MG-8048 Fourth 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. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLII No. 74 • 1:30 p.m., TUESDAY, JUNE 1,1993 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, 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. MITCHELSON, 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 Wellington 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 ..

3653 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday,June 1,1993 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDIN GS PRESENTING PETITIONS Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Jeffrey Monias, Corey Monias, Maggie 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. Mr. Oscar Lathlln (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Ovide Mercredi, Phil Fontaine, Sydney Garrioch and others requesting the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Donna Guerette, Marilyn Halbert, Yvonne Sanderson and others requesting the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment centre in northern Manitoba. Mr. George HI ekes (Point Douglas): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Bob Brightnose, Bernice Scatch, Nora Mcleod and others requesting the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, I bet to present the petition of Yvonne Manoakeesick, Vincent Mason, Diana Wood and others requesting the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to consider making, as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. *** Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River) : Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Harley Bradley, Laurel Palosaari, James K. Anderson and oth ers requesting the Manitoba Minister of Agriculture (Mr.

Findlay) to consider conducting a plebiscite of Manitoba's farmers as soon as possible on the issue of removing barley from the jurisdiction of the Canadian Wheat Board. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Hickes). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr. Clerk (William Remnant}: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS there is a very serious solvent abuse problem in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS according to the RCMP over 100 crimes in Thompson alone in 1992 were linked to solvent abuse; and

WHEREAS there are no facilities to deal with solvent abuse victims in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS for over three years, the provincial government failed to proclaim the private member's anti-sniff bill passed by the Legislature and is now proposing to criminalize minors buying solvents even though there are no treatment facilities in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS for nine years, the 25 Chiefs who comprise the Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak, supported by medical officials, police and the area Member of Parliament, have proposed a pilot treatment project known as the Native Youth Medicine Lodge; and

WHEREAS successive federal Ministers of Health have failed to respond to this issue with a commitment; and

WHEREAS the Manitoba provincial government has a responsibility to ensure that there is adequate treatment for solvent abuse. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier to consider making as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba.

3654 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Dewar). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr. Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS there is a very serious solvent abuse problem in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS according to the RCMP over 100 crimes in Thompson alone in 1992 were linked to solvent abuse; and

WHEREAS there are no facilities to deal with solvent abuse victims in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS for over three years, the provincial government failed to proclaim the private member's anti-sniff bill passed by the Legislature and is now proposing to criminalize minors buying solvents even though there are no treatment facilities in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS for nine years, the 25 Chiefs who comprise the Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak, supported by medical officials, police and the area Member of Parliament, have proposed a pilot treatment project known as the Native Youth Medicine Lodge; and

WHEREAS successive federal Ministers of Health have failed to respond to this issue with a commitment; and

WHEREAS the Manitoba provincial government has a responsibility to ensure that there is adequate treatment for solvent abuse. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier to consider making as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Maloway). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed) Mr.

Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS there is a very serious solvent abuse problem in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS according to the RCMP over 100 crimes in Thompson alone in 1992 were linked to solvent abuse; and

WHEREAS there are no facilities to deal with solvent abuse victims in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS for over three years, the provincial government failed to proclaim the private member's anti-sniff bill passed by the Legislature and is now proposing to criminalize minors buying solvents even though there are no treatment facilities in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS for nine years, the 25 Chiefs who comprise the Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak, supported by medical officials, police and the area Member of Parliament, have proposed a pilot treatment project known as the Native Youth Medicine Lodge; and

WHEREAS successive federal Ministers of Health have failed to respond to this issue with a commitment; and

WHEREAS the Manitoba provincial government has a responsibility to ensure that there is adequate treatment for solvent abuse. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier to consider making as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Lathlin). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed] Mr.

Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS there is a very serious solvent abuse problem in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS according to the RCMP over 100 crimes in Thompson alone in 1992 were linked to solvent abuse; and

WHEREAS there are no facilities to deal with solvent abuse victims in northern Manitoba; and

WHEREAS for over three years, the provincial government failed to proclaim the private member's anti-sniff bill passed by the Legislature and is now proposing to criminalize minors buying solvents even though there are no treatment facilities in northern Manitoba; and

June 1, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 3655

WHEREAS for nine years, the 25 Chiefs who comprise the Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak, supported by medical officials, police and the area Member of Parliament, have proposed a pilot treatment project known as the Native Youth Medicine Lodge; and WHERE AS su ccessive federal Ministers of Health have failed to respond to this issue with a commitment; and WHER EAS the Manitoba provincial government has a responsibility to ensure that there is adequate treatment for solvent abuse.

WHER EFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier to consider making as a major priority, the establishment of a solvent abuse treatment facility in northern Manitoba. *

(1335) PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Mr. Edward Helwer (Acting Chair person of Stan ding Comm ittee on Privi lege s and Elections): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the First Report of the Comm ittee on Privileges and Elections. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Your Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections presents the following as its First Report.

Your committee met on Tuesday, April 27, 1993, at 5 p.m . in Room 254 of the Legislative Building and Monday, May 31, 1993, at 10 a.m. in Room 255 of the Legisl ative Bu ilding to disc uss the organizational process for public hearings for The Freedom of Information Act.

Your comm ittee adopted at its May 31, 1993 meeting the following recommendations: MOTION: THAT the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections advertise extensively within Manitoba that public hearings be held in Winnipeg on June 22, 1993, at 7 p.m ., and if necessary, Saturday, June 26, 1993, at 10 a.m., and written subm issions regarding the comprehens ive review of The Freedom of Information Act be accepted by the Clerk of the Committee.

MOTION: THAT this comm ittee limi t the time of oral presentations to 20 minutes per presenter with up to a further 10 minutes for questioning by committee members, and that the 20-mi nute presentation limit be included in the appropriate advertisements. MOTION: THAT following the public hearing process, staff of the department responsible for The Freedom of Information Act draft a report to be presented to the Standing Comm ittee on Privileges and Elections by March 31 , 1994, for their debate and approval and later presentation to the House.

Your committee reports that it has concluded the organizational process to establish public hearings for the review of The Freedom of Information Act. All of which is respectfully subm itted. Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Portage Ia Prairie (Mr. Pallister), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. *** Mr s. Louise Dacquay (Chai rperson of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Comm ittee of Supply has considered certain resolutions, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr.

Sveinson), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to table Supplem entary Information for Legislative Review for the Manitoba Department of Health. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Hon. Harry Enns (Minis ter of Na tur al Resources): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House. Mr. Speaker, honourable members, today I had the pleasure of announcing, along with Mr.

Monte Hummel of the World Wildl ife Fund, Canada and Allison Elliott of the Manitoba Naturalists Society, a provincial regulation under The Wildlife Act that will ensure a large part of the Cape Churchill Wildl ife

3656 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 Managemen t Area remains protected for designation as a national park. This regulation will preclude mining, commercial forestry, hydro-electric development or other activities that could significantly impact natural habitats within the wildlife management area and will protect the area for future designation as a national park. This action demon strates our commitment to the proposed Churchill National Park and reaffirms the government's commitment to the Endangered Spaces Campaign.

The campaign's goal is to protect representative portions of Manitoba's natural areas. Land protected under this regulation will qualify as representative of the Hudson Bay Lowland and the Arctic Tundra natural regions of Manitoba. Manitoba's initiative will maintain the area's suitability for designation as a national park, and it will be a step towards having the area contribute to the protected spaces goals under the federal Green Plan.

The negotiations between Canada Parks Ser vice, the LGD of Chur chill, local native representatives and the Department of Natural Resou rces have be en wide-ranging an d constructive in respect to possible national park establishment in the Churchill region. Negotiations over the proposed park area will continue. Provisions are in place to maintain local and traditional uses in the wildlife management area. As well, this regulation does not-1 repeat­ does not prejudice any native land entitlement negotiations that may be included in this area. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. George Hl ckes (Point Douglas): Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to rise to respond to the minister's comm ents, because the park that has been negotiated for the community of Churchill is mostly In the Cape Churchill area, which is the habitat for snow geese. Also, it has been traditionally a hunting area for the local residents. It was heavily used in the past for aboriginal trappers of the area.

I am glad that the government is going to continue negotiations with the local people, because it has to be looked at as an area to be used for tourism and an area to be used as a park, but also, not to exclude the usage of the local residents and the aboriginal users of that area. It is very important that is looked at and considered very strongly.

With it becoming a national park, hopefully when they develop this into a national park and hire personnel to staff it as a national park, I hope the minister will encourage his federal counterparts to ensure that local residents-o r insist that local residents are given opportunities to be employed at that park.

Whether or not it takes training dollars to get people of the area qualified, because there is such high unemployment in the community of Churchill, and they are relying on the assistance of this govern ment for the park as they are for the spaceport, a rail line, I hope the minister will insist that local people are hired, adequate training is put in place and will make sure that the aboriginal users of the area and the local residents of the area are not jeopardized in any way because those are areas we have used for years and years. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. •

(1340) Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second OpposHion): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join with the minister and to recognize what is indeed a considerable achievement. We are moving, albeit extraordinarily slowly, one could almost say at a snail' s pace , towards our comm itm ent to endangered spaces in the province of Manitoba, but at le as t ther e is some mo ve men t in the announcement that is being made today and that has to be seen as positive.

Unfortunately, it comes just one day after the announcement of a parks policy in Manitoba with the bringing down of a new parks act, which is a toothless tiger in terms of any genuine protection for parks in the province of Manitoba which come under provincial jurisdiction. So while they are prepared to protect those that will hope fully and soon come un der federal jurisdiction, it is, I think, unfortunate that the minister has not taken exactly the same kind of long-term strategy with regard to the parks within his own jurisdiction.

This is a good step in the Endangered Spaces Program and I look forward to hearing other announcements. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon from the Rock

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA 3657 Lake School eleven Grades 7 and 8 students under the direction of Mr. Walter Warkentin. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Rose). On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Maple Leaf Fund Transaction Review Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the OpposHion): Mr.

Speaker, the public is repulsed with some of the examples of greed a nd profit for funds received under the Imm igrant Investment Fund, examples where people got a hundred-thousand- dollar fee­ Mr. Kozminski-for managing a vacant lot adjacent to the Broadway building, examples of garages and car washes flipping and flipping and flipping again so that outrageous amou nts of money are made, examples of $622,000 for the Maple Leaf Fund paying Mr. Kozminski a fee for managing one of his own properties.

On page 31 of the report, the report states that the government tabled a part dealing with the Maple Leaf Fund: The terms of our engagement did not extend to an exhaustive investigation to determine whether all related party transactions had been adequately disclosed. I would like to ask the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) whether, in fact, the internal review that was announced by the government on March 26, 1991, included those transactions? •

(1345) Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, in terms ofthe Leader of the Opposition's

preamble, that is part and parcel why, if he goes back to the audit that was prepared and submitted back in December of 1992, there are many suggestions around the whole issue of the original application, the reasonableness of any projects, the amount of-in fact, there is a suggestion, which we endorsed, in terms of capping the amount of fees that promoters and developers can, in fact, take from any individual project.

Again, he is pointing to deficiencies that existed in the program that were outlined in my letter back in March of 1991 to the federal government indicating what our role was in terms of the review of economic impact in our province and what we saw as the federal government's role.

In terms of the related party transactions, when the matter was reviewed internally back in March, April of 1991, at that particular point in time, officials pointed out that while there might be some general concerns about percepti on, in terms of the guidelines that existed, there were no violations of guidelines that were in place, Mr. Speaker. Mike Bessey Involvement Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the minister should inform the public that the government was being threatened with lawsuits on July 22, 19 92, which pr eci pitated the investigation.

It was not the minister riding off on a horse dealing with this issue unilaterally. I have the letter from Mr. Shead. Getting back to the dates, Mr. Speaker, there was no internal review and no external review, obviously, of the connections dealing with the various companies in spite of the fact there were public allegations. There were questions I raised in a letter to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) of March 25, 1991, about this issue, and subsequent to that date, about a person named Mike Bessey, a person described by Manitoba Business as the Premier's No. 1 adviser.

The No. 1 adviser to the Premier of Manitoba, the most powerful person second only to the Premier himself, according to Manitoba Business, was appointed on September 4, 1991, to the position of Acting Deputy Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism. What was Mr. Bessey's involvement in these internal reviews, and what was Mr. Bessey's involvement in recommending a second approval of the Canadian Maple Leaf Fund, a fund obviously of tremendous pecuniary interest for Mr. Kozminski? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Once again, the Leader of the Opposition is absolutely incorrect in his

preamble in terms of what precipitated the review, and it had nothing to do with the letter he refers to. There were other issues that came to light at our level, and we initiated the review, Mr. Speaker. It had nothing to do with that particular letter that the Leader of the Opposition is, in fact, referring to. In terms of Mr. Bessey's role, he was the Acting Deputy Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism for a period of time. We have outlined on many

3658 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 occasions the process to the Leader of the Opposition and members of this House. The Leader of the Opposition knows full well the process. It is a similar process to that put in place back in 1986 when he was a part of government, that these matters are dealt with at an administrative level in terms of the review of the economic impacts on Manitoba. The process was the same in 1986 under his government. It was the same in 1988 when we came to power, and it was the same when Mr. Bessey was Acting Deputy Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism.

Political Connections Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the minister contradicts himself. On the one hand, he said, I dealt with these concerns in my letter I wrote to the government; on the other hand, he ordered an internal investigation. He, the minister, promised the public he would have an internal investigation, and then he goes ahead and has an approval of Mr. Kozminski to get a next fund after those issues of internal review are allegedly being dealt with by the Conservatives opposite.

I would like to ask the minister: Who was dealing with and who was investigating the political connections between the Conservative government of the day and Mr. Kozminski, a person who is a prominent fundraiser for the government? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, again, the Leader of the Opposition is up to his usual approach, his usual attack with any of these issues, always trying to politicize and impute motives and so on in any one of these situations.

This audit was conducted on five individual funds, and there was no political involvement in terms of the decision making around the Maple Leaf Fund. It followed the same process that every other fund that was approved, starting back in 1987, followed. The treatment of that particular fund was not treated any differently than any other fund, Mr.

Speaker, and I think the Leader of the Opposition, I am sure, is interested to know that a release through the press today from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, says: The provincial government intends to review its participation in the federal Immigrant Investor Program in the wake of Manitoba's withdrawal from it. With Manitoba moving so quickly, it makes it easier for Saskatchewan to do a review, said David Kutcher, a consultant with the province's Business Imm igration Program, once again confirming what I have told him on many occasions is the role we are playing in this initiative. *

(1350) Mr. Doer: The minister did not answer the question of who reviewed the political connections between the government of the day, the minister of the day, the deputy minister who is the chief political adviser for a period of time or is chief adviser to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the various investors, Mr. Speaker. We are very concerned about this. We were very concerned about it when the government first announced the audit. The audit is very thorough in financial analysis. The public is repulsed by what has happened, Mr.

Speaker, and it is obvious that this is an exercise in greed in terms of the Province of Manitoba, and we want some answers to these questions about the involvement of the provincial government. The provincial government, the Conservative government, in 1990, received money from the Canadian Maple Leaf Fund itself in political donations. I would like to ask the minister whether the auditor reviewed the political donations and whether they came appropriately or inappropriately to the Premier and the Conservative Party of Manitoba. Mr. Stefanson: Once again, the Leader of the Opposition follows his usual approach.

In fact, he must have been reading old issues of Hansard because the Leader of the second opposition party, I believe, raised this very same matter back in March or April of 1991, if I recall correctly, Mr. Speaker. Again, he is dealing with issues that do not relate to the approval process around any Immigrant Investor Fund, and we have a series of them in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker, and I believe, if you were to go through the list of people who are a part of any of these funds, you would find individuals who probably support all three political parties.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the review process that the administration of Industry, Trade and Tou rism was doing un der his time in government and has been doing under our time in government since 1988, Mr. Speaker.

June 1, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3659 The process is the same, the internal review. Our role is the same. Our role is the review of the economic benefits to Manitoba on any project, and we have said consistently from Day One-and we confirmed it back in March of '91 . We confirmed it in June before the task force in terms of a submission from my department. I confirmed it in writing to the chair of the task force. We have confirmed it over and over again, Mr.

Speaker, what our role is and what we recognize as the federal government's role, and we put them on notice over two years ago what their role was in terms of compliance, in terms of monitoring, and that continues to be substantiated by our audit. I am pleased to see that other provinces are now following the lead of Manitoba, provinces like Saskatchewan, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, these issues became public. The connections between the Conservative Party and the Maple Leaf Fund and Mr. Kozminski became pub lic in 1991.

The minister himself promised an internal review to ensure that these matters would be dealt with. He then proceeded to approve, through his department, another second issue for the same Mr. Kozminski and the same Canadian Maple Leaf Fund in November of 1991-which he confirmed yesterday in the House- su bseque nt to the appointment of Mr. Bessey as acting deput y minister of the department. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister: Did the auditor review the role of Mr. Bob Kozminski as chairman of the Conservative spring Premier's dinner in May of 1993 and its relationship with the Premi er (Mr .

Film on) and the Conser vative government in terms of approving these funds? Mr. Stefanson: I cannot help but restate, Mr. Speaker, my comments to the Leader of the Opposition, that I am totally disgusted with his approach in terms of dealing with this national issue, and he is doing a disservice to the entire issue. I went back and I read his questions back in April of 1991. Do you think he asks about investor protection in those questions? No, Mr. Speaker. Does he ask about compliance mechanisms? No. Does he ask about monitoring protection or anything? No, none of those types of questions.

All of a sudden, on the heels of initiatives of this government in terms of cleaning up this issue, he now starts to try and politicize the situation and tie one director to this political party. I have told him what the process is. He knows full well what the process is. He was there when the process was put in place in terms of the review on the role of Manitoba, and for him to do what he is doin g today is absolutely una cceptable and unconscionable. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the only cleaning up that is going on is some of these developers tied to the Conservative Party.

I have asked the minister three times who investigated the political connections. Three times, the minister did not answer because nobody investigated that matter, because the government would not dare have that investigated. I would like to ask the government who is investigating the fact that in 1991 , after the minister himself and the government themselves promised an internal review-t he Premier (Mr. Film on) himself promised an internal review in his Estimates. The Premier himself said that Manitoba has the best record in Canada.

I think when these investigations are completed, unfortunately, Manitoba will have the worst record in Canada. Who is reviewing the fact that either people did not see it or did not want to see it in 1991 when the government did not investigate the connections, did not investigate the second party as the reports says, and the government did not even ask the auditor to investigate the second relationships? Who is dealing with the bigger picture of why there are verbal agreements on these funds? Why are there verbal agreements and files missing on other funds?

Why is this thing so loose and why is nobody investigating the political realities or the political connections between Mr. Kozminski, who is the chair of the Premier's fundraising, and the provincial government? *

(1355) Mr. Stefanson: I am not sure where the Leader of the Opposition is heading with this whole line of questioning about political connections. Does he want us to go back to each and every director of each and every fund and find out what political party they belong to, go back to each individual investor and find out what political party they belong to? We certainly know that people who are proponents of some of these funds, and some of these funds that have pr obl ems, are not su ppo rters of the Progressive Conservative Party, Mr. Speaker.

3660 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 It is for reasons of having no politicization that the process was put in place under their government, that these decisions are made at an administrative level. Decisions around the Maple Leaf Fund were made the same way as every other fund in terms of stopping at an administrative level in terms of the process. The role of the provincial government is to review the economic benefits. The remaining roles are the responsibility of the federal government.

We followed the same procedure that he was a part of when he was in government, and it is one that keeps politics out of it. As I said, Mr. Speaker, he does a pure disservice to try and create the kind of picture or to try and paint the kind of picture that he does. He is doing a disservice to what is a national issue. We have govern ments in Saskatchewan, Ontario, New Brunswick and across this land recognizing that something needs to be done, and they are following the lead taken by Manitoba. Immigrant Investor Fund Attorney General Involvement Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second OpposHion): Mr.

Speaker, the very sad part about this debate is that, obviously, whether it was set up by the New Democratic Party or whether it was added to by the Conservative Party, it has been badly managed since Day One. That is perfectly clear. The question is, what is happening today to protect funds that are still in existence and to protect investors who have, in fact, contributed those funds? The first audit was complete in February. Can the minister tell the House if upon receipt of that first audit, it was sent to the Attorney General for further legal investigation? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, the first audit the Leader of the Second Opposition is referring to is the Winnipeg Ramada Renaissance Hotel on north Portage. That report was received shortly after February 4, which is the date of the auditor's report. Simultaneously, we were having a legal opinion in terms of many of the aspects around this particular project from the legal firm of Taylor, McCaffrey. One Mr. D'Arcy McCaffrey and others in that firm were doing a legal opinion.

We waited for the conclusion of not only the accounting and auditor's report but also the legal opinion before deciding to forward all five copies of the audits along with the pertinent information to the Attorney General's department. I do want to remind the Leader of the Second Opposition, I think she is fully aware that since the end of December of 1992, the funds in the Ramada Renaissance, the funds in The Pas and the funds in sou1h Portage have all been frozen, so nothing can be happening to those funds.

We have made a recommendation in terms of what we think should be a reasonable course to follow in terms of the disposition. So far, the federal government does not agree with us. We will continue to pursue that. I agree with her. I agree with her comments about the problems around this fund, and we can say, should we have acted sooner or when should we have acted. We have accepted that as fair criticism, unlike the kind of criticism and politicization we see from the NDP. We accept the timing issue, Mr. Speaker, but we have addressed it, and we are the first province to be addressing it.

It is interesting to see the reaction now coming from provi nces across Canada, because this is not, I assure this House, a unique problem to Man itoba. We are goin g to find unfortunate situations across Canada. Funding Freeze Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second OpposHion): Mr. Speaker, while it is clear that the funds were frozen in one particular project, because of the audit completed February 4 and because of the minister's concerns even prior to the completion of that audit, can the minister tell the House today why the other funds' assets have not been frozen in the same way? •

(1400) Hon. Eric Stefanson (Min ister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, again, as the Leader of the Second Opposition, I believe, knows, we did not have the authority to freeze funds. The three funds in question were frozen at our request to the federal government. We did not have any reason to make that request, and, certainly, there is nothing preventing the federal government, if they saw a reason to implement it, from imposing it at any given point in time. So at stages during the audits, there was no reason to make a request as it relates to other funds.

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 3661 Most of the funds that we have before us, some are specific projects that are now completed. What we are dealing with in many cases we are learning from unfortunate situations after the fact, but what we can learn from this is an improvement around the program in its entirety. That is why we will not go back into the program unless integrity and reasonable rules are built around it. At this point in time, as the Leader of the second opposition party knows, we are out of the Imm igrant Investor Program . Ramada Renaissance Project Ownership Transfer Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Quite frankly, in my opinion, the best thing to do with the entire program would be to abolish it and stop selling visas to enter Canada. Mr.

Speaker, the province has frozen funds for the Ramada Renaissance project, but the audit says there is not enough money to complete this project, contrary to the guidelines, and that has been admitted, but Lakeview, contrary to these guide­ lines, as well, signed a deal with the North Portage Development Corporation which says that if the project cannot be completed, ownership will be transferred to the North Portage Development Corporation. What effect does the freezing of the funds have on this arrangement? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr.

Speaker, that was one of the deficiencies found by the auditors, that if the project was started and defaulted on, there was a provision with North Portage that the hotel would transfer to North Portage, which clearly was not outlined in the offering me morandum when the or igin al subscriptions were sold to immigrant investors. At this particular point in time, nothing has happened to the funds that are on deposit.

We have made a recommendation to the federal government to go to the courts and to get somebody appointed on behalf of the investors, most of whom live outside of Canada currently, in Hong Kong, Korea, Taiwan and other parts of the world, that somebody should be appointed by the courts to represent them.

That indivi dua l then, in consu ltation with investors, can start making decisions around the disposition of the remaining funds, the whole issue of the hotels, the whole issue of their visas because they all have been issued, or the majority of them have been issued visas to Canada, and what will happen with those visas if a project does not go ahead. So we have made what we think is a very reasonable recommendation to deal with this situation. So far, it has not been accepted by the federal government. They have suggested, Mr. Speaker, utilizing the trust company, RM Trust, as a mediator in this situation.

We disagree with that because we think RM Trust was a part of the whole process, and they do not bring the independence that would be brought to the issue by court­ appointed individuals on behalf of the investors. Asslnlbolne River Diversion Natural Resources Support Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, there has been ongoing concern and now growing evidence that this government is paving the way for the Assiniboine diversion with support in many forms.

I have a memo from the dir ector of Policy Co-ordination branch in the Department of Natural Resources where he writes: The Manitoba Natural Resources supports the Pembina Valley Water Co-op's proposal conceptually, based on the information provided in the EIS in the addendum and based on our familiarity with the proposal through our past involvement in various aspects of the proposal during the planning project stages. I would ask the Minister of Natural Resources why this official in his department is giving this kind of su ppor t before the en vir on men tal im pact assessment. Hon.

Harry Enns (Mi n ister of Na tural Resources): Mr. Speaker, the Department of Natural Resources and the federal agency referred to as PFRA, the prairie farm rehabil itation organi zation agency, are the two main organizations responsible with the mandate for management of Manitoba's water resources. Both of these agencies have been actively involved in pursuing the resolution to the chronic water shortages of that particular region of the province known as the Pembina Valley Water Co-op management group.

They have been called upon, in fact, they have been funded by this government as well as by the Government of Canada in pursuing a resolution to this problem.

3662 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 It is not surprising to me therefore that officials within the department have assisted the Pembina Water Co-op in bringing this proposal forward which is now before the provincial Clean Environment Commission for consideration. Ms. Cerllll: Mr. Speaker, for the same minister: Why is the support not made conditional on dealing with the environmental concerns, some of which are raised in the same memo? Why is this support not made conditional on dealing with these environmental concerns? Mr. Enns: Mr.

Speaker, as you would expect on a proposal of this kind, all kinds of issues are raised. Professional people are doing their jobs. Here is a listing of the kinds of memos that people from the Dep ar tm ent of Envir onment, my department, Fisheries, Oceans and Fisheries, have raised with respect to this issue. All are being looked at and addressed. If she reads the memo further, the comment is also made that in the opinion of some of the officials of the department, these issues can be mitigated or their seeking further advice from the Department of Environment will be dealt with in a particular way.

But that is all neither here nor there. The issue is, these are the kinds of things, these are the kinds of testimonies that will be sought by the Clean Environment Commission upon which a decision and recommendation will be made to government. Mr. Speaker, let me make it very clear. These are department officials doing their job. The government of Manitoba has yet to deal with this issue. Ms. Cerllll: Mr. Sp eaker, why is it that our De partm ent of Natural Resou rces is giving unqualified support based on documents that now four other federal agencies are not satisfied with?

Why is it that our federal agencies are not satisfied with the information which has been said to be inade qua te, and our Depar tmen t of Natural Resources is accepting it? Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member really cannot have it both ways. She quotes from the same do cumen t where the very responsible departmental official points out certain concerns, points out matters that have to be addressed. That is hardly unqualified support, Mr. Speaker. What it is, is a de partmental official doing his business with respect to a particular proponent's proposal before the Clean Environment Commission.

Agricultural Research Centre Location-Northern Manitoba Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, we have a government in this province that plays favouritism in those areas that have Tory representation and then pun ishes those areas where, in the words of one minister, have voted the wrong way. We saw it with decentralization and we saw it with lack of support for the Port of Churchill. Now, Mr. Speaker, we are seeing it with the announcement of the agricultural research centre.

We have long said that there should be more research into agriculture, but I want to ask the Minister of Agriculture why the research centre and all the satellite facilities are in the southern part of the province. Why did he not push to have research in northern areas such as Swan River, Dauphin, The Pas and other areas where there are different climatic conditions, different soil conditions? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr.

Speaker, we believe very strongly in research, and I am very pleased to see that the agricultural indus try is putting forth money to help with a research centre with a main site and four satellite sites across the province. That is five locations. I want to tell the member that the committee that went through the process of determining where these sites would be analyzed, I believe, a total of 11 different locations in the province. There was broad analysis where those sites should be.

The indus try , in terms of producers, the processing ind ustry, is putting money into the research centre along with the federal and provincial governments to be sure that we research the proper topics to increase the diversification of agriculture in the province of Manitoba. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, we all believe that there has to be more research done, but we believe that there has to be research across the province and support for agriculture across the province.

How can he tell us that his government can fund the centre for $2.7 million over 10 years but has no funds in this year's agricultural budget to support the horticultural position in northern Manitoba? Why is he ignoring agriculture in northern Manitoba?

June 1, 19 93 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 3663 Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, the funds from Manitoba government come from a variety of departments, a number of different sources. Our commitment in agriculture is two half- time positions that are going to be moved from other locations to that location at times in the year when they need to be operating in that particular position. So ours is in-kind support, existing staff in the existing budget. *

(1410) Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, again, we are not seeing support for northern Manitoba. How can this government say they are committed? They say they are committed to support for research, but how can they say they are supporting farmers when they will not lobby to have grain shipped through the Port of Churchill which will help farmers? They cannot find money to support the Churchill economic development centre or support the northern research study centre. Why are they only interested in southern Manitoba? Why will they not support research and supports for northern Manitoba? Mr. Findlay: Mr.

Speaker, that member should be ashamed of some of the falsehoods she puts on the record today. In terms of lobbying for Churchill, no government has worked harder for Churchill than this govern­ ment right here and this Minister of Highways (Mr. Driedger). The Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism­ An Honour able Member: No government has failed more miserably either. Mr. Findlay: There is a member from the North who does not care about what is being done for Churchill. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.

Stefanson) and myself signed the initial agreement on the Arctic Bridge which is being brought forward with the industry and the players from Murmansk in Russia to be sure that the Port of Churchill has a viable future. No government has worked harder than this government for the Port of Churchill, and that member is embarrassed by that fact. Mr. Speaker: Prior to recognizing the honourable member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), I would like to ask the honourable Minister of Agriculture-because in your response the honourable member has said the honourable member for Swan River (Ms.

Wowchuk) put falseh oods on the record. It is clea rly unp arliame ntary. I would ask the honourable Minister of Agriculture to withdraw that remark. Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, if I erred in using the word, there is no question she put some factual inaccuracies on the record. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I have asked you to withdraw the remark "falsehoods." Order, please. The honourable minister is having trouble hearing. I have asked the honourable Minister of Agriculture to withdraw the remark "falsehoods." Mr. Findlay: I withdraw that word, Mr. Speaker, but the intent of what I said is there. Mr.

Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable Minister of Agriculture. [interjection) What did I miss? Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the minister, after he supposedly withdrew the remark, said that the intent of his remarks remain. That is not in keeping with our rules or traditions. If the minister is going to withdraw, let him withdraw without any qualification. That is only fair and that is the way we proceed in this House. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I did not hear the remarks of the honourable Minister of Agriculture.

Unless the honourable minister would like to withdraw it again, otherwise I will take this matter under advisement and peruse Hansard to see if it is on the record. Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the use of the worci- Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable minister. That does clear up the matter. Distance Education Telecommunications System Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborn e) : Mr. Sp eaker, yesterday in Estimates in Education, we had a le ngthy di scus sion about the use of da ta transmission and distance education and the way in which we link up the department and schools.

I notice that the Minister of Education has set up a Task Force on Distance Education, that she received an interim report in November, and that she has the final report in her hands.

3664 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 We have now been informed by school divisions that they are having to negotiate separately with MTS at considerable cost per school division to establish these connections, and there has been no attempt on the part of the department to co-ordinate these negotiations and hopefully negotiate a lower cost on behalf of all of the schools. I would like to ask the minister, at a time when money is so tight, why they have not been more active. Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Mini ster of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, the report on the Distance Education Task Force is being released to the field for comment. It is also being analyzed by government. There are, however, some school divisions which have wished to go ahead and enter into pilot projects or enter into various distance education programs. They have been in touch with the Department of Education and Training, and we attempt to provide assistance where possible. However, in terms of the development of a policy, our government is still reviewing it based on the task force report. Mr. Alcock: Mr.

Speaker, it is one thing to have a policy about the use of the system. lt is another thing to co-ordinate the establishment of the system. The member responsible for telephones sits some four seats down. Is it not possible to establish a co-or dination of this rate setting? It is costing divisions as much as $5,000 a month and up to $150,000 to hook up. It seems like a tremendous waste of money. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Speaker, again, in the Task Force Report on Distance Education, we reviewed a number of matters including technology, various types of technology, which technology across the province was the most applicable in various areas. We recognize some technology will not work in some parts of the province, so we have not established a policy yet. We are looking at the detailed information which has been provided to us, as are school divisions across this province, to develop a policy. Distance Education Telecommunications System Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, we are not talking about a specific technology.

We are talking about the carrier. There is a significant difference. Maybe I could ask the minister responsible for telephones because the school divisions tell us that MTS will not negotiate with a number of school divisions together but wants to go school by school. Can the minister tell us why MTS is following this policy? Hon. Glen Findlay (Min ister responsible for the admlnlstraUon of The ManHoba Telephone Act): Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Telephone System Is a public utility in selling services.

I can assure the member that they are looking at the issue as to how they can price it in a fashion that is reasonable and responsible to all concerned. Brandon General Hospital Kidney Dialysis Services Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Health. Mr. Speaker, government financial restraint and cutbacks at the Brandon General Hospital have resulted in major staff layoffs, closure of beds, downgrading of services, a growing waiting list for mamm ography testing.

Now patients dependent on the kidney dialysis unit are being told that because of budget restraints, the level of service is being capped and that if an additional new patient or patients arrive, some of the existing patients will be asked to relocate to another dialysis unit outside of the Westman region, causing considerable financial and emotional hardship. My question is: Will the minister look into this matter and ensure that Brandon General Hospital patients who come from the Westman area will not be forced to relocate to another town or city outside of the region? Hon.

Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I apprecia te my honourable friend's question, even though some of the

preamble is laced with inaccuracies. Mr. Speaker, there has not been-well, I will back away and I will qualify the statement I am about to make. The investment by this government into dialysis in the last five years has been significantly greater than any previous five years of government, since dialysis became a program funded within our hosp ital sys tem . It has included sign ificant expansion at most hospital locations. It has included

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 3665 new expansion at Portage Ia Prairie to serve some of those Manitobans who may have accessed the Brandon program. It includes ongoing planning to expand our dialysis program. But, Sir, for my honourable friend to make statements that we are cutting back on the resource to dialysis in the province of Manitoba is an absol ute ly false statement. I would like my honourable friend to please consider accuracy in his statements and maybe even an apology of his statement. Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

In his response the honourable Minister of Health used the words "false statements," which is clearly unparliamentary. I would ask the honourable minister to withdraw tha t remark. "False stat em ents" is clearly unparliamentary. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, not being learned of the rules, you might perchance guide me, Sir, in how I can point out an inaccuracy that an honourable friend puts- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Beauchesne's 489 clearly states: It is ruled un parl iamen tary to use the words "false statements." I would ask the honourable Minister of Health to withdraw said remark. Mr.

Orchard: I will withdraw that remark, Sir. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable Minister of Health. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, if the honourable Minister of Health will look in Hansard, he will see that I used the word, "capping" the level of services. I did not say cut back the level of service of dialysis. I said the capping of dialysis services, which is causing the problem, and people in Westman are legitimately concerned, living in many of the constituencies that honourable members across- Mr. Speaker: Question, please. Mr.

Leonard Evans: My question is, does the minister appreciate the hardship that this permanent or temporary location that is being proposed will cause the existing patients at BGH who usually spend between three and a half and four hours, three times a week, to be able to simply stay alive? How can you expect these people to relocate without causing considerable emo tional and financial pain due to the capping of the service- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that my honourable frien d corrected an inaccu rate statement in his first

preamble, but placed an inaccurate statement in his second

preamble. Mr. Speaker, there has been more expansion of capacity- *

(1420) Point of Order Mr. Leonard Evans: The minister says he is pleased that I corrected an inaccuracy that I mentioned in the first one with regard to the dialysis service. I want to make it clear and ask the minister to look at the record. I said capping- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. *** Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend from Brandon East's first inaccuracy was alleging cutbacks in dialysis. His second inaccuracy is alleging capping of services in dialysis. Both statements are inaccurate.

If one were an outside observer, they might say they were false, but an outside observer, of course, does not have privilege in this House. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, our rules are quite clear. l am surprised that the member opposite, who has been in this House for a considerable period of time, is not aware that not only can one not use unparliamentary language, one cannot phrase other statements that would impute unparliamentary language. I think the intent was very obvious on the part of the member. I would ask him to withdraw those statements. Mr.

Speaker: On the poin t of order raised, Beauchesne's 490 : • . . . it has been ruled parliamentary to use the following expressions: ... False." *** Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I want to simply remind my honourable friend from Brandon East that the reason why dialysis is in Brandon General Hospital was the efforts of the member for Arthur (Mr.

3666 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 Downey) when he was in opposition, dragging the NDP government that he sat around the cabinet table on, to put dialysis in Brandon In the first place. That may have coincided with the time that my honourable friend was in the underground bunker at Camp Shilo when he closed hospital beds at Brandon General Hospital. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr.

Speaker, the ladies and gentlemen and the doctors and the health givers who are concerned about a legitimate problem will be very disconcerted about the garbage of a reply that we are getting from the Minister of Health­ garbage, total garbage. Let us get some answers- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Question, please. The honourable member for Brandon East, with your question now, please. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr.

Speaker, does the minister appreciate that many of the kidney patients are elderly, on fixed incomes, and cannot afford the relocation costs, and they believe that this service is being capped and so do the doctors and so do the health givers? Therefore, is the government prepared to assist them in some way in their relocation, if this is being required? Certainly, far better, Mr. Speaker- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend made the statement in his

preamble that people, including doctors and patients, believe that the service is being capped. They would maybe believe that, although it is not accurate, but they would have a greater tendency to beli eve that after listening to the incorrect, inaccurate and improper information my honourable friend from Brandon East brings to this House periodically. U.N. Convention on Children's Rights Government Strategy Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr.

Speaker, this evening, a vigil will be held here on the grounds of the Legislature to mark International Children's Day and to demonstrate a commitment to the rights of children, especially a concern for the increasing numbers of children who are neglected or abused. Members on this side of the House have asked the governmen t num erous ques tions in the past regarding the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services what steps his government has taken toward Implem enting the goals of that U.N. convention. Hon.

Harold Glll eshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, our department deals in considerable detail with the children of Manitoba, first and foremost in the daycare system where we have doubled the funding over the last five budgets that we have devoted to daycare. In a recent meeting with my colleague from Saskatchewan, she was amazed that their budget of $13 million is so small compared to the commitment we have here in Manitoba.

As well, we devote considerable time and effort and resources to the Child and Family Services system where, again, we have seen drama tic increases in the amount of funding that we give to those agencies. Within those agencies, we have brought in a number of reforms such as the Child Advocate, the service information system, the high-risk estimation system which is now being impleme nted by Chil d and Fam ily Services agencies across Manitoba. I can tell you from a recent meeting I had with the board chairs and the executive directors, they are very positive about these reforms that are being brought into place.

Child Poverty Rate Reduction Strategy Mr. Doug MarUndale (Burrows): I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services, given the fact that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) said in December 1991- and he promised to work co-operatively on any program designed to eradicate poverty with respect to the children of our province, what programs has this minister and his government implem ented or even designed or even proposed to reduce the appalling level of child poverty in Manitoba where one in five children lives below the poverty line? Hon.

Harold Gllle shammer (Minister of Family Services): Besides addressing the provincial rates on an annual basis, we moved to create an exemption for the children's trust funds that exist within this particular program. We have given additional assistance for school supplies. We have passed on the goods and services tax as exempted income. We have increased the liquid asset

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA 3667 exemption levels. We have changed the head of household policy. We have modified the wheelchair transp ortation for socia l reasons. We have extended the health benefits to recipients who have the health card. Cu rrently, a numb er of dep artments of this government are in consultation with the federal government- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Martlndale: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services to explain to Manitobans how the policies of his government he has implem ented, including cuts of social assistance rates, cuts to tax credits, cuts to health care for welfare recipients, increases in child care fees, cuts to foster parents, user fees for essential medical suppl ies and the extension- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Question, please. Mr. Martindale: ... how these policies can be reconciled with a spoken commitment to eradicate child poverty and fulfill the goals of the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of the Child. Mr. Gllle shammer: Mr.

Speaker, this government realizes with other governments across this country that we must have the deficit under control if we are going to maintain social programs in health, in family services and in education. As a result of that, we have made some changes. Even though the member talks about cuts, the Department of Family Services has seen dramatic increases in the budget line for every budget year for the last six budgets, and, at the same time, of course, being able to keep down the level of taxation. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. Nonpolitical Statements Mr.

Jack Reimer (N iakwa}: May I have leave for a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Niak wa have lea ve to mak e a nonp oli tical statement? [agreed) Mr. Reimer: Mr. Speaker, I rise today and ask all members of this House to take a little time out of their hectic schedules to pay tribute to one of our greatest resources-ch ildren. As well, Mr. Speaker, I call on the Assembly to recognize an event that is taking place later today which places the spotlight on the serious problem that is affecting too many children in our cities, our towns, our villages and our local neighbourhoods.

It is the problem dealing with viole nce against children. Sadly, innocent children are far too often the victim of senseless abuse. I know we all hope and pray that this form of sick violence is stopped one of these days. As I said earlier, children are one of our greatest resources. They bring pleasure to our lives, and through their own form of infl uence change people's lives for the better. Children are our future teachers, our police officers, our sports stars, and yes, even our future politicians.

There will be a vigil outside the Manitoba Legislative Building this afternoon at 5:30 to show concern for abused children who do not speak for themselves or seek help. As well, the gathering is designed to bring this serious problem to the attention of more people. I call on this Assembly to salute the many hard­ working volunteers for their dedica tion toward combatting this problem, and I also invite members from the House to join me in attending today's vigil at 5:30. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Bu rrows have leave to mak e a nonpolitical statement? [agreed) Mr.

Doug Martindale (Bu rrows}: Mr. Speaker, I would like to add to the remarks of my colleague and say that I too will be attending the first annual International Children's Day kids vigil on the grounds of the Legislative Assembly. I hope that many other honourable members will join us to show our commitment and support for children and to let the public know that we are in support of rights for children and that we are opposed to anything which is harmful to children, particularly, abuse and neglect of any kind. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Committee Changes Mr.

Edward Helwer (Gimll}: I move, seconded by the member for Portage Ia Prairie (Mr. Pallister), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Economic Development be amended as follows: the member for Emerson (Mr. Penner) for the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey); the member for St.

3668 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) for the member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson); the member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Stefanson) to fill in the vacant spot. Motion agreed to. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. Darren Prazn lk (Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would move, seconded by the honourable Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and that this House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Mr.

Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable depu ty government House leader, seconded by the honourable Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House- Mr. Praznlk: Mr. Speaker, if I may, just before you put the question, I would ask if you would canvass the House to see if there is a will to waive private members' hour? Mr. Speaker: Is there a will to waive private mem bers' hour? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: No. Leave is denied.

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 Tr aining; and the member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay) in the Chair for the Department of Environment. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) ED UCATION AND TRAINING Mr. Deputy Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau) : Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this

section of the Committee of Supply me eting in Room 255 will resume consideration of the Estimates of Education and Training. When the comm ittee last sat it had been considering item 2.( a)(1) on page 35 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have for tabling today a report on the Analysis of Staffing Complement by Staff Category as was requested yesterday. I also have to table four copies of the course Skills for Independent Living with its complete content of the Interim Guide. Mr. Reg Alc ock (Os borne) : Mr. Deput y Chairperson, given that we are in the administration

section of this-actually maybe the minister could help me with the term too, am I talking about a branch here now of the department? I am interested in developme nts at the School for the Deaf, and I am wondering If the minister could just bring me up to date on what has occurred there in this last year, if there have been any changes in program staffing, et cetera? Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. At this time we are dealing with line (

a) on Division Administration

(1) Salaries. If you will note on line (d), Manitoba School for the Deaf falls there and that is when the minister's staff will be here to answer those questions. *

(1440) Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we are prepared to answer that particular question at this point. Just to clarify, the member was asking if this was a branch or a division. The line 16.2(

a) we are looking at the administration of a division, the division of Program Development and Support Services. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member has asked some questions regarding the Manitoba School for the Deaf. First of all, to answer in relation to policy and what is new in that area, the direction of the Department of Education and Training with regard to deaf education is to support a continuum of program options for parental choices.

The program options available range from the bicultural, bilingual deaf education at the Manitoba School for the Deaf to programming provided in the integrated and/or segregated settings in the public school system. The department and its position on bilingual and bicu ltur al educ ation for the dea f and the hard-of -hearing students, the Department of Education and Training fully supports bilingual and bicultural education for deaf and hard-of -hearing students as an im portant program option. This approach is being developed and is provided at the Manitoba School for the Deaf.

In terms of the use of technology in the classroom for deaf children,

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3669 several members of the Manitoba School for the Deaf administration and teachers recently attended a workshop entitled: Enabling Technologies for the Classroom ofthe '90s. Within budget restraint, plans are being made to co-ordinate Information received regarding these and other specialized classroom materials so that the programs compatible with the current Apple and IBM computers may be obtained. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the bicultural program that the minister referenced, I think she indicated that it was being offered at the School for the Deaf.

Is it offered In any of the integrated classrooms in other divisions? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the bilingual and bicultural education is primarily through the Manitoba School for the Deaf. It is difficult in the other programs in the public school system because there is not really a milieu for the bilingual and bicultural programming. It is somewhat easier in some programs in some areas where the students are clustered. I understand that there is a program in St. James where there would be a greater likelihood of the possibility oft hat working.

However, it is very difficult in some rural areas, for instance, where there would not be enough children to cluster to provide the milieu. Mr. Alcock: I should maybe try to define this a little better, too. There is a range of disability. Some children who are considered deaf are in fact classified as hard of hearing and with augm entation can function with some assists within the school. Others are deaf to the point of using sign language of some sort. I can remember the St. James program .

How ma ny children who are using something other than an oral method of instruction are currently in the school system and not at the Manitoba School for the Deaf? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we do not have those exact figures with us because we are not at that specific budget line. We could estimate the numbers. It is a very broad estimation across the province of approximately 25 to 50 young people. Mr.

Alcock: Yes, I appreciate that we are doing this a bit out of order, although services to children who are classified as deaf and not receiving services at the School for the Deaf would not necessarily be tracked within that line. Would that be correct? Where would those children fall? In what part of the appropriation should I be looking for more detail? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Depu ty Chair pers on, the Manitoba School for the Deaf is our program, so we would have that information under our appro­ priation.

Services provided to other children within the province are programs which are provided through local school divisions. So the information Is not necessarily information which we would have in total because it is not our program. However, under the appropriation 16-2 (e), which is our Child Care & Development Branch where we have our seven consultants who operate in the rural area, we might have some further information in that area. Mr. Alcock: Perhaps then, not necessarily at this moment or even if we get to that particular line today- Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please.

Could I ask you to just move a little bit back from the mike? It is actually giving us feedback right now. Mr. Alcock: Is that better? Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Yes. Mr. Alcock: Oh, here I thought I was helping yqu. Not for today's session necessarily, but I would be interested in that number, roughly how many students. I would also be interested-and this may be something that can be answered now. Those children who are identified as deaf and needing something other than simple auditory augm entation that are being taught with a sign language system­ are you still not hearing me?

An Honourable Member: They did the same thing to me last night, Reg. Mr. Alcock: No, I think the minister is actually trying to provide useful information. I do not have any sense that they are- An Honourable Member: I do not mean she is not doing that. I am talking about your information. Mr. Alcock: Oh, okay. Is this any good? Is that better? Do you want to try this, No. 9? That is okay? Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Yes. Mr. Alcock: Do you want me to repeat all that or do you understand? I just want to know, is ASL the language of instruction? That is ali i want to know. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, yes, at the School for the Deaf, ASL, American Sign, is the language of instruction.

3670 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 Mr. Alcock: What about these 25 to 50 children in the other school divisions? Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that ASL, as I have said, is the language at the School for the Deaf, but within the other programs which students are in, we have some difficulty knowing exactly which of the languages is being used, because Signing Exact English may be the skills that the person has who is available to assist that student within the classroom. So I understand outside of the MSD, there is some mixture of ASL and Signing Exact English. Mr.

Alcock: Yes, it is my understanding that the St. James prog ram u ses ASL. Are there other examples where there is a clustering of this that allows the use of ASL? Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that St. James is really the only large cluster of students. *

(1450) Mr. Alcock: The minister met some time ago with representatives from the deaf community about a study of deaf education, and I am wondering what the status is of that. Mrs. Vodrey: I did have a meeting with some representatives of the community and at that time they did ask about a review of deaf education in our province. I can say now, and I did say then, that I am in favour of a review because we are seeking to improve continually the education for the deaf and the hard-of- hearing students in Manitoba.

But I have said that as an alternative to a total review, I have requested that the advisory board for education of the deaf and the hard of hearing and the de partment jointly prioritize issues to be examined. Then I will be able to determine in consultation with this advisory board how these matters will be reviewed and how the resulting recommendations will be able to be implemented. Mr. Alcock: Has that committee been able to prioritize? Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that the first meeting of that committee will be next Monday. Mr.

Alcock: Can the minister inform me as to who the representatives of the Community Centre for the Deaf are? Who is representing the deaf community? Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that the two representatives from WCCD are Bruce Koskie and Dianne Mondor. Mr. Alcock: Perfect. I think you will get very, very solid feedback from them. Now, the minister mentioned that this was a joint committee with the deaf and the hard of hearing. How are they defining the hard-of- hearing community, or are we really talking about the oral education community? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, one of the issues that was discu ssed was a broa der representation on the board and that broader representation to include what the committee had referred to as the hard of hearing as well as the oral deaf. I understand that there will be a representative at the Monday meeting who represents what the community has determined is hard of hearing, and then one of the issues that they will be looking at specifically Monday is to take an active step in terms of a broader representation on the board.

They will be looking, I am informed, at the three areas: the hard of hearing, oral deaf and als o mo re representation from the deaf community. Mr. Alcock: I do not need to take up the time of this committee in the details of this issue.

I am sure the minister's staff, who have been well immersed in the concerns of the profoundly deaf community over the use of ASL and the cultural implications that has for their community, and their concern about an erosion of the core of that commun ity as we develop education methods that they question the efficacy of-a lthough I am not certain that we should be getting into that here. I would like to know, the Manitoba School for the Deaf, is there a policy around downsizing the School for the Deaf?

There has been a significant decrease in the number of children served at the school, and I am wondering whether this is a result of a specific policy, or has it just been the development of other services that have allowed children to be served in their home communities? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I can tell the member that it seems some of the reasons for what is now a fairly stable population are really the issue of parental choice. We certainly in the department have not taken a role either pro-mainstreaming or con-m ainstre aming in ter ms of working with families.

In terms of the projected populations, it is true in about '88-89, there were 89 students, it went to 90; in '90-91 , it was 88; '91-92 , 85; '92-93, 82. The projection for the next three years is 83 students. So there has been a relative stability over the past­ well, it would be projected for five years.

June 1, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 3671 Mr. Alcock: So there is nothing in the planning or sort of forward-looking policies of the department to reduce the size, reduce the use, reduce the focusing on the School for the Deaf. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, no, there has been nothing. Mr. Alcock: I am pleased to hear that. Certainly, it is an area that arises. Every now and again I will get a phone call, because I have a number of friends who are deaf, that a little panic goes through the community aboutthe potential closure ofthe school.

I suspect they react to the rumours that come out of the budget process as much as anybody else. For the ASL commu nity, the school is a very important center. They use it not just for the education of their children, but it forms a social function within the commu nity, too. They would be very loathe to see it changed or closed or the program further decentralized. On curriculum, I had a question about the IB programs. How is the curriculum for the IB programs established? Is that something that the department does or are we borrowing a curriculum that has been established outside of the province? Mrs.

Vodrey: Mr. Dep uty Chair pe rso n, the International Baccalaureate program is a program which was developed in Switzerland. It is a standardized curriculum, a standard program . Stude nts who are taking the International Baccalaureate program, those Manitoba students must first complete the Manitoba curriculum and then compl ete two years of the International Baccalaureate program . I am informed that there is somewhat of an unevenness in the completion, because there are two possible ways to complete, one being a diploma at the end of the program in which the students do an extended essay.

They also do three courses at a higher level as well as our curriculum. Students may, howev er, obtain a cer tifi cate in the International Baccalaureate program which requires somewhat less of a commitment to the total course. *

(1500) Mr. Alcock: The cu rricu lum comes out of Switzerland, I think the minister said, presumably because it is a curriculum that is administered worldwide in all of the international programs. Is there any process whereby the department has an involvement with that? Do they feed information back if they have any kind of exchange with the people who establish that curriculum? Mrs. Vodrey: In Manitoba there are five schools which offer the IB program, the IB courses, and they have come together and have an International Baccalau reate office in Manitoba, and that is located at Kelvin High School.

I am informed that it is a somewhat loose liaison in terms of the International Baccalaureate relationship. Our concern is that students complete the Manitoba curriculum, and that we view the courses offered by these five schools as local option courses in which the schools choose to offer the IB as a local option. Therefore, they have come together, as I have said, to form the IB office in Manitoba. Mr. John Plohman {Dauphin) : Yes, just a couple of questions to the minister regarding the staff table that she gave us. I thank the minister for that information.

I note that yesterday the minister talked about 15 management for 1992, and this table shows 14. Can the minister explain that dis­ crepancy? She indicated there was a reduction of two, down to 13 from 15, and now it seems that it was only from 14 down to 13. Mrs. Vodrey: I would have to check the record for having given that number to the member, but, as I check the Estimates book for last year, the number is 14 and that is the correct number. Mr. Plohman: Yes, well, the minister clearly said there were two co-ord inators that were removed, and now it would show there was only one.

I mean, that was clear last night. If that was just a mistake, that is fine. Mrs. Vodrey: The co-ordinators are considered within the Professionalff echnicalline, not within the Managerial line. Mr. Plohman: That makes the information given even more difficult for me in terms of accepting what the minister is saying. I asked that question under management, and the minister said that there were two managers removed, those being co-ordinators. Now she is saying that is not even the relevant category. Mrs.

Vodrey: I would have to check the record, but there were some questions asked in an area of clarification, and I asked the member yesterday, was he referring to directors, was he referring to co-ordinators? So what we have done today is provide the detailed information that the member

3672 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 has asked . We have provided him with the information in the Managerial line, in the Professional/Technical line, in the Administrative Support line, and then provided a column with total. I am prepared to answer any questions he might have regarding the information which we have put together for him today. Mr.

Plohman: I will certainly ask questions on this information, and I appreciate having it, but I would assume when we ask the minister questions and she gives definitive answers, which Is on rare occasions, that we have to assume that those are factual, not just something that comes out of the air somewhere.

I asked distinctly yesterday about managerial positions and how many were reduced and the minister said two from 15 to 13, and we asked about Professionai!T echnical and Administrative Support, and that Is where we got into larger numbers, and that is why the minister said I should have to come back the next day and give us the information. So it was clear that the information that was asked for and rece ived yesterday was obviously incorrect information. Inso far as the Professiona l/Technical and Adminis trative Sup port-no, first of all in the management; I will just finish with that.

If we see this year 13 managers for 261 staff, the ratio is 1 to 20, and last year there would have been 14 for 343 staff, so the ratio would have been 1 to 24.5. Under that scen ario, the mi ni ster is beco min g mo re manager-heavy and she has more managers per staff than she had previously. It is a significant increase, 4.5 on 20 which is close to 25 percent increase in terms of the percentage of managers per staff or staff per managers. Why is that? Can the minister give us any indication why she is making the department even more management top­ heavy? Mrs.

Vod rey: In terms of some of the reorganization that we are doing within the Dep artment of Education, we are providing much more of a co-ord ination function, and so the people who hold the managerial roles are still looking at working with a client base of approximately 200,000 students. So we are still providing that type of function which may fall into the Managerial category. The member looks at some of the reductions in the Department of Education. Yes, there was the decentralization of the clinicians to the employment of the home school divisions.

Those clinicians did fall within the function of one manager. That one manager does retain a very large role throughout the province, particularly in the area of special needs young people. •

(1510) Mr. Plohman: The mi nister's answer is not consistent with a desire to put priorities with services. It would seem to me that, when she made the decision to eliminate the clinicians, these were Professlonai!T echnical people who provided direct service to children. She is now rationalizing having managers service 200,000 students, and therefore it was necessary to keep as many as she has done. That does not make sense, because the managers do not provide direct service to children. The Professional/Technical people did and do, to the extent that they are left.

I cannot understand the rationale behind that kind of thinking. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, as I explained to the member in the last answer, we do still perform a co-ord ination function within the province. In terms of the direct service, direct service, for instance, by clinicians, was provided by the clinicians. That direct service Is now being provided by clinicians who are within the employment of their home school division where they are establishing their own employee­ employer relationships. The department's role, however, is to continue to offer a support function.

We have gone over several times the kind of su pport function which the department is willing to, and is still active in, one being the certification of those clinicians. (Mrs. Shirley Render, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair) In terms of the overall management function, as I said, we do provide for co-or dination. Our role is to assi st in the area of planning and, wher e appropriate, prioritization. We have to develop strong consultative links with the field, and that is the way that the Department of Education and Training is looking now to provide its leadership role in Manitoba. Mr.

Plohman: Would it not make more sense to provide support services for those clinicians who were laid off and deleted from this department? The minister likes to use the term "decentralized," when, in fact, she has offloaded them onto local school

June 1, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 3673 divisions with grants that are not sufficient to meet their total cost. In any event, they are working for an independent em ployer, an em ployer not of governm ent. Therefore, the direct management is not necessary for those people who are no longer in the department. If they need support services, they need it from Professional/Technical people, to give support to those Professional/Technical people in the field or employed by the divisions.

It does not seem to be necessar y to ma intain the full complement of management which the minister has virtually done here. Mrs. Vodrey: The member speaks about providing support to the clinicians in the field and to the school divisions. I have explained to him that the department is actively su pporting the school divisions with their assistance in recruitment and selection process and through the involvement of senior consultants in speech and language and psychology from the Child Care & Development Branch, so they can assist in the area of recruitment.

I have also said, we will also provide the supervisory function that is required for clinicians to become certified within the province of Manitoba. In addition and in response to the school divisions' requests, the Child Care & Development Branch is arranging for the transfer of the diagnostic and treatment materials which were used by those clinicians to the department, from the department to school divisions and to districts em ploying clinicians. So there is a number of functions which are being undertaken.

The member has asked about supervision and has asked about support, and I have told him that is still being provided. Mr. Plohman : Some of the comments made by the minister seem somewhat absurd in trying to explain this. In terms of the recruitment process, I would think that the Human Resource

section would be providing that support. That is not something that would come under this section, as a Human Resource personnel department of government. As well, the minister talks about transferring materials to the school divisions from the Diagnostic Centre. Is she saying that she needs these managers to transfer those materials? Mrs. Vodrey: First of all, in the area of who provides support and who assists in the area of recruitment, Human Services is involved in that area.

However, the role of the manager from the Child Care & Development Branch area is to provide information regarding the specialization and the special skills required regarding these clinicians, so there still is a professional input from the person who is being employed as a clinician from their own professional background. The member is speaking about the issue of managers and, as I have said, we are looking at a reorganization within the PDSS area and we have been speaking about that for some time.

When we have completed our consultations-and I have explained that reorganization will be completed with consultations with the department itself and also with the field. When we complete that reorganization and that restructuring process, then we certainly will be looking at the issue that the member for Dauphin has been raising and discussing. Mr. Plohman: I guess I have to ask the minister if it is her policy to maintain management while cutting services to children? Mrs. Vodrey: When the memb er speaks about cutting services to children, I am not sure exactly what he might be referring to.

He has spoken over some time about clinicians, and I have been able to tell him over discussion over several time periods that the clinicians will be looking at employment, not through the Department of Education and Training, but employment through home school divisions. I have already explained the model, that there are 19 school divisions currently operating in that way. We have spoken about the grant available to the home school divisions for the hiring of clinicians.

We have also spoken about supplem entary support available for school divisions as they hire their school clinicians, so there certainly is still support. In the area of special needs support, also, I would remind the member that we have increased quite significantly our special needs funding over the past few years in the Department of Education. We have this year, through our funding formula, recognized as has never been recognized before, funding support for emotionally behaviourally disordered young people and also for hard-o f-hearing young people.

So there has been, on a number of fronts, support offered in the area of special needs. The member does not seem to have grasped the picture. Mr. Plohman: Under one category, the minister has pr ov ide d additional funding for severely handicapped children, Level II and Ill, with low

3674 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 1, 19 93 incidence, high cost. On the other hand, she has cut clinicians that supported all the kids with special needs, with no guarantee when that was done that these services would be maintained. The minister has admitted that she has no way of enforcing that these would be provided by the various school divisions if they choose not to take advantage of the support that is there from government, support which I have said several times is not adequate to meet the total cost. We know that.

School divisions have told us that, whether the minister admits it or not, that $45,000 Is not sufficient. The minister cannot have it both ways with this. If she says she has decentralized these clinicians, are they then the responsibility of the local school boards? The minister cannot use that as a rationale for retaining almost all of her managers, while these are now within the ju risdiction of the school divisions. That is what we have been arguing with her, that she has retained the managers and done so at the expense of direct services to children, personnel who are providing direct services to children.

That argument is very powerfully demonstrated in the data that has been given to us. It will be encouraging, I guess, in this process if the minister would simply admit that is the case at the present time, and that she will undertake to deal with that distortion in the future, either by restoring services, staff that would provide direct services to children or by reducing management. Our preference would, of course, provide the services to children. If she is going to take away those staff, then surely she has to also remove a proportionate number of management from the section. *

(1520) Mrs. Vodrey: We certainly support direct service to children and support that in a number of ways. First of all, in the area of clinicians-and I have explained this and perhaps the member when we get to the funding formula will also have a concrete way to look at the support which is offered. The grant to su pport clinic ians has been increased.

In addition, we have spoken over the cou rse of the Estima tes process about supplem entary funding available through the funding formula to school divisions that would need further assistance in the hiring of their clinicians, and that support which comes through supplementary funding would assist school divisions in certainly a number of ways.

So I have made it clear that, as individual school divisions hire their clinicians, they will receive support through the grant available for the hiring of clinicians; in addition, where required, they would rece ive su pport through the supplemen tary category of the school funding formula. ! believe that certainly answers the question of the financial commitment. In addition, when the clinicians were in the direct emp loy of the Department of Ed ucation and Training, there were 52 positions.

Now that school divisions will employ clinicians directly, the number of positions available, calculated by way of the formula, is 59.5. That is more. So it is certainly evident that funding the services to special needs children through clinicians and funding them through the school funding formula should, in fact, lead to better service for special needs children. In terms of the local divisions, I would also be very surprised if divisions did not access the services of clinicians because of the supports available to them. Mr.

Plohman: The minister may be correct that most divisions feel incum bent not to reduce services, and therefore will do everything possible to attempt to hire clinicians. I am not saying they would not think that is a priority, but she should not have difficulty understanding why they would not when she has cut their funding by 2 percentthls year and then placed this greater burden on them to also find additional monies locally.

If she is surprised about it, I think she should get over that surprise immediately because there are very good reasons why they would not be able to offer the services that they would deem to be desirable. Point of Order Mrs. Vodrey: Just let me tell the member that special needs funding went up 6 percent this year in school funding. The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mrs. Render): The minister does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over facts. *** Mr. Plohman: It is a ridiculous point on the minister's part because it does not even deal with the issue. The ridiculous point is this, that, in fact,

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 3675 we are not talking about the same thing, clinician services. The special needs that I referred to earlier was the severely disabled students, whether it be the Level II and Ill students, where there have been increases in funding. Insofar as the clinicians are concerned, there is a substantial decrease in this line in funding. The grants on the other side may end up adding up to as much as the decrease here, but there is the decrease in this line.

If the minister can show that the money being provided for clinicians in another line is greater than the decrease here, then she will have a point to make about that. I want to say, though, that I would not keep talking about enhanced grants for clinicians because that happened last year, and so I do not know how many years the mi nister wou ld keep talking about enhanced grants. The grants were not enhanced this year, even while this major step of removing them and transferring them over to school divisions was taking place.

I think it is clear the minister would have to­ whether she is supplying an adequate amount of support for special needs kids, and we would argue tha t she is not. She has also reta ined an overabundance of managers while she has reduced staff who provided direct service to students. That is the point I am making at the present time. I note also on this table, though, that the minister has made cuts, and, as a result, that she has more Administrative Support SYs than she had under the 1992-9 3 Estimat es.

We have all thes e Professionavr echnical people being eliminated, and yet we have maintained the managers and we have maintained all of the administrative supports. As a matter of fact, the number is higher in absolute terms; and, in percentage terms, it is much greater. How can the minister explain that? Mrs. Vodrey: First of all, I just have to make a comment around the issue of the funding. The member has said, will I be able to show that in fact the funding adds up to the same on behalf of clinicians and special needs young people?

I am certainly informed that, when we add in the supplementary funding available to school divisions as well as the budget line that we have been discussing, yes, we will be at what would certainly be seen as a break-even point even at this time. So I think that it is very important for the member to not continue to say that somehow there are not the same kinds of support available within school divisions because, in fact, I have explained that there is support from two areas: one through the funding formula; another through the area of supplem entary funding.

In terms of the staffing within the Department of Education and Training, we do look at the programs that are being offered, particularly in this area, which is the Program Development and Support Services area. We also look at the priorities in this area, and we do not make a sweeping gesture in terms of a formula. We do not make reductions in terms of formula, which the member is trying to get at. There must be some way-he has given us some ratios and so on during the discussion in the afternoon. He seems to feel that, based on ratios, decisions should be made.

As I have explained to him, and as I have been explaining to him, there has been a careful look at the issue of programming which is being done and also priorities. We have wanted to look at minimizing the impact on service within any of the programs which we offer in the Department of Education and Training. As we discuss more of the services, then the member may find that this becomes more clear to him than simply a mathematical formula. (Mr. Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair) *

(1530) Mr. Plohman: I am not saying that she should use ratios, but I am saying the ratios reflect what she has done. She has not even considered the fact that, as a result of her decisio n , she has far more Administrative Support to Professionalffechnical people, secretarial support and so on that are needed, than previously, before these massive cuts were undertaken in this branch. I am asking the minister how she can justify having so many more sup port staff when she has so many fewer professional staff providing direct service to kids. Mrs.

Vodrey: Again, the member has been using ratios as an attempt to try and look at how things should look in his mind, and I have said that we did not make those decisions based on that ratio formula. Instead, we looked at issues such as program and priorities.

3676 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 I have also explained, and I can go over it again, that we are looking at restructuring in this K to 12 area. We are looking at reorganizing in the K to 12 area, and I have told him, even this afternoon, that dur ing this res tru ctu ring and during this reorganization we will be most certainly looking at the complement of staff, the functions of staff, the priorities of staffing. So, as he asks us to review exactly the work of staff, yes, we will be doing that as we do the restructuring and the reorganization. Mr.

Plohman: The point is, the minister has made some hasty cuts here without considering the impact on children at all. She keeps saying that that is her primary consideration, services for children, but that is not reflected in the staffing table that we see before us. In fact, it goes quite the opposite way. She has maintained, and enhanced, actually, Administrative Support by two and a quarter staff while cutting 77 Professional/Technical staff and reducing management by only one.

Overall, this has distorted the ratios that were there historically with regard to professional staff, administrative support and management. As a matter of fact, the ratio for Administrative Support has gone from one to four, to one to three. That is a significant change, and I want to ask the minister how she can rationalize that on the basis of enhancing service to children. Mrs.

Vodrey: The member knows very well, I believe he should know, that school divisions are now going to be the employers and are going to be responsible for that direct service, where clinicians, for instance, were previously the employees of the Department of Education and Training. School divisions are now responsible for that direct service. I have explained to the member that we are in the process of a restructuring and a reorganization, and it is a process. Through that process, there has been a process of consultation. The consultation has been with our direct staff and also with school divisions.

We are in the middle of that consultation. When the consultation is complete, then we will be able to look at making some of these changes. As I have said, as a result of the consultation, managerial positions are being reviewed, but at the momen t, they still have a function within the Department of Education and Training in relation to the field. The member's difficulty is that he is looking only at numbers, and we are looking at total programs and initiatives.

The member seems to be having a lot of difficulty putting together the picture of the programs and the initiatives that the Department of Education and Training is responsible for, and it is looking at prov iding support to the field, as he focuses only on a specific number. Mr. Plohman: Since the service to children was supposed to be the governing criteria, why did the minister go the opposite way with these cuts?

First of all, she has said today already that it was not to save money, because the staff is claiming and the minister is claiming that there are actually more total dollars in the area of clinicians overall. Through the grant system, there is actually money when you consider the grants for clinicians as well as direct dollars for programs. When the minister is finished consulting in the middle, my point is she is saying that the­ [interjection] Well, I would like the minister to be able to hear. There is no sense me rambling on if the minister is not listening.

The point is the minister is saying that total services for special needs, including clinicians grants as well as programming grants is more than was previously available in this particular area before the offloading and the cuts in the clinicians. So if it was not done to save money, and it was done for the opposite priority that the minister says was the governing criteria, which was, of course, that services to children would be protected as the major criteria here, then why did the minister do it at all, if it was not just to show the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) that she had reduced staff and, therefore, SYs were down and the government could say to the public, we have reduced civil service positions. Is that not what was really behind these cuts? It does not make any sense any other way. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, I think if the member reviews the comments I have made, he will find that I said there has been an increase in the special needs funding, but that in terms of the funds to support clinicians, we are now, through the two methods, at approximately a break-even point.

So there have been two areas I have discussed in terms of where the funding lies. We have again spoken­ [inte�ection] The member seems to want me to hear him, but then he seems to be talking while I am trying to give him an answer, so let me repeat the answer again.

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 3677 There has been increased funding in the area of special needs, approximately 6 percent, and we are at the moment at approximately a break-eve n point in the area of funding for clinician services through the school funding formula for clinicians and also through the supplemen tary funding. *

(1540) If the member would like to speak about actually services to children, then we might want to take a little bit of time to talk about the employment of clinic ians by the local school division, that employment by the ju risdiction closest to the student. In the 19 school divisions that currently operate that way, obviously that has been a way in which they have felt that they have been able to deliver service in a way that is closest to the place where the student lives. As the member knows, when I worked as a school clinician, that was a model that I worked in.

I worked in a model where I was not employed by the province. I was, instead, em ployed by a school division and was able to work directly with the personnel who had the direct responsibility for the educational instruction and programs for students. Mr. Plohman: The minister just made my point when she said that there is a break-even on clinicians and no money saved by this move. So the minister was not doing it for the purposes of saving money, she is now saying.

If you look at the other criterion, services to children, there was only one way the minister could ensure that the services would be at least as good as they were the prior year or even better: that would be to ensure that those clinicians were maintained in the department. She has no way of knowing for sure whether that service is going to be maintained at its previous level. There is every indication that it will not simply because school boards are in a pinch as a result of this government's failure to provide adequate funding for the education of children in this province through the public school system.

Therefore, some will, as a matter of fact, have difficulty rehiring all of these clinicians. So it was not to enhance services to children that this was done; it was not to save money. So what was it for? What was the purpose? Why did the minister make this move? You know, she talks about consultation now. She is going to go and consult and then determine whether she has got too many managers. I thought this was something that was rather internal to the department. They are going to determine how many managers they need and how many Administrative Support staff they need.

The minister is going to go and consult on that. Why did she not consult then on the Professional/ Technical people before she dumped them onto school division? There was no consultation there. It was a last-minute decision. There was no notice given to school boards. There is no consistency at all in this minister's approach. She is all over the map. Mrs.

Vodrey: Let us look historically then, first of all, to say that the department has provided leadership during the last two decades to ensure that clinician services were developed in rural areas in this province, in rural divisions and districts, and in isolated areas of the province. I can tell the member that, when I arrived in the province of Manitoba in 1975, I did have a chance to talk with what is now the Child Care & Develop­ ment Branch and to look at clinician services in the rur al parts of Manitoba and to look at the development of those services.

We are a province where there is a cluster of population within the city of Winnipeg, but we recognize that we have children and families that are living in all places of this province. So there has been, from a historical point of view, an effort by the department to make sure that these clinician services have been developed. We have talked about the financial end, and then in my last answer I spoke again about clinician services being offered where clinicians are employed by the local school division.

They then work very close to their employing authority, and they work very closely with the people who are making decisions on behalf of children. I also explained to the member that was a model that I have some experience with in terms of being able to work directly with those people within school divisions who are making decisions on behalf of children and, as a clinician, to have the opportunity to work directly with those people making those decisions. That answer was given when we were speaking about how decisions affect children and how we look at the impact of decisions directly on children.

I think that answers the first part of his question.

3678 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA June 1, 19 93 The second part of his question regarded the actual setup of the Department of Education and Training, particularly in the Professional Develop­ ment and Support Services area. In this area, I have been explaining all afternoon, and several times before that, that we are looking to provide the service in the most efficient way, to make sure that the role of Manitoba Education and Training is well understood throughout the province. The member seems to have some difficulty with the issue of consultation.

Even though I have explained that the issue of consultation relates, No. 1 , internally with our own staff so that there is a full understanding, a stror.g corporate picture.

Much earlier in the Estimates, I discussed the fact that one of the important goals of the restructuring and the reorganization is that, when a representative of our department is out within the school divisions, they will be able to speak for more than just their single area or discipline and that they will not have to go through the whole process of saying: well, that is not the area that I work in, I cannot tell you anything about that; but instead to assist in the development of a much stronger corporate picture. So we are going thr ough a process of consultation. One is internal.

One is with the field so that the role that Manitoba Education and Training has developed is, in fact, well understood. We will be completing that reorganization, and we believe that it will make us a very efficient organization. As I said, we are working very closely with divisions. We are working closely with divisions in the transfer of responsibility of clinicians. We have been very supportive to school divisions, and we expect to continue to operate in that way. Mr. Plohman: Let the minister not leave on the record that I have any problem with consultation.

I have consistently advocated consultation on the part of the minister before she makes some of the fundam ental decisions that have been made. Obviously, this concept of consultation applies to the minister's thinking in certain instances where it is convenient; and, in other instances where it is not, she conveniently forgets to mention that it should have been done. In the case of clinicians, in her brilliant wisdom, the minister determined for school boards that they should want to employ clinicians locally. She never heard from them that they wanted this and they were clamouring at her door for it.

She just decided that they should employ them locally, that it is good for them, and it is good for the clinicians and everybody should want this. Tha t is not the kind of heavy-handed, top-down decision making that reflects consultation. There does not seem to be any element of consultation in that kind of approach, and there is no advanced planning in that kind of approach either.

If the minister had said we are looking at doing this, we are going to provide sufficient incentive to school boards to ensure that it will not cost additional dollars for them to hire these clinicians and that we would like to see a date one year hence, perhaps the fall of '94 for this to take place, then, of course, it would have made some sense, and the minister could have rationalized what she was doing in terms of consultation and so on. But this was dumped on the school boards with about two weeks notice prior to their having to finalize their budgets.

So the minister cannot try and explain away history here, that somehow there was a process of consultation-- there was not-a nd secondly, that this was what was wanted-it was not-and that she was keeping services to children as the primary consideration, because it was not the case. So she is wrong on all of those points. She is misleading, whether deliberately or not. The point is I feel, my personal opinion is we are being misled here by this minister, and I wish she would come clean and provide facts and not- Point of Order Mrs. Voclrey: The member continues to use the word "misleading·.

He has used that word a number of times, having been cautioned by yourself at several opportunities. The Acting Deputy Chai rperson (Mr. Reimer): The minister does not have a point of order, but I would ask all memb ers to be careful in their selection of words and the implications of such. *** Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Acting Deputy Chairperson, just in my own comments here, not on a point of order, I should remind the minister to review Hansard, read Hansard and read the Chairperson's apology to me where he had incorrectly asked me to withdraw remarks dealing with "misleading• when they were used in a context which was not an allegation that the minister was delib erately misleading the committee.

June 1, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3679 H she is able to go back and read that, then she would know, before she even decides to attempt a point of order on this point, that it would be futile to do so. So I stick by the words I have used. To me, what we have seen here from the minister is misleading information in my mind, and I would ask the minister-{inter jection) That is right, in my mind, and any reasonable person's mind-1 can only assume on the basis of what the facts surrounding the cuts are, and what the minister said by way of explanation. It just does not jive. It is not consistent.

Now, will the minister admit it was not for the reasons she has provided to this committee that these clinicians were dum ped on school divisions, but it was merely to satisfy a need to reduce civil servants in her department? It was to make the government look good by showing a shrinking civil service, and it had nothing to do with maintaining and enhancing service to children, and it had nothing to do with the other excuses which the minister has given here, and it had nothing to do with the results of consultation. *

(1550) Mrs. Vodrey: The member has gone on in quite a long discussion where some of the facts may be questionable and where I would suggest there were some misleading statements which the member has continued to put forward over the course of our discussion. So, absolutely not, I will not confirm, cannot confirm, would not confirm, his final comments. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, can the minister tell us what action she intends to take to deal with the massive change in staff ratios in this branch? Mrs.

Vodrey: I have explained this particular answer several times through the course of the afternoon. When the memb er looks at some of the staffing changes, we have discussed that some of those staffing changes are in fact clinicians who will now be employed by the existing school divisions, and we have also said that the department will continue to provide support to those clinicians. The department will also assist school divisions and support school divisions and assist in recruitment and also supervision for certification.

I have also explain ed a number of times this afternoon that we are in a process of reorganization within this particular division of Education and Training, and with that process, as I am sure the me mber would know, the process of change requires a dialogue, and there has in fact been a consu ltation , and we have tal ked about the consultation which is an internal consultation as well as a consultation with school divisions, and we have spoken about that process a number of times this afternoon.

We have also spoken about, within that process, the work which will establish priorities for service and which will also bring us to a restructuring of the de partment. So the answer, Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, to the memb er's question remains the same answer that I have provided him several times this afternoon. Mr. Plohman: I have to characterize the minister's summ aries that she does so often as a teacher