Manitoba Hansard — 22 April 1991 (Sitting 27A, 35th Legislature, 2nd Session)

35-2-27a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Second Session - Thirty-Fifth Leglslature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL XL No. 27A -1 :30 p.m., MONDAY, APRIL 22, 1991 Printed by the Offlce of the Queens Printer. Provines of Manitoba ISSN 0542-.-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature LIB - Liberal; ND - New Democrat; PC - Progressive Conservative NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARR, James CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRI EDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HARPER, Elijah HEL WER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY,J im MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MclNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington Crescentwood River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage la Prairie Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James lak eside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas lnkster The Pas St. Norbert Elm wood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Flin Flon la Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River PARTY.

LIB ND ND LIB LIB ND LIB ND PC PC PC PC ND ND PC PC PC LIB PC PC ND ND PC PC ND LIB PC ND PC ND LIB ND PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC PC PC PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC ND PC ND PC PC ND ND

1032 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, Aprll 22, 1991 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon from the Garden City Collegiate thirty Grade 9 students. They are under the direction of Roberta Topping. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak). Also this afternoon, from the Job Entry Program at Evergreen School Division, we have 19 adult students.

They are under the direction of Laurel Johnson. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD ESL Programs Government Commitment Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, during the election, on September 7, 1 990, on a radio show debate, the question was posed to the Premier (Mr. Filmon): What promise will you make to preserve both the size and quality of the existing second language programs for immigrants in our pr ov ince?

The Pre mier answere d: Education, particularly for immigrant population, and we believe that they are very key to our economic future, so we will continue to support the ESL program. Mr. Speaker, over the weekend we met, and again today our critics met with a number of students from Red River Comm unity College wh ose programs are being cut by the pro vincial government.

I would ask the Premier: In light of the fact that six teachers have been laid off, 16 0 students and 10 courses are being reduced with his government's budget announced last week, will the Premier reverse the decision in that budget and keep his commitment to the size and quality of ESL programs that he made in the election to the people prior to the vote on September 11 ? Hon. Bonnie MHchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr.

Speaker, before the Leader of the Opposition puts misinformation on the record, I would like to indicate to him and to the House and to those wh o are taking ESL programming throughout the province of Manitoba that in fiscal year 1989-90, $1 .1 million was in the budget for ESL programming; in the budget of 19 91- 92, $1 .3 million is in the budget for ESL programming. That is a 20 percent increase over two years, based on the Premier's commitment and this government'scommitmentto ESL programming throughout the Province of Manitoba. • (1 335) ESL Programs Government Commitment Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, we have over 1, 000 people over the weekend who disagree with the minister who rose in her place today, because they know in fact that there are 200 -(interjection)- well, that is a different issue now, they were making decisions. Well, that is what we want to get to. What decisions did you make and why? Mr. Speaker, the Premier stated during the election that immigration was a key to our economic future. Hundreds of students today stated that ESL was a key to their future in our province. There is a 200-person waiting list at Red River Community College.

The government, directly through its own budget, cut that program and 10 courses and six teachers in that program, affecting hundreds of students. I would ask the Premier whether he will keep his word from the election in terms of ESL at Red River Community College, or is he going to go back on his word and in fact cut those programs at our community colleges?

1033 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I think it should be known that there were two deliveries of ESL in the city: one was done by Winnipeg School Division No. 1, the other by Red River Community College. In an attempt to more cost-effectively deliver ESL training to students and clients throughout the city and throughout the province, it was decided that we would indeed allow Winnipeg School Division No. 1 to deliver the generic ESL training.

Red River Community College will be delivering ESL training of a more specific nature, which is going to be for specific programs and for individuals who need specific ESL training. The generic training that the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Mitchelson) referred to is increased by 20 percent, and it is indeed the generic type of ESL training that we are speaking about today. ESL Programs Government Commitment Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, while there is a waiting list at the Winnipeg School Division and there is now a greater waiting list in the whole "system" because of the cutbacks in the government budget that were announced last week, the waiting list now will be 200 greater at the community colleges because of the cutbacks of this government.

So I would ask the Premier, who has made statements about the province taking over more control, western premiers taking over more control of immigration, why on the one hand is he saying immigration is the key to our economic future and also making commitments in the election to the size and quality of the existing ESL, which includes Red River Community College, and why is he going back on his word and going back on the policies that made Manitoba have the best ESL program all across Canada? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premi er): Mr. Speaker, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

Two straight ministers have indicated that there is 20 percent more funding than was there two years ago for ESL training. The Minister of Education and Training (Mr. Derkach) has described the difference between generic ESL training and speci fic trades-related and oriented ESL training, and he has told the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) how the matter has been distributed. Mr. Speaker, I cannot add any further to it other than to say, the 20 percent increase in funding over two years is not a cutback. Health Care System Multlcultural services Ms. Judy Wasylyc la-Lels (St. Johns): Mr.

Speaker, we on this side of the House and in fact the multicultural community as a whole cannot help but conclude that this government does not care about multiculturalism. We want to know why they are following more the advice of the Minister of Energy (Mr. Neufeld) than listening to the voices of our newcomers, our immigrants and our refugees. I have a question, Mr. Speaker, on this matter for the Minister of Health, because this government did not stop at ESL cutbacks. It has also targeted multicultural health services. Mr.

Speak er, we want to know why, if mul ticulturalism is such a prior ity for this government, this past week the Deputy Minister of Health sent a letter to Planned Pare nthood informing them that their valuable program called the Immigrant- Refugee Health outreach program, one of the mo st signi ficant and su ccess ful multicultural health services in the province of Manitoba, was denied funding. We want to know how this minister and this government can justify that kind of cutback- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. "(1 340) Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, let me indicate to my honourable friend that the commitment this government has to the health of newcomers to the province of Manitoba is not narrowed to one single effort that my honourable friend refers to through Planned Parenthood, an operation that we provided support funding to last year as a start-up grant, I have to tell my honourable friend, with no commitment that we would be able to continue any future funding. Mr.

Speaker, lest my honourable friend wants to leave the impression that we do not consult and/or act upon advice of the multicultural community in terms of their health matters, let me indicate to my honourable friend that for the first time in the province of Manitoba this government has a Multicultural Health Advisory Committee made up of represent atives, professionally and from the newcomer community to Manitoba, to provide

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 1034 government on needed areas of advice, policy change and direction so that we can better serve the health care needs of newcomers to Manitoba who, through langua ge difficulties, through cultural adjustment difficulties do not understand the range of services available to provide them with the care that they may well need. The advisory committee is providing with policy direction around those very issues. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr. Speaker, his advisory committee will tell him that the Immigrant-Refugee Health outreach program is a success and must be continued.

I want to ask the minister how he could stand up in the House on November 30 and say, I have been more highly involved in the multicultural issue than probably any other issue, and then on April 17 , 1991 , turn around and withdraw all funding for one of the most successful services in the health care field for the multicultural community of Manitoba? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I have indicated to my honourable friend the nature behind the funding last year.

The reason I made that statement November 30 is that we have established a number of initiatives in which we are trying to focus on the very unique and special needs of health to newcomers in Manitoba. One of the first initiatives was an attempt to come to grips with problems in the mental health field, because some of the newcomers to Manitoba come from countries where they were oppressed by the government of the day, and that has caused some difficulties in adjusting to our democratic and free society in Manitoba.

We put special efforts in place, through our Mental Health Division, to try and address those unique problems before they become major health risks to those newcomers to Manitoba. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Well, it is clear he is not listening to his own advisory committee, and we want to know if perhaps that is why he has cancelled his meeting with his own advisory committee for this Thursday at six o'clock.

My question to the minister is: How can he on one minute of the day talk about health care reform so that we can have savings down the road and in the next breath cut back a program that will not only incur savings for all taxpayers but will aid the most vulnerable members, the most voiceless members in our society today? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I am going to deal as calmly as I can with my honourable friend's

preamble to her third question, wherein she is indicating that I cancelled a meeting for Thursday of this week of my Multicultural Health Advisory Committee. Mr. Speaker, the chairman of that committee has a pressing family matter which took him out of the province this year. That is why the meeting did not proceed. She might consider the in terests of people other than her narrow partisan political approach to issues in this House. Medicare System Abuse Study Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, I was disturbed to read some quotations by the federal Minister of Energy with respect to the state of medicare in Canada, one of those statements in which he said that people believe that there is abuse of the medicare system. Since that abuse would only have to be identified at the provincial level, can the provincial Minister of Health tell this House today if there are any studies in the province of Manitoba that would indicate that there is anybody who is abusing the medicare system here in the province of Manitoba? "'

(1345) Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I presume my honourable friend is referring to the newspaper coverage of apparently a resolution brought forward for debate at an upcoming federal party convention. Mr. Speaker, I do not have any background knowledge such as may have stimulated the resolution, but let me deal with the issue of health care services in Manitoba and the approach we have used.

I want to indicate to my honourable friend that in January of last year, after receiving advice from the professional pharmac ists of Mani toba, who indicated that there were overprescribing tendencies for certain restricted narcotic pharmaceuticals, we took their advice. We brought in the triplicate prescription program. In its first year of operation, the number of narcotic pharma ceutical prescriptions wen t down significantly with a cost saving of approximately $750 ,0 00 to the Pharm acare program and increased health status of those Manitobans who

1035 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 were no longer being prescribed and using narcotic and addictive drugs. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr. Speaker, what the minister is suggesting is that doctors are overprescribing, because patients cannot overprescribe medications for themselves. I want to know very simply: Is there any clear data that would lead Mr. Epp to say, "Many people believe user fees reduce abuse, and so there would less of a drain on the system"?

Do we have any of that kind of statistical evidence ava ilable in Manit oba that would ind icate Manitobans are abusing or misusing our health care system? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I cannot answer that question on behalf of Mr. Epp, and I would suggest that my honourable friend contact Mr. Epp if so interested in finding out what might drive his decision making. Let me tell my honourable friend, because she has accused the doctors of overprescribing narcotic pharmaceuticals in the introduction of triplicate prescriptions, that is as usual not the whole truth from my honourable friend the Liberal Leader.

One of the problems that we addressed in the triplicate prescription were those Manitobans who were double, triple, quadruple doctoring with no ability to recognize that they were doing that and hence abusing the Pharmacare program. That triplicate prescription program allowed us in a very, very good way to come to grips with overprescribing of narcotic pharmaceuticals, saving the taxpayers of Manitoba and improving the health status of other Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. Health Care System User Fees Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs {Leader of the Second Opposition): Well, Mr.

Speaker, it is quite obvious that there is no statistical evidence available that people are abusing the health care system, and yet this government introduced just last week a user fee on the transportation of northern patients. Mr. Speaker, can the Mi nister of Health tell us today if this is his way of co-operating with the senior federal minister from this province so that user fees will become a way of life in the province of Manitoba and in Canada? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): In simple terms, as clearly and as precisely as I can make to my honourable friend, the answer is no.

Furthermore, we do not accept advice from Mr. Epp unless we think it is good for Manitoba. Neither did we accept the advice from the Liberal Leader when she said we should charge for meals in hospitals, toothpaste in hospitals; that we should throw 40 percent of Manitobans currently in personal care homes out on the street. We will not take that advice either, Mr. Speaker. * (1 350) CareerStart Nonproflt Organizations Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Family Services. Mr.

Speaker, the primary failure of this budget is that it does not offer solutions for the No. 1 problem facing Manitoba, namely, economic recession and growing unemployment. Instead, it is making the recession worse through cutbacks, including the scaling down of the CareerStart Program. Mr. Speaker, the question to the Minister of Family Services is: Can the min ister confirm or acknowledge that the nonprofit sector will for the very first time have to pay one-half of the wages of the students hired under CareerStart? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr.

Speaker, the member of course is correct that we have made a lot of essential decisions in this budget, and while we do not like to see the program reduced, the CareerStart Program has been somewhat reduced in budget from previous years. People are currently applying for the program, and I believe the deadline is May 3. All of the components of the program will be treated in the same way this year. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Sp eaker, he has confirmed that the nonprofits have to pay half.

How can the minister expect groups such as the Canadian Cou ncil of the Blin d, the Kidney Foundation or all those dozens and dozens of community groups that run direct services for people with handicaps, how are they supposed to be able to participate in this program? You are forcing them to pay half of the wage. They do not have enough money to operate as it is, so you are virtually going to eliminate them from the program. How can they participate?

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1036 Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, many of the businesses, nonprofits and community groups who have taken advantage and participated in this program in the past will again be participating in the program this year. We are pleased that we are able to offe r a number of millions of dollars in financial support so that these summer positions for students can be put in place. Job Creation Statistics Mr.

Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Will the minister tell this House how many fewer jobs will be created this summer because of the reduced budget and because of the reduced wage subsidy for the nonprofit groups? Are we looking at 2,000, 3,000 fewer students given job opportunities because of the cutbacks of this government? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, in the past year somewhat ove r 4,0 00 positions were created through accessing the CareerStart. Many of the businesses of course access two and three CareerStart grants.

We are going to make every effort to have those grants passed around to as many nonprofits and businesses as possible. We anticipate somewhere around 3,000 positions will be created by the use of the CareerStart Program. fishing Industry Flnanclal Assistance Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, in addition to having their loan assistance for the upcoming season put in question by this gove rnment, fishermen are also facing a cutback in the northern fishermen's freight allowance of over $82,000. This will create additional hardships and cut into their profits when they do get their fish to the market.

My ques tion is for the Minister of Natural Resources. Why is this government and this minister threatening the livelihood of Manitoba's fishermen? Hon. Harr y Enns (Min is ter of Natu ral Resources): Mr. Speaker, the same question was raised last week by several members opposite. It has been indicated to both the members in this House and to the fishermen of Manitoba that steps are being taken to review the manner and way in which the loans program has functioned for the fishermen of Manitoba. My understanding is that those are proceeding and announcements will be made in due course.

Fishing Industry Flnanclal Assistance Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlak e): Mr. Speaker, my supplem entary ques tion is for the Minister of Northern Affairs. Can this minister tell the House why the government moved the administration of operating loans from MACC to CEDF at such a crucial time in the fishermen's season without any regard to informing the fishermen? Hon. James Downey (Minis ter responslble for and charged with the admin istration of The Communities Economic Development Fund Act): Mr. Speaker, let me make it very clear that it is unfortunate that the member for Interlake had not been aware of this.

It was the member for Gimli who in fact brought it to the attention of the government, the timing and the concern for the fishermen. -( interjection)- I am surprised the member is getting excited. He should have been excited a little sooner on this. Let me make it very clear that CEDF is working with MACC to make sure that the program will be delivered probably more efficiently and probably, with the fishermen in the North, a little better program than it has been in the past.

I can assure him, even though he was not aware enough to speak on what was going on, that with the work of my colleague from Gimli, who is concerned about the fishermen, we will work positively on behalf of those individuals. .. (1 355) Mr. Cllf Evans: Mr. Speaker, by what date, I have asked this minister, I have asked the Minister of Agricu ltu re. The fishermen are call ing me daily-daily-long before they were calling the honourable member for Gimli. By what date can this minister assure that CEDF can approve the loans? What date? Mr. Downey: Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated, it is being worked out between the MACC and CEDF . Meetings have taken place over the last few days and are going on today. I can assure him that the program which the member refers to I am sure will be available as it was in the past within a very few days.

1037 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 ESL Programs Government Commitment Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (lnkster) : Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. This government and the Premier never cease to amaze me. Earlier this morning -(in terjection)- his colleagues might not be so happy to applaud the Premier (Mr. Filmon) once they hear this comment. Earlier this morning, the Member of Parliament from Winnipeg North, Dr.

Rey Pagtakham, called the Red River College to find out what effects and impacts the cu tbacks this go vernm ent has superimposed on immigrants who are going to be using ESL programs were going to have upon his constituents. He received a return phone call, at which time he was told that if he has any questions regarding the ESL cutbacks that he is going to have to call the Premier's office. Mr. Sp eaker, is it govern ment policy that everything that has to go through Red River College or any other organization in the province of Manitoba has to be funnelled through the Premier and the Premier's office? Hon.

Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, this member for lnkster never ceases to amuse me. The answer to his question is no, Mr. Speaker. ESL Programs Funding Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (lnkster): Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is to the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship. Earlier in Question Period she made reference to the '89-90 Supplemen tary Information and the '90-91 and said in fact that it is an increase, that the government is committed to the ESL program. My question then is to the Minister.

If we take a look at today's Estimates, the debates that are ongoing right now, there is in fact a decrease when we look at ESL, at the Grant Assistance, from $1 .5 million to $.98 million. My question is to the government. Will this government commit last year's budgeted amount to the ESL program in this year's budget? Hon. Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, in fact we have committed more money to ESL in this budget, and maybe if the member chose to wait for the Estimates process and learn the details of that line in the budget. Previously in last year's budget, Mr.

Speaker, the federal government flowed their money for ESL programming through the Manitoba government and to Winnipeg School Division No. 1 and Red River Community College. This year the federal government is paying directly to Winnipeg School Division No. 1, so in fact we are not showing that cost recovery in the Estimates this year as we were last year. In fact, there is more money going, not less. Government Commitment Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (lnkster): Mr.

Speaker, the bottom line is that Red River, when it comes to ESL, there are going to be fewer students going next year, starting in September, than there are this year. This government says that they are committed to ESL, but their actions do not speak- Mr. Spea ker : Order, please. The honourable member for lnkster, kindly put your question, please. Mr. Lamoureux: My question, Mr. Speaker, is: Does this government support ESL or does it not? If it does support ESL, then why do they not start showing and proving it? * (1 400) Hon. Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr.

Speaker, there has been a 20 percent increase in funding for ESL programming from this government over the last two years. I would indicate to the member opposite that that certainly is a commitment by this government. Mr. Speaker, I just wantto indicate something that happened over the weekend. Someone whom I know well was asked to sign a petition by someone in the community at a local convenience store in support of ESL programming.

When the person who had the petition was asked about the difference between Red River Community College and Winnipeg School Division No. 1, the answer that was given to this person was, well, in fact, people at Red River Community College do not have to pay for ESL progr amming, but people who go to Winnipeg School Division No. 1 do have to pay. I would hope that is not the kind of information that the opposition is giving to -(interjection)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1038 Point of Order Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the Minister of Culture and Heritage withdraw her last comment. She is imputing motives, which is not parliamentary. We have been fighting in a fair fashion for the protection of the ESL program. This government- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member did not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. Wards Boundary Review Government Research Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): My question is for the Minister of Urban Affairs.

The wards boundary review commission has now completed its hearings. My understanding and that of every political commentator is that there has been a consistent support for maintenance of the present system, a strong inner-city representation, a recognition of Winnipeg's historic communities and strengthened community committees. My question for the minister is: Will he now recognize this extensive expression of public support, or will he continue to follo w his own ideological agenda and insist only on a report which recommends between 12 and 15 councillors? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr.

Speaker, first of all, it would be foolhardy in my view to have set up a committee to go out and hold public hearings and not at least wait until they report. That, Mr. Speaker, is anticipated sometime in the next week or two. Ms. Friesen: I assume that the minister has examined the research produced by the urban institute of the University of Winnipeg and presented to the Eldon Ross wards review committee. Mr.

Speaker, against all odds, I continue to anticipate that the Minister of Urban Affairs has commissioned research within his own department as a basis for bringing forward legislation for the ward changes in Winnipeg. My question for the minister is: What is the basis on which he is proposing these radical changes? Where is the evidence to show that it will benefit Winnipeggers? What research has this minister commissioned? Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, I would suspect, and if I could offer some advice, that hypothetical questions really have no place during Question Period in this House. Mr.

Speaker, I indicated to my honourable friend earlier that I do not know where she is getting all of the statements contained in her

preamble, because no decisions have been made, nothing has been tabled in this House, and I just finished saying that we will deal with the report when it is received. Report Avallablllty Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, my question dealt with research, not with hypotheticals. This minister is cer tainly very fa mili ar with hypotheticals. Given Canadians' current concern for open public institutions, is the minister prepared to table in this House the full record of both the public hearings and the private meetings which the Eldon Ross review com mittee has conduc ted over the past two months? Hon.

Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Spea ker, when we talk about hypothetical situations, when we talk abou t theor etical applications, the entire City of Winnipeg Unicity act was a hypothetical imposition upon the people of the city of Winnipeg by a former NOP government. They were the ones who caused the whole problem in the first place by creating that great urban experiment. That great theoretical application of mun icip al gove rnment created many of the problems that we have today as a result of that activity. Harvey Pollock Case Publlc Inquiry Mr. Dave Chomlak {Klldonan): Mr.

Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Justice. The Pollock matter has lingered in the public's mind for several months, and it has not been resolved by this minister's inactivity in this regard. Given the request from the city and given his own involvement and the involvement of his department and his own involvement by virtue of having reviewed the files and the charges, will this minister commit today because he owes it to this House to holding a public inquiry into the Pollock matter?

1039 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I have already responded in a positive way to the Mayor of the City of Winnipeg, who visited my office the morning following a council meeting in the City Council Chambers ratifying a recommen dation by the Ex ecut ive Policy Comm ittee. I have responded positively to the request that there be an Inquiry into the matter referred to by the honourable member. Mr. Chomlak: Mr.

Speaker, my supplementary to the same minister is: Will the minister table in this House today the terms of reference for that particular inquiry? Mr. Mccrae: When the terms of reference are fully developed, they will be made public, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Chomlak: My final supplementary to the same minister is: Will the matters be public, and will they Include a review of the Crown's actions in this regard? Mr. Mccrae: I am not sure why the honourable member has a fixation on the part played by the Crown in this matter, but ultimately the review of the whole matter will deal with the part played by the Crown, Mr.

Speaker. The honourable member asks whether the inquiry will be pub lic. I have made it clear that all outstanding questions will be answered. The question of how the inquiry will be operated is a matter I hope to take up with the person or persons vested with the responsibility of conducting the inquiry. The Brick Warehouse Prosecution Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, my ques tion is to the Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintosh).

I would like to know why any firm in Manitoba should go to the expense of registering their name when in fact Brick Warehouse of Calgary can flaunt the law and get away with it. For over 1, 000 days the government has refused to press charges against Brick Warehouse Limited for failing to register their firm under The Corporations Act and The Business Names Registration Act. Would the minister tell this House why the government refuses to press charges against this renegade firm? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, the decision in the Brick reference was rendered very recently, and I have not yet been given a briefing from those reviewing that decision as to all of the implications of that decision to this point. Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, I was hoping by asking the question to a different minister that I would get a better answer than I have been getting for the last couple of years from this minister. My qu estion is again to the Mi nister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintosh). The minister should know that failing to register under the act is subject to a fine under

Section 1 87(5) for each day thatthe firm is not registered and that the fine for the Brick Warehouse would now amount to over $50,000 for every- Mr. Spe aker: Orde r, plea se . Would the honourable member kindly put his question now, please. Mr. Maloway: My question to the minister is: When will the minister act to press charges against the company and collect this revenue? Mr. Mccrae: I would ask the honourable member to review Hansard and read the answer I just gave.

A review of the decision is underway and answers to the questions like the honourable member is putting are forthcoming after that review is complete. Business Names Registration Act Intention Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, it seems that the government perspective on this issue has not changed one bit, and they have had a whole year now to do something about it. I would like to know what the real purpose of The Business Names Registration Act is in the first place. Is it just simply a way for the government to raise money from companies, because it appears to give them no protection? Hon.

James McCrae (Minis ter of Justice and Atto rney General): The honourable member knows full well from discussion of this matter over three sessions lasting for the last couple of years that there are some pretty significant issues involved in the Brick matter. It was this government and my department that assisted in the reference to the court so that the Brick matter might hopefully somehow be satisfactorily resolved. Obviously the

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1040 questions are not quite so simple as the honourable member would suspect. I suggest the honourable member take the time to look further into this case himself, as we are doing with our review of the judgment that has been rendered. A simple look at Sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution of Canada might prove pretty instructive to the honourable member. * (1 410 ) Alcohol Foundation of Manitoba Budget Reductions Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

In the summer of 1990, when the Minister of Health announced the drug abuse program chaired by the member for Fort Garry, he made a statement: "A new approach is needed which recognizes the ro le of prevention and the imp ortance of emp owe ring and supp orting individuals and communities at the time they are battling addiction." Can the minister tell this House why this government has slashed $1 7 4,000 from the AFM's drug awareness program? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minis ter of Health): Mr. Speaker, the reductions in budget at the AFM are those reductions in middle-mana gement staffing positions.

The programs and their availability to the com munity and their utili ty and value to the community will remain untouched. Substance Abuse Prevention Programs Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, the news release also said there is growing concern that addictions go beyond personal behaviour and are linked to the social and economic factors such as unem ploymen t, lack of social sup ports, geographic isolation and a sense of hopelessness. All these things exist today in this society.

Can the minister tell this House: Have they given up their so-called War on Drugs, and why are they ignoring the children of this province? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): The simple answer to at least part of my honourable friend's question is no. The second more full answer that I would like to give my honourable friend is that the children of this province , particularly adolescen t women, are exceedingly better served today than they were last year, the year before or any time in the history of the province if they suffer from addiction to drugs and alcohol.

On Friday of this week a number of us from this House, including the chairman of the War on Drugs Committee, the MLA for Fort Garry, the MLA for St. Norber t and myself were at the St. Norbert Foundation doing a ribbon cutting with a young woman at Kirkos House, the first adolescent women's treatment program in the province of Manitoba and the first one in western Canada to deal exclusively with the add iction problems of young adolescent women. Substance Abuse Prevention Programs Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, my final question is to the Minister of Education.

Given that there is a 10 percent reduction in the curriculum services which formulate the new programs, can the minister tell this House when the stud ents in Manitoba will be receiving the compulsory drug awareness program? Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minis ter of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I would like to indicate to my honourable friend that indeed there are several programs that are being delivered through the Department of Education and Training in the public schools of this province which have to do with drug awareness and the prevention of abuse of drugs.

Communities throughout Manitoba have become involved in the delivery of those programs, and I might add that almost every school in this province today is delivering some form of drug awareness program in their particular high schools and elementary schools. Tourism Northern Manitoba Mr. Jerry Storie (Flln Flon): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism. last year the Manitoba lodges and outfitters, many in northern Manitoba, experienced a 40 percent reduction in tourist traffic.

In this budget, this government has chosen to cut off the support to the North of 53 Tourism association.

1041 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 My question is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism. How can this government talk about its support for the tourism industry and cut off support to the only regional organization which supports tourism in northern Manitoba? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minis ter of Industry, Trade and Tourism) : Mr. Speaker, not unlike a question in this House on Friday.

The kinds of promotions that the department of Tourism is undertaking, working co-operatively with the outfitters and tourism organizations throughout the province, are in terms of a focused approach in the target markets that we are going after, promoting the positive aspects of our outdoors in terms of our fishing and lodges and so on. Mr. Speaker, I think the results will speak for themselves after this promotion is complete. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. Nonpolltlcal Statements Mr. Edward Connery (Portage la Prairie ): Mr.

Speaker, I would ask for permission to make a nonpolitical statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Portage la Prairie have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Leave? Agreed. Mr. Connery: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to recognize Dr. Don Rae. Dr. Don Rae was named 1991 Family Physician of the Year by the College of Family Physicians of Canada. This prestigious award is sponsored by the McNeil Pharmaceutical (Canada) Ltd. and will be presented to Dr. Rae at the Royal York Hotel in Toronto. Dr.

Rae was selected by the National Endowments and Awards Committee after he was recommended by the provincial chapter. Mr. Speaker, the criteria for this award include excellence in practice over time, community medical service, general service to the commu nity and service to the college and family physicians and personal interests. The candidate has to be in practice for over 15 years and a member of the college for at least 10. Dr. Rae has been a member of the college since 1958 and received certification in family medicine in 1970 and fellowship in 1972.

He was elec ted pre sident of the World Organization of Family Doctors in 1989, an international association representing 150,000 physicians in 41 countries. Dr. Rae has also been the national president of the college in 1976-77 and the Manitoba

chapter president in 1968-69. In Portage, he is also involved with the St. John's Ambulance association and is the honourary lieutenant-colonel of the 26th Field Regiment of the Royal Canadian Artillery. He is also an associated professor at the University of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, I have some very personal connections with him, because it was this particular doctor who had me go back into the hospital after a heart specialist had indicated my EKG was okay. He said he was not happy. Fortunately for me, some five days later I had my heart attack in the hospital after undergoing some medication. So to Dr.

Rae I maybe owe my life, but if nothing less I could have been very severely impaired with heart damage. Mr. Speaker, I ask this Legislature to join with me in recognizing this very prestigious award for Dr. Don Rae, who is in rural practice giving excellence to rural people of Manitoba, and I congratulate him . Thank you. Mr. Gary Doer (leader of the Oppositio n): I would like leave from the House to make a nonpolitical statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable Leader have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Leave? Agreed. Mr. Doer: I would just like to briefly join the member for Portage la Prairie.

I thought he would be making a nonpolitical statement today about the award for Dr. Rae, recognizing Dr. Rae as the Physician of the Year. I think we are all very proud of not only the award today, but the contributions Dr. Rae has made to the quality of medicine and the quality of life in Manitoba. For what I know about Dr. Rae, and it certainly is not as much as the member for Portage (Mr.

Connery), but if you were to use the term "making house calls" and all the kind of medical qualities and values that we all remember and value in physicians and doctors, not just to be technicians in medicine but also to be members of the community and quality people that we all respect, Dr. Rae meets all those tests, Mr. Speaker. I think this Legislature should recognize the contributions of Dr. Rae in Portage and across

Apri l 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1042 Manitoba and congratulate him , his family and his commu nity on the recognition of the doctor as the Family Physician of the Year. Congratulations, Dr. Rae. Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, may I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for The Maples have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? (Agreed) Mr. Cheema: Mr. Speaker, I would like to add best wishes from our caucus to Dr. Rae who has been nominated the Family Physician of the Year.

Myself as a family physician involved in the college activities, not on a political basis but a nonpolitical basis, I have heard a lot of things about Dr. Rae. This award certainly speaks for that. He has served the commun ity of Manitoba and Portage and has contributed in a very special way to promote the culture activity, the community activities, and also in the other parts which most people do not realize, that the physicians also play a very important role in economic development. I think it is one of the testimonies to the hard work Dr. Rae has done.

Also part of their campaign now, they are also starting to help the poor who are hungry. I think that is a part of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. They are starting a campaign in the first week of June to make sure that people who are hungry in Manitoba have got food and shelter. We sh ould not be only doing that during the Christmastime, but all of the other times. Thank you very much. ORDERS OF THE DAY BUDGET DEBATE Mr. Speaker: Adjourned debate, fifth day of debate, on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness), the proposed amendment of the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr . Doer), and the proposed subamendment of the honourable Leader of the Second Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs), standing in the name of the honourable member for Crescentwood who has 22 minutes remaining. Mr. James Carr (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, I am glad to pick up where the clock stopped me on Friday to have a look at the implications of the Minister of Finance's fourth budget. I was intrigued in just scanning over some of the speeches made by members opposite that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr.

Findlay) said as recently as Friday, looking south of the border for his political inspiration and quoting Thomas Jefferson erroneously, that the best government is the least government. That is clearly the political and fiscal agenda of the Progressive Conservative government across the way. If there was not enough evidence in the minority Legislatures which have since been replaced by a tenuous majority government, the evidence is certainly in the budget tabled by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness).

We can see it line by line that phase two agenda of the Conser vative gove rnment is now being played out and implemented. Interestingly enough, the comments from the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) and the Minister of Energy (Mr. Neufeld), in particular, are that constituents are telling them that this budget did not go far enough, that the expression that they are getting is that there ought to have been more cuts, more layoffs in the public service, a more deeply felt intrusion into the public sector of the province.

I ask the question to the Minister of Finance, if that is the case, why did he not do it? Why did he not go farther? The reason that he did not go farther is because there were political constraints that held him back. Presumably, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) did what he thought was right, what he thought was in the best interests of the province, and that it was not going farther for a whole host of very good reasons. *

(1420) I am particularly interested, Mr. Speaker, at the revenue side of the tabled statements in the Detailed Estimates of Revenue of the Province of Manitoba, and I think they tell a very important story. While we have heard through Question Period and in speeches all kinds of rhetoric directed at the federal government for offloading and for cutting back on transfer payments to the provinces, cutbacks which we can see here in EPF, in the Established Programs Financing arrangements that fund post-secondary education and health care, but we look at the line of equalization, and we see that there is literally $100 million more coming to Manitoba, through equalization, than came to

1043 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 Manitoba the previous year. -(in terjection)- Well, this is the anticipated revenue expected by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), and presumably he uses the best figures available to him at the time the budget is printed. If you look at the total contributions of the Government of Canada year over year as best as the Minister of Finance knows them, we see that the increase is, in fact, 5 percent. Well, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) says it is 1. 5.

I am looking at his own statements, and we see that the contributions from the Government of Canada are up from $1.622 billion to $1 .707 billion. Yet if you look at the revenue projections from the Minister of Finance's own sources, we see here truly the real weakness of the Manitoba economy, the weakness of the Manitoba economy not just for the coming year, but representative of the fiscal record of this government since it became government three years ago, and there are some very telling figures here. Corporate revenues are way down. Corporate revenues are down because the economy is sluggis h .

The fiscal policies adopted by the government have not in any way contributed to economic development, in growth in the corporate sector, and if you look at the retail sales tax figure we are looking at $20 million less next year than last year, which is another very strong indication of the general economic condition of the province. (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) Perhaps as illustrative as anything else, we look at what is happening in the housing sector, and we see that the land titles fees are way down, I think something like $1.2 million this year from last year.

All of the economic indicators show that the Minister of Finance is not taking us out of recession over the next several months, but he predicts that the recession is actually going to deepen. Then the ques tion arises, wh at is the government's fiscal policy in order to take Manitoba out of the recession, rather than last out of the recession as some economic indications would have us believe?

The answers, I am afraid, are not very encouraging, Madam Deputy Speaker, because the government has taken the view that it has no role to play, other than setting some kind of climate, establishing an environment within which the private sector will grow and create jobs. Have more jobs been created in Manitoba since 1988? No, fewer jobs, fewer meaningful jobs under the fiscal policies of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and the government of Manitoba over the last three years, there are fewer Manitobans working.

The number of layoffs as a result of plant closures and a general deterioration of the economic conditions of the province, including the lethargic housing sector and the slow retail sector, are hurting us. This is not even to men tion the malaise in the touris t indus try-as we revealed last week some 20 percent fewer automobile visits to Manitoba from south of the border than at the same time last year. So the government's approach is to pull back. I am reminded of the image of two boxers in the rink, Madam Deputy Speaker, and one is hitting hard, and that boxer is the recession.

The response of this government is not to hit back with innovative fiscal policy but to retrench, to protect itself, to go into some kind of defensive shell hoping that the boxer will get arm weary, punch drunk and go away. Well, there is no evidence that is what is happening. The evidenc e is qu ite to the contrary. The defensive shell that this government has put itself in is really resulting in a deepening of the economic situation in our province, not taking us out. I challenge the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) when he makes what likely will be the closing speech on the Budget Debate to show to us, using any statistical information that the Minister of Finance believes to be relevant, that any sector of the Manitoba economy is better off now than it was three years ago when this Minister of Finance took office. whether that is the agricultural economy, rural communities, the inner city of Winnipeg, university students, those who access the health care system.

In what ways has the fiscal policy of this government created opportunity, so that those sectors have been able to grow rather than retrench as they have over the last little while?

The trend is very disturbing because what we have, in spite of the fact that equalization payments from the Government of Canada are, in fact, probably the single biggest growth industry that the government of Manitoba has-w hich by the way, Madam Deputy Speaker, is yet another reason if we needed one to prove that Manitoba is a real beneficiary of federalism-that if it were not for the bulwark of federalism, Manitoba would be in a lot worse shape than it is now. If we look at what the

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1044 Minister of Finance has chosen to do with his fiscal options, we see that he is doing the very same thing that he accuses the Government of Canada doing in his own budget figures. let us look at some of the examples of the offloading, Madam Deputy Speaker.

First of all, he has transferred to municipal governments 2,000 kilometres of provincial roads at a cost of some $6 million; engineering and water management service resulting in a loss of 24 positions; local government districts have activities reduced for provincial government savings; a reduction of $500,000 in street improvement grants to cities, towns and villages; a reduction of $200,000 to the Rural Municipal Bridge Assistance Program. How about grants to the City of Winnipeg? Does the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) believe that when he freezes grants to the City of Winnipeg, either the gen er al purpo se gr ant or the transportation grants, that the City of Winnipeg is going to say, okay, and not pass on some of those responsibilities to the property taxpayer? So what is the net effect? There really has been through this budget a substantial transfer of taxing authority and responsibility from the general revenues of the province to the property taxpayers, not only of the City of Winnipeg but of rural mun icipalities right across the province.

One is left to pose the question: Is that a fairer form of taxation than taxation that we collect through income tax arrangements with Ottawa? Is that a fairer way of taxing the people of Manitoba now that we have offloaded the same thing that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) accuses the federal governm ent of doing to property taxpayers throughout the city of Winnipeg? I do not think so, because in fact those taxes tend to be regressive. My friend the Minister of Energy (Mr. Neufeld) knows the tax system better than I do and probably better than most members of this House.

Does he believe that transferring tax burden to property owners is a fairer form of taxation, it is a better way of raising revenue, that somehow it is going to strengthen the infrastructure and the economy of our province? i do not think so. I certainly did not hear the Minister of Energy say that it was during his remarks. How about the quality of life for our citizens in the province of Manitoba?-because after all, that is the argument we use in trying to entice people to come to our province.

We do not generally talk about the weather when we are enticing people here, although I must say every once in awhile I run into people who argue that we have the finest climate in the country. I will leave that to the debate of others. •

(1430) We tend to talk about quality of life, that it does not take very long for us to drive to work, that we have cleaner water, we have cleaner air, we have a less hurried kind of pace that we take through our everyday lives, that we have one of the finest cultural lives available to citizens in any city in North America-and I agree that that is true-a nd we have a first-rate quality of education in our universities and commun ity colleges. These are all of the arguments we use when we are trying to either entice people to come to Manitoba or try to convince them to stay.

Yet this budget represents a substantial attack on many of those quality of life indicators that are so important to us, and as a community, Manitoba has always relied heavily on the volunteer sector. By the massive cuts in grants to organizations, we will see that it is going to be more and more difficult to ask people to give of their own time, of their own resources, if we as a communi ty are not prepared to fund those things in which they believe. There has been a substantial reduction in what I would call the quality of life indicators in Manitoba as a result of this budget.

How about the issue of layoffs in the public service? The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) tells us that many of the jobs will be lost through attrition, through early retirements, those which are already vacant or in some kind of severance arrangement that will be made with public servants who want to leave. Even after all of that is accounted for, we will see that between 375 and 450 people will lose their jobs. That in itself is something that we can debate, the appropriateness of putting civil servants out of work at a time of recession.

Equally important is to look at the way in which the civil servants who no longer work for Manitoba were handled because often governments are judged not only on what they do, but on how they do it. Was it handled with compassion? Was it handled with caring? Perhaps in some cases it was, but the horror stories that we now hear told,

1045 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 coming from people who no longer have a job with the public service, are not very encouraging. This in spite of the fact that the Premier tells us that he, himself, gave instructions to all managers that the layoffs in the public service were to be handled with tenderness and with care. It was ham-handed, the bloodletting was done with insensitivity, as we see everyday, stories of people who were handled with a bludgeon and who no longer now have any economic prospects.

The handling of it was poor, an indication of the way in which this government is handling the human issues that are associated with these budget cuts. An Honourable Member: A little Sterling Lyon here, go the same way he would go. Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister of Labour): Get some facts. Mr. Carr: The Minister of Labour says, get some facts. I read quotes from him in the newspaper, and he can tell me if he thinks he was misquoted, that, yes, there were instances where it was not handled very well. Well, that is all I am saying, that the government did not do a very good job, it could have done much better.

Th en there is the whole quest ion of decentralization, and this one is really for the books. We can remember when the decentralization issue was announced by the government and how they were going to create economic opportunity for rural communities outside of Winnipeg-- An Honourable Member: Hundreds of jobs. Mr. Carr: Hundreds of jobs. Meanwhile, what has his budget done to jobs in rural Manitoba?-cut, cut, cut.

So the logic of the government is to take people who would rather live and work in Winnipeg, move them to rural Manitoba where they do not want to go, and then in the next breath take people who love rural Manitoba, who are working in rural Manitoba happily and active in the communities and fire them. -(interjec tion)- Well, I do not understand the logic. Is the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) not saying that there are jobs lost? Look at the Natural Resources, many of these jobs in rural Manitoba, 231 jobs were cut which really des troys the credibility of the decentralization program; it makes no sense.

Forest received a cut of 12.63 percent; silviculture, which is reforestation, cut by 14. 23 percent. So what is the commitment to the health of this sector in Manitoba? None. Water management and hydro-tec hnical services cut at a time when the government is planning on diverting much of the water in southern Manitoba. Fisheries cut by 16.56 percent; Wildlife by 7 .94 percent, and I am very anxious to hear the response of the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) when he closes debate because the question that he will be answering, for the benefit of Manitobans and the taxpayers of Manitoba, is how this set of fiscal policies is going to take us out of the recession. He refers in his budget speech to the future of Manitoba and that the decisions he took were not so much for us but for our children. That is a goal with which none of us would disagree, but the Minister of Finance is going to have to explain to us how that goal is going to be accomplished with the measures that are in this budget.

For example, how is he going to improve the prospects of the Manitoba economy when there is literally no economic development strategy? You know sometim es-and I would think the Conservatives would know this because they pride themselves on management, that sometimes you have to spend a buck to make a buck. -( interjection) Well, the Minister of Finance obviously disagrees with that remark. Tourism is an example-a nd I hope he will listen to this-is the single largest industry in the world. People invest in the tourist industry because it pays off dividends in the long run.

When you have people coming to your province spending money on hotels, on restaurants, in the shops, that generates jobs, that is economic activity. An Honourable Member: What about the lodges? That is where the tourism is growing. Mr. Carr: The lodges are very important. Does the Minister of Finance expect that more people are going to come to the lodges of Manitoba when he has cut the park service, when he has cut tourist promotion, when he has cut the grant to the Tourism Industry Association of Manitoba?

If Manitoba develops the reputation as a place that does not place a high priority on its tourism industry, then they are not going to come to Manitoba, all of the Minister of Finance's (Mr. Manness) objections notwithstanding. If he cannot see a link between the commitment this government gives to the tourism industry and the health of our

A pril 22, 1991 LEG ISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1046 lodges in northern Manitoba, then he better smell the coffee, because believe me- An Honourable Member: Northerners want less taxes ... Mr. Carr: Everybody wants to pay less taxes, Madam Deputy Speaker. There is not anybody going to stand up in this House and say people like paying taxes. Is that why the property taxpayers in Manitoba are going to pay more this year as a result of this budget? Is the Minister of Finance saying that a property tax does not count when people try to determine every year what their tax liabilities are?

I do not know about the Minister of Finance, but if you would canvass people around this Chamber, they would tell you that the property tax hit is about the single biggest they get aside from the income tax hit they get. How about all the offloading to the rural municipalities? Is this not going to filter down to people who earn a living, who will have less disposable dollars as a result of this budget? I do not really understand the Minister of Finance's logic because we are going to determine the best we can just what the impact of all of this offloading is going to be on taxpayers.

Then we see some very silly things in the budget. I will just use one example, as I see my time is running out. In the line for the Wards boundary commission in the Urban Affairs Estimates, there is $90,000 for the Wards Review commission which has already cost the government $20,000 that it did not have to spend because they have a commission established by the act which is free, and now there is an additional $90,000 that they are paying out-w ho knows why-I guess we will find out in the Urban Affairs Estimates. •

(1440) Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I want to say that nobody has all the right answers, and we can only be judged on the choices we make. This government has taken a radical course; some members of the Treasury bench think not radical enough. It is radical because it is careless in its approach.

It has not taken into account the needs of people as they react to the new Tory reality, and most important, the failure of this budget is that it really does not give any hope to your children or to mine that as a result of the fiscal policies of this government, they have a better and a brighter future in the province of Manitoba. That is the great failing-a decision made not to invest in the people, the training of our human resources and the promotion of those strengths that we have as a province that make us unique in Canada.

Afte r fou r budge ts of the Progressive Conservative Party, we see that our province is not better off. In fact, our province is poorer off, so we will continue to be aggressive in giving options and alternatives to the government while criticizing the choices that they make at a time when the people of Manit oba are looki ng for sensiti vity and leadership. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Mr.

Praznlk: Madam Deputy Speaker, it is certainly an honour and indeed a privilege for me, as a member of the Executive Council and as Minister of Labour, to rise today to speak in support of the budget that was presented in this House by my colleague the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness). I quite enjoyed the remarks of my colleague, a fellow member of this Chamber, the member for Crescentwood (Mr.

Carr), but what I found in his remarks that I think are very characteristic of so much of the criticism levelled against this budget, indeed budgets that all provincial governments, even in Liberal provinces, are having to bring in at this point in the history of our country is the sense that somehow there is a magic solution to the financial problems, somehow that difficult choices can be avoided or covered up. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) Mr. Speaker, there is, in the remarks of the member for Crescentwood, indeed in the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Doer), certainly in many members of the New Democratic Party, particularly the New Democratic Party, a sense of unreality that I find almost unbelievable in this day and age. There is no doubt that every member of this House would love to have access to vast more wealth for this government, indeed any government, to spend. There will always be many mo re programs and projects that we would like to take on, many more services that we would like to deliver to the people of Manitoba, many more programs.

I am sure, with 57 of us in this House, there must be over a hundred new programs among us that we can invent, think about or propose, all of which may improve the quality of life for Manitobans, but there is a reality there, a reality that they all have to be

1047 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 paid for. That reality has gone over the head of so many for so long, Mr. Speaker. The failure to come to grips with that reality has indeed put not only our province, but other provincial governments, indeed our national government, at a very critical point in the history of our country, indeed our province. Mr. Speaker, when I became a member of this Legislature and became more and more familiar with the finances of the province, there were some basic numbers that came to impress me.

What I found, as I am sure other members of this House have found, is that the vast majority of people in our province, indeed our country, never fully are aware-an d I certainly was in that category prior to my election-o f exactly where our money is being spent. It amazes me, when one knows those numb er s, just how wrong often that public perception of where dollars are being spent actually is. Mr.

Speaker, at a publ ic meeting in my constituency with the school division that we sponsored jointly some weeks ago, a strong supporter of the New Democratic Party, someone who lives in my home village, came in halfway through the meeting, had missed the presentation, got up to make a comment and said what has become very typical of what New Democrats say. This woman got up and she said that government is not spending money in the right place. We should be spending it on health and education. We should not be spending $3 billion on the highway project now underway on Highway 44. Mr.

Speaker, she said with all sincerity and candour, she used the term $3 billion on a small stretch of highway. I could not resist. I got up and I said to her, Shelly, I said, do you mean $3 billion? I said, the whole provincial budget is just $5 billion. Oh, well, I am not sure, she said. How much is that project? I said, in total with paving and everything else, I understand somewhere in the neighbourhood of $1.3 million. I said, our total Highway budget is $100million.

The vast majority of people who were there had heard the number, and they all looked at her with great disdain actually as to, you know, where were these numbers coming from. The point of the matter is, there was an utterly wrong statement, an utterly wrong perception about where money was being spent. She had it, I think, because it is shared by many, many Manitobans who never have the opportunity to see those numbers. Mr.

Speaker, what was the saddest part, of course, is I think she was trying to make some points for the New Democratic Party, and I believe fell far short of that simply because she did not deal with the facts. I do not think any member on this side of the House has difficulty with debating choices, debating issues all within the context, of course, of reality.

It becomes very difficult in this Legislature, indeed in the course of public debate, to have a really thorough di scussion or debate on public expenditure when the unreality, the public myth, of where government spends money remains and is propagated by members of the opposition. Mr.

Speaker, I think it is deserving on all of us, or it is incumbent on all of us to deal with the realities and the facts as to where government spends money, because the trends as to where this government spends money are not unlike those trends in every other provincial jurisdiction in this country no matter what political party occupies the benches of government. Mr. Speaker, just to put some of those numbers into perspective-I had the opportunity as do all members, with our householder that I sent out throughout my constituency, some about 9,000 copies of this.

The numbers because they were based on the budget Estimates of last year, and numbers come in a little bit differently from actual expenditure, but the purpose was to give people a sense of the relative amount of money where it is spent. Mr. Speaker, the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) has asked to use my householder. It is outdated with the coming in of the budget because these numbers have now changed, but I would be glad to provide him with a copy. In fact, he would like to provide it in his constituency.

Just to put things in relative terms of spending, we spend in Manitoba about $5 billion a year-I am rounding off my nu mbers. About a million people, that is $5,000, approximately, a person in this province. Where do we spend it? We are now spending close to $1,800 a parson on health care, by far the largest expenditure. Almost $2 out of every $5 on health care. We are now spending close to $1,000 a person, just under $1,000 a person on education.

That is, almost $1 out of every $5 that we spend as a Legislature for the people of Manitoba is spent on education; the area of family services, over $550 a person in that particular area. Of course, the one expenditure this Legislature in

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1048 reality has absolutely no ability to deny and that, of course, is our interest payments which are now over $550 a person a year. Those four large areas gobble up the vast majority of our budget, and that is the case in almost every other province: health, education, family services and debt servicing. Everything else we spend on that kind of comparison is pennies. Mr. Speaker, the next hig he st area of expenditur e-and my friend the member for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale) may appreciate this-the next highest, remember, nothing below $550 per person in those four large areas of expenditure. The next largest area of expenditure is tax credits, including the Homeowner Tax Credit and all of the tax credits for lower-income Manitobans. That accounts for somewhere between $200 and $250 a person. The next highest is the Department of Justice, somewhere between $100 million and $150 million approximately- $150 a person. Mr. Speaker, that is the scale, the great distance, between these departments and the big four. *

(1450) We go from there into our Highways budget. last year in Manitoba, we spent some $118 or $117 per person on new highway construction. When my constituent from the New Democratic Party said we are spending so much on highways, I do not think she realized at all that that new Hi ghway construction budget for the last year in Manitoba, and it is somewhere around that number again this year, is only equivalent to the wage and benefit package for St. Boniface General Hospital. In other words, we spend on wages and benefits at St.

Boni face General Hospital virtually the same amount of money, now probably a little bit more than we spend on all new high way construction throughout our province .. look at how you compare those numbers. So when members say, oh, there is room to take it out of highway construction-there is not. We do not spend a lot on hi gh way construction now. Then when you go into other programs, the Departm ent of Agricul ture, the Min ister of Agricul ture (Mr.

Findlay) sits behind me in the House, he probably wishes every day he could have twice the money that he does; last year spending somewhere between $90 and $100 a person. The Interest Rate Relief program, about $23 a person; the Department of Rural Development, somewhere $50-$60 a person; Culture, Heritage and Recreation in the order of around $50 a person. Again, my numbers-I am using my constituency pamphlet based on last year's budget. Some of these have changed a little bit and I have not been able to sort through the numbers.

Just again to give the range, the relative sense of those numbers, because when you come down to a department like mine, the Department of labour, with the $1 million allotment we have for the program for Older Worker Adjustment, our budget is $17 a person. For every $1 we spend in the Department of labour, the Department of Health spends over $100. I cannot see, when I hear New Democrats or liberals or anyone saying, the thrust of where you are spending is wrong, there are other sources of money you should be tapping for health care or education.

Those are already such overwhelming parts of provincial budgets not just in Manitoba, but indeed in all other provinces. They consume a huge amount of money. Mr. Speaker, again, the Department of Environment, somewhere $12, $13, $14 a person; Fitness and Sports somewhere $10, $12 a person reduced this year, of course, because the Manitoba Sports Federation will be using its accumulated surplus out of lottery monies to function. Just again, those kind of numbers, the big four way out there, everybody else substantially lower in relative terms.

Over a number of years we have seen governments of different stripes, right across the country, put dollars into those high priority areas. I think when the pu bl ic-and I know in my constituency the response I have had to this pamphlet that I sent out before the budget to give people an idea of where their dollars were being spent, was just incredible. I have never, in the years I have been involved in politics both as an elected member and working for an elected member, seen the kind of response to a pamphlet as I have seen to this one.

People were saying it is about time someone gave us the facts, I did not realize we spent that much on health care, I did not realize we spent that much on education, I just did not know. Mr. Speaker, I think the debate over budgets and finances really has to be put into that context, and it is regrettable I think, on all our parts, that this type of information is not out there more often amongst members of the public, indeed, all members of this

1049 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 House. We deal in these great budget books that are complicated and difficult to get through, and we talk about percentages of increase and decrease in departments but when you look at where the dollars are actually being spent, I do not think there is a member of this House who could probably get up and say that governments are not spending those dollars in the high priority areas, the high priority that the public has, which of course is health, education, family services and the area over which we have absolutely no choice, our debt servicing.

I know members of the New Democratic Party from time to time in my constituency-I know I had the opportunity to speak in my department, to brief employees in the Department of Labour on the budget, and I know one of the shop stewards from the MGEA asked the question, well, do we really have to be paying that interest? I know members of the New Democratic Party often propagate the belief that these dollars are flowing into vast corporate vaults somewhere in New York and they are fueling champagne and caviar for the elite. Mr.

Speaker, a very large portion of our provincial debt of what we owe, is owed to pension funds, and I know the Minister of Finance in this House has spoken on a number of occasions about those pension funds. I just give you five examples of the pension funds that we owe our interest to, who depend on us every year to make our payments so that their members may have a pension, and who do they include ?

They include groups like the Texas Teachers' Retirement Fund, the Lutheran Brotherhood Pension Fund, the California Public Employees' Pension Fund, the Alberta Teachers' Pension Fund, the Canadian National Railroad Pension Fund. Again, those people depend on us paying our interest so that their pensioners can receive their pensions.

Anyone who says to me we should not have to worry about where that money goes, should know that is the first dollar that this Legislature approves, and that the people who have loaned us their savings for us to expend annually to cover our own costs, those people depend and have a right to expect that they will have their interest paid to them. Let no one here suggest otherwise, because I think it would just be silly and downright dishonest.

One part of our budget that I would like to discuss a little bit, and I know members opposite have a hard time dealing often with, particularly the New Democratic Party, is the concept of provincial debt and servicing debt and what that debt is costing us. In the 1980-81 provincial budget, the cost of servicing our accumulated general purpose debt in this province amounted to about $79 a person. That was not an excessive amount of money.

Today it is somewhere around $550 a person and well on its way to $600 a person, now the third or fourth largest expenditure of government and probably the fastest growing area of expenditure over the last decade. Mr. Speaker, when you look atthe numbers, when you look at the years, in the '80s when provincial revenues were growing by substantial amounts, 10, 12, 16 percent, government expenditure growing at an even faster rate, money being borrowed many years under Mr.

Pawley's administration, over half a billion dollars a year being borrowed, while revenues were increasing and those dollars always having to have the interest paid on them annually, growing and growing until in 1985-86-and I look at the members of the New Democratic Party who are here. •

(1500) I know the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), who was the former member for Burrows, was a member of the Legislature at that time, but many others were not. What they may not want to recognize was in that particular year the government of the day, of which their party was part, I think came to realize that they were in real trouble and started internally within government reductions of services, reductions of funding, reductions of financing to others.

They brought in what turned out for them to be the most politically disastrous budget of their party's history, designed to take more and more tax dollars out of middle class-t he ones they try to defend in this House, particularly lower middle-class families. They did it because the debt, the borrowings that had gone on, the servicing of those borrowings had gotten to the point where their own bankers were telling them they had to do it.

Even though they wanted to pretend to be the party of Manitobans and they were going to show those bankers, they had to go and increase taxes and reduce services because they knew they had to pay their interest if they wanted to be able to borrow any more. What is particularly interesting about the 1985-86 year, Mr. Speaker, was in that particular year it was the first year in this province's history where our total

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1050 deficit for that year was solely for the repayment of interest. Not one penny of any dollar we have borrowed as a province since that year has gone to fund programming. Every dollar- every penny of every dollar, Mr. Speaker, has been used by this Legislature to pay interest. Since that time we, as a province, would have had surplus in every year since '85-86 if we had not had to pay interest on our debt-s ince '85-86, two different administrations.

What that says is I think the good news about that-and it is sort of good news in a sad way-is we are able to deliver a large amount of services, quality services to the people of Manitoba for less money than they give us each year to spend, or we take from them to spend. Yet the pressure grows, because we continue to borrow, this year some $325 million cushioned by a $125-million transfer from the rainy day fund.

I remember being part of debates in this House when members opposite criticized thatfund, said we should not be doing it, we should spend the money in this year, who daily came into this House, Question Period after Question Period, demanding money be spent on anybody who came to this building and said, give us more money. If we had done that, we would have been even farther on that slippery slope to the Newfoundland example. Mr.

Speaker, if you wonder why any member on this side of the House can make the difficult but essential and necessary decisions that have to be made, and why, if members of the New Democratic Party were now in government they would have to do just the same thing, just like their compatriot Mr. Kostyra had to do in this House when he brought in the budget that was their downfall, it is because of the Newfoundland example. All of us as politicians either realize today, or should realize, that if we do not get control of our financial house we will have choices taken away from us in the not too distant future.

That is what has happened in our sis ter province of Newfoundland, indeed a province of a half a million people today-and again, the worst case example, but we are all on the same road--a province that today cannot borrow money except with a federal government guarantee, and I think in the area of 18 percent interest. It is called junk bonds. Mr. Speaker, do you think Premier Wells of Newfoundland wanted to lay off 2, 100 public servants in his province of half a million people? An Honourable Member: Liberal Premier. Mr. Pr azn lk: Lib eral Pr emier Wells of Newfoundland.

Do you think that he wanted to make those layoffs? He had to do it because his bankers told him he had to do it. Even $30 million, or $40 million, or $50 million, or $100 million more in federal transfer payments would not have postponed the inevitable in that province, not only 2, 100 public servants and the elimination of 600 vacancies in their public service, but also 1,200 people in the health care area. -(interjection)- You know, Mr. Speaker, the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) says a hundred million would have helped.

I do not think the member has read the financial statements of the federal government yet. We feel the pressure in this Legislature where 10 cents or 11 cents out of every dollar is going for interest payments. They are now at 30 cents. Yes, we would all like more money. There are areas where we think they should be spending more wisely and we are having those debates with them. The inevitability of that growing consumption of dollars for interest payments will come and it will come for a federal government sooner than later.

It will come for Manitoba just as it has come for Newfoundland unless there is a concerted effort to get control of our finances. Mr. Speaker, members of the New Democratic Party may try to hide from it and one day they may find themselves on this side of the House again, but they will have to do exactly what Eugene Kostyra did in his '88-89 budget. They will have to do exactly the same thing as he did in '87-88, and they will be faced with exactly what the Liberal Premier of Newfoundland is facing now. They may hide from that.

They may try to believe that it is not possible, but you know, the public of Manitoba, and I sincerely believe this having followed politics a long time, throughout all of my almost 30 years, Mr. Speaker- Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows) : Thirty years as an adult? Mr. Praznlk: Not as an adult, the member for Bu rrows (Mr. Martindale) makes a com ment. Politics was always a very big part of our family and dinner table discussions. Mr. Jack Reimer (Nlakwa): Conservative.

1051 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 Mr. Praznlk: I can remember politics in our house from my earliest times, from being three, four years old. In fact, the member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer) made a comment about politics. My family actually comes from a long Liberal tradition. My grandfather was the president of the Liberal Association in Springfield, but my grandfather died a Conservative. Mr. Speaker, I had many members of my family who were supporters of the New Democratic Party as well, but I will tell you, they do not support the New Democratic Party today.

The reason I am on this side of the House today as a Conservative, the reason why I think the Lac du Bonnet constituency is on this side of the House and the Springfield constituency and the Gimli constituency and how many other ridings, La Verendrye, that had never been Conservative rldings, is that the people of Manitoba, particularly the younger people of Manitoba, realize the burden that is being placed on them, realize that the decisions of the 1970s and indeed the 1980s were ultimately wrong decisions and realize that it is going to take difficult but necessary decisions, essential decisions, to correct that path, because disaster, real disaster with lots of real pain, is just around the corner if this Legislature and the Legislatures of nine other provinces and of federal parliament do not take necessary steps to avert that kind of calamity.

Mr. Speaker, I remember growing up in the '70s and following politics and election campaigns. I remember Howard- An Honourable Member: I remember it well. Mr. Pra znl k : That is right. I re memb er the comments and the campaigns where who could outbid who for votes, who could bring in another government program to do something else. All parties competed against one another shamefully, and they brou ght in those programs. They borrowed the money, and they never paid the debt. Mr.

Speaker, I remember sitting in this House as Premier of the Manitoba Youth Parliament, being a young university student in December of 1981, and if there was a turning point for me when I became a Conservative member, it was that day. I remember sitting in that particular loge. I sat between the newly elected member for Morris, Mr. Clayton Manness, who had been returned in the general election of November 17, sitting between him and the new Premier, who was my MLA of the day, the honourable Howard Pawley. I remember listening to a debate between the two of them about how we finance government, and I remember Mr.

Pawley saying that in classic Keynesian economics, when times were bad, like they were in that recessionary period of the early '80s, government should be spending money to stimulate growth. I remember Clayton Manness turning to him, and he said, yes, Howard, but where do you make up that money? Howard Pawley, avoiding the question of when do you make up that difference, because the other part of the Keynesian model is that when times are good, government should retract, pay down that deficit and rearm itself to deal with recessions. You know something, Mr. Speaker, the New Democrats had that opportunity.

They had that opportunity during the '80s, and when the economy turned around and when revenues were coming in at the rate of 1 O percent, 12 percent, 16 percent, Mr. Pawley forgot that Keynesian economics, and he borrowed and borrowed and borrowed, so all of our chil dren, all of the poor people of Bu rrows constituency will be struggling forever and a day under that kind of yoke.

Members of the Liberal Party and this party may have differences from from time to time, but the Liberal Party still appreciates, I think, some of those bottom-line economics which members of the New Democratic Party continue to fail to observe. *

(1510) Mr. Speaker, this House may mark my words but if governments do not come to grips with those pressures and those realities, whoever sits on this side of the House will face the Newfoundland example; but if we continue to sit on this side of the House, we will avoid that because we are doing the right thing-not an easy thing, not an easy task, but ultimately the right task. When you listen to the comm ents from the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) about what this province is going through and the plan that he is implementing on our finances to get control, you will see, within the very near future, almost every other province , except probably Ontario, follow suit because this province really is on the leading edge of trying to get control of its finances and have a firm basis for providing services to the people of its province.

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1052 It is so ironical watching Ontario. I understand that the former chair of the Workers' Compensation Board in Manitoba has now gone over to Ontario to help make a mess of their Workers' Compensation Board. Mr. Speaker, you know I just want to digress for a moment. When this government came to power in 1988, the Workers' Compensation Board was so badly run by a labour government in Manitoba, a government of workers, that there were 200 boxes of active files sitting in a corridor in the basement that no one even knew what was in them.

They did not even have sufficient telephone lines into the office to accommodate all of the people taking telephone calls. They took phones literally off the desks of some people to move them onto others because they did not have enough phone lines. Now we should all be having a moment of silence for the workers of Ontario, what they are going to get with those kind of changes, because the bad management from here has now gone over to Ontario. I have not been around in elected politics for a long time. My colleague the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) is indeed the dean of this Chamber.

I think if you ask that member about Ontario today, he could almost repeat to you step by step about what Bob Rae is doing in Ontario. It is exactly what happened here and got us into so many problems and difficulties in destroying so much of our province, and that is what will happen in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few minutes of my time just to discuss the very regrettable layoffs that we had to do in the Civil Service. As Civil Service Commission minister, it is never easy, not only to be a minister, but it is never easy in any form to have to end somebody's employment with you.

Indeed, it is one of the most difficult tasks, I think, anyone can ever be called upon to perform. Now, the member goes cut and hack and cut. Well, there are some of us in this House who know exactly how New Democrats handle layoffs, and the classic example is Mr. Joe Brako, who used to be the Deputy Minister of Highways and Transportation. Do you know how Mr. Brako, whom I have met personally and talked to, was told that his services were no longer needed? You know, I will tell you how he was told. He heard it on the news in his car corning back from Regina. Mr.

Speaker, the Premier of the day, the grand Pooh-Bah of the New Democratic Party, Mr. Pawley, who was supposed to-Pre miers hire deputies-did not even have the courtesy to wait till Mr. Brako arrived back and to call him in and tell him personally that his services were no longer needed. That is the kind of disgusting hypocrisy that we hear time and time again in this Chamber. We will remind members opposite of Mr. Brako, because that is the way they treat their employees. On the news they learn that their services are no longer needed, from the radio on their way back from a meeting in Regina.

So let them not say one word in this House about how this government handled this particular very difficult situation, because their example does not afford them that right, I believe, to comment on what took place over the last week or so. It was our intention that every employee who was going to be affected by this process would be told personally by either the deputy or their senior manager. Indeed, in some departments I know that senior managers went out and travelled great lengths across this province to meet and tell those people so they would hear from their management directly and privately.

We also provided more than what the collective agreement called for in layoff situations. We provided and are providing an enhanced package for people choosing that package if they take it up front to go off the redeployment list. We have offered one week of severance for the first 10 years of service, a minimum of three weeks severance plus two weeks for every year after 10, with a maximum package of 52 weeks-one year-far greater than most ever get in the private sector.

We also provided everyone with the 18 weeks notice or money in lieu of notice, because we wanted to make sure that we were more than fair in providing those severance packages, because it is difficult times. We recognize that. Mr. Speaker, we also put into place, and I am very proud of this program, because I think it is going to prove to be an effective one, a voluntary incentive for any public servant wishing to leave public service who is in a position -(i nterjection)- well, Mr. Speaker, the memb er for Selkirk (M r.

Dewar) makes his comment, but at least members on this side of the House pay their bills, and I am really sorry to have to say that. If you ask why there is no money, that

1053 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 is why, and I think that member should take some responsibility for his own life. An Honourable Member: Pay your student loan, Greg. An Honourable Member: Oh, but it will take a long time to get it done. Mr. Praznlk: Only when forced by public pressure, Mr. Speaker. We provided a voluntary incentive package of 18 weeks of severance in addition to whatever that person would be entitled to if they left the public service. The member calls it a buyout.

Yes, it is to encourage those people who were thinking of leaving, would like to leave, to make their decision now to make that position available for those who have been laid off who would like to stay in public service. Over the next week or so we should know how many positions have become available in that pool. Of course, they have to be positions for which there is someone on the redeployment list, and that should minimize, that should reduce further the number of people actually affected in this process. Mr.

Speaker, there are cases where people may have not been dealt with in a manner that they have felt they should have been dealt with. I would remind members opposite that anybody who has been laid off is going to have a very difficult time. Anybody who is laid off is not going to be enamored with their employer and is not going to have anything probably good to say about the way in which they were handled. One has to put those comments that are coming out now by many in that context to be fair. It is understandable.

I think if any of us were in that position, of course, we would probably say we were not handled well. Given the fact that people were to be told personally, given the fact that we provided them with and are providing them now with a host of services and supports including assistance in preparing resumes, dealing with some of the stress and anxiety of a layoff, et cetera; we provided them with a handbook outlining this information; some departments, I understand, brought all of their affected staff together to help provide those services-Mr.

Speaker, we are trying to do this in a humane way, and the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) says, pushing them out the door. They did not even push Mr. Brako out the door. He rolled in to find his stuff out on the street. That is the way New Democrats handle layoffs. We did not do it that way. The members opposite, when they get up and apologize to Mr. Brako publicly for the way that they handled that situation, then they may have earned the right to comment on the way this government handled the situation, and Mr. Brako is still waiting for that apology. ...

(1520) Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I want to say that nobody likes to be in a situation where you cannot meet all of the demands on the Treasury that are there to be met. No one likes to be in a situation when you have to lay off staff. No one likes to be in a situation where you have to make difficult decisions, but they do have to be made. Any political party who thinks and honestly believes that there is some cash cow out there to milk, that there is some way that you can avoid the inevitable decisions that are now coming down for every government, including Mr.

Rae in Ontario, then they are fooling themselves. You know, Mr. Speaker, they are not fooling the people of Manitoba because the vast majority of Manitobans-and I say this, particularly of my generation- appreciate the decisions that have to be made and know that if they are not made now, there is not any kind of hope for any kind of strength or good future . The people of Bu rrows constituency, of Interlake, of Selkirk and of Broadway, the people who know, they deep down know that as well.

I would say to members opposite, it is time for all of us to put away that kind of malarkey that has dominated politics for 20 years and get down to the real tough issues that have to be dealt with. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Marti ndale: Mr. Speaker, normally in this House people say that it is a pleasure to rise and speak in debate. Today, it is not a pleasure to rise and speak on debate since there is so much pain in this budget. There is pain for many Manitobans, but pain for particular groups in our society.

There is pain for aboriginal people; there is pain for rural Manitobans; there is pain for northern Manitobans; there is pain for poor families; there is pain for women and there is pain for seniors. I will come back to this, explain what I mean and why I think there is so much pain in this budget.

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1054 Before I do, I would like to start off and commend the government for three good things that I actually found in their budget. An Honourable Member: Only three? Mr. Mart indale: Onl y three. For example, converting the annual tax credit for social assistance recipients into monthly payments is a good thing because what the government did by that was they cut out the tax discounters. It was not just that it was depriving money from people on social assistance, but it was also the taxpayer's money that was being skimmed off the top by the tax discounters.

When the minister announced this in his Budget Address, I was pleased to hear that. That was a progressive thing they did in this budget, something that they should have don e years ago and something that the federal government should have done years ago and could still do. In fact, I would hope that the federal government would take this good example, imitate it and do the same thing. Second, I supp ort and we suppo rt the gove rnme nt-labour spon sored emp loyee ownership fund. The fund will provide incentives to facilitate the transfer of broad ownership of Manitoba companies to employees.

It will help Manitoba employees to take ownership position in companies. It will create jobs and save jobs. It is $2 million well spent. The third thing I would commend the government for is the elimination of the Seniors RentalStart program. This program I believe was brought in in 1986 by an NOP government, but brought in at a time and for a particular reason, namely to increase the number of rental units being constructed. With a high vacancy rate, I do not think this can be justified anymore. It is also hard to jus tify a program that spends money subsidizing very rich seniors.

These are people who are putting $25,000 to $100,000 equity into a project and then paying rent of $250 to $950 a month, depending on which Seniors RentalStart project they are buying into. What the government was doing was subsidizing people in the top 5 percent of the rental market, people that could afford to buy condominiums and do not need government assistance or those kind of life-lease programs. I think the program, while it had a purpose and a social goal when it was first introduced, had outlived that. I commend the government for chopping that particular program.

I am supporting the motion of nonconfidence by our Leader because in presenting its budget, the government has completely failed to develop an economic strategy that will counter the severe recession facing the Manitoba economy. There is no economic strategy of this government, otherwise they would not be laying off civil servants when the unemployment rate is 10 percent. The manufacturing sector has declined from 62,000 jobs to 54,000 jobs. Public administration jobs are declining even before the recently announced layoffs. Transportation layoffs have resulted in a drop in the work force from 43,000 to 40,000.

Corporate tax revenue is down 47 percent or $86 million, but on the other hand, individual tax revenue is up 7 percent or $84 million. The gas tax revenue is up 10 percent. Manitoba families though are paying the difference. There is no economic strategy to the Minister of Finance's (Mr. Manness) budget. I am supporting the motion of nonconfidence because this government has cut thousands of jobs from the Manitoba economy and has cut job creation programs when the actual unemployment rate has increased to over 10 percent under this government. Unemployment will be up as a direct result of the government's budget.

For example, not only are there civil servants being laid off, but the result of cuts to grants to nongovernment organizations will result in at least 300 jobs being lost. The government needs to look at but is probably aware of the multiplier effect, so probably for every job that is lost, two more jobs will be lost because of money that circulates in the economy-or money that will not be circulating in the economy because of those layoffs. An Honourable Memb er: The trickle-down theory? Mr. Mart indale: Well, it is your -it is the government's trickle-down theory.

You lay off one worker and two more get unemployed because the money is not in the economy circulating to keep those people working. It is a Tory trickle-down economic theor y , but it creates unemployment-that is the problem. There are also cuts to staffing in regional offices which will result in unemployment, most of which will be in rural Manitoba. I am supporting the resolution of nonconfidence because Manitoba has dropped to tenth out of 10 in

1055 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 private investment and seen a 47 percent cut in corporate income taxes because of the failure of the government. There is irony in being tenth out of 1 O in private inves tment since the Tory party campaigned in 1 988 and '90 on getting the economy going again. Any of us who were candidates in both those elections will remember the Tory candidate saying, we are the party of good management, we are the ones who are going to get the economy going again. What happened? That is what they say, that is true, but what happened since then?

The economy has got worse and worse since 1988, and they have been in government since then. This is their fourth budget. Instead of fulf illing their election promises of getting the economy going again, things are getting worse every year. Of course, you know, they couch it in language which could be summed up best, I guess, as business friendly, because that is what they want to do, is help their business friends.

Now they are going to do it with this budget because they are going to privatize things and give things to private companies that civil servants were doing in the past, although I think they should really take the advice of some of their business friends like Buddy Brownstone, who is quoted very interestingly on the front page of the Business

section of the Free Press on Wednesday, March 6. The headline is, deficit cutting, start with us; business says it is willing to get by without the grants. I think it is a very interesting quotation from Buddy Brownstone, their friend, the President of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce. We would like them to take us seriously, he said. We have said to all governments for some years that we have to get our economic house in order. We are saying, start with us. While business says it can do without government handouts, it favours assistance through repayment loans and tax forgiveness under certain strict criteria.

Have they listened to Buddy Brownstone? No. He is saying start with us, cut off the grants to business. They listen to him for everything else. Why do they not listen when he says cut the grants to businesses? Sounds like good advice from a source that normally they would listen to. I am surprised that they have not taken his advice in this budget. The government wants to make the economy more business friendly by doing things that the business community is asking that they agree with. For example, they want to achieve their goals by cutting back on labour legislation that they consider is unhealthy.

In response to these requests, in the last session they repealed final offer selection. It is clear that they have not totally achieved the goals of the business community yet, but who knows, with another few budgets they probably will. They will be able to do everything that they want, and things will just get worse and worse and worse. I am supporting, and our party is going to support our Leader on a motion of nonconfidence because this government has ignored the future of this province by instituting major cutbacks to education, training and job creation programs for young people.

They are cutting education by funding it at less than inflation. This is a shortsighted policy. • (1 530) You know, I listen to business people. This might surprise the members opposite, but in the morning I go for coffee at the North Y, and there is a group of business people who have coffee there every morning. I said to one of these people, reputedly a millionaire who owns his own insurance company, I said, what do you think of the budget and what do yo u think of the cutbacks ?

We got talking specifically about education and he said, what I think they shoul d be doing is pouring money into education, pour it into education, he said, so that we can be competitive with countries like Germany and Japan. His feeling is that we need to improve educational standards, improve educational funding and improve the quality of graduates. (Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) Another business owner who was there at coffee at the same time, who also owns an insurance agency in East Kildonan, agreed with him. He said, we have a problem.

We cannot hire graduates from high school because they are not well enough qualified. We need to improve standards. We need to improve the quality of education, and we should improve the funding as well. That is not me who is saying that; it is my business friends over coffee in the morning. Why are these people saying this? They are saying it because it will pay dividends in the future. Funding for education is an investment in the future, not just the future of young people and their education, but the future of our economic well-being in this province as well.

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1056 Instead, what is the government doing? They are cutting support to community colleges, reducing It by $3.9 million, cutting Native education funding by 1 0 percent, eliminating the high school bursary program by $1 . 7 million-money that is given to the poorest students to encourage them to stay in school. This is the group of students who need the most help. We know that there is a very definite correlation between educ ation and income; that the more education you have, the more likely you are to have a higher income.

Student Aid has been reduced though by $1 .2 million, and university tuition is going up by 15 to 20 percent. There has also been a $600,000 reduction in funding to English as a Second language programs and yet, while cutting back on education funding, the government has increased funding to elite private schools by 11 percent. I am supporting the motion of nonconfldence, and my party is supporting the motion of nonconfidence because this gove rnment has severely cut programs for people throughout Manitoba.

I believe that by cutting back on programs for vulnerable people and poor people that this budget contradicts a whole lot of things, but one is the Mission and Goals Statement of the Department of Family Services. One of the goals of the department is, quote, to ensure that Manitobans' basic needs for food, clothing, shelter, safety and care are met. One of these groups is seniors, and what did the government do? They de-indexed the 55-Plus income support program. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) couches It in terms of so much per senior per week, but the total is quite impressive. It is something like $480,000.

Collectively, they are hurting all seniors who benefit from this program. I am supporting the motion of nonconfidence of this party because this government has further jeopardized the extremely difficult situation in the rural economy by failing to develop a rural economic strategy and deal fairly with the crisis facing Manitoba farmers. Hon. Glen Fin dlay (Min ister of Agricultur e): Do you know of what you talk? Mr. Martl ndale: Mr. Acting Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture asked me a question and, of course, I am going to be careful in what I say now because I do not pretend to be an expert in rural issues.

I am only going to talk about the ir plan of decentralization. That is basically their only strategy for rural Manitoba, to decentralize Civil Service jobs to rural Manitoba. We, in our party, are in favour of that. Our only criticism has been how they have tried to carry it out. I think their policy seems to be one step forward and two steps back. They announce decentralization and then they cut out 15 0 jobs in Housing, most of them in rural Manitoba. They talk about decentralization in the throne speech, and then they bring in a budget which cuts civil servants in rural Manitoba.

They are redeploying Housing staff. Some of them have been phoning me, and it is qu ite interesting what they say. They say, we were working in rural Manitoba and we were moved to Winnipeg, or we were told, you can take advantage of this redeployment program if you move to Winnipeg, and then somebody is going to have to do the same job. They are going to be driving out to rural Manitoba, doing the same job that they were doing before, but based in Winnipeg, which is really going to cost the government more money. It does not make any sense at all. An Honourable Member: Poor research done.

Mr.Martlndale: The research, Mr. Acting Speaker, is my own. It is people who have been phoning me and telling me what is happening to them in the Department of Housing. I am happy to do that kind of research. It is very interesting to hear what people have to say when they are moved from places like Brandon to Winnipeg. That is an example of Tory decentralization. I am supporting the motion of nonconfidence because this government has cut programs to northern and aboriginal Manitobans, including job and education programs. They are cutting out Northern Youth Corps job program . This is extremely shortsighted.

It is taking away hope for northern Manitobans, especially for northern Manitobans who are young. There is $1 .6 million taken from ACCESS and New Careers, much of whic h would have helped northern aboriginal people. They are taking away the hope of the university education and jobs from aboriginal and northern Manitobans. The budget for Northern Affairs has been cut by $2.5 million. They have cut $1 .2 million from the northern infrastructure. They have cut aboriginal development programs. They have eliminated the

1057 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 22, 1991 Northern Association of Community Councils grant. The Native Commun ications grant has been eliminated. I think this government has basically written off the North and written off our aboriginal people. I su pport the resol ution of nonconfidence because this government has failed to deal with the real needs of Manitobans' health care system and introduced user fees for Northerners. The real need is to provide community-based health care as a front line of deli very of health care, backed up by institutions.

There are some examples on how this is happening, on how the change is happening in other places. I think we would do well to study these changes and see how they are being Implemented, see If they work, look at the successes and imitate them In Manitoba. For example, perhaps some members have read about the changes that are happening in Victoria, B.C., rather significant changes, and probably happening there because they have a higher percentage of seniors than any other city in Canada, but we know that seniors, as a percentage of the population, are increasing all over Canada.

We would do well to study the experience there. One of the things that they have done is they have tried to keep seniors in their own home, whether they are sick or well, and they have done that by greatly Increasing funding to home care and to home nursing. An amazing thing has happened It has been so successful in keeping seniors out of hospital that five hospitals in Victoria, B.C., have voluntarily taken a million dollars out of their budgets and given it to this new program of home care and home nursing.

Now, can you imagine any hospital in Winnipeg or any hospital in Manitoba voluntarily giving up a million dollars to put the money into home care or home nursing? Well, it is hard to imagine, but it is probably what they should be doing because it is cost-effective in the long run. I have some personal experience with this, having looked after an elderly neighbour of mine who was ill. This individual spent months in the hospital until we arranged for home care. As a result, she spent much less time in the hospital. Now, those hospital stays may have been costing up to $900 a day.

I am not sure of the exact figures, but we know that hospital care is very, very expensive. One of her problems was malnutrition. The first time she was in the hospital for a number of months, she gained 17 pounds. Obviously, this individual was getting sick and was going back for repeated hospital stays because she was not eating properly. Once we cleaned up her house a little bit and home care put in a worker and she was getting two hot meals a day, the senior citizen spent much, much less time in hospital. She was getting good nutritious meals, and she was getting companionship.

The cost of paying a home care worker $6 or $8 an hour is minlscule compared to this person being in hospital and being cared for by nursing staff, other support staff and doctors, three shifts a day at somewhere, I do not know, $800-$900 a day. We need to do much more of this, and I would urge the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) to study the Victoria experience and see if it cannot be replicated here in Manitoba and in Winnipeg. If they are saving a lot of money in Victoria, which seems to be the case, then there is no reason why we cannot save money in Winnipeg.

The example I have given of my neighbour I think is probably typical of other seniors and could be replicated here. • (1 540) We are dis appointed that ther e is now a transportation fee for Northerners. This seems to be extre mely discriminatory because it is only applied to Northerners. In fact, it is probably illegal under the Canada Health Act, and I hope that someb ody from northern Manitoba takes the government to court to see whether it is illegal or not. Certainly it is the thin edge of the wedge; it is the beginning of user fees in Manitoba. I support the resolution of nonconfidence, Mr.

Acting Speaker, because this government has not provided adequate support for services to Manitoba families. In fact, there are some very specific cuts whic h has affected fam ili es. They have , for example, cut funding from Parent-Child Centres. The Parent-Child Centres are providing excellent programs in neighbourhood schools and formerly in storefront locations, which provided programming that was very appropriate, especially for single parent mothers. This government has also cut back on CRISP, the Child Related Income Support Program, which supported working poor families.

This program is one of the best programs in existence because it is targeted to low income families, not people who are unemployed who are eligible for social assistance, but people who are working poor, people who are not entitled to supplement programs because they

April 22, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1058 are on social assistance, and many of whose income may even be below what the income is of people on social assistance. Unfortunately, the government chooses not to advertise these kinds of programs. People do not know that they are available. If you do not know that something is available, you do not apply for it; if you do not apply for it, you do not get it. The result is that every year the take-up rate goes down and down and down, so in fact by attrition, you might say, it is costin

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-2-27a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 2nd hansardpdf 27a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	05f3ef27ebfc26ce9126651cd9ffa613edf268d6

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