advice to the ministry of Education as well as, certainly, to our person nel people within the ministry of Health. St.

Boniface HospHal School of Licensed Practical Nurses Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Health tell us if his Department of Health has replied to the letter of April 30 from the St. Boniface Hospital president? The president of the hospital is simply requesting the minister to have a meeting and discuss the closure of the LPN school at St. Boniface Hospit al. The minister is saying, at the same time, that they are going to study the proble m. Why do they have to close this place before stu dying the problem? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, my honourable friend might recall that there was a flurry of rumour and concern expressed in December of last year wherein it was almost a given fact of accepted belief that the St. Boniface school for nursing for LPNs was closed in December of 19 91 . That was not accurate. They are accepting students now , and they intend to accept students into the fall class.

May 27, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3852 When those rumours came up, we asked for verification from the St. Boniface Hospit al, their board and senior management. We received the information essentially that I have shared with you in the last minute, Sir. We have not established the meeting as requested April30, but those meetings will be scheduled and will be most producti ve. • (1 420) Community-Based Health Care Licensed Practical Nurse Role Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr.

Speaker, can the minister tell this House if he is in agreement with the conclusion of the task force on LPNs, which clearly states that the move to the communi ty-based hospital model or the commu nity-based hospital care will require more LPNs rather than fewer LPNs? If that is the case, why is the minister putting a morat orium on the edu cation of LPNs? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, as we see the health care system evolve from an institutional-based service delivery model to commu nity-based service delivery patterns, I would expect the nursing professions-in plural, not narrowed only to the LPN, as my honourable friend has just ques tioned-would see their services required in greater numbers in commu nity care delivery settings, be that in communi ty-clinic type delivery systems, as attachments in outpatient services to acute care hospitals, or directly in the Conti nuing Care Program and support services proced ures. PR 340 Grading Project Completion Mr.

Bob Rose (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Highways. Manitobans are pleased with the performance of the Minister of Hi ghways and Transporta tion, particularly with the ongoing commitment to capital projects that bring direc t economic benefits, employment and econom ic activity in the short run as well as long-range benefits in infrastructure, much needed in rural Manitoba. Part of the program that was announced for this year's construction was eight kilom etres of grading and gravelling on PR 340, north of Wawanesa.

Can the minister assure the people of Wawanesa that this project will be completed this year? Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, when I tabled the '92-93 Construction Program here just a little while ago in this House, I want to indicate that our tendering process is such that we are usually almost two years in advance when we do our projections or approvals. I want to indicate to the member that the approvals we have on the '92-93 Construction Program do not necessarily mean that construction will take place this year.

We are trying to get as many of those programs down, but we have carryover from last year, plus the advanced program . But those progr ams are approved, and they will be tendered as soon as we can bring them forward . Mr. Rose: I thank the minister for that answer. Faith Community Baptist Church Building Relocation Mr.

Bob Rose (Turtle Mountain): On a different topic, can the minister assure the congregation of the Faith Commu nity Baptist Church in Souris that their application to move a building from Gladstone to Souris will be dealt with expeditiously, with due conside ration given to costs involved with the alternative routes? Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): The issue that the memb er raises with me is a rather complex one. We have a substantially large church building that has been requested to be moved.

I have instructed staff to try and work together with the commu nity as well as the mover to see whether we can accomm odate that. To move that building along the Trans-Canada Highway creates some concerns in terms of just the size of the building in terms of safety, and we are going to try and accomm odate the people so they will be able to do it at the least cost. Retail Trade Sunday Shopping Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, for many years, this province has had regu lations related to Sunday openings.

The most recent regulations were agreed to by all parties in the Mani toba Legi slature in the mid-1 980s and maintained Sunday as a day of rest for many Manitobans. This government has now moved to open casinos on a Sunday, and I have a very straightforward question to the Premier, very sim pie.

3853 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 What is the policy of this gove rnment on Sunday openings? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Min iste r of Ind ustry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson), I believe, some time ago in this House, indicated that he was reviewing the effects o f cross-border shopping and a number of other issues on Tourism and on opening on Sundays, and that he was going into a thorough and complete review of that matter to see whatthe economic effects were, pote ntially, of Sunday openings.

I do not believe that there has been any conclusion arrived at or that the studies are com plete at this point. Mr. Speaker: The honour able member fo r Thompson has time for one very short question. Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, will the government be consulting with a broad range of Manitobans, including Manitoba workers, including many rural communi ties who have concerns about this? Will he ensure that any changes that take place are in response to what Manitobans are saying, not any particular lobbying that is taking place on behalf o f various groups at the current time? Mr. Fllmon: Mr.

Speaker, this government always consults with people. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) talked about the fact that people talk to him over a cup of coffee. The fact of the matter is that all of our members on this side of the House are very active in their comm unities, are out there talking with people throughout the course of every given week, throughout the course of every year. We make It a practice.

I meet with dozens and dozens and dozens of grou ps who ask for opportuniti es to meet with me as Premier and so do each and every one of our ministers and our members so that we can keep consulta tion on a full range of public issues. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDE RS OF THE DAY Hon. Darren Praznlk {Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would like to, first of all, announce that the Standing Comm ittee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources will meet on Thursday, May 28, 1992, at 10 a.m. to conti nue to consider the 1991 Annual Report of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board.

I would also like to call in terms of order of bills, Bills 20, 12, 15 , 80, 81 and 70. Mr. Speaker, I would also like you to call, in advance of that, Bills 75 and 91 for second readings. SECOND READINGS Bill 75- The Health Services Insurance Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): M. le president, I move, seconded by the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger), that Bill 75, The Health Services Insurance Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'assurance-maladie et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois, be now read a second time and be referred to a commi ttee of this House. Motion presented. • (1 430) Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, The Health Services In surance Am endmen t and Consequen tial Amendments Act is a major component of the reorganization of health care delivery in Manitoba. With this bill we are implementing a strategic management plan to integrate the Manitoba Health Services Comm ission and Manitoba Health into one organi zati on.

This will bring together commu nity-orie nted and institutionally oriented services to produce a be tter balance between the two systems. This bill is the legal framework for implementing this change and the additional changes required as a result. Most of the amendments in this bill, major and minor, can be described as housekee ping. However, two very important changes are included.

First, the Minister of Health will assume direct responsi bility for all po wers exercised up to now by the commission, including control over the Manitoba Health Services Insurance Fund, except for certain appeals and advisory functions. Second , a new quasi-judicial body, the Manitoba Health Board, will be established to handle appeals as well as some advisory and admin istrative functions. This board will have a minimum of five members, including a chairman and vice-chairman appoi nted by cabinet . The appeals to be considered will concern registration of insured persons and entitlement to health benefits.

The board will also approve applications to ope rate

May 27, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 3854 labor ato ries and personal care homes. The board will have appeal responsi bilities related to hospital budgets. Howe ver, in this field the board makes only reco mmendations to the minister, not decisions that are binding. In order to provide some flexibility, the legislation allows the board to sit and act in panels as long as a quorum , set at three, is present. Mr. Speaker, without dwelling on particular sections, I would like to go through the bill with respect to specific areas it concern s.

Sections 3 to 27 rewrite the present legislation to give the Minister of Hea lth direct powers now exercised by the Manitoba He alth Services Comm ission and establish the Manitoba Health Board . Sections 28 to 75 dealing with the management of the Health Services Insurance Fund, registration of residents for health insurance and benefits, insured hospital and personal care home services and the health facility budget process, in that or der, will have references to the minister instead of the commission.

Section 85(3) pro vides for the minister or the Medical Review Comm ittee to disclose information respecting an order made by the Medical Review Committee under

Section 80, including the name of the medical practitioner affected by the order, the amount the medical practitioner has been required to repay by the order and the reasons for the order. Mr. Speaker, this will carry with it the pro vision that no information which could in any way identify a patient who has received medical services from the medical practitioner shall be made public. Finally, more than a dozen other acts require amendments because of this bill.

In all cases, the consequential changes are housekeeping amendments which remove references to the Manitoba Health Services Comm ission, change refe rences from the commission to the minister or transfer authority from the comm ission to the minister. We have already implemented a number of organizational changes arising from the decision to amalgamate the Health Services Comm ission with Manitoba Health. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank the members of the Manitoba Health Services Commi ssion board for their dedicated services to the people of Manitoba in overs eeing the operation of our prov ince's health and hospital insurance services. I look forward to their cont inuing participation in health care on the Manitoba Health Board. I would like to pay similar tribute to the more than 600 employees of the commis sion whose functions and responsibilities are now directly a part of my department.

They and the other members of the department, as well as the rest of the health care commu nity, will help take Manitoba and Manitobans into a new era in health care. I look forward to working with them in the months and years to com e. Sir, I recom mend this bill and its provisions to all members of the House for speedy passage. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Bill 91- The Liquor Control Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer), that Bill 91, The Liquor Control Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia reglementation des alcoo ls, be now read a second time and be referred to a comm ittee of this House. Motion presented. Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Speaker, this amendment to The Liquor Control Act is sparked, as you may recall, by the recent problem that was identified with regard to the consu mption of Chinese cooking wines. These wines-and beverages like them, liquors and so on-used in cook ing, are not meant to be consumed as beverages because of their high salt content.

They were being sold on the shelves with a very high alcohol content, sometimes up to and approaching 40 percent, and being consumed, resulting, in some cases, tragically, a fatality. The amendment that is being proposed will enable beverages such as this to come under the control of the Liquor Control Commission. Prior to the drafting of this amendment or currently in our society here in Manitoba, these beverages are considered to be nonpotable beverages, and as such, do not come under our control because The Liquor Control Act to date governs beverages which are potab le or drinkable.

Bringing these beverages under the control of the Liquor Control Commis sion enables us to set regulations which will restrict the sale of these

3855 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 beverages in ways that are more acceptable and more safe for the consumer. As well, Mr. Speaker, in bringing forward this amendment, we are increasing substantially the penalties that will be able to be applied to those who commit infractions of the law. The situation that currently exists in Manitoba under

Section 113 of The Liquor Control Act makes it illegal to sell these substances for consumption, but it has been difficult for the police to lay charges because they have had difficulty in pro ving that the beverages were being sold for cc;msumptive purposes. As well, the penalties that exist at the current time have no minimum, and the proposal that we are putting in place will see a minimum penalty established of $500 when the maximum will be substantially increased from $2,000 to $1 0,000. This penalty, it is felt, Mr.

Speaker, will discourage in a fairly strong and substantive fashion, those who previousl y felt that they could pay a minimal fine and st ill cont inue selling suc h beverages for consumption, making their profit from the sales and the fine being seen simply as a cost of business. The regulations that are proposed have been drafted by the Liquor Control Commis sion.

They do not form part of the act, of course, because they are a regulation, but it is the intention of the regulation to put conditions of sale on these substances, to allow them to conti nue to be sold in grocer y stores where those legitimate buyers and sellers wish to see them, but restrictions on sale will be imposed such that it will be easier for the police to lay charges if the conditions are not met and, of course, as indicated earlier, the penalties will be much stiffer. As well, Mr.

Speaker, those cooking wines and nonpotable intoxicating substances that will now come under our control , conta ining alcohol between 1 percent and 20 percent, will be able to be available with restrictions to those who feel that they are buying them for legitimate purposes.

No beverage more than 20 percent alcohol by volume of this nature will be sold in the pro vince with the passage of this amendment. * (1 440) Many people were consulted in the drafting of the amendment and in the drafting of the proposed regulation, and those people deserve a great deal of credit and thanks because there was a great deal of discussion as to the most effective way that this matter could be dealt with.

We had two goals in coming forward with this: one was to restrict the sale and impose penalties; the other was to still allow it to be available for that communit y which uses it for legitimate purposes and for restaurants and so on. It was a tricky balance, Mr. Speaker, to arrive at, and I do believe the regu lation and the conditions of sale that are imposed, once passed, will be effective. The regulation, of course , will be able to be mon itored and revised if needed.

We do believe that it will be effective on its own but are prepared to add further conditions of sale, if necessary, if these prove to be in any way inadequate. We express our thank s to the Man itoba Pharmaceutical Associati on, to those members of the nonpotable substance comm ittee, the coalition that had come up with a lot of prethinking on this, to John Rodgers of the Main Street Project, to the mem bers and staff at the Liquor Control Comm ission, and Mr. Speaker, I wish to express very sincere thanks to the member for Point Douglas (Mr.

Hickes) who expressed great interest in this topic from the very beginning, who put forward constructive ideas, who was a ver y positive and helpful influence towards the final proposal that we placed before the House, and I feel that it was the epitome of good constructive opposition that I saw in the developmen t of this amendm ent. The member for Point Douglas has also offe red ideas and suggestions for the regulation which are very much appreciated. I wish to place that on the record , because I feel that it was important to acknowledge his help throughout this process. Mr.

Speaker, I recommend this particular bill, Bill 91 , to the House, and I ask for the support of members in ensuring its speedy passage so that the people of Manitoba, the consumers of Manitoba, will be better protected and better served by an updating of the act in this fashion . Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): I am very pleased to be able to speak on this particular bill toda y.

I want to thank the minister for her last comments, because I think it is very clear that this bill was an exam ple, I belie ve, of how government and opposit ion, members of the Legislature of differing political views, can work together towards a common goal and hopefu lly with the passage of this bill achieve positive results in terms of dealing with a very significant problem that has developed . I would like to ind icate, of course, as the minister pointed out, there were many com munity groups

May 27, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA 3856 that offered suggestions and ideas. Certainly on our side we are very pleased to see this particular bill, and, in fact, I know the member for Point Douglas had hoped to be able to ask a question in Question Period as to whether another area, such as antisniff legislation , which was passed a couple of years ago.

Some of the more veteran members of the Treasury benches might not wish to look to the minister who has introduced this bill, the Minister of Consu mer and Corporate Affairs, in terms of an example of reaching an all-party consensus, which was the case in the antisn iff, tho ugh, and implementing it, not simply passing the bill, because I have no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that this minister has no intention of passing this bill and simply leaving it to collect dust. I know that the bill is intended to be pro claimed and proc laimed as soon as possi ble.

I know there are times when the minister and I have gotten into debate on issues in this House, somet imes offi cially from our feet and sometimes less officially from our seat, Mr. Speaker, and I am sure that will cont inue. I get the sense in the period of time I have gotten to know the minister that we will be having many more debates in the future, but not on this bill and not on the process and not on the generous way, I think, in which the minister has publicly indicated the role of all member s-and certainly her own role should be noted-whether it be the member for Point Douglas (Mr.

Hickes) , members of the com munity as well, in terms of seeing this particular bill come to fruition. Let us not forget what the bill is dealing with, Mr. Speaker, because it is a very serious problem that has developed. It is a question, I know, that has been raised in this House on many occasi ons in terms of nonpotab le intoxicants and in terms of this particular intoxicant and the serious health risks attached. As the minister is quite aware, and has made known in this particular bill, there is a serious prob lem.

People looking for high alcohol content, looking for ready accessibility, have found these types of products to be available and accessible, but they carry a particular risk, because while they are intoxicants they also contain a high degree of salt. The concern has been expressed that people have quite literally died of dehydration, because, of course , alcohol itself tends to dehydrate, and when you com bine alcohol and salt, which also dehydrates, it becomes a medical problem that only grows worse .

The more someone drinks of this particular type of intoxicant, the more they becom e dehydrated and the more they drink again. In many ways it is similar to the whole dilemma of seawater. I know if one looks at situations, people have been in lifeboats having to deal with drinking water and have turned to seawater. It has the same impact-ir onically, when water itself can dehydrate. That is the kind of concern that was brought forward by the member for Point Douglas. The bottom line, Mr.

Speaker, is it was a concern brought forward by members of the community, and I think what should be noted-and we talked before about some of the individuals involved in this-is the relative speed as gov ernments are considered in terms of bringing this bill before the Legislature. I say relative speed, Mr. Speaker, because the bottom line is this has really been of significant public attention the last several months and has come to light in this Legislature I know through the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) who has brought in a private members' bill to deal with this.

If the go vernment was not going to proceed and, once again, I am pleased to see that in this case the gov ernment has chosen to proceed with its own bill. Of course , a gover nment bill, while it perhaps is equal to a private members' bill in terms of ability to deal with issues, et cetera, does have the advantage of the fact that the government can call the bill as it has today and with the co-operation of the Legislature, there is a far greater chance of a government bill being passed than a private members' bill. I think that is significant.

I think the fact the gov ernment has brought in its own bill indicates the fact that it is quite willing and anxious to see this matter expedited. I would say, Mr. Speaker, that the whole area of nonpotabie intoxicants is something I think we need further work on, and I say this to the minister in her capacity not only as responsi ble for this particular area, but in terms of other areas. I know it has been a major concern in my own comm unity of Thompson for many years.

I am not just talking about the particular products indicated here, but Lysol , for example, which is a major probl em . * (1 450) There are many consumer products that are intoxicants, and I realize it is in a different area we are dealing with in the sense of jurisdiction. We do have a problem with merchants conti nuing to sell-and I know in my own com munity-intoxicants

3857 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 to individuals despite the fact they realize that it is creating serious health risks. I have seen that in my own commu nity. I can indicate that the MKO in Thompson, Mr. Speaker, which represents northern bands, has been working very strongly on this issue on behalf of aboriginal people. They have been looking, as I said, to action in regard to the antisniff bill which was passed by this Legislature unanimously, I might add, and still has not been proclaimed.

I am hoping, agai n, and I mentioned this earlier-and I do not mean to say this facetiously or in a political sense-I am hoping perhaps the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintosh) can work with the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) on these other issues, because I think in a short period of time she has consulted fairly widely with commu nity groups. She has consulted with the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes). I think she has shown that through that consultation we can end up in a situation where action can take place that is going to have a significant, meaningful impact on this issue.

It is the same thing in terms of antisniff, and I hope the minister will work with the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) to get the issue out of the realm of legalities, legal opin ions and bureaucratic concerns that have been expressed about the bill. I say that because there must be a solution. If we can move as quickly as we have on this particular matter, surely, we can move on the other areas as well. Perhaps the minister can persuade the Minister of Health to consult with comm unity groups, because we have indicated we are not hung up on any particular bill.

This other matter, which is very related to this, in terms of the antisniff legislation, if that bill is no t enfor ceable, let us bring in another bill. Let the government bring in the bill. There is no question here to my mind of getting credit. It does not matter if the Minister of Health brings it in or whoever, it is the question of getting it brought in. Surely there must be the same sort of sense and good advice to resolve that problem in the same way that this matter has been dealt with, because I believe it is a very creative solution.

What this bill proposes, what this minister proposes is a very creative solution. It is the result, as the minister said, of many ideas. Sometimes I think that is one prob lem in the Legislature itself, and that is that we often have a very limited foru m to be able to put forward those ideas. Fortu nately, private members' hour is available to the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hic kes), to raise his concerns in Question Period, but I wo uld suggest that perhaps one thing we might want to look at is using our standing committees to deal with this matter. Surely, this is as nonpartisan as you can get.

I want to throw this out as a suggestion to the mini ster. I would hope if there was such a committee, given the consultation that she has been involved with and the action she has taken on this bill, that she would be part of that committee. Perhaps the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) as well could be pa rt of it, pe rhaps go ve rnmen t backbenchers could be part of it, perhaps opposition members could be part of it, using a standing comm ittee that could travel the pro vinCEH>ecause this is a province-wide issue-could hold public hearings on dealing with nonpotable intoxicants, not just in terms of the cooking wine dimension but other nonpotable intoxicants, dealing with the whole tragedy of sniffing, of travelling into northern com muni ties perhaps, into different areas of Winnipeg, because it is no t unique to any one area.

There is very much a myth in that sense, that certain areas of the city are more subject to this prob lem, or certain areas of the pro vince. I would suggest that the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) might also be involved , because I could see a significant role for the school system to play, and perhaps dealing with the problem of young people, who are using no npotable intoxicants and seriously damaging their health, making them aware of the risks to their health of doing it. We could involve the Minister of Justice (Mr.

McCrae) perhaps, because obviously there will be legal and enforcement ques tions that will be involved in any particular bill. I think that would be positive. I know our critics and members on our side would be interested. I am sure the Liberals would be interested. I think it would have the advantage of creating the same kind of legitimacy that this bill has. This is indeed a govern ment bill, but it is not a bill that is strictly the result of the gover nment itself sitting down and making a de cision. The government deserves recognition for recog nizing the problem and acting on it.

May 27, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 3858 I mentioned in particular the role of the minister, but it was a result of a broader consultati on. I would suggest, and I put this forward as a positive suggestion, that we might want to look at the same approach , as I said, for the broader issue, of having a comm ittee, perhaps when this Legisla ture recesses, that could travel the province and could undertake consultation I really would encourage those ministers to be involved and perhaps a chair could be appointed specifically on that committee to start the proce ss.

I would like to indicate that I am sure, from our side, the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hic kes), given his concern about this particular area, would be quite willing to further discuss this matter with the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintosh), the minister respons ible for the Liquor Comm ission, and other mi ni sters on the gov ernment side. Mr. Speaker, I could talk at much greater length, but I did want to, as I said, do two things. I will say in conclusion the points I wanted to make.

One, was to commend all who have been involved in this process: the minister, the me mber for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), the com munity groups; and the second , to take the opportunity to once again stress the fact that perhaps we could learn from this experience, in an area that is clearly nonpartis an, clearly a serious public problem in terms of public health, the area of nonpotable intoxicants, perhaps we can take this experience and not let it stop with this one bill, but perhaps, when we are out of session, hold hearings across the provi nce .

Perhaps in the next session we may be in a position of standing in this House debating bills that are the direct result of that kind of process. I know we are talking about reform ing this institution, and I know there are discussions ongoing in that regard, and without getting into any details, I think there is a clear sense around us in this House amongst many people, veteran members, newer members, that we can function better, particularly when we have nonpartisan issues. Surely there will be partisan issues.

We have our traditional debates, traditional processes, but in many ways there are so many issues out there that are not partisan, that are far better dealt with than the way this mi nister has dealt with this in conjunction with the opposition critic, than the normal adversarial approach that we end up in Question Period on more partisan issues. Perhaps our comm ittee structure is a way of dealing with that, and perhaps we can do some significant work on that after the end of the session, whenever that may be. With those few words I would like to indicate that I know the member for Point Douglas (Mr.

Hickes) , I am sure, would like to put some comments on the record , and I once again congratulate all people, the minister, the member for Point Douglas, members of the committee group for some very excellent work on a very major public concern. Mr . George Hlckes (P oint Do uglas): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to rise to speak to this bill today , because it is a bill that has been waiting to be brought into the House by the citizens of Manitoba.

I am really amazed the positive progress that this minister was able to acc omplish in such a short period of time, because I have also been meeting with various interest groups and various organizations and they have nothing but positive things to say about this bill. A lot of those organizations have indicated that they have been in contact by the minister and her office, so she has done a lot of consulting with the communi ty people and with various organizations and has listened, has listened to the people , and has take n the recomme ndations from the people and has put them into action.

The reason I say that is because with this bill you have one side of the ledger that deals with unpotable substance, substance that you drink, and with this bill that will eliminate a lot of the proble ms and should reduce a lot of the health costs in Manitoba in the future, just by this one bill.

The reason I state that is because there is another on the other side of the ledger that the citizens of Manitoba have been looking for from this government, the passage of the antisniff bill, which deals with the other side of the ledger; that is the glue sniffing and whatever substance that you inhale, and that should be a direct respon sibility of the Health department, the Health minister (Mr. Orchard).

If the minister, who has only been in the House since we were elected in September 11, 1990 and has been a minister a much shorter period of time than other senior ministers, can go out there and consult with the people and listen to the people and get this kind of action, I cannot see and I do not understand why Bill 91 , the antisniff bill, has not been proclai med.

3859 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 Even if you have to make the amendments or whate ver it takes in order to approve your study-appare ntly there is a study going on-approve your government's study-because it is this kind of action that saves lives, that protects people. People do not organize and speak out just for the sake of organizing and speaking out.

It is because individuals are very, very concerned about what harmful effects these substances and the sniffing substances are doing to individuals of Manitoba. * (1 500) When you look at this bill that I am .speaking to today, it is taking a very serious direction . It is not saying, I better watch that little corner grocery store or I better watch this unscrupulous salesperson because they might not like what I am doing. This bill says, I have listened to the people, and I am acting on behalf of the people. It says right here, if a salesperson sells a substance the fine is $500 to $1 0,000.

The second time there is no question. You do not stop on go, you go directly to jail. It does not matter who you are. So that is why the people are very satisfied with this bill, and that is why I will be our last speaker today on our side, because we are ready to move it into comm ittee because there are organizations and people out there that want to have a chance to address this bill and see it passed as soon as possi ble. For every hour, for every day we delay the passage of this bill it is affecting someone out there.

So the sooner we, the House as a collective unit, get this bill passe d and proclaimed the more lives this bill is saving, and the more dollars we are saving for health care that will be needed in the future if we contin ue to let people abus e these sort of substances; and it will increase the overall cost to all taxpayers of Manitoba. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) I just have to say that since this bill was introduced I have had briefings and have been consulted by the minister in a very co-operative manner. There was not one confronta tion.

There was total consulting with our side of the House, and total con sulting with the law enforce ment people, with the citizens. I was at a meeting over the weekend and I spoke to some of the members of the Point Douglas Residents' Associa tion, who are very concerned about the substance abuse that is taking place. A member of that associati on has even been contacted by the minister's office and consulted with, and that is the kind of consulting that individuals in the province of Manit oba exp ect from government ministers, because ministers and individuals in this House, no one has all the answers.

We need to get out there to listen to the peopl e, to listen to the concerned citizens of Manitoba so positive measures such as this bill can take place. These issues that pertain to citizens of Manitoba, and if we can attain those goals through a nonpartisan worki ng agreement, that is the best poss ible way of doing it. So I just wanted to commend the minister and her go vernmen t for introducing this bill and for responding very quickly to the people of Manitoba. I know that by this bill you are saving people's lives, and I hope the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) can find time in his very busy

schedule to consult with the minister who is responsible for the Manitoba Liquor Control Comm ission (Mrs. Mcintosh) to seek some advice. We are never too old or never too late to learn. Seek some advice how she and her department were able to accomplish such positive measures in such a short period of time and how to go to listen to the people and take from their recomme ndations and solve the proble ms that people in Manitoba are facing. Consult with the individuals.

If he can just find a little bit of time in his very busy schedule, maybe in the near future we will see where Bill 91 , that deals with the other side of the ledger, with proble ms we have with sniffing products. Once that is dealt with, then you can say that this gov ernment has dealt with the problem right across the board . But without procl aiming Bill 91 , the minister has done half the government's job, the mi nis ter responsible for the Liquo r Control Comm ission (Mrs.

Mcintosh) has done half the gove rnment's job, now it is the Minister of Health's turn to stand up and do the other half to help the citizens of Manitoba. With that, I am pleased to say that we, on this side, are ready to pass this bill into committee. So thank you, and I would like to thank the minister again, and her staff, for an excellent job. Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): On behalf of the Liberal Party , I want to put just a few remarks on the record so that we can move this bill very speedily on to committee, hope fully at the conclusion of my remarks, and that we can get passage and Royal Assent as soon as

May 27, 19 92 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 3860 pos sible to improve the health conditions of many Manitobans who have succumbed to the attraction of buying this particular product when it was not in their best health interests to so do. Mr. Acting Speaker, before I begin my own remarks, I want to commend the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) for raising this matter in the Legislature and even going so far as to quickly draft his own private member's bill in order to stimulate the minister to respond accor dingly.

She has so done, and we now have a piece of legislation which, I think, is guaranteed unanimous support in this Legislature and will get the kind of speedy passage that we want. Why do we need this kind of legislation ? Well, we nee d it because we kno w tha t there are unscrupulous people who will take advantage of those who have either genetically, or through a life experience, developed a serious alcohol pro blem.

We know that they do not frequently understand the risks involved of their imbibing a product which they see only as an alcohol-driven product and do not recognize that this has within its capacity very dangerous substance. The amount of salt in this product, one would think, would almost discourage them from drinking it because of the poor taste, but the price remained attractive, and that was one of the reasons why some could prey on these people and sell a product which was in their health's bad interest to purchase and to cons ume. Mr.

Acting Speaker, we have a situation where the minister has increased the fines dramatically, and she has ensured, I think, that those who would deal with their fellow citizen in an unscrupulous manner will now have to think twice. It will not guarantee that there will be not those that will still try to take advantage of human beings. Unfortunat ely, they will always be with us. But now they are going to have to seriously consider the impact on them if they try to abuse another human being in this manner.

It is very clear that when somebody goes in once a month and buys a bottle of Chinese cooking wine that they may in fact be using it to cook with. When someone goes in and buys it once a day or perhaps several times a day or buys several bottl es at a time, unless they are producing Chinese banquets with gay aplomb, they are using it for one purpose, and that is to drink. It does not take, quite frankly, a genius at the till to recog nize that is the case. We are now bringing it very much to their mind that they must take that into considerat ion.

But I want to deal just a moment with a much broader issue, and that is the issue of how we can work effectively through legislation to make sure that the Minister of Health's (Mr. Orchard) reform package, which will move us to a communi ty-based health care delivery system, is going to require input from other go vernment departments, and this one is a perfect example.

If we are going to curtail the abuse of a product which is consumed, thereby causing massive dehydration problems, pote ntially causing massive high blood pressure problems, then we have to have close co-operation bet ween the Min is ter responsible for the Liquor Control Commis sion (Mrs. Mcintosh) and the Minister of Health. Well, I would suggest to the minister that the same thing is very much at her potential ability to control fetal alcohol syndrom e. We know that pregnant women should not drink.

If they drink even as little as one two -ounce drink a day during a pregnancy, it can lead to this very complex syndrome which can lead to a health care cost of millions and millions of dollars. We have asked in the past for the minister to do some very simple things, and I want to put those on the record again today.

Just signs at liquor outlets indicating the dangers of drinking during pregnancy would go a long way to alleviating this proble m. *( 15 10) I also suggest to her that she might consider-and obvi ously there is a cost factor involved in this one, and that is why she has to consider it-the printing on liquor bottles themselves. We know that each bottle is price marked.

If at the same time it was price marked also a label could go on that bottle which would indicate that consumption during pregnancy can lead to fetal alcohol syndrome, that is something that I would also like her to evaluate for purposes of cost, because I think if we did something of that nature that it would be very cost-effe ctive. The national Minister of Health has indicated he will do nothing about the enforcem ent of labelling on all alcohol bottl es unless that request comes from pro vincial ministers.

3861 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA May 27, 19 92 So I would recom mend to the minister that she herself draft a letter to the national Minister of Health indicating that we want that labelling universal. This would eliminate any cost from the Manitoba Liquor Control Commis sion, because it would be on the bottl es by the time they were received by the Liquor Control Commission.

If the national governm ent would so act in the manner that they have acted, for example, with regard to cigarette packaging, the dangers of smoke in the causing of cancer and ot her health ailments-so if she can also take a leadership in that area and dictate the appropriate letter to the national Minister of Health, I think that would be a welcome initiative. We would also like, as the members of the official opposition have indicated, to see some movement on the antisniff legislation which we have all passed in this House, and would hope that if the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) is still looking atthe regulations that he too would get very speedy passage of a new bill, if a new bill is necessary. If the bill that we passed in the past is inadequate, because it might lead to some constitutional challenge-he has never proven that to us, but he has indicated that might be the case- then, please, give us a new bill that we also can join in in some harmony to ensure that there is some protecti on for young people, in particular, with regard to the sniffing legislation, because it seems to impact more severely upon them.

We also need to get the Education minister involved here, because I am amazed at the amount of substances that young people will ingest with the idea that they will have no side effects whatsoe ver. I want to just recount a very simple incident. I have a yearly skating party in my constitu ency. I always give out balloons, particularly to the younger children, and we always have helium in them. Last February, I noticed teenagers coming up for the balloons, and they were not coming for one, they were coming back for two or three or more.

Well, being an old schoolteac her, I had to, of course, find out what was happening, went down into the locker ro oms, and guess what? They were swallowing the helium in order for their voices to change and for them to speak in a funny kind of voice. I asked them if they knew of any potential danger of their doing this-no, it was fun; it was not going to hurt them. But, indeed, it can hurt them. That will lead me to a decision next year. We will use air in the balloons, and we will not use helium, because I do not want to encourage young people to ingest any substance which is not in their best interests to do.

I think that the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) has got to look at the curriculum that she has developed and will be continuing to develop in the health care area to make sure that our young people do know what they are eating, what they are sniffing, what they are imbibing, and the effect that those kinds of things can have, not just now, but in their long-term best health interests. So with those few remarks, Mr. Acting Speaker, I am delighted to indicate that the Liberal Party wants speedy passage of this bill.

We look forward to hearing a number of presentations from com munity activists in this area in the commi ttee stage, and we hope Royal Assent can be achieved very quickly. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House, second reading of Bill 91 , The Liquor Control Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia reglementation des alcools. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? (Agreed) DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 20- The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), Bill 20, The Munic ipal Assessment Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur I' evaluation municipale, standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Second Opposition Party (Mrs. Carstairs). Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I began my remarks on Bill 20 last week, and want to complete them today , and to indicate to the government that I will be the last speaker in IT!Y party to be speaking on Bill 20. Mr. Speaker, it is a bill which does a, political ly, we think, bad thing. It pushes forward an assessment date which we were guaranteed, in the passage of Bill 79, would be achieved by 1993.

There is no reason for it to be now postponed and that assessment not in 1994. The tables are going to be ready. The assessments are going to ready.

May 27, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3862 As I explained when last I spoke , we can see only a political motivation to this particular change and we think that is not in the best interests of the taxpayers of the province of Manitoba. But in addition, Mr. Speaker, I want to address what is not in Bill 20. There is no question that the purpose of Bill 20 is to amend what the gov ernment perceived as some flaws in Bill79, which we passed several years ago. Well, there is a very serious flaw in Bill 79 which has not been addressed by this Legislature.

We hope that the go vernment between now and the day that this bill comes to committee, that they will propose an amendment. If they do not, then we are prepared to propose that amendment. We would ask particularly those members from rural Manitoba to consider it in great detail. Certainly, the Keystone Agricultural Producers have let the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) know in no uncertain terms that they are very concerned about the impact of Bill 79, in its present form , on the evaluation of their prope rties, and their inability to appeal those values on current market prices.

If you live in a city and you have a home, you can not just appeal on assessed value, you can appeal on current market value. Yet, if you have a farm prope rty, despite the fact that that farm property may have deterio rated-for any number of reasons-in value, you can only ask for an appeal based on its assessed value, not on its current market value. We think that is wrong, as do the Keystone Agricultural Pro ducers. We see no reason, since this bill is going to be opened up anyway, why it cannot be opened further and correct this flaw.

In addition, we see a serious problem developing in some commercial properties located in rural Manitoba. I began the other day, and unfor tunately got cut off because of five o'clock, with regard to the Campbell Soup prope rty. What has happened in that particular situatio n is that we have a plant whose assessed value is based on the fact that it is an up and working plant. Based on that assessment, quite frankly, it is not particularly attractive to pote ntial purchasers at this moment in time, because they are paying far too much tax if they buy this property, based on its assessment.

If they were able to appeal it on the basis of its current market value, that property would take on far more interest and far more appeal to a potential purchaser who might go in and essentially perform a function similar to what Campbell Soup did in a secondary processing of our agricultural product, something we not only want but need in the pro vince of Manitoba .

So our concern about Bill 20 is less what it contai ns and is far more on what it does not contai n, and we believe thatthe movement from assessment rates to 1 993 to 1 994 will only make this even worse, because if the commercial pro perties, if the farmers of the province of Manitoba could be at least gu aranteed that they were going to get an appropriate value for '93, they would at least have that window of opportunity as soon as possible within the next year.

By putting it off for yet another year, we are asking them to pay more tax than they should be paying for yet anoth er year, and we think that is not a good encouragement for them as they look to their increasing cos ts in all areas, but increasing costs for taxes as well. • (1 520) I am also particularly concerned about the fact that if one reads recent corre spondence that I have received from Keystone Agricultural Producers, it would appear that the Min ister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) does not read his mail, at least not his mail that he receives from the Keystone Agricultural Producers.

I have , for example, a letter which I am prepared to table, although I think any member could get it from the minister responsible if they so chose , but let me just read this paragrap h: In light of the rem arks contained in your letter of May 1 , 1992, I would wonder if my letter of April24, 1992, which was both faxed and mailed , was ev er brought to your attention. Mr. Speaker, if it is the case that the Minister of Rural Development (Mr.

Derkach) is not reading his mail from the Keystone Agricultural Producers I would like to suggest that he do so and that he do so at his very first opportunity, because I think they have some very valuable things to say about Bill 20, ways in which they can make Bill 20 even better and more in the interests of the farm population of the province of Manitoba . I would also encourage the Minister of Agriculture (Mr.

Findlay) to encourage his Minister of Rural Developm ent to look into this matter on behalf of the farmers of the provi nce of Manitoba, and again would suggest that we would welcome such an amendment at committee stage. We know that if it comes in as a gov ernment amendment it will have much greater opportu nity of

3863 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA May 27, 19 92 passage, but we will introduce such an amendment if the govern ment is not forthcom ing with a similar amendm ent. With that, Mr. Speaker, we are prepared to see it go on to comm ittee stage on behalf of our party. Mr. Speaker: This bill is also standing in the name of the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen). Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? Leave. [Agreed) 811112-T he Animal Husbandry Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay), Bill 12, The Animal Husbandry Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'elevage, standing in the name of the honourable memb er for Dauphin (Mr . Plohman), who has 10 minutes remaining. Stand? Ms. Rosa nn Wo wc huk {Sw an River): Mr. Speaker, just on information, if I could ask, the member for Dauphin was wanting to speak on this bill and then pass it to committee. He will be here very shortly. Can we go to the next bill and then come back to this? Hon. Darren Praznlk {Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I think we are prepared to have this matter brought back to accomm odate the member for Dauphin so it can be passed into commi ttee. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the will of the House to recall Bill 12 at a later time this afternoon? [Agreed) *** Mr. Praznlk: Mr. Speaker, I thank, again, the Hous e for their indulg ence as we try to accomm odate a variety of interests in moving bills through here tod ay. I understand if you may call Bill 70 out of order that we may be able to deal with that one. Mr. Speaker: Do you want me to call Bill 70 now? Mr. Praznlk: Bill 70, yes, please, and then 15 , 80 and 81 . Bill 70- The Social Allowances Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Mr.

Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minis ter of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer), Bill 70, The Social Allowances Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'aide sociale et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois, standing in the name of the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans). Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? [Agreed) Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs {Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill 70, to indicate to the minister in no uncertain terms that it is not the principles of Bill 70 of which we have any disagreement. Bill 70 provides for a one-ti er payment of social assistance payments in the provi nce of Manitoba.

It is a concept and a policy that we have endorsed for a long time. What we have serious difficulties with in this bill is the regulatory powers which have been given to the minister, regulatory powers which, if all ind ications of his recen t me etings with municipalities are to be believed, he intends to use in a way which is not in the best interests of social assistance recipients in the province of Manitoba, nor is it in their best health care interests, which I have raised on a number of occasi ons should be of vital concern to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard). Mr.

Speaker, 89.5 percent of all social assistance recipients live in the city of Winnipeg. Less than 11 percent of them live outside the city of Winnipeg. What the minister is suggesting is that he will go to a rate which is less than is presently paid by the City of Winnipeg. The result will be twofol d.

Either the City of Winnipeg will have to pick up the additional costs, because the Department of Family Services will only meet 50 percent of what they decide is an appropriate fee, or they will have to reduce the amount of social assistance which is given to 89.5 percent of the social assistance recipients in the prov ince of Manitoba . It is intolerab le, Mr. Speaker. One of the areas which is particularly to be highligh ted is the food portion of the social assi stance budget.

At the present time, the province of Manitoba recognizes a very small amount of money for infants, an amount which is less than 50 percent of what the City of Winnipeg recomme nds for infants. It does not go anywhere to pay for the cost, for example, of form ula such as Enfalac. It will not be adequate to meet the needs of an infant child if we go to the rate which is rec ommen ded by the Department of Family

May 27, 19 92 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3864 Services as opposed to the rate presently set by the City of Winnipeg. I have had discussions with a number of city councillors as to why the money for the food budget for an infant is substantially higher in the City of Winnipeg. The reasons are very simple. They have made the very conscious decision that if infants get a good healthy start, if it is assured that they receive adequate nutrition between birth and age one, then they can be guaranteed to have far fewer health prob lems later on in life. I do not think the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) would have any disagreement with that at all. Yes, we have to spend the money up front, but as his own study which he put on the table today indicated so very clearly, it is urban young women who are unm arried who seem to have disproportionately low birth weight pregnancies. Those low birth weight children do not get the kind of adequate start they need.

The recommen dation that is made by this task force group which proposed this report is that we have to ensure that there is better prenatal care, that there is better control over the nutritional ingredients that go into a pregnant woman's diet in order to ensure that she has a child which has a higher birth weight at the average of about eight pounds and not substantially lower than that particular weight. There are a number of other factors that create a low birth weight child. One of those facto rs, Mr. Speaker, can be high blood pressure.

Another one of those factors can be gene tic, but a disproportionate number of low birth weight babies are born to women who have inadequate nutrition levels. So we must recognize that those children already start with a poo r start. If those babies after having been born with a low birth weight also receive inadequate amounts of nutrition, in other wor ds, inadequate amounts of food between birth and year one , then they are goin g to be even mor e disadvantaged. You know , Mr.

Speaker, we tend to think that that will just mean that these children will not weigh as much and that they will be prone to more infections and therefore will cause a greater drain upon the health care system. * (1 530) Unfortu nately, it is not just their physical growth that is affected. It is also their mental grow th. We know that there is a high correlation between their ability to think and reason and inadequate levels of nutrition.

Not only can these children end up being a drain on the health care budget, they can also end up being a serious drain on the Education budget as we need to provide more and more special needs funding for those you ngsters in the school system. We are far better off to recognize these vulnerable women, and these vulnerable children, early in the process and make sure that they get the nutritional requiremen ts that they require for good health. Mr.

Speaker, I am very conc erned about what the City of Winnipeg will choose to do when they are faced with the possibility of having to spend an additional $5.6 million on social assistance. I am afraid that some of them in a time of fiscal restraint will say, we do not have the luxury of topping-up the amou nts of money unless we are going to be guaranteed that we are going to get 50 percent of tha t toppe d-up money from the pro vincial gov ernment. But the Mi nister of Fa mily Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) is not looking towards that as a viable solution .

He is looking at the lowest common denominator; he is looking at the municipal rates that have been set prov ince-wide for less than 11 percent as the guideline by which he will set social assistance rates for the pro vince of Manitoba. He will be very wrong and misguided if he moves in that direction because it will lead to increased costs for the Minister of Health. It will lead to increased costs for the Minister of Education, and in the long run will lead to increased costs for his own department as these peo ple become drains on the social assistance budget of the decades to com e. Mr.

Speaker, it is so shortsighted on his part to not recognize that there is no thing luxurious about the social assistance rates presently being set by the City of Winnipeg and the Pro vince of Manitoba . They are not even adequate to living at the poverty level. They are way below the poverty level. To suggest that they should go even further below the poverty level is untenable. Bill 70 in its philosophical impact is a valid piece of legislation .

Bill 70 in terms of the impact that will occur thro ugh regulations which can be set by this Minister of Family Services could end up as a disaster for the provi nce of Manitoba. So it is not the intention of the bill, it is the action of the minister on that bill, that concerns us very much. I ask the members of the government caucus to raise this matter with the minister. If he insists on going to a

3865 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 92 lower level of standard than is presently paid to social recipients in the pro vince of Manitoba, he will have created a very serious health and education problem and family service problem into the future. I do not think that is what he wants to do, and so he must be prevented now from, quite fran kly, divesting himself of respon sibility which is his and his alone, and look to the higher standards to ensure that there is adequate nutrition for those who live at social assistan ce. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Doug Martindale (Burrows): It is a pleasure for me to rise and speak on this bill, somet hing we have been alerting the com munity to, especially advocacy organizations like Manitoba Anti-Poverty Organization and churches that are involved in the distribution of food on behalf of Winnipeg Harvest Food Bank. We know that there is a great deal of interest in this bill and that there will be a number of presentations at the committee stage. There are good reasons for that.

There are good reasons for the concern out in the commu nity on the part of advocacy organizations and by the City of Winnipeg as we saw at the meeting to which we were invited recently. What is the purpose of The Social Allowances Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act? The purpose is to harmonize social assistance rates throughout the province. The reason for that is there is a great disparity of rates and great disparities in the administration of social assistance amongst the various municipalities.

This disparity has been the subject of study, several studies over the past decade, beginning with the report of the Manitoba task force on social assistance, which I believe issued its report in September 1983, and they recom mended a one-t ier system. They gave reasons for it. They said that the system at that time was based on distinctions about the duration of assistance and variations which were inequi table. They said there were advantages to the standardization of rates. At that time there were 202 municipalities, of which 126 had lower rates than the province .

In many cases, municipal rates excluded personal allowances. The public presentations to that task force urged that, if the provi nce cannot move to a one- tier syst em, then at lea st they should standardize the rates to the provi ncial level. A full single-tier system would result in economies of scale and do so at very little additional cost. The previous government, the ND P government, intended to move in stages towards standardizing the rates, and they calculated at that time that it would cost about $8 million if they standardized the rates for every municipality except the City of Winnipeg.

The task force report said there would be many benefits, that there would no longer be imputed distinctions which are ofte n unsu pportable or unsupported by the empirical facts. They said there would be no need to transfer cases from one administration to anot her. There would be no need for recipients to change residency to get higher bene fits.

In fact, one of the problems in rural Manitoba and even in cities is that quite often social assistance consists of a one-way bus ticket to Winnipeg, which is really causing depopu lation , causing people to go to Winnipeg, and not accepting responsi bili ty for people who live in those municipalities, but dumping them off and dumping the expense off on another municipality, frequently the City of Winnipeg. Municipalities would no longer have to fulfill functions beyond their resources and beyond the ability of their staff who are not trained to deal with people on social assistance.

They talked about the transition to a one-tier system, and they said that it could be volu ntary and evolve over a period of time. In summa ry, there were many good, positive reasons for a one- tier syste m. Well, what happen ed next? Well, after the change of governm en t the Conser vative government appoi nted the Social Assis tance Revie w Committee. Did they hear from the public? No. Did they hear from poor people? No. Did they hear from advocacy organizatio ns? No.

In sp ite of that, they rec om me nded the harmonization of rates throughout Manitoba, and the result is Bill 70, The Social Allo wances Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act. What were the findings of the SARC comm ittee report? Well, they said that since each municipality esta blished its own by-l aws regarding social assistance there were a number of proble ms. There were different sets of rules depending on which municipality people were in; there were different eligibility requirements; there were different ad min istrative process es. The result was inequities.

May 27, 19 92 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3866 I have heard some interesting stories about this. In fact, I heard a story from the constituency of the member for lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praz nik). I was talking to a lawyer in his constitu ency. He mentioned that in the town of Beausejour, when someone applied for social assistance it was a very public process, because the decision had to be taken to council. I understand that is very common in rural Manitoba. I think that there is a problem here with confidehtiality.

When people are applying for any gov ernment program , whether it is social assistance or anything else, it should be confidenti al. The need should not be discussed by a town counci l. In fact, I think members of the cabinet would be appalled if they had to apply for a go vernment agricultural program and have their income and their assets made public informati on. They would be tota lly opposed to that. I think the same principles should apply when people are applying for social assistance.

Their personal information about their income and their assets should be confidential and their need should be confident ial. The other example that I heard of was, someone in a rural municipality in western Manitoba applied for social assistance and wrote a letter. The letter was read at the R.M. council meeting, and one of the councillo rs was an immediate relative of the person applying for social assistance. No one should have to apply in such a public way for social assistance and have all the councillo rs find out what their need is and why they are applying.

So there are good reasons for moving to a one-t ier system administered by provincial staff. What we have is a half-baked measure here, a half step towards that. They are going to standardize the rates, but they are not going to standardize administration. The SARC committee recommended extensive regu lation of the bene fits, rates and financial eligibility criteria with flexibility for municipalities to exceed the regulated rates. What would the cost be?

The cost would be only an incremental cost estimated at $3.4 million, accor ding to the SARC committee. • (1 540) Similarly, the report of the Women's Initiative said that in some municipalities the administration of assistance is often inaccessible, demeaning and punitive, something to which I have already referred. Anyone who has to apply and has their application made public by way of discussion at an R.M. or town council is certainly demeaned and punished in the application process. Well, what did the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) say in introducing this bill at second reading?

Well, he covered much of the same ground that I have and referred to the Social Assistance Review Comm ittee report. He said, at page 1980 of Hansard : • ... municipalities will retain the flexibility to exceed the minimum standard levels " Well, that is true on the surface of it. They will be allo wed to exceed minimum or standardized provincial rates. The problem is that the province will not reimburse them, at least we do not believe they will.

We have not seen the regulations, and 1 think the muni cipalities, especially Winnipeg, Thompson and Brandon, are still lobbying the pro vincial government and the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) hoping that some changes will be made. We do not think that those changes will be made. In fact, we think that the purpose of this is to offload expenditure from the province to the municipality, in the case of the City of Winnipeg, $5.6 million a year. The City of Winnipeg has a very tou gh choice to make.

They can either absorb that cost and pass it on to city ratepayers or they can cut benefits by $5.6 million. If they do, there will be extreme hardship for people on social assistance because the city benefits are considerably better than pro vincial benefits. For example, at the meeting that the City of Winnipeg had to which myself and other members attended, they published a

schedule of basic allowa nces. Except for peopl e who are single with no dependents, the other three examples were all of higher levels of benefits. For example, in a family of two adults and one child, the city benefits are almost $2,000 higher than pro vincial. In the case of two adults with two children, $3,000 higher. In the case of two adults with three children, $3,000 higher. These are people who are living way below the pove rty line . The social assistance income in most places in Canada is somewhere between 40 and 60 percent of the poverty line. So we are not talking about people who have any room to maneuver here or any flexibility. We are talking about people who live on

3867 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA May 27, 19 92 a bare minimum of income, and those people have serious financial problems. For example, the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg did a survey of food bank users and social assistance recipients. What they discovered was that the most serious deficit in the social allowance that people were receiving was in the area of rent, that frequently people were taking money from groceries and personal needs and household needs, the only three discretionary items, and spending it on rent in order to purchase better accommodation and much of that going to slum landlo rds.

In fact, in the city of Winnipeg, the amount of pro vincial money going to landlords in the inner city was estimated at $60 million, and much of that is not mo ney that Is going to pu rchase adequ ate accommodation, but substandard accommod ation . I would say that taxpayers are not getting a good return on their money, not getting good value for their money, because-the honourable member for Pembina (Mr. Orchard) asked me what the solution is.

The solution is to give people on social assistance more money in their rent allowance , but with pro visions to make sure that it goes to purchase more adequate housing rather than cont inuing to go to slum landlo rds, becaus e we kno w that-[i nterjection] Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) feigns surprise, in spite of the fact that his government has continued the department of rent regulation. He knows that we already have rent regulation in this pro vince- Han. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): We do not have housing police. Mr. Martindale: The member for Pembina (Mr.

Orchard) says we do not have housing police. We regulate the housing industry, not just for people on soci al assistance, but for all renters except people living in new apartment blocks, who are exempt. Mr. Orchard: The Soviet Union has gotten rid of all that. You are in old-t hink. Come on. Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, the member for Pembina forgets the 1981 election, and the fact that renters in significant numbers voted for the NDP because we were in favour of rent control and his gov ernment had abolished rent control , and he was part of that gove rnment.

That was a decisive factor in the elec tion of 19 81 and the change in gove rnment. Mr. Orchard: Is Manitoba better off for it? No. With Howard Pawley and a half billion a year deficit- The Minister of Health asks rhetoric ally: Is Manitoba better off for it? Well, I would say that renters are better off for it, and renters understand that under rent regulation, they pay fair rents instead of being gouged by greedy landlords. That is a fundamental difference between his government and our govern ment.

But I would have to say, and the Minister of Health would agree with me, that they have learned their lesson because they kept rent regulation, they did not get rid of it when they were in offi ce-unlike the Lyon gov ernment. Philosophical ly he is against it, but in government he does not do anything to change it because he knows that the majority of renters in Manitoba are in favour of rent regulation. But, Mr. Speaker, I digress from Bill70, The Social Allowances Amendment Act.

We know that in this new legislation, Bill 70 adds to the provi ncial act all those individuals who pre viously were the responsibil ity of either mu nicipalities or local gov ernment districts. This oste nsibly makes the bill fairer in that location does not count anymore; whether you live in Winnipeg, Brandon , Thompson or Grand Rapids, you will have access to the same basic social assistance rates. The provi nce will determine through regulations, the amount and type of assistance they will cost-share with cities, municipalities and LGDs. Cities, municipalities, and LGDs cannot give any less

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-3-73
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 3rd hansardpdf 73.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0216109f3c4ae6bc1eb81feecbca18055ad56fc6

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