MG-8048 Third Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 42 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocsn Speaker VOL. XLII No. 71 • 1:30 p.m., THURSDAY, MAY 27,1993 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and PoiHical Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETI, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEE MA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACOUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHE LSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER, Brian 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, Hon. WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant Vacant CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellin gton River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin- Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie 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 Rossmere Rupertsland PARTY.

Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP Liberal NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

3437 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, May 27,1993 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Mr. George Hlckes (Point Douglas): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Christine H. Massan, Isabelle Thompson, Gwen Pompana and others requesting the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishment of a solven t abuse trea tment facil ity in northern Manitoba. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Stephen Walker, Victor Walker, Eric Mason and others requesting the Premier (Mr.

Film on) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishmen t of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Joseph Monias, Gabby Flett, Annie Monias and others requesting the Premier (Mr. Film on) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. *** Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Sheila Mullen, Dan Neal, Garth Mihalick and others urging the government of Manitoba to consider keeping the Misericordia Hospital open as an acute-care facility. *** Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Millie Harper, Rita Harper, Tommy Harper and others requesting the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse trea tmen t fa ci lity in northern Manitoba. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to table the Auditor's Report and Statement of Operations for the year ended March 31, 1992, for the Office of the Queen's Printer. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 38-The City of Winnipeg Amendment, Municipal Amendment, Planning Amendment and

Summary Convictions Amendment Act Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Ducharme), that Bill 38, The City of Winn ipeg Amendment, Municipal Amendment, Planning Amendment and

Summary Convictions Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Ville de Winnipeg, Ia

Loi sur les municipalites, Ia

Loi sur l'amenagement du territoire et Ia

Loi sur les poursuites

sommaires, be introduced and the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. Bill 39-The Provincial Court Amendment Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that Bill 39, The Provincial Court Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Cour provinciale), be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieu tenant-Governor, having been adv ised of the conte nts of this bill, recommends it to the House. I would like to table this message. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Minister of Finance, seconded by the honourable Minister of Environment, that Bill 39, The Provincial Court Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Cour provinciale, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, having been adv ised of the conte nts of this bill recommends it to the House. ' Agreed? Agreed and so ordered.

3438 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 The honourable minister did this on behalf of the honourable Attorney General (Mr. McCrae). •

(1335) Bill 40- The Legal Aid Services Society of Manitoba Amendment and Crown Attorneys Amendment Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Attorney General (Mr. McCrae), I move, seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Ducharme), that Bi11 40, The Legal Aid Services Society of Manitoba Amendment and Crown Attorneys Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Societe d'aide juridique du Manitoba et Ia

Loi sur les procureurs de Ia Couronne ), be introduced and that the same now be received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. I would like to table the message. Motion agreed to. 811141-The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I am instructed to do the following: Please read script and follow the next three steps.

I move that Bill 41, The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi concernant les pares provinciaux et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time, seconded by the honourable Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik). I am instructed to remember to table the message by saying, I would like to table the message. So I table the message from His Honour. He has been instructed about the bill. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the loge to my right, where we have with us this afternoon Mr. Arnie Brown, the former member for Rhineland. On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon. Also with us this afternoon, we have from the Parkland Christian School sixteen Grades 7, 8, and 9 students under the direction of Mr. Galen Toews . This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach). Also, from the R.H.G.

Bonnycastle School, we have seventy-five Grade 6 students under the direction of Ms. Maureen Arnason. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodrey). On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon. •

(1340) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Port of Churchill Grain Shipments Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, we have been raising the issue of the Port of Churchill since this session opened, and it would come as no surprise that we are raising it again this afternoon to the First Minister.

During the Premier's Estimates, subsequent to the announcement that was made in February of 1992 and after the Arctic Bridge agreement was signed on November 3, 1992, the Premier indicated that he had much more confidence in the new federal Minister of Agriculture, who is now the lead federal minister for the province of Manitoba, and that he had greater confidence that his personal efforts would improve the situation for the Port of Churchill and improve the situation of Canada-Manitoba relations.

Today, we have learned that ships will be leaving for Russia with wheat, 500,000 tonnes, but not from the Port of the Churchill. There was a Jot of optimism from the government ministers opposite, optimism which we shared in February of this year. Can the Premier tell us what is the status with the shipment of wheat to Russia, and what is the status of the ships for the Port of Churchill for this shipping year? Hon. Gary Fllrnon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I would just prefer the member not take liberties with what I said in Estimates.

I did not say that I had confidence that it would improve the situation for the Port of

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3439 Churchill. I did make the overall reference that the Minister of Agriculture, now the new lead minister, I felt strongly would improve the situation for all of the various issues we have to deal with. With respect to the Port of Churchill, I have no other information other than that which is available through the media today, which indicates that in keeping with the policy of the Canadian Wheat Board, they are contemplating a shipment on a time

schedule that is asked for by the client, which happens to be Russia. Despite our efforts-and we have made considerable efforts to try and convince them to do shipping through the Port of Churchill­ they have indicated that the timetable of request by Russia is so early in the season that Churchill, of course, would not be open for the shipment. That is regrettable, Mr. Speaker. We certainly would have preferred that this not be the case. I know we will be trying to follow that up with the Wheat Board to see whether or not there is any alternative to that schedule. Port of Churchill Grain Shipments Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): There are two parties to the negotiations and different parts of the negotiations that are being concluded with the Soviet Union-or Russia, rather-particulary in light of the fact that, allegedly, they were over their, quote, credit line, to begin with. We do not have any confidence on this side, watching what has happened with Brian Mulroney and Baie-Comeau getting priority shipping year after shipping year. It looks like Charlie Mayer has continued to acquiesce to the Prime Minister, in our opinion, and has not stood up on behalf of the people of Manitoba.

I would like to know from the First Minister (Mr. Filmon): What is the status of other potential shipments from the Canadian Wheat Board through the Port of Churchill? We are seeing every year a dwindling number of ships and tonnage going through that port. I know the government is trying to do something about it. We have agreement after agreement after agreement, optimism in the winter and very negative results in the summer, Mr. Speaker. How many ships are going to go through the Port of Churchill in this shipping year, now that we have been, I think, sabotaged by the federal Conservative government? Hon.

Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, we. are facing the same problem that we have faced for the last five years in terms of getting advance commitment from the Wheat Board. We have lobbied as extensively as we know how. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) himself has written to the federal minister imploring him to make use of the Port of Churchill. We have asked the federal minister to actually impose or request the Wheat Board to move grain through there.

We are still hopeful that we can come to some understanding or agreement that grain is going to move through Churchill again this year. I am still optimistic that under the Arctic Bridge concept, as we develop this further, ultimately we will be able to have a long-term life expectancy for the Port of Churchill if we develop the Arctic Bridge concept. At the present time, there is no commitment. We continue to push and lobby for grain to move through the Port of Churchill. I think our government is very committed.

The Premier has certainly instructed all of his ministers to be very active in terms of trying to make sure that all activities that can take place should take place through Churchill. *

(1345) Northern Studies Centre Funding Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a further question to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) about Churchill. Churchill has been working to try to get long-term shipping agreements from the Canadian Wheat Board, and, again, the mayor said today that he feels very negative if this federal Conservative government is re-elected in terms of the future of the port. We have asked questions about the Rocket Range and the status that that has.

The Premier indicated in Estimates he is writing a letter to, I guess, the same minister who is responsible for the Wheat Board. We hope we get better results, or I hope he writes it to the Prime Minister. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, we have asked questions for a number of years about the situation with the Northern Studies Centre or the Arctic centre in Churchill. That centre has been funded at about approximately $200,000. It was reduced and then

3440 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 increased again, then it was reduced and then increased again. Now we understand there is no security of funds for that centre. We understand, because of the tentative nature of the provincial Conservative · government's commitment to this Arctic centre, that the development officer, the one development officer at that centre has resigned.

Can the Premier tell u&-this community just cannot keep getting body blows from Conservative go vernments in Ottawa and Conservative governments in Manitob a-w hat the status of that funding is for the northern centre and why we have lost a very valuable development staff for that centre? Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I think that we are quite prepared at any time to put the record of this government up against the inaction of the previous administration in the Province of Manitoba and in the situation in which we found the town of Churchill.

We all appreciate the fact that it is the Canadian Wheat Board, it has been stated many times, that offers grain for sale out of this country, and it is the purchaser who determines where they will pick the product up. We, through the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger) and through the different departments, have continually expressed interest in having purchasers take grain out of the Port of Churchill.

As has been indicated, the Arctic Bridge is a mechanism that was not established under the previous administrati on but established under the leadership of this government to further enhance the opportunities of Churchill. As it relates to the Northern Studies Centre, I believe those questions would be appropriately asked in the Estimates of the Department of Education where the traditional funding has been. We have committed to the Port of Churchill. We have committed some several thousands of dollars to the Rocket Range program investigation, Mr.

Speaker, and as I indicated, I know where the funding is, and I indicated, too, it would be appropriately asked, as it is an educational program, under the Department of Education. Asslnlbolne River Diversion PFRA Study Release Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environment. Due to an amendment in The Environment Act, the minister could request that other jurisdictions provide their studies and information relevant to an environmental assessment in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, this new power is necessary with respect to the Assiniboine diversion.

Given that the PFRA is not registered to make a presentation at the upcoming Clean Environment Commission hearings, will the minister ensure that all of their studies are made public by the dates of the hearings in Manitoba which begin in a few weeks? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr.

Speaker, the Clean Environment Commission will certainly look at what information is available as they go through their hearings, and if they believe there is information that would be useful, that would be vital to any decision-making process, that they would want to have made available to them, then we will see that request. I am sure that any information that is needed, Mr. Speaker, can be made available. It is not a matter of the commission sorting through material and deciding whether or not they want to hear it. They want to hear all of the information. Ms.

Cerllll: Given that this government has said these Clean Environment Commission hearings will be as thorough as possible and the new amendment gives this minister the power to request this information, I ask that the minister will make a commitment to request that the PFRA studies will be made public, so we can have a complete review, and all the information will be made available for the Manitoba hearings. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, the answer I gave a moment ago is the correct answer.

If the commission sees that there are gaps or further information they need to make a decisi.on that is fully informed, then they will request that information. Mr. Speaker, l give you my commitment and I give the commitment to the province that any information that is needed for a proper decision will be made available. •

(1350) City of Winnipeg Concerns Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson): Given that the City of Winnipeg today has taken the unusual action of launching a public ad campaign because of their

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3441 concerns for lack of information and studies with respect to water flow, can the minister tell us what he thinks of the City of Winnipeg's concerns in these areas? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Well, Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that there is a view that the commission will not take a broad enough approach to this licensing process. We have said consistently that the commission will not be fettered in the concerns that can be brought before it and th e Information it will be able to request.

When I look at the fact that it is considered that a public campaign is being put in place, I have to ask the question, Mr. Speaker, that the commission should be looking at the facts of the matter, and what we need is to make sure that all of the facts are brought forward. They can then deal with the matter appropriately. Port of Churchill Grain Shipments Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, on February 17 of this year, we learned with great fanfare of a great sale of wheat to the Soviet Union, now Russia.

We learned further that it was the wish of these individuals who were in a delegation visiting our Premier (Mr. Filmon) that this grain be shipped through the Port of Churchill. The Wheat Board denied it. The Wheat Board said there is no deal. Well, there is clearly a deal. A deal has been signed, and the Premier said today he knew nothing more about the deal other than what the media knew. Will the Minister of Transportation tell us if he has had any information which would indicate that such a deal has been made, other than media reports, and if he does not, why does he not have that information? Hon.

Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, we go through this course again in terms of what is happening at Churchill or not happening at Churchill. It was our understanding at the time we met with the delegation from Russia, Mr. Kuramin, who was a representative from Murmansk at the tim e-- he made the announcement. It was not this government that made the announcement that they would be prepared to take so and so much grain through the Port of Churchill. We further felt this was a commitment on their behalf.

We are pursuing it right now to find out what has happened, but my understanding is-and one of the frustrations between the Canadian Wheat Board and Export Klieb, which is the counterpart from Russia-we were under the impression that any further grain, that a good portion of that would move through the Port of Churchill. We are in the process of finding out exactly what went wrong or what is going wrong because my understanding was that the Export Klieb people by and large had given an indication that they were prepared to take the grain through the Port of Churchill. We are pursuing that.

I will make that information available as soon as we have further information on this thing. Mrs. Carstalrs: But, quite frankly, we cannot deal with just impressions. Can the Minister of Hig hways table today correspondence that he has had with the Minister responsible for the Wheat Board and the Wheat Board itself indicating the arrangements that he believed were made in good faith by the Russian delegation meeting with our government? Mr. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I do not have that information here. I will get what information I have and bring it forward to the member at a later time.

Port of Churchill Grain Shipments Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Can the Premier (Mr. Filmon) tell the House today if there was any funding that was provided to the Russian delegation by the Province of Manitoba with respect to the Arctic Bridge concept? Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Yes, there is joint funding between the Province of Manitoba and the Russian organization that was here meeting on behalf of purchasing product from this country. * (1 355)

3442 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 Substance Abuse Treatment Centre Northern Manitoba Mr. George Hlckes {Point Douglas): An important information meeting was held this morning with Chief Sydney Garrioch of the Cross Lake Band and representatives of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs and MKO to discuss the need for a northern solvent abuse treatment centre. Mr. Speaker, I will table a copy of the brief presented at the meeting for the benefit of those members of the House who were not able to attend.

Given the serious problem of solvent abuse in our province, will the Minister of Health today make a firm commitment on record to provide provincial funding out of the health reform initiatives fund for a solv ent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba? Hon. Donald Orchard {Minister of Health): As my honour able friend may well know from tha t presentation, MKO put forward a proposal to the federal government through the Medical Services Branch for a treatment centre to be located at Cross Lake, and that happened in 1991, Sir. Mr.

Speaker, I think '1t is most appropriate tha t MKO continue their efforts to seek financia l assistance from the federal government to provide that treatment centre at Cross Lake. Mr. Hlckes: Then can the Premier (Mr. Filmon) tell us if he has raised this matter with the federal government, and has he obtained a guarantee of funding this year for a solvent treatment centre in northern Manitoba? Mr. Orchard: Maybe my honourable friend has this information and, should he not, I would be glad to provide him with it.

Apparently after receiving the proposal from MKO for a $7-million, 30-bed treatment centre at Cross Lake, that project, it is my understanding, was not accepted by Medical Services Branch federally because they believed that it was too costly in terms of both capital and operating costs compared to other services which are available in the province. This is my und erstanding of the federal government's position. The Medical Services Branch is conducting a survey across Canada of substance abuse treatment needs in the native population of Canada.

It is expected that report will be completed in late May or early June of this year, Sir, and I would suspect it might provide some guidance to my honourable friend and to the delegation that was in the Legislature today in terms of where the federal government might proceed next on this issue. Mr. Hlckes: Mr. Speaker, it was made very clear this morning that there are enough studies and papers brought forward, that it is time for action. So I would like to ask the Premier (Mr.

Almon): Since his own 1992 Health Action Plan stated that Manitoba will launch a major initiative to combat substance abuse in this province, why has this commitment not been put In place? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend, in his

preamble, is correct in that we are undertaking initiatives in terms of substance abuse, but my honourable friend is not correct in saying that this initiative has not been commenced, and I look forward to the opportunity of explaining a number of initiat ives through my ministry and through government in terms of substance abuse, not the least of which is the tabling of legislation we believe will work in terms of the issue of sniff. Mr.

Speaker, I am somewhat troubled with my honourable friend's direction of questioning in terms of automatically making the assumption that the province ought to provide the entire funding package for a treatment centre which is clearly a federal government responsibility. Mr. Speaker, my honourable friends, when they were in government and had the opportunity to act on this, did not, preferring to rely on federal government leadership. Now from opposition, they seem to be proposing a somewhat changed approach. School Division Boundary Review Terms of Reference Mr. John Plohman {Dauphin): Mr.

Speaker, reports now indicate that the public school boundary review is on once again after being shelved a year ago by the Premier (Mr. Almon) when he said in the House on March 18, and I quote: • . .. now is not the time to further impose yet another potential major change on them."-them being school boards. As with most actions of this minister, mass confusion reigns in Manitoba on these decisions, and "impose" seems to be the operative word used by this government. So I ask the Minister of Education today: Will she clarify if she is truly proceeding with a boundary

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3443 review this time? Is it tie d to the establishment of the Francophone division, and will she table in this House the objectives, information on who will be involved, what the projected savings will be and the timetable for such a review? *

(1400) Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, in answer to a question yesterday, I did say in this House that I expected to make an announcement regarding the issue of school boundary review shortly. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, I asked for the terms of reference. Obviously, the minister does not know what she is doing again. She cannot even confirm if it is on again, off again- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Question, please. Mr. Plohman: In regard to this potential review, Mr.

Speaker, can the minister assure the House here today that the public will be involved from the very beginning, even before the terms of reference are established, that it will be consulted and that there will be no decisions imposed on the public by this minister, as the Premier seems to indicate is the way- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, as I said to the member earlier today, as I said yesterday, the issue of boundary review was deferred in an announcement last year.

There were a number of issues which the school divisions and the public were working very hard on at that time. I said yesterday in the House and earlier today that I planned to make an announcement about school boundary reviews shortly. Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Speaker, I want to ask the minister if she can tell us today-not shortly, today­ whether in fact she will be following the recom­ mendations of her own reform report, which she released after six months of sitting on it, which asks that governance and greater equality of educational services be a major objective of that report, especially in rural Manit oba, of any consideration of a review. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, again, any information regarding this government's plans and details, of course, would come forward at the time of an announcement.

I would like to remind the member we did say last year when we deferred the issue of school boundary review that there were a number of issues which were ongoing, and those issues have now been brought to a stage, I think, that has provided the public of Manitoba with more information. last year, when the school boundary review was deferred, we were in the first year of a new educational funding formula. We are now into the second year. last year, we had just completed the final hearings of the review of legislative reform of The Public Schools Act. We did not have that report yet.

That report we now have and th at has been released to Manitobans for comment. last year, at the time the boundary review was deferred, we had not released any information on our plans for Francophone governance. This year, we now do have that legislatio n before the House. Fourthly, Mr. Speaker, last year, we had only announced the formation of the Task Force on Distance Education. That final report has now been released before the public. We have four initiatives which have now been completed and are before the public. Special Operating Agencies Fleet Vehicles Branch Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Ministe r responsible for Government Services. last year, the government began setting up under its legislation for special operating agencies a series of quasi-private sector organizations that were delivering government services, one of them being Fleet Vehicles. I, frankly, was rather supportive of this move at the time they began.

I note, however, when one looks at the Orders­ in-Council that were passed at the time the agency was set up, Orders-in-Council that have been amended just a couple of weeks ago, that the value of the assets transferred had been reduced by some $2.284 million. I would like to ask the Minister of Government Services where that $2.2 million has gone. Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Minister of Government Services): Mr. Speaker, first of all, I will get into more of that when we go into Estimates, but briefly what it is, is underestimating. The value of the

3444 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 vehicles that were going into the new company were underestimated by that amount of money. As you can probably appreciate, we had about 2,600 or 2,700 automobiles that went in, and it was overestimated, the ones going into that company at the time it was started. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, however, at the same time that the organization was set up, it declared in the publicity that was put out that it would be required to produce annual operating plans. I also notice that they have removed that requirement in this new 0/C.

I am wondering if the minister can explain why they are changing the way in which these organizations operate. Mr. Ducharme: In no way are we changing the operating of the SOA that was established. The year-end was just at the first of April, Mr. Speaker. I will go through the plan with the individual when we do get to Estimates. As I explained earlier, there was a difference that was going in, as we were establishing a new company at the time. Mr. Alcock: Mr.

Speaker, I have been through the plan quite clearly, and the minister has taken a number of steps this year to change the way in which this organization functions. I an wondering if he will assure us it is not because the organization is having trouble competing in the way he said it would. Mr. Ducharme: Mr. Speaker, in no way are we having any difficulty in the establishment of the plan. The employees who are involved have done an excellent job. The only question he does hav e-a nd it is a logical questio n--is the overestimation of the vehicles going in.

At that particular time, they were estimated going into the SOA at the time, and as a result of the 2,800 automobiles that were involved, that can easily happen. It was just a book type of entry that established that value at the time of the establishment of the company. Private Money Lenders Regulations Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Premier (Mr. Rlmon) took as notice for me a series of questions from the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) regarding loan brokers. I am pleased to provide the answers to those questions today.

The member indicated yesterday, in fact stated categorically, that the government had done nothing on this issue and asked when we are going to do something and what it is going to be. I think it is important to put on the record, Mr. Speaker, that my department did begin to investigate this as soon as the initial com plaint came to us toward the end of April and that we have been working with the City of Winnipeg Police closely since that time and have taken a number of concrete actions, some of which I was not able to say in the course of the ongoing investigation. The investigation is still ongoing.

I am able to provide certain pieces of information today, however, that I was not able to report before. Unlike the member opposite, of course, my department has to operate on the basis of evidence, proven evidence, and due process must be abided by. I can inform the member that under The Business Practices Act which this government was pleased to bring in, my department, after consulting with Crown counsel, obtained from the court and carried out an order to freeze the firm's bank account. They also obtained and carried out a search warrant.

They also received an order granting an injunction which prohibited any representation being made to the effect that a loan had been obtained and from accepting any fee pursuant to that without prior written confirmation of such approval being first received by the lender involved. That was the first point that was raised by the member. Secondly, he asked a number of questions again on loan brokers. I wish to emphasize first of all, Mr.

Speaker, that it is important for the member opposite to understand that orders such as these can only be obtained after one is able to detail their sufficient cause and sufficient evidence for a judge to grant that these orders be allowed. The second question the member asked, which I will provide the answer for-he asked three questions, Mr. Speaker. That was the first one. The member opposite asked why we had not acted on a supposed 160 complaints received by the Better Business Bureau. I should first indicate that the Better Business Bureau is not a branch of my department.

It is a private, nongovernmental agency of business people, members of the

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3445 business commu nity. They do not report to government. Secondly, I should indicate-and this is very important because the member based the premise for the rest of his question on the first statement, which was inaccurate-the Better Business Bureau did not receive 160 complaints. They received 160 inquiries over a period of time about loan brokers. The member may wish to consult a dictionary- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. *

(1410) Education System VIolence Reduction Strategy Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education. The government cannot duck its responsibility for the problems in education, including those of violence in the classroom and providing safe environments. As MTS stated in its report today, quote: Adequate resources have to be provided and that is the responsibility of the government. The government does not get it, Mr. Speaker, despite numerous reports.

Will the government now deal with the issue as raised in the MTS report today by specifically doing three things: co-ordinating services, providing resources to decrease class­ room size, and thirdly, providing proper clinician support? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): The issue of violence in the schools is one that has been of great concern and has been discussed frequently and has also, in support of reducing violence in the school, been supported by this government in terms of financial support.

That financial support has been offered through our Student Support Branch which has delivered a number of programs which will assist schools in managing violence in the schools. We have also spoken during the process of Estimates and in this House before about the co-ordination of services which is now being considered by ministers within this government, and we have taken that process very seriously, and I believe that we also have a record to stand by. Mr. Chomlak: Mr.

Speaker, how can this minister say that they are taking it seriously when they fired 66 people from the very division that created the document, Working with Violent and Aggressive Students? How can she make that claim and claim that there are adequate resources at the school division level? Mrs.

Vodrey: That member seems to continually misunderstand-! give him the benefit of the doubt of misunderstanding-when he now knows that clinicians will be hired by school divisions as their direct employers and that the funding for clinicians is provided through the schools funding formula model and that the support for clinicians was increased by this government under the new funding formula model. Mr. Chomlak: My final supplementary is to the same minister.

Will the government sto p procrastinating, bring together all the departments to deal with the issue and perhaps in her education reform package that she talked about earlier, they can put something in there about violence and providing a safe environment for children and teachers? Mrs. Vodrey: The issue of violence in the schools and the issue of violent behaviour is one that has been looked at. I did explain in the Estimates process that there has been a committee which was directed to be set up. Deputy ministers chaired it. It also had a working group. The working group has reported to the deputy ministers.

The ministers will now look at the information which has been provided, and in terms of what will appear within legislation, there have been recommendations which appear in that report regarding rights and responsibilities of parents, students and teachers, and we will certainly have a look seriously at the recommendations. Children's Dental Health Program Funding Reinstatement Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, last night, I had the opportunity to attend a meeting in Swan Lake in the heart of Tory country.

Again, close to 200 people came out to protest this government's decision to cut the treatment side of the Children's Dental Health Program. People understand the value of this program. It is based on wellness, preventativeness, and it is very cost efficient. I want to ask the Minister of Health if he will now admit that he has made a mistake by slashing this program. We would applaud the minister if he would

3446 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 now admit this and reinstate the funding to a program that is very valuable to rural and northern Manitobans. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, as tempted as I am to garner applause from the negative democratic party, I cannot take up that offer, with all due regret.

However, I will indicate to my honourable friend that since the meeting I had the opportunity to attend in Minnedosa some two to three weeks ago, a number of in itiatives have comm enced with significant leadership from some of the individuals involved in the delivery of the program in the school system. I am hoping that maybe these initiatives coming from the individuals involved in the program might lead to a reasonable opportunity in the community funded by the community. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr.

Speaker, will the minister then consider other recommen dations, and will he consider the recommendation that came out of last night 's me eti ng askin g that the program be maintained for this fiscal year and that a dental health assistant be hired to review the program, and allow people to have input? Those people who deliver the program have not had any input. There has been no consultation. Will he reinstate the funding-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put her question. Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, I know my honourable frien d was unable to attend the mee ting in Minnedosa, but wh en I was at that meeting, I made it very clear to all those who were in attendance that the financial decision of government in terms of being able to maintain the treatment side of the program was not up for reconsideration, that I did not have that kind of flexibility, as my honourable friend requests.

Subsequent to that, Sir, the suggestion was made by one of the superintendents of a neigh bouring school division as to whether government might entertain options in which parents might be able to work within the school division to maintain the program. It is those types of options that we are willing to entertain further investigation of fact and possibility. Fee for Service· Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): I want to tell the minister that school boards and superintendents are very concerned about having to pick up this responsibility. They have enough work to do as it is.

Will the minister assure us that this program he is considering now does not involve a fee for service and that it will be open to all people? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to my honourable friend from Swan River, who was not at the Min nedosa meeting- but she might consult with the member for Kildonan (Mr.

Chomiak) who was, because one of the superintende nts made a suggestion exactly au contraire to what my honourable friend is suggesting now, wherein a superintendent who I believe had a substantial knowledge of how the program has worked made the exact opposite suggestion and asked whether government would consider having school divisions, with cost recovery from parents of children enrolled in the program, be able to explore the option of continuing the program with cost recovery from parents with children enrolled. Mr. Speaker, tha t suggestion was not government's.

That came from a superintendent who was part of the meeting in Minnedosa. School Division Boundary Review Government Commitment Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I was sitting back li stening to the Minister of Education give a verbal diatribe as to why it is that we do not have reform or restructuring of our school divisions. Mr. Speaker, I would argue that it is a question of political will. In fact, when we saw the will of the government to change and restructure City Hall, they were quick to be able to take action.

My question to the Minister of Education: Can she tell this House why that very same political will is not there to restructure the number of school divisions in the city of Winnipeg, in fact, in the province of Manitoba? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Mnlster of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, it is obvious the member has not been very close to the issues of education and has not had the opportunity to know very closely what the issues are that have been

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3447 occupying a great deal of time in terms of education, so let me review them for him again. Last year at the time that we deferred the boundary review, there was in its very first year of operation, a new ed funding formula, and school divisions were in the first year of application. Secondly, the hearings had just been completed for the legislative reform of The Public Schools Act. There had been no analysis of the recommen­ dations and there had been no report issued.

Thirdly, we had not released our plan for Francophone governance and, fourthly, the Task Force on Distance Education had only just been set up and had not even begun its work yet. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, what is clear is this government has no intention of fulfilling an election promise they made to the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, I have been following the issue of education very closely, and the quality of education has been deteriorating under this minister. Mr.

Speaker, my question to the minister is: What is this minister doing specifically to ensure that the quality of education is improving in this province, not continuously going downhill and deteriorating under this particular minister's administration? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, obviously, I reject, as I am sure many Manitobans will, the comments of that member, but I will say to him-and he might be interested in listening further in the Estimates of the Department of Education-that there are a number of initiatives which are underway.

There have been a number of reforms which have begun and have been completed within the past three years to look at education and education reform. There are a number which are also currently in progress. I have said that I will make an announcement regarding the boundary issue shortly. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. Nonpolitical Statement Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for the Interlake have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed) Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake): Mr.

Speaker, it is with pleasure that I wish to inform members of the House, in recognizing a student by the name of Donald Hallett from the Peguis First Nations Reserve who is graduating from Grade 12 from the Peguis Central School this June. Since 1980-81 till 1992-93, Donald has attended and completed his education without missing one day in the 1 0 years that he has attended the school. Mr.

Speaker, the school and his peers are honouring him on June 3 with a special awards night, and I know that members of this House join me in congratulating Donald on this very, very great accomplishment in continuing his education. Thank you. *

(1420) ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce, firstly, a Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources will meet on Tuesday, June 8, 1993, at 7:30p.m. and Wednesday, June 9, 1993, at 7:30 p.m., if necessary, to consider the 1991 and '92 Annual Reports of the Manitoba Telephone System. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable government House leader for that information. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the members of the Legislature whether or not there is a willingness to waive private members' hour. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the will of the House to waive private members' hour? No? Leave is denied. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for the Department of Education and Training; and the honourable member for Seine River (Mrs.

Dacquay) in the Chair for the Department of Environment. *

(1430) COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) EDUCATION AND TRAINING Mr. Deputy Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): Good afternoon. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order.

3448 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 27, 1993 This afternoon, this

section of the Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 255, will resume consideration of the Estimates of Education and Training. When the committ ee last sat It had been considering item 1.(e)(1) on page 34 of the Estimates book. Chairperson's Ruling Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Before we move on, I was just going to bring down my ruling from last week. During the evening sitting of Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 255 on Tuesday, May 25, 1993, the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) used the words "misleading to the public." I had ruled that the words were unparliamentary and had asked him to withdraw.

The honourable member for Dauphin explained that he had not used the words to indicate that the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodrey) was deliberately misleading but that the global figures presented were misleading to the public. I subsequently took the matter under advisement. I reviewed Hansard from that evening and past Speakers' Rulings to provide some guidance on the use of the word "mislead." There have been many instances where the word "mislead" in many different contexts have been ruled both in and out of order.

On October 30, 1 990, the Speaker ruled: "It is very plain that any words that indicate that a Member knowingly or deliberately misled the House are unparliamentary." In my opinion, the phrase used by the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman), that is, "misleading to the public," was not a direct charge that the minister had intentionally or knowingly set out to mislead the public, and is not unparliamentary in the context in which it was used on Tuesday evening. I should have not asked the honourable member for Dauphin to withdraw the phrase, and I apologize.

Having said that, I would like to remind the members of this committee that, although some words may be unp arli amentary one day and not the next, dependent on the context and other factors, the word "mislead" and other words meaning the same thing have caused intervention on the part of the Chair, and I would caution all members to choose their words carefully. *** Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Does the minister have any items to table prior to our beginning today, especially those dealin g with the reserves, surpluses? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I do have some items for tabling this afternoon. The first one was requested and is a list of the Department of Education and Training Secondments for the 1992-93 Fiscal Year. Secondly, I have a Manitoba Education and Training Classification Activity during the fiscal year '92-93, where we were requested to provide information regarding the number of classification requests processed, upward classifications and so on. I would like to table that now. Then, Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I would like to table information regarding Declared Aboriginal Employees in the Department of Education and Training as of the date May 28, 1993, and that information is broken down by division and is also broken down by classification. Then, I would like to table the information from Manitoba Education and Training regarding the directors in the department. This information covers all the areas of Manitoba Education and Training with a numerical

summary of male, female, disabled individuals, native individuals, visible minority individuals. Finally, I would table for the member, as I said that I would, the percentage of 1992-93 Net Operating Expenditures by Division in Descending Order of the percentage. Mr. Plohman: I thank the minister for that information. I wondered if she was also going to provide the FRAME reports, or is that not ready at this time? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it was our understanding that the FRAME reports and that information was to be tabled and available under the line 16.5. *

(1440) Mr. Plohman: If the minister can make it available before that, it might assist the process somewhat. So if there is no reason why it should not be tabled prior to that, then I would ask the minister to consider that. I am not going to push that point at this time

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3449 any further-just to have it considered in terms of facilitating the process. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I wantto ask the minister before we get into this section, it is kind of a preliminary question asked in the House about the Northern Studies Centre. Could the minister indicate what line of her department this would be covered or if indeed, there is provision made for this Northern Studies Centre in this department? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I can tell the member that the funding for this particular area is found in the Department of Education and Training, as was spoken about in the House today. The amount of money is $1 00,000, and the budget line would be found in the post-secondary part of my department under the Advanced Education and Skills Training division. Mr. Plohman: I thank the mini ster for that clarification. That will be helpful.

This particular area deals with the office of the assistant deputy minister, and as I said earlier, the effect of schools funding is an important objective, an expected result of the activities of this particular office. There was some discussion recently regarding, first of all, the Francophone division that will be set up. I am wondering if the minister can indicate for the record what the grant per student, per pupil, is across the province, in other words, if money is being transferred -and I asked the mini ster questions under the policy area about the establishment of a Francophone division.

We had some discussion earlier this week on that, but we did not clarify the figure of dollars that would be associated with any transference. I would assume that this office would be involved in determining what that would be in terms of the transference to the Francophone division from existing divisions, along with the students when they would move to that division. Could the minister give us the precise figure on that? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, during our last discussion, I did explain to the member that the Monnin Committee is now in the process of doing its work with the communities, and, through that, there will be a registration process where parents then determine the registration of their children. We will need to have the results of the Monnin Committee, which will then assist the new school board, when elected, in looking at the registration, looking at the ages of young people registering within the Francophone division. They will be able to look at the issues relating to transportation within the Francophone division.

Then, as a result of that, we would then be able to come with the number for the average per student cost within that division. As I have said to the member before, there is still some work that is being done. It is in progress at the moment. When all of that work is done, then we will be able to provide the information to the member. Mr. Plohman: Maybe it is possible that the minister did not understand my question. I think we could have some information that is available now as opposed to waiting till the Monnin Committee has finished its work.

We are not asking at this particular time for the total dollars, even the total number of students that would be registering with the new school division. I assume that the minister is saying that there will be some indication of that from the Monnin Committee when they make their report, some indication of intention by students or by parents, but that is not what we were asking right at this particular moment.

What I wanted to know is the average cost or average grant per student rather than if it varies per division, which I assume it might-the average amount of the grant, of the per-pupil grant for students in Manitoba that could potentially be included in this school division. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair person, the information that the member asks would best be discussed under 16 .5 at that particular appropriation, but we could perhaps, given a little bit of time, provide the member with an estimated number this afternoon. Mr.

Plohman: Yes, we had calculated a figure dividing the total amount of dollars provided to the public school system by the number of students and came up with a figure. I believe that to be an accurate figure. However, we would not want to use inaccurate information, so if the mini ster can indicate what a good ballpark figure would be, without anyone attempting to hold the minister to within $100 or $200 or $300 per student. Mrs.

Vodrey: I can provide the member with a figure of approximately $4,000, but I would do so with the caution that that information is not being verified by calculation and that is only an estimated number. I

3450 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 would not expect that the member would want to use that very specifically in further discussions. Mr. Plohman: Well, that is the figure that I have been using, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, as a result of the simple calculation that we did. However, I wanted to determine whether the minister's figures were in that same ballpark, or whether there was a great variation.

For example, would that average be, if it was, say, a ballpark average figure-would it be reflective of the majority of the students who would be transferred over to the Francophone division, knowing that the majority of those students are located in the school divisions of St. Vital and St. Boniface and perhaps Seine River? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I will tell the member, as I have said from the beginning, I am not able to tell him that number at the moment. I am not able to see into the future, and I am not able to provide him with that information.

I have explained what is already in progress in terms of the setting up of the Francophone division, and when that work has been done by the Monnin Committee and then the details looked at by the school board, which we expect to be elected this fall coming up, fall of '93, then we will have more information for him. *

(1450) Mr. Plohman: I appreciate the minister not having all of the definitive information, but she is certainly in a position to determine whether that figure is an average figure, is reflective of where the majority of students would come from, because she and her department would know this. I note that the assistant deputy minister's office is concerned about real and perceived equities, and so, therefore, would be fully aware of grants coming from the province by division. You cannot deal with the issue of equity and inequities if you do not have that knowledge and that information.

So the minister is in a position, through this particular office, to supply this committee with information as to per pupil grants that would be provided to, say, the St. Boniface School Division, if I use that as an example. If the $4,000 figure is reflective, then I will accept that. If it is not and if it is, say, $5,000, then I think that is significant. So I am asking the minister if in fact the divisions where most of the students are projected to be transferred from would be reflected by the $4,000 figure, or is it more likely that figure should be higher than that? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, again I can say to the member, as I have said, that I will not speculate. I cannot speculate. We do deal with grants, but those grants are established again when we have a set of pupils, when we have more details on transportation. However, he has asked for information regarding the per pupil cost for some school divisions by way of example, and I can tell him it is $3,700 for St. Boniface and $4,300 for White Horse Plain. Those differences are a reflection of a number of issues including the tax base. Mr.

Plohman: Would the minister know the variance in the per-pupil dollars raised by local taxation for those divisions, or for all divisions in the province? Would it vary from as low as $1 ,000 to as high as $2,000 additionally per pupil? Because I note in the Francophone policy paper that the minister has issued, there has been an indication that these dollars would also be transferred, that dollars raised locally for each of these students would be transferred. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, the member is getting into some details which we would cover in 16.5 when we have the appropriate staff here, with the appropriate information available at that time. At this point, it would really just be speculation. It would simply be an effort to deal with figures which may not be accurate. So I would ask the member that we look at this in 16.5 when we have the appropriate information to discuss it. Mr. Plohman: I do not want to push the minister on this and her staff. It seemed this would be a figure that would be readily available. I am talking about averages. That is why I asked it.

In terms of the money raised locally, that variance would be som ething that would be within the routine knowledge of the minister. However, it seems it is not, so I will move on to another area. If the minister does get the information, an average figure and a variance, I would like to get that as soon as possible. We certainly will be asking that when we come to 16.5 as well. The issue of amalgamation of school divisions or boundary review, has there been an initiation of any of the components of policy in this area by this office that we are dealing with now?

I say that with the thought that, since the assistant deputy minister is

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3451 dealing with the whole area of effective school funding and real and perceived equities, satisfaction of school divisions and so on, indeed that would be something this office would play a major role in. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, as I have said, I have not yet made an announcement on the issue of boundary review. I have also said that I would be looking to make an announcement on the issue of boundary review shortly, within the next while.

I am not able to discuss any potential details relating to that because an announcement has not been made, and there is, at this point, nothing for the member and me to look at continue discussing around such an announcement. Mr. Plohman: Is this office involved in putting together the minister's terms of reference and facts involving costs associated with any review, potential savings, that kind of thing? It would seem that savings from the public school system would be an area where this office would play a major role. I remind the minister that the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) is quoted recently as well saying that there are savings to be made. l can get her the quote from the MAST newsletter that just came out, as well. The Minister of Finance, on an open-line show, on, I believe, April 27, indicated that there were major savings to be had, and this review was, by no means, off. It was something the minister felt was very important to move ahead with as quickly as possible because there were savings to be had. I am paraphrasing his statement but it is very close to what was said, as I recall it in that news letter.

So I understand that the minister has been working on this, and probably does have some in formation to give to the comm ittee. The announcement does not mean that she cannot talk about it, just because the announcement has not been made yet. We are talking about the principles and concepts involved. I am asking, under this line, dealing with this office as it applies to a boundary review, because we are talking about, I would think, costs, here.

Since the minister's office, the assistant deputy minister in this case, is involved in that whole area of equity betwe en school divisions and costs, it is important that we understand the role that his office would be playing in this review and the status of that preparation. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, the issue of boundary review, as I said in the House, was an issue which was deferred by this government.

It was deferred because there were a number of initiatives whic h were in the process, in some cases, of being developed ; some had not even been announced, the details of which had not been announced. Now, as I have said earlier today, there were four, in specific, that I have referred to. I will go over them again. One was the issue of the new ed finance formula. The new ed finance formula was in its first year of application. School divisions were dealing with the new formula, the degree of certainty that we believe it provides for school divisions.

We recognize that it would require some ongoing reshaping ; that is why we kept the committee available to do the work of that ed finance model. That committee did its work, by the way, and some of its recommendations were reflec ted in the ed funding form ula and the announcement this year. Then, I also spoke about the issue of Distance Education Task Force, and that had only just been struck. Obviously, there had been no report and no work done yet on behalf of that committee. That comm ittee has now pro vide d its report to government; that committee's report is now out and is being reviewed.

Then, I also spoke about the legislative reform issue, and the last hearing was only held towards the end of January. As a result of that, we did not have any analysis of that information or any information which was out for the public to examine. Then the fourth issue, as well, was Francophone governance . Our pla n had not ev en been announced. So with that, we did defer the decision. • (1 500) What I have said to this point is that it was only deferred, and I expect to make an announcement on it shortly.

When I do make that announcement, I will be able to provide the member with a great deal of information that he might wish to ask for at that time, but at this ti me, I have not made an announcement regarding it. Mr. Plohman: I am certainly aware that the minister has not made a formal announcement. I thank her for that clarific ation again, a very interesting dissertation and reiteration of what she said in the House today about why times are better for a review now than they might have been a year ago. I am not

3452 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 questioning the minister on the issue of why it is more appropriate now to proceed with this review. Simply, I would assume that the minister would do some preparation prior to making such an announcement and would have some ideas of the concepts she is dealing with and the parameters she wants to have on any review, some contemplation of who would be involved and the format to be involved, something about the timetable and that kind of thing.

All these things would have to be considered, I would think, by the minister and would be some of the things that she would be dealing with in consultation with her staff to come up with a review process that would be acceptable to the general public and to the school divisions throughout the province. We know it is not going to come out of thin air. At least we hope it is not when the minister finally makes the announcement, that she is not just going to kind of dream it up the day before. So we do have a situation here where we are in a preannounce­ ment stage, and there is a lot of work that has to be done.

I am asking about that angle or that aspect of it. Perhaps the minister can just tell us whether she sees a per-pupil saving, in terms of funding, of any review, and has she projected an amount with regard to that? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chai rperson, as the member said, this is a time before any announce­ ment has been made, and in the time before any announcemen t, I would not in any way consider making suggestions, speculations and providing a discussion.

When an announcement is made, then there will be information which I think will answer some questions which the member might wish to put forward at that time, but an announcement has not been made yet. When I do make the announcement and whatever that announcement may be, then I will be able to answer questions the member has at that time. Mr. Plohman: Does the mi ni ste r have any projections on per-pupil savings of amalgamation? Mrs.

Vodrey: It seems the member, whatever the announcement may be, seems to want to prejudge exactly what an outcome might be and want to have some details before there has been any input which the member might wish to be a part of. So I will say again, I have not made an announcement regarding this. I expect to make an announcement regarding it shortly. Atthe time of the announ cement, the memb er will have an opportunity to ask a number of questions, and I expect I will be able to provide some information for him at that time. Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, the reason I ask that, of course, is the Mini ster of Finance (Mr. Manness) did state that there are savings to be made and it is a quote from his statement. There seems to be a preoccupation with savings. I would assu me that this is one of the major consider ations of the government in terms of boundary review. So I ask her whether she has a projection since the Minister of Finance has stated that there are savings to be made, whether she knows whether they have been quantified in any studies.

If the minister does not want to say she is including that consideration in her announcement that is to come, fine, do not say it, but the point is I want to know whether this office has been involved in any projections with regard to savings that could be achieved as a result of amalgamation. It is a simple question, and I think the minister should be able to answer that. (Mr. Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair) Mrs. Vodrey: The member is questioning me on comments made by my- colleague at a time when I was not present, and I am afraid I do not know exactly what my colleague said.

I was not there. If he has those questions, he might like to ask that colleague in that colleague's Estimates any further details or background as to why those comments were made. What I have said today is that I expect to make an announcement shortly, and when I make that announcement, I will make sure there is information which the member would like, and we will be able to discuss it further at that time. Mr. Plohman: Well, does the minister then-if she does not want to comment on her colleague's comm ents, would she be able to give a direct answer on her opinion?

Rather than basing it on somebody else's opinion, this is the minister's opinion I am asking for as a result of any research and studies she may have had done by her department.

May 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3453 Does she have any projections on potential additional costs or savings as a result of any bounda ry review or amalgama tion of school divisions? Mrs. Vodrey: Again, the member wishes to jump ahead of any information which might be provided in an announcement, and I have said to him, and I think that I can only say it again, I expect to make an announcement shortly. When I do make that announcement, then we will be able to look at exactly what is included in that announcement, and I will be able to answer questions regarding that announcement. Mr.

Plohman: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chair­ person, does the minister not want to consult with anyone regarding this announcement prior to doing it? Mrs. Vodrey: Again-w ell, let us go over it again. As I have explained to the member, I will be making an announcement shortly, and when we have a chance to look at that announcement and what is included in that announcement, then the member may wish to ask some questions at that time. Mr. Plohman: Prior to making the announcement, who is the minister consulting with? Mrs. Vodrey: Again, the answer remains the same.

When I provide the information at the time of the announcement, then we will be able to discuss the information contained in the announcement, and until an announcement is made, I am not able to provide any further information to the member. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, ! am a very patient person, and I can just keep, you know, probing the minister with these questions and she will find it, I think, to her advantage to deal with them. They are, as the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) has stated, legitimate questions. I am not asking the mi n ister wha t will be in the announcement.

She may say that she is shelving it until after the next election . She may say that she is going to proceed before the election. She may say she is proceeding immediately. She did not want to give me those details of timetable and so on. So what I am asking her now, whom is she consulting with prior to making the announcement? The minister always talks about partnership. • (1 510) An Honourable Member: Focus groups. Mr. Plohman: Well, she has talked about focus groups, and that may be all the consultation that is taking place, but if it is focus groups, then say so. Is she consulting with the trustees on this?

Is she consulting with the Teachers' Society? These are the partners that the minis ter has mentioned previously in the Estimates process. She talked about the par tne rsh ip. Is she talking with superin tendents prior to this? Whom is she consulting with? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Acting Deputy Chair, as I have said to the member, I do have good discussions on a regular basis with partners in education. ! have the opportunity to speak on a regular basis with the Manitoba Teachers' Society, school trustees, school supe rint ende nts, home and school parent-t eachers associations, and visits when I go into schools, when I go into the colleges and universities, and when I am in the community. So there is a great deal of opportunity for people to raise a number of issues with me.

However, the details of any announcement that will be made in the near future will have to wait until the time of the announcement. Mr. Plohman: We certainly understand that the minister now is very reluctant to give any details of whether she will be making an announcement that says there is a review coming or there is no review coming. Howeve r, the reports in the Free Press today, from the quotes from the minister, indicate that the review is still on. The Finance minister has stated it is certainly something the minister is pressing ahead with at the appropriate time.

We have legitimate concerns in the opposition, representing the public interest, ensuring that the minister is doing her job in the interests of the public. That is our job to ensure that the minister is doing that, at least to our best ability. So it is important we know that the minister is not too far along on any announcement she makes and perhaps gets down the road with imposing certain things as opposed to a true consultative review involving all the partners of education. I am concerned the mi ni ster may, in fact, announce some decisions as opposed to consulting on a review.

That is why we want to ask these questions now before an announcemen t is made, not ask after an announcement is made or to give advice. It is too late then. We need to have an

3454 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 understanding of what process the minister is going through to get to the announcement. I ask her to provide that information at the present time, as to, for example, the assistant deputy minister's office at the present time. How is this offi ce in volved in the prepar ation for tha t announcement? Are financial matters a major consideration in that preparation? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, let me start with the last question first. The content of any announcement would be revealed at the time of the announcement.

The member asks what kinds of things might be considered if there is such an announcement to provide the review. Obviously, I would provide that information at the time of any such an nounce men t, so that in forma tion is information which is yet to come. The memb er is speculating out loud about perhaps outcomes, and that is purely speculation, and I think it is important to look at it as speculation and not fact. He is speculating out loud. He is wondering out loud about possible outcomes, about wha t may happe n, abo ut how any such announcement might be developed.

I have provided the information that I am able to, and that is to say, that a year ago, slightly over a year ago, boundary review was deferred. As he heard from me in the House yesterday, and obviously from some conversation that he may have had with another minister, this government did make a promise in 19 90 that we were interested in looking at boundary review. We have said, as of yesterday, that I exp ect to make an announcement on boundary review in the very near future. That is the information that is available at this time.

It relates to our government's position, and it relates to a position a year ago of deferral. I have explained that in the deferral there were a number of reasons for deferral at that time. Now I have said that an announcement is to be expected shortly. When I make that announcement, the contents will be available to the member. We will be able to have a more full discussion at that time around whateve r the content of that announcement is. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I hope we will because the minister is certainly not being very forthcoming with this committee at the present time.

The questions I am asking are very legitimate on this important issue. I guess I would just lik e to ask the mi nis ter whether she is consulting, at this time, on the issue of boundary review with school boards in the province prior to making any announcement. Mrs. Vodrey: I would remind the member that I do have a very strong record of consultation, and that I do have regular meetings. If there is any question around that legislative reform, the reform of The Public Schools Act, never before has there been a public consultation on that reform.

The reforms of the past have been done with out any public consultation; therefore, with the issue of legislative reform now, there has been public consultation. As I have said, there have been the opinions of over 6,000 Manitobans who have come forward and who have given their ideas of what they believe the reform of The Public Schools Act should look like. That was important information. That is important information, because it has allowed Manitobans to say what they believe is important before legislation is written, and then before it requires a great deal of discussion during comm ittee hearing process.

This allo wed Manitobans to say from the beginning where they believed what the reform of The Public Schools Act might look like and what it should look like. So I would say that there has certainly been consultation on a number of issues. In the matter of the school boundary issue, any further information will come forward at the time of the announcement. Mr.

Plohman: Can the minister indicate whether the reform that she talked about which resulted in the report on the panel on education legislation reform, whether the recommendation on school boundaries is a consideration in the process that the minister is going through right at the present time, prior to her announcement? (Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair) Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. De puty Chai rperson, the recommendation that comes forward from the panel on education legisla tion reform was again a comment.

It was outside of the specific scope that that committee was looking at in terms of where Man itobans believe they would like to see amendments to The Public Schools Act. They have made a comment on information which Manitobans have provided for them. How this relates to the announcement that I might make in the next short while, we will have to wait until we see the announcement.

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3455 Mr. Plohman: The minister does not even want to tell this committee whether she believes that her philo sophy with regard to her review is consistent with what is being recommended here or what is being noted as a comment by the panel. I point out to her that they are suggesting that the publ ic wants a special comm ission. In the newspaper today, the minister said she is looking at a special commission. She is quo ted by Don Cam pbell that she is lo oking at a special commission.

That is more information than the minister has been prepared-! would have to characterize her com men ts in the Free Press as being qu ite forthcoming compared to what the committee is getting here. The minister seems to have clammed right up on this issue as she perhaps, in a moment of disregard for the conseq uences, decided to make some comments on the review. She talked about the idea of a commission. I want to ask the- Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. * (1 520) Point of Order Mrs. Vodrey: On a point of order, Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I do not believe it is appropriate for members to speculate on a frame of mind or on motivation in terms of answering. I believe the member is doing that right now. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The honourable minister did not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. *** Mr. Plohman: Can the minister indicate then-1 think the minister's actions are something that anyone can draw conclusions about with regard to this, the contrast betwe en what was said in the paper and what is being said in this Chamber -no thing in the committee and some speculation in the media.

There is the difference. I just wanted to ask the minister, is that one of the considerations then, a special commission, or has that been ruled out by the minister? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, in the committee this afternoon, I have given information to the member regarding reasons for deferral, what has been accomplis hed by the Department of Education since the time of the deferral.

I have outlined four specific areas, some were not even announced at the time of the deferral, which have now been announced and are very close to being accom pli shed, so that information has been covered this afternoon. I have also this afternoon explained to the member that I will be making an announcement shortly in response to a question that was posed yesterday by a reporter in the Free Press.

The que stion specifically has not been posed this afternoon, but the information was, if there was to be an announcement on a boundary review, would it be possible that among the options which might be considered for such a review if it was announced, would it be perhaps a commission? At the time, I said a commission would be a possibility if in fact that was the announcement. Howeve r, I have said an announcement has not been made. Until the announcement is made, any details about the content of that announcement, what it would be, will have to wait un til the announcement is made. Mr.

Plohman: The mi nis ter has ma de an announcement through her statements that this is just a deferral and theref ore a review and a campaign promise by the government in the election campaign of '91 is still on. In other wor ds, it is just a deferral. That is clearly an announcement that a review is pending. The exac t details of that announcement are what is at issue here in terms of whether it will include a commission or not, whether there will be consultation or not and all of those kinds of things.

So the minister cannot backtrack to the point of saying now that she cannot even tell this committee whether she is going to have a review or not. That clearly has already been stated so hiding from that fact is fruitless. I want to ask the minister now as she contemplates this announcement whether in fact the governance issues and education services as outlined as a concern and identified as a concern, especially in rural areas, by the panel in their comment in their report on legis lative reform will be taken into consideration in drawing up the terms of reference that will be included in the announcement. Mrs.

Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, I do not want to make this difficult for the member; sincerely, I do not want to make this difficult for the member; but I will say that until the announcement

3456 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 93 is made, it is very difficult for us to discuss these issues. If he is asking, is government concerned about service in rural areas, has government been looking at issues in relation to service in rural areas, I will tell him, yes, we have. That is why last year we struck the Task Force on Distance Education and I have explained to the member that the third and final report of the Task Force on Distance Education has been released and we are expecting that it will be examined by school divisions.

We understand that as we have spoken about before during this Estimates process that the issue of Dis tance Educ ation is very im portant to particularly rural and northern Manitoba, though we have also unde rstood that Distance Education certainly has an applic ation within the city of Winnipeg. We have spoken about, as recently as Monday, the Distance Education issues being integrated within our PDSS

section of the division of the Department of Education and Training because it would be important that the curriculum development and Distance Education be both in consideration at the same time. So if he is looking specifically at concerns and action being taken to support rural schools and northern schools in Manitoba, I can tell him that that action is already underway, and we have already completed the work of the Distance Education Task Force. If he wishes to ask further how that may relate to an upcoming announcement, we will have to wait until the announcement is made. Mr. Plohman: Under the objective of this particular

section of the department: implemen tation and evaluation of policies for the Administration and Finance and Support to Schools divisions, what role is this

section of the dep artment playing in preparation for a position on boundary review? Mrs. Vodrey: I just wonder if I could ask the member to refer to that

section again, please? Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, on page 29 of the Supplem entary Estimates booklet, Financial and Administrative Services, Office of the Assistant Dep uty Minis ter, Objec tives, second line, implemen tation and evaluation of policies-lea ving out, processes, operations and services. I did not quo te that. I ju st said, impl em entation and evaluation of policie s for the Administration and Finance and Support to Schools divisions. I asked the minister, referring to that objective from page 29 for this

section of the department, what role this

section of the department is playing in preparation for a position on boundary review? Mrs. Vodrey: This particular set of objectives refers to our school funding model, and that is where the work is particularly tied in to this objective. Mr. Plohman: Funding models are an integral part of the fu nction of any school division, and development of policies with regard to boundary reviews or configurations are tied very closely to that. That is why I asked the minister the question, whether this

section is playing any role in developing a position on that. If the minister is saying no, there is no role being played, then, fine, I will ask these questions dealing with the role under another section. Mrs. Vodrey: The answer is no. Again, further information regarding the announcement will have to be discussed at the time of the announcement. Mr. Plohman: Does the minister have any analysis from this

section on per-pupil costs or savings of the boundary question? * (1 530) Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, I have answered this question several times this afternoon about any of this information, and I have explained that when, in fact, there is an announce­ ment which I have said to the member will be shortly, then we will be able to discuss anything further, relating to the content of that announcement. Mr. Plohman: The minis ter tabled a lis t of accu mula ted sur pluses of divisions, without identifying them, as the percentage of their net operating expenditures.

Has the minister discussed with her staff the fate of operating surpluses under a revised boundary configuration? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the answer is no. Mr. Plohman: Can the minister tell us what her position is on surpluses under a revised boundary configuration for Manitoba school divisions? Mrs. Vodrey: Again, as I have said when we discussed the issue of surpluses into the future in the past, no. lt is very difficult to speculate in general. I did make that point when we discussed this the last time we were sitting.

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3457 The information regarding surpluses in any proposed announcement I will be making shortly I am not going to comment on at the moment, because we do not have that announcement before us. Mr. Plohman: In preparation for the announce­ ment, is the minister, in a formal way, consulting with anyone outside of her department? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, this is a question which has been asked this afternoon and which I have answered this afternoon. I am prepared to answer again, if that would be helpful.

The answer is I have had, since I have been minister, a great deal of contact with all of the educational organizations and also parents and parent-te acher home and school associations, also with individual parents, parent councils and Manitobans. Since I have been minister, I have spent a great deal of time making sure I have that kind of contact with Manitobans. So I can tell him that this contact is ongoing. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we know the minister has talked with people in education, and from time to time, yes, as circumstances develop, it can be done very informally.

I am asking about formal consultation with anyone, any groups, outside her de par tm en t in preparing the announcement on boundary review. Mrs. Vodrey: The answer remains the same. The answer is that there is consultation going on, on a regular basis, of issues of interest to the partners in education, to parents, to individual schools, to individual Manitobans. There is information brought forward frequently regarding issues that people feel are im portant.

I can tell him again that the consultation and the discussion, which I think is very important-it was spoken about a great deal today -is important and is ongoing and then any further information regarding a proposed announcement would come at the time of the announcement. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the minister is saying that the announcement is being developed and the position by her staff in the department? Mrs.

Vodrey: What I said was that as Minister of Education I have contact with many Manitobans and with the educational partners, as we all do as MLAs and as elected individuals, and certainly as Minister of Education, I have contact as well. Mr. Plohman: Has the mi niste r put out any proposals at all for feedback yet on this issue prior to making the announcement? Mrs. Vodrey: The member would like to get the in formation tha t would be cont ai ned in an announcement through some other method.

I have expl aine d to him that I will be making the announcement shortly and that when I make the announcement there will be information. The member might like to ask questions at that time. I know he has been speculating out loud about what that announcement might be. He has even been hypot hesizing about portions of the announcement. I have been again attempting to provide him with the answers that are available before the time the announcement is made, but now the information that I believe he would be seeking would be contained within the announcement. Mr.

Plohman: I am certainly disappoi nted in the minister's unwilli ngness to be forthcoming in any way, shape or form in this. I think this is illus trative of the general mode of operation by this minister's secretive approach to things, dropping them on the public without any outside consultation. As much as the minister says that there is consultation, we have not seen any evidence of that from the min iste r's ans wers, any evidenc e whatsoeve r from any groups outside her own staff within her department who have been consulted in coming up with her final announcement.

It would seem to me that the min ister has either not consulted or is choosing to hide relevant information from the Legislature and the committee. The minister should realize that is not her role and that is not proper protocol and ethics by a minister of the Crown when coming before the committee. Point of Order Mrs. Vodrey: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, first of all, I say nonsense to everything the member has said so far. I would also like a clarification of the member's accusation of unethical behaviour. Mr. Plohman: If the minister does not have it clear already, I think- Mr.

Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable minister did not have a point of order, but I would ask all members to choose their words very carefully so that we do not provoke any animosities here.

3458 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 *** Mr. Plohman: I certainly would not want to do that, Mr. Deputy Chair. As I have indicated, the minister has not been forthcoming and is not doing her position any favours in terms of its position in the Legislature. Certainly, we are not pleased with that, and I do not think the public will be either. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I want to­ * (1 540) Point of Order Mrs. Vodrey: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Chai rperson, before we move on the issue of forthcoming, the member simply wants to have the announcement before the announcem ent is made. Mr.

Deputy Chairperson: The honourable minister did not have a point of order. * * * Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the minister continues to abuse the rules of the House by interjecting with non-points of order, and she knows that very well after being here now a couple of years. She certainly should know what a point of order is. The minister knows as well that i have not asked her for the announcement. What we have asked is what preparation, what consultation she has done, whether she has considered certain pieces of information.

She has refused to answer every one of those questions, and we could go around this thing for hours. I am prepared to do that. I think, and I am sure my colleagues agree, that this minister has to have more respect for the Legislature. I say that seriously. More respect, it is not a game. It is a time to supply information, and that is what is lacking in the minister's attitude towards what is happening at this committee, a lack of respect for the process and for the Legislature of Manitoba and the parliamentary process. That is what I am raising with the minister. I could not say that more seriously.

It is clear that those aspects that I have asked about are important aspects for the public to consider prior to any announcement, and that is what the minister has a responsibility to live up to in terms of her position as minister. I am going to indicate to the minister that this will not serve her we ll, this secretive approach to these major concerns. As much as I would like to continue this and would be quite willing to and patient to do this, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am going to move on and, at the same time, note the complete reluctance of the minister to provide forthcoming answers to this committee.

Point of Order Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to indicate that certainly a member of the Legislature who has been a member of government and a cabinet minister indeed should under stand the process of the Legislature . He knows full well that when any government or any minister of any government is making an announcement, indeed that announce­ ment is made and then members of the opposition do have the opportunity to ask questions. So the minister is within her right. I guess I might just like to point out- Mr.

Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable minister did not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. *** Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The honourable member for Osborne, on a point of order. Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): No, I am just going to ask a question. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Just one minute then. The honourable minister, on another point of order. Mrs. Mitchelson: No, not on a point of order. l have my hand up to speak. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, not then on a point of order, but just on a comment.

We have a member of the official opposition who is the critic who is condemning a minister of the government for many different aspects that fall under her responsibility. I might just like to comment and say that when the critic for Education was the Minister of Highways, I might ask him to make some comment on how much consultation he did prior to building the bridge north of Selkirk to nowhere, which cost the taxpayers of Manitoba some $27 million to $30 million? We have a member of a government that was turfed out that was extremely irresponsible in making that decision.

I have not checked back through Hansard and the records and the kind of information that the then-Minister of Highways did

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3459 put on the record as to who he consulted and how many Manitobans actually supported that decision and how many people indeed today travel over that bridge that was built that went absolutely nowhere. So we have a- Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. Could I ask the honourable members to deal with the line that we are on. That is Financial and Administrative Services. I think the bridge issue falls under the Department of Highways. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Deput y Chairperson, I actually would like to make a serious intervention here, if I might.

We are in this committee room. We have been in this committee room for some 20-odd hours on this particular department. We have a bunch of staff from the department who are being forced to sit through this. I agree with what the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship said and what the minister has said to date that a minister should not be forced to reveal in advance policy decisions that may simply be in formulation. That is not what the member is asking for. I think this is just generating into a farce. I think it is a waste of everybody's time.

The member is asking clearly, what process did you go through; who did you talk to; how are you arriving at that? I think those are legi timate questions. I think if all we are going to do is sit here and play word games, we should shut the process down and go home. Surely, there is a role in the Estimates process for people to ask legitimate questions and receive honest answers. Otherwise, I mean this whole business that we are engaged in right now is discredited.

To the extent the member asks questions that he knows he should not be asking, I would grant the minister some leeway, but I would like to hear a few answers to some legitimate questions. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: 1. (

e) Financial and Administrative Services (1 ) Salaries $903,800. Mr. Plohman: Is this the Internal Audit section? Have we passed that line? Internal Audit is also covered under this as well, is it not? Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Yes, it is. Mr. Plohman: Yes, I want to ask the minister, with the hope of course that we will get more forthcoming answers from this minister, whether she could give us a review of the audits that were completed under this

section this past year and some indication of some of the findings. We will be asking more detailed questions on that. So if the minister is able to provide some of that to us atthis time--1 understand thatfor the next year, for the year coming up, Workforce 2000-as printed in the Supplemen tary Esti mates-S tevenson Aviation Cen tre , Prof essional Cer tification, Administration, Pupil Transpor tation and New Careers will be audited. Could the minister give us a report on this past year's activities in this area? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I would like to start by introducing Jane Holatko who is the Director of Internal Audit and who has joined us at the table. In terms of the audits for the Department of Education and Training for the year 19 92-93, they include the Manitoba School for the Deaf, Distance Education and Technology Branch, Assiniboine Com mu ni ty College, Red River Com muni ty College, Keewati n Commu nity College, Program Analysis, Coordination and Support branch of the PACE Training division and the Post- Secondary Car eer Deve lopment and Adult Co nti nuin g Education branch. The last two are in process.

In addition, there were general audit certifications done in this past year, as well. Mr. Plohman: Can the minister give us a review of the Distance Education audit? Obviously, that

section was elimi nated in this year's budget. Was that as a result of anything that came out of the audit? Mrs. Vodrey: No, the restructuring of that particular branch was not as a result of the audit, and the restructuring of that particular area was, again, as I have spoken about, an effort to bring the work of the Distance Education and Technology Branch in as a part of our Program Development and Support Services division. * (1 550) Mr.

Plohman: Was there any contemplation of elimina ting this division when this internal audit was begun because, obviously, the work was done for nothing if the division is gone? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the audits that are done are done to improve management pr actice. They lo ok at in formation such as mana gemen t pr ocess es, legis lative and

3460 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 1993 administrative requirements, financial reporting and controls. That was the work of these audits. However, the audits do not include decisions of government policy in terms of the restructuring which has been done with the Distance Education and Technology Branch which does integrate it much more fully with our Program Development and Support Services work. Mr. Plohman: I did say that the division was elimina ted, and, of course, that is not true. There are several-a large number of staff; I take it 37 staff remaining versus 49 the previous year.

Obviously, the work is still ongoing. However, the audit was as of the operation of the branch at that particular time as opposed to what it might exist at the present time. I asked the minister whether there was any contemp lation of those changes prior to deciding on which sections would be audited this year. Was that a consideration in determining whether this

section would be audited? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, the auditing that was done on the Distance Education and Technology Branch was part of a regular audit cycle, and, obviously, the auditing can only be done on what exists currently and it cannot be done on what may exist in the future. Mr. Plohman: The minister just said earlier, and as I know , the internal audit to work as it was set up when we were in government- the internal audit function was set up in a number of departments throughout the '80s.

I do not know whether Education was one of them, but certainly most departments were established with an internal audit function. It was to improve management and the internal workings of the branches that were selected for audit.

This was done on a rotationary basis, I would think, throughout the whole department over a number of years with a few branches every year, but that contrasts somewhat with what the minister just said that, obviously, the audit could only be done on what existed at the present time-a t that time-not what was going to exist in the future, but there are recommendations made about what will exist in the future, what changes should be made. I would ask, then, whether the changes that were made wer e consistent with what the audit had identified for improvements. Mrs.

Vodrey: The audit, then, as the member knows, really deals with the issues of management practice, not necessarily the issue of configuration or staffing. I am informed that, as a result of internal audit now, they are in the process of reviewing and doing a follow-up of the audit recommendations. Though Distance Education has been integrated, there is still, as I would remind the member, the Winkler area. So the results of the audit process are being followed up, but I would remind him that they focus on issues relating to management practice and not policy decision. Mr. Plohman: Yes, Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, as I understand it, they also deal with adherence to legislative requirements, on the part of the branches that are being audited in the adequacy of financial reporting. Can the minister indicate, for each of these branches, the major recommendations, or would she be prepared to table those on the workings of the branches that were audited this past year? Mrs. Vodrey: I believe the member was asking for the recommendations of the internal audit as they looked at the Distance Education and Technology Branch.

What some of the recommendations were: An im proved program pri oritization su pported by cost-benefit analysis, a formal plan of long- and short-term resource needs, review of Distance Education, review of funding mechanisms. The recomm endation also was improved linkage of operational and financial planning.

We were also recommended to look at consistency and provincial perspective of the plans and policy for Distance Education and Technol ogy course development, delivery, funding and other su pport, also, the es tablishment of dep ar tment al re porting mechanisms based on the role of Distance Education and Technology, and formal evaluations and business case reviews of major new initiatives.

We also were to look at improved internal controls, financial monitoring and accountability of contracts and partnership agreements, use of gross accounting procedures for the Manitoba satellite network, expenditures supported by appropriate contracts and sufficient invoice detail, review and realignment of the ISP Winkler staff workload , and also improved program budgets, proper invoice coding to program areas and monitoring at the

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3461 program unit level, and decisions on the ISP inventory and student record systems. Mr. Plohman: I asked the minister if she could table those for each of the audits. Can she do that? Mrs. Vodrey: I am prepared to table those results, and I will table them at the next sitting. * (1 600) Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Deputy Chair, I believe last year, this

section conducted an audit of the Labour Market Policy unit. I wonder if we could hear a discussion of the results of that. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Cha irper son , I am informed that it was not a specific audit of the labour market area, but rather it was a review and an audit of what was the former PACS area, policy analysis and co-ord ination area. I am informed right now that the work relating to that area is in a draft report stage. Ms. Friesen: I belie ve last year's Estim ates suggested that there was a separate audit to be done of the Labour Market Policy unit. I am just trying to look for it in the book.

Was that a mistake or were plans changed in the middle? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Cha irperson, I am informed there has not been any change, that the audit was for the policy analysis and co-ordination unit, the former PACS and the labour market area is a portion of that unit as it was structured at the last Estimate's process, and, therefore, it would have been part of a review of that total area. Ms. Friesen: When does the minister expect that to be completed? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there is a process when the draft report is done.

We expect, because it is in part of that process, to have the final information in about a month's time. Ms. Friesen: Would the minister be tabling that when it is available? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair person, I am in formed tha t those reports are in ternal to government. Howeve r, I am tabling this year some

summary information of the com pleted areas and would be prepared to table, whether it be Estimates next year, the similar kinds of

summary information relating to that area. Ms. Friesen: I am interested in the

section that would deal with the Labour Market Policy unit. I wonder if the minister could tell me, since she has the staff here, the kinds of questions that were being asked in that unit. How many people were you evaluating? What level of evaluation is it? Is it an audit which looks at results? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, the audit which is done by the internal auditor is not an evaluation of the effectiveness of a program. The auditor informs me, again, as I believe it has been stated before, the auditor does not evaluate people or programs.

The auditor does examine management process and also financial controls. Ms. Friesen: Then in the evalua tion of the management process In that particular unit, would there be any evaluation of what appears to be the absence of any labour policy, strategy, document, anything available to the public? Where is the management process in that unit that is not leading to the presentation of any labour market strategy? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, again, the auditor in Internal Audit does not evalu ate program outcomes, and so would not be looking at that specific issue but instead looks at the management practices and the controls. They look at issues such as the setting of objectives: are objectives defined and understood? They look at issues of planning: does a planning process take place, and is it effecti ve? They look at program review and evaluation : are programs reviewed on a periodic basis and any required adjustments made?

They look at program efficiency and effectiveness to say: are criteria set and monitored in order to assess a program's efficiency and effectiveness? They also look at areas such as financial reporting and controls, and they look at the reporting and monitoring, financial planning, internal controls and checks. They look at protection of assets, central government financial control procedures and policies. Ms. Friesen: I am sure since the minister has already a draft version of this report she could tell us what the evaluation is of the planning process in the Labour Market Policy unit. Mrs.

Vodrey: No, I do not have a copy of the draft report. The report in the process is sent to the assistant deputy minister of that area, and the assistant deputy minister of that area is reviewing it, and then it is passed on to the deputy minister. So we are not at the stage where I have a draft report. Ms. Friesen: Do we have the staff here who conducted that evaluation? * (1 610 )

3462 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 27, 19 93 Mrs. Vodrey: I did introduce Jane Holatko who is the director of the area. She is of course in charge of the audit. The staff member who conducted the audit is not here. Again, I just would say that it is important in the matter of an audit that there is some separateness in terms of the practice and that we have to be careful in terms of what we are asking the auditor to comment on in terms of the line of questioning the member is pursuing. Ms.

Friesen: So we do in fact have the supervisor here who presumably laid out the questions and supervised the production of that particular report. As the mini ster knows, I have made many attempts in Question Period and at other times in fact to find any kind of strategy from the Labour Market Policy unit, to find any kind of reports. So this is not a new question on my part of having asked about the effectiveness and the planning and the goals and where this unit is going.

So now that we do have somebody here who has met with that unit, who has posed some questions, it seems to me it might be helpful if we could have a sense of where the planning and the goals and the efficiency of that unit are. (Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair) Mrs. Vodrey: The issue of the labour market policy which flows or governs that plan is best looked at under 16 .4. The auditor, as I have explained, does work relating to the management practice.

The auditor would not be able to comment on the issue that the member is asking and that is the issue of what exactly the work has been within that area. We can discuss that work when we do get to 16 .4. Ms. Friesen: But since we do have the staff here in audit, and what I am trying to get at, and I will certainly do that when we get to this unit later, is to try and understand why there has been no labour market strategy from this government at a time of recession, at a time of educational change, at a time when most Manitobans are really fearing for their educational and labour future.

So it is a major issue, I think, for Manitobans. Perhaps here we can elimin ate one reason for the absence of that strategy. Is it a management problem'? Is there a difficulty there? You have done an audit. Does it show any difficulty? If it does not, then we can eliminate the management aspect. And when we come to the other

section which looks at the unit itself, then we can look for other causes. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, first of all, I completely reject the member's statement of no policy. I completely reject that. We have been speaking about the work that has been done by that unit over some time. I simply point to the reorganization of the post-secondary side of the department. I point to the signing of the Canada-Man itoba Labour Force Development Agreement. I point to The Colleges Act and the colleges moving to governance.

There certainly has been a lot of work done in that area, and we can certainly examine the work that has been done in that area when we get to the budget line. In terms ofthe Internal Audit, as I have explained , the director of that area is here. She has explained. She has provided the information to me and I to the member of exactly where in the process the internal audit rep ort is and that she would not be commenting on the issues that the member is asking. Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is the minister I am asking to comment.

I am asking her to comment on the management and the efficiency of her Labour Market Policy unit, which she has done an audit of and whose audit staff she now has with her in the room. The mini ster, for example, mentioned the signing of the Canada-Manitoba Labou r Force Development Agreement some years after other provinces have signed and certainly two years in delay from the documen ts that we have had in this process. In 19 91 , it appeared that some distance had been gone towards the signin g of that agreement.

Two years later and with only a year left to run in the program, six months of which is going to go into planning, we have just begun to look, in this province, at a labour market development plan. Here is an audit which looks at efficiency. Is this efficient? The minister wants to parade it as an element of inefficiency. Well , I would like to see the audit and hear from her perspective whether this was an efficient way to pr oceed with the development of the Canada-Manitoba Labour Force Agreement. (Mrs. Shirley Render, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair) Mrs.

Vodrey: Madam Acting Deputy Chairperson, it seems that the member would like to speak about the process that we went through in terms of the signing of the agreement and what in fact we did in

May 27, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3463 terms of the signing of the agreement. I am more than happy to talk about that and the decisions that were made and the negotiations that occurred within the negotiation for the Canada-Manitoba Labour Force Development Agreement. As I have said before, in the process of signing, many provinces did not sign at exactly the time that the agreement came into effect. It did not affect the funds flowing. We can look at any effect that the member might be concerned about in terms of the signing of that agreement. However, the agreement is now signed.

We can talk when we get to that budget line around the issues that were negotiated by Manitoba, but I h ave made a number of them clear. I spoke about wanting the recognition of our colleges with in our Man itoba Labour Force Developmen t Agreement. I have spoken about a numb er of issues which are contained in that agreement. It was important to Manitoba that the agreement reflect the interests of Manitobans. The member seems to have some trouble with that. She seems to feel that we should have just signed an agreement as it was presented, and that by one example.

So I have let her know that that was not our position and that we certainly did some negotiating. Again, in terms of the overall labour market strategy , there has been information coming forward. I have also explained when we have discussed it in the past that the labour market strategy, though it is developed from within the Department of Education and Training, there is also an opportunity to talk with other gove rnment departments that would be important in terms of developing the labour market strategy.

Also from that area, in co-operation with the federal gov ernment, we produ ced Man itoba Pr ospec ts , which pr ov ided informa tion to Manitobans who are looking at labour market forecasts for professions and for the kind of work that they might like to do. So there has been information whic h has come from that particular department. I am more than prepared to talk about it in greater detail. When that detail is discussed and the me mber has full information, we can then perhaps continue on with her concerns about-or any concerns which she might express. Ms.

Friesen: Madam Acting Deputy Chairperson, the issue we are looking at here is an internal audit of a unit which, to me and to other Manitobans, seems to have been very unproductive. I am trying to elimi nate some of the reasons for that lack of productivity. * (1 620) You have done an audit which has looked at management, which has looked at planning, at goals, at efficiency and effectiveness. You had a Labour Force Development Agreement, which was ready to be signed in 19 91 , not the earliest but by no means the latest at that point.

Then between 1 991 and '93 it seemed from the outside that nothing happened in that unit. Nothing happened with the signing of tha t Labour Force Development Agreement except, yes, the minister says that money flowed. Yes, money did flow. One of the pu rposes of that Labour Force Development Agreement, in fact, is to co-ordinate the pur chasing of policies, to co-ordinate the attitudes and the relationships with communi ty colleges and with post-s econdary education.

What happened in those two years was, in fact, the reduction of our commu nity colleges, the withdrawal from cou rses and programs by the fede ral government without any co-ordination. That is the problem, and we are suffering with that now, so where is the efficiency in the management in this particular