Manitoba Hansard — 15 October 2007 (Sitting 19, 39th Legislature, 1st Session)

39-1-19

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LIX No. 19 – 1:30 p.m., Monday, October 15, 2007

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P.

DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P.

SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

1299 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, October 15, 2007 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYER ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 214–The Public Schools Amendment Act (Property Development) Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): I move, seconded by the Member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson), that Bill 214, The Public Schools Amendment Act, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Schuler: Mr.

Speaker, this bill will make it very clear going forward what the roles and responsibilities are for school divisions in regard to property development, something that is not clear currently in legislation and again going forward will make it very clear that school divisions are not to be in the property development business. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] PETITIONS Provincial Nominee Program Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

The background to this petition is as follows: Immigration is critically important to the future of our province, and the 1998 federal Provincial Nominee Program is the best immigration program that Manitoba has ever had. The current government needs to recognize the backlog in processing PNP applications is causing additional stress and anxiety for would-be immigrants and their families and friends here in Manitoba.

The current government needs to recognize the unfairness in current policy on who qualifies to be an applicant, more specifi cally by not allowing professionals such as health-care workers to be able to apply for PNP certificates in the same way a computer technician would be able to do so. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier (Mr. Doer) and his government to recognize and acknowledge how important immigration is to our province by improving and strengthening the Provincial Nominee Program. This is signed by D. Santos, R. Reyes and R.

Deokno, and many, many other fine Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to table the Civil Legal Services Special Operating Agency 2006-2007 Annual Report. Hon. Christine Melnic k (Minister of Water Stewardship): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the 2006-2007 Annual Report of Manitoba Water Stewardship. Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Science, Technology, Energy and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, I'm pleased to table the 2006-2007 Annual Report for the Manitoba Health Research Council. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us the spouses of foreign military attachés representing more than 18 different countries here on official business with the Air Force. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. They are the guests of the honourable Minister of Federal-Provincial Relations (Mr. Doer).

Also, in the public gallery, we have from the University of Winnipeg, we have 34 students under the direction of Laura Reimer, and this group is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer).

1300 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today, too. ORAL QUESTIONS Location of Hydro Power Line Reasons for West Side Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Since the announcement that Hydro had caved to the pressure from the Premier and the NDP government to run the newest high-voltage power line on the daffy detour as opposed to the direct route, Mr.

Speaker, we've learned that the NDP are prepared to leave a legacy of half a billion in debt to future generation s, to result in more coal being burned which will contribute to greenhouse gas emissions in our world. One of the reasons the Premier gave for this decision was that he was concerned about power sales to Xcel Energy. On Friday, Xcel Energy confirmed that they are completely indifferent as to whether the power line runs down the east side or the west side, Mr. Speaker.

They indicated that the deal is not contingent on that, and that they didn't see this as being an issue as they went through regulatory hearings in the United States. So, I want to ask the Speaker: Given that it's not about UNESCO, it's not about Xcel Energy, is the Premier prepared to say that the real reason is that he's afraid to have a fight with Bobby Kennedy, Jr.? * (13:40) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, certainly, Mr. Speaker, we're not afraid to have a fight with the member opposite which we had a couple of months ago on this issue.

We in Manitoba in the election campaign didn't know where the members were. But, since 2004, we've been stating clearly to the public of Manitoba, based on opportunity and on the issue of achieving a transmission line, that we thought the east side was imprudent as a venue. We also said during the campaign that the Leader of the Opposition said he would go the east-side route. He would roll the dice with future sales of hydro; he would roll the dice with the opportunity of a UNESCO World Heritage site. We said, yes, the capital cost of $300 million because a converter station is a constant from both sides, Mr.

Speaker. We said the capital cost would be higher. Of course, the transmission line is amortized over a period of 30 to 50 years. We also said– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: –over a period of time. We also said that the sales to Minnesota–which, by the way, were not negotiated by Conservative governments. All they did was mothball every hydro-electric proposal ever proposed. So now we're getting the hindsight wisdom of members opposite who have mothballed every hydro-electric project and have not taken advantage of the export sales that we took advantage of. Mr.

Speaker, the sales to the United States two years ago were close to $800 million. There was also a sale to Ontario which, again, was negotiated by an NDP government in 1987. If you look at, in the next 10 years, the export sales will be close to 40 percent of the revenue of Manitoba Hydro, and we are not going to roll the dice with that proposal. Mr. McFadyen: What the Premier is saying is that, in effect, he's concerned that phantom opposition may arise at some point in the future, and for that reason, he is going to leave half a billion dollars in debt to the next generation, Mr. Speaker.

Never mind rolling the dice. He's rolling the debt to the next generation without any willingness to stand up to a rational opposition wherever it comes up. Now, he has said previously that he didn't want to have a fight with Bobby Kennedy, Jr., over the boreal forest, so let's just take a look at Bobby Kennedy, Jr.'s, position on Manitoba Hydro. He comes out, in his paper a couple of years ago, saying that he is opposed to all new hydro-electric construction in Manitoba. He's opposed to new dams.

He's opposed to new transmission lines, and he says, and I quote, this is Robert Kennedy, Jr.: "Manitoba Hydro has been selling its projects as the answer to combat climate change due to the low greenhouse gas emissions of hydro-electricity, but hydro development not only harms the land and the people who live there, it may worsen global warming." He says, "it may worsen global warming." In response to that, Mr.

Speaker, Bob Brennan, on behalf of Manitoba Hydro wrote, in response to Bobby Kennedy, Jr.: The three new Hydro facilities and associated transmission currently being discussed in our province would impact 0.04 percent of Manitoba's 65 million acres of forest. He goes on to say, and I quote: To characterize this impact as a threat to Manitoba's boreal forest is an irresponsible exaggeration.

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1301 Given that the president and CEO of Manitoba Hydro characterizes these comments as an irresponsible exaggeration, I want to ask the Premier who's side he's on, Bob Brennan's or Bob Kennedy's. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, it sounds like the Kennedys' position is the same as the Conservatives' position. When we proposed to build Limestone, the Conservatives came in office, what did they do? They mothballed it. When we negotiated Conawapa, they mothballed it after they came into office.

When we negotiated building a new dam at Wuskwatim–I don't know whether you've noticed but north of this Legislative Building, we're building a dam on the Burntwood River. We're building it right now. So, Mr. Speaker, we're not on the side of the mothballers across the way, but we are on the side of the future development in Manitoba. We're also on the side of smart future development. Smart future development looks at opportunity, which we believe is most positive for the people of Manitoba with the UNESCO World Heritage site, and it also looks at liability. Mr.

Speaker, in the next 10 years–it'll take at least 10 years to build a transmission line because it will have to go to the Clean Environment Commission. It will have to have public reviews, and to do nothing is the easiest political option for anybody to take. That would be their option. They had a recommendation to build it down the east side 20 years ago; they did nothing. That's their option; that's their position.

In the next 10 years alone, the hydro-electric sales to United States and partially to Ontario will be $5.5 billion; again, negotiated not by members opposite, negotiated by governments that we were part of, Mr. Speaker. That is a liability because to create–[interjection] Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I want to remind members we have a lot of guests in the gallery that came all the way down here to hear the questions and the answers, and I also need to be able to hear the questions and the answers in case there is a breach of a rule. I am asking the co-operation of members.

The honourable First Minister has the floor. Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me look at the numbers: $300-million transmission line–not the converter station which would be needed for both options–is the capital cost which we have been up front with the public on from 2004. Members opposite have taken a different view. The $5.5 billion, at 10 years alone, for export sales to United States and other provinces–We believe that you have to look at the issue of whether this, in fact, will become an international cause célèbre.

It is very important we do this in the smartest way possible, all transmission lines– [interjection] Well, I know members opposite–[interjection] Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: You know, with their childish heckling and their childish laughing, Mr.

Speaker, they don't understand that a $300-million capital cost is a large number, but amortized over a 30- to 40-year period is a financial cost that has to be put against a $5.5-billion revenue over the next 10 years alone; $600 million in revenue alone is an extremely important factor to consider, and obviously we believe there is opportunity for the UNESCO World Heritage Site for people in Manitoba, people in Poplar River, and also economic reliability for revenues that we negotiated, and we're not going to roll the dice like members opposite. Mr. McFadyen: Mr.

Speaker, what the Premier has effectively said is that because he's making deals, you know, what is $500 million? What's half a billion dollars in debt? What's 25 hospitals? What's half a billion dollars to an NDP government? They feel they can throw away half a billion dollars, waste precious clean energy, and that is why every time the NDP come to power, they get thrown out because Manitobans know that they can't afford a wasteful, reckless, irresponsible NDP government.

So I want to ask the Premier: Given that he is saying that he can afford to throw away half a billion dollars because he's afraid of international pressure, Mr. Speaker–[interjection] Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. McFadyen: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. The Premier has even flip-flopped since the election. He said during the election campaign he wasn't going to run a west-side route; he was going to run it through the north. Now he's changed his position on the location of the line since the election.

So he thinks that he's got an election mandate to throw away half a billion dollars, and I beg to differ. I have spoken to many Manitobans over the past two weeks, and they

1302 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 don't remember voting to make themselves $4,000 poorer because of the reckless decisions of this NDP government. So I want to ask the Premier: Given that he is talking about international pressure, which means that he is concerned about Bobby Kennedy Jr. mounting a protest; given that Danny Williams was prepared to stand up to international celebrities for the people of Newfoundland, why, when it comes to the people of Manitoba, won't he stand up to Bobby Kennedy Jr.?

Why is he limper than a dead codfish when it comes to standing up to Bobby Kennedy Jr.? * (13:50) Mr. Doer: That's probably the lamest question I've ever had in Question Period in the eight years we've been in office. You know, Mr. Speaker, first of all, to talk about being thrown out of office four months after we've had the privilege of being re-elected, I don't know what planet the members opposite are on. Secondly, Sophia from Poplar River is a Manitoban. She has vowed to fight any proposal to put a transmission line down the east side. We listen to people like that, that have international credibility.

Manitobans, I know they live a little further north than the Legislative Building. The member opposite may not have met Sophia in Poplar River, but we have, and we respect her view. Mr. Speaker, the tourism industry is growing three times greater than other tourism and ecotourism. We believe the– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: You know, if they don't have anything intelligent to say, can they stop heckling? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. We're trying to get as many questions and answers in. The clock is ticking. I remind members of that.

We're trying to get as many questions in. The honourable First Minister has the floor. Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the members opposite, again, when they talk about being thrown out of office, we built both the major hydro proposals that are contributing to the revenue. We built a system that was put in place that allows for the lowest hydro-electric rates in North America. The member opposite worked for Mike Harris and Ernie Eves which has had almost the highest rates in Canada. That's his track record. Mr. Speaker, let me explain some of the economics.

First of all, it's opportunity on the east side: $5.5 billion in the next 10 years are export sales. All sales in United States go to a regulatory body. A regulatory body in Minnesota includes representatives from the State House of Representatives and the Senate that are Democrats. It also includes the governor that's a Republican. If anybody on that side of the House wants to roll the dice on an international cause celébrè, which the east side and the boreal forest would be, versus the predictability of $5.5 billion in sales, that's the reason why they oppose Limestone.

They said it would cost future generations X number of millions of dollars. Well, you know what it's done? It's saved people money because we got the export revenues and we got elected to build and keep the export revenues, to keep hydro-electric rates the lowest in North America. That's our pledge and that's what we'll do with this proposal. Economy–Manitoba Provincial Debt Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, this week is Small Business Week.

Small business, in order to be successful, must control their debt, unlike this government that is busy building the debt that Manitobans and small business will have to bear. Already Manitobans' per capita spending on debt is the highest in the west. With interest rates on the rise, the cost to service that debt is sure to increase. Mr. Speaker, I don't need any smoke and mirrors from the Minister of Finance. What I would like is a straight answer. When is the Minister of Finance going to address our spiralling debt and the burden that is being borne by small business? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, if the member would have read the Public Accounts, he would have noted that the debt went down $117 million last year.

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1303 If the member would take a look at the budget, he would know that the small business tax rate in this province is the lowest in Canada. If the member would, again, look at the budget, he would note that when they were in office, the debt-to-GDP ratio was 32 percent. Under us, it's under 24 percent. We've taken the debt-to-GDP ratio down by 25 percent. Members opposite never even got close on that kind of an achievement. Mr. Borotsik: Mr. Speaker, let's talk per capita debt. Every child born in the province of Manitoba is born with a debt of $15,400.

This figure is going to continue to grow. The NDP spending frenzy is continuing, over $300 million for a Hydro tower. The cost overruns of the Red River Floodway will be financed by debt; a mountain of debt will be placed on the taxpayers' shoulders. This government is throwing away an extra half a billion dollars, a half a billion dollars for Hydro debt on the west-side transmission line. Not only is it poor management, it is irresponsible management. Mr. Speaker, when is the minister going to start working towards a better future for our children, rather than a legacy of debt? Mr. Selinger: Mr.

Speaker, all I can say is the member did pretty well for one breath reading that script across the way. There is no overrun on the floodway project. The member should be supporting. That project has been extremely well implemented inside the province of Manitoba. It has not only brought numerous benefits for business in Manitoba, including small business; there have been set-asides that have allowed Aboriginal small businesses to compete for contracts, develop jobs, do economic development, and there will be a legacy of prevention of flooding in this city which will avoid $10 billion of disaster costs.

The member opposite should have never voted against it. Hollow Water Cottage Barricade Government's Negotiations Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, negotiating with Hollow Water at a time when the illegal barricades remain sets a very dangerous precedent and it's a reward for criminal behaviour. Negotiating while the illegal barricades remain was something that the Minister of Conservation said he would not do time and time again. So I ask the Minister of Conservation: Why would he negotiate when illegal barricades are still there? Isn't he rewarding criminal behaviour? Hon.

Stan Struthers (Min ister of Conservation): Well, for crying out lo ud, Mr. Speaker, for two weeks this member has been telling me to do just that. Where does he stand? Where has he been on this? We're working very hard day after day to make sure that we do the right things to get the chief to bring his blockades down. We have said very clearly that we will do what it takes to work with the chief to accomplish that so that normal commerce can get back on track in that part of our great province, Mr. Speaker. We continue to work hard. We continue to be committed to getting those barricades down. Mr. Hawranik: Mr.

Speaker, this past weekend, according to the Minister of Conservation, he indicated that talks to end the Hollow Water blockade made progress. Obviously, the minister offered something to Hollow Water, something to end the blockade. So I ask the Minister of Conservation: What did he offer Hollow Water? What kind of veto did he give them? Mr. Struthers: I– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Struthers: I'd suggest that the Member for Lac du Bonnet get some kind of professional help to get him off his obsession with vetoes. There's no veto here. Mr.

Speaker, as a matter of fact, I think the member should attempt to think a little deeper on this problem. What the Minister of Culture (Mr. Robinson) and I did was we attended a sweat lodge. We attended a sacred ceremony. Members opposite can belittle that sacred ceremony if they like, but this was a good opportunity for us to start a better relationship, a deeper relationship, to open up lines of communications and do what we can to make sure that the rights of First Nations are respected, consultation takes place, economic development opportunities are pursued and bring the barricades down.

1304 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 Health Care Retention of Doctors Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, since 1999, 1,240 doctors have left Manitoba to practise in other jurisdictions. That's 1,240 doctors who are not available to provide care to Manitobans when they need the care. In fact, two of the leading pediatrics specialists in Manitoba will be leaving for Iowa, leaving behind worried parents whose children need a cardiologist or a neurologist. Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister of Health indicate why she was unable to keep the two critical specialists and why they've joined the other 1,240 doctors on the caravan outside of Manitoba. * (14:00) Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I believe, according to the College of Physicians and Surgeons registry, we do indeed have 54 more doctors in Manitoba today than we did last year. That's a record-breaking year. Indeed, that's a record-breaking year for increase in doctors. Ten years ago, there was another record-breaking year. Th at was the year when 74 doctors net left Manitoba.

So I think that the member opposite needs to pay close attention to that fact. When it comes to the reference to the pediatric cardiologist, we are aware that this individual will be leaving Manitoba. We are in very active recruitment of two more pediatric cardiologists, and we are very optimistic that we'll secure that employment. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health is spending too much time talking to NDP spin doctors and not talking to medical doctors in the province of Manitoba. Manitoba has now trained 1,240 doctors for other jurisdictions in Canada.

We're training other doctors for the rest of the world while our patients are waiting for care. The Canadian Institute for Health again shows that Manitoba is well behind the national average for doctors per residents. The NDP offers less care further from home. Since the minister can't seem to achieve excellence when it comes to doctors for Manitobans, can she at least tell us when she's hoping to achieve average? Ms. Oswald: I recognize that he's new, but using the member opposite's statistics of migration, under the members opposite government, over 2,000 doctors left Manitoba.

When we talk about the net gain of doctors, we are ahead here in Manitoba. Since 1999, 235 more. Here's an interesting point. You would think that during an election period, when the opposition would likely be putting their best foot forward for Manitobans on their health platform, how many doctors did they promise, Mr. Speaker? Zero. Who was the chief engineer of campaign strategy for that, Mr. Sp eaker? Why, it was the Member for Steinbach. Health Care Nurse Practitioner Job Opportunities Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I wish the Minister of Health would pay attention to this fact.

Judy Marvin, one of my constituents, passed her nurse practitioner exam almost two years ago, but despite the minister's promise to hire more nurse practitioners, Judy can't find a job. If she's not hired within the next year, she will lose her RN(EP) status. Just last week the College of Family Physicians of Canada said that nurse practitioners could be a big part of the solution to the doctor shortage, yet here in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker, fully qualified professionals can't get jobs. Has the minister actually made funding available to the RHAs for more practitioners?

Or is this just another empty promise by this NDP government to end hallway medicine, just like ending hallway medicine. Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Mr Speaker, I can inform the member opposite that indeed we have 37 extended practice–or nurse practitioners, on the registry in Manitoba, indeed, with the broadest scope of practice in the country. We know that we have committed, in conjunction with our health care professionals, with doctors and with nurses, to hire 700 more nurses over our mandate.

I bring us back again to that election period when, presumably, the members opposite would be putting their best foot forward for all Manitobans. What did they promise? What did they promise? Not to train one single nurse, once again, in Manitoba. Mrs. Rowat: End hallway medicine in six months, Mr. Speaker. That's their record. When it comes to nurse practitioners, this NDP government is all press releases and empty promises and no action. Time and time again, they have promised to hire more nurse

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1305 practitioners; yet fully qualified individuals, professionals, cannot get jobs. Apparently, RHAs must hire nurse practitioners out of the same funding that is intended for doctors. This is pitting one profession against another. She has failed patients who would benefit from access to nurse practitioners. She has failed 13 rural communities who have no acute-care emergency care services available, Mr. Speaker. So, seriously, I ask the Minister of Health why she continues to make false promises that she cannot keep. More nurse practitioners where, Mr. Speaker?

Ms. Oswald: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the question, and I can let the member opposite know that, in addition to our commitment to hire 700 more nurses here in Manitoba, we've also hired a co-ordinator for nurse practitioners in May of '07 to assist rural RHAs in the acquisition and the hiring and the placement of nurse practitioners. And it must be said, once again, members opposite during the election campaign made it out of Winnipeg once for a rural health-care announcement. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

McFadyen) said that health care would not be their priority during the election, and they certainly proved that to be true. CAIS Program Delays Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I've spoken to yet another producer who is facing long delays in having his CAIS application processed. In March he applied, and he's still waiting for answers half a year later. These types of unaccepted delays make it financially challenging for our producers. We keep raising the issue, but it's not getting fixed. Mr.

Speaker, will the Minister of Agriculture explain what steps she is taking to ensure these problems are dealt with, that Manitoba producers can access the program when they need it? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, when CAIS was introduced across the country, here in this province it was administered by the federal government. Producers spelled out very clearly that there were challenges in the application process. We have been working as we negotiate the next round of the Agriculture Policy Framework Agreement to look at how those steps can be streamlined.

We are working on that, and I would say to the member: If he has specific cases of individuals who are having difficulty with their CAIS, I would ask him, if the individual is willing to share their information with my office, we will work with them to try to expedite that process as quickly as possible. Mr. Eichler: It is clear the CAIS program has serious problems. There are long delays in processing applications. Some producers find themselves underpaid, then overpaid within just a few weeks. When producers call the administrators they can't get the answers th ey need.

This is causing real economic hardship for our producers. These problems simply can't be repeated. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Agriculture explain if she has given any consideration in the next farm program being administered by the provincial government, or is she satisfied with the current delivery system? Ms. Wowchuk: And indeed this is a very important issue. That's why we've consulted.

That's why we've been holding meetings across the province with producers to look at how the CAIS program can be changed, and I can assure the member that the program is being changed so that money can flow more quickly to producers, Mr. Speaker, in various aspects of the program. With regard to the delays, again, I would say to the member opposite, if he has specific cases, and there are many cases wher e individuals need some help in expediting their application form, please let me know who they are, and my staff will work with them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Flin Flon Contaminated Soils Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, all Manitobans have great concern for the children of Flin Flon who may be playing in public spaces, in parks or schoolyards or around their homes in areas where there is significant contamination with mercury or arsenic or lead. I ask the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) what action she has taken to date to address these serious concerns, and, if the minister could tell us when the actions have been taken, that would certainly be helpful. In particular, I would like to know if any of the contaminated areas which were identified have been cleaned up. Hon.

Stan Struthers (Min ister of Conservation): Mr. Speaker, if the Liberal leader would have been listening last week to some of the questions and

1306 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 answers that were given, he would know that we've begun addressing this particular problem. We've been working with the citizens of Flin Flon to identify the areas that need to be cleaned up, and we have been moving on that through the Sustainable Development Fund itself through my department. We have identified $60,000 that we have been spending to make sure that we clean up areas such as playgrounds and other parts of the community that citizens believe their children are at risk at. So we have been moving forward on that.

We have been proactive with it and will continue to do so. * (14:10) Mr. Gerrard: I gather that not one single playground has been fully cleaned up. Last week the Minister of Health said in Estimates that it would be best not to warn people if their individual child's playground had higher than acceptable levels of lead, mercury or arsenic. She said, and I quote: One would not want to tell somebody in one schoolyard that they should protect themselves. Well, I beg to differ. Children need to be protected and have safe places to play.

Schoolyards and playgrounds with higher than acceptable levels of mercury should either be cleaned up or closed down until they are cleaned up. I ask the Minister of Health: When will she act to ensure that the Flin Flon children have safe places to play? Mr. Struthers: I gather the Liberal leader has problems in understanding the written word. I mean, this study was put together by the Department of Conservation. We worked in co-ordination with the Department of Health. We work in co-ordination with the citizens–[interjection] I don't think he wants to hear the truth. Mr.

Speaker, we did this study so that we could help the people of Flin Flon. I'm assuming that that's what the Liberal leader wants too. We are and we will continue to be identifying those places within the city of– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Struthers: Despite all the noise from the Liberal leader across the way, we will continue working with the people of Flin Flon to identify those areas that need to be cleaned up and we'll continue that work which has already begun. Standing Committee on Crown Corporations Frequency of Sittings Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, The Forks North Portag e Partnership is a group that should be reporting to the Manitoba Legislature. In fact we've had the Deputy Premier (Ms. Wowchuk) make the commitment that it would be reporting through one of our standing committees and, as the minister was right, it should be. We find out the last time it actually reported to the Manitoba Legislature was in November of 2001 which is in keeping with the Doer government and the NDP being in contempt with accountability with this Legislature. My question for the Pr emier is very simple.

Does the Premier not see any value of having a standing committee hold Crown corporations or companies like The Forks North Portage Partnership to account by having them come before standing committees? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Speaker, we've had a track record in this province going back 25 years in which we, the Province led by NDP governments, has partnered for urban development, and nothing is a greater success story than The Forks North Portage.

Now, just in case the Liberal member hasn't noticed, the regular shareholders' meetings–in fact, I recently met with the H onourable Vic Toews and Sam Katz, and there's also an AGM coming up with The Forks North Portage. He has every ability to go to The Forks North Portage, which is a tripartite body, and put forward his ideas. So I would suggest that the member opposite should perhaps leave the building, come down with me to the AGM at The Forks, and he'll find out what a great job The Forks North Portage is doing for Manitoba. Parks and Wildlife Society Tembec Forestry Association Deal Mr.

Drew Caldwell (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society and Tembec forestry corporatio n recently negotiated an important deal on the east side of the province which significantly affects critical wildlife habitat and

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1307 bolsters Manitoba's bid for gaining UNESCO World Heritage status for this region of the province. Can the Minister of Conservation inform the House of the details of this deal? Hon. Stan Struthers (Min ister of Conservation): Mr. Speaker, in April 2006 we released our recovery strategy for the boreal woodl and caribou. In June of '06 we listed the caribou as threatened under our Endangered Species Act. In the '07 budget we provided for two more caribou biologists.

I congratulate Tembec and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society for moving forward in a progressive way, I believe, in deferring logging operations for 50 years on an area of 26,000 hectares which is the winter core zone for the Owl Lake woodland caribou herd. This is a very good step forward. It shows that co-operation works, and it shows that with leadership we can protect the signal species on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. Falcon Lake Ambulance Service Suspension of Service Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr.

Speaker, earlier today I received a phone call from a constituent in Falcon Lake indicating that they received a letter today telling them that their ambulance service had been suspended yesterday and wouldn't be available till tomorrow. Can the Minister of Infra structure (Mr. Lemieux) indicate what he is doing to ensure that that ambulance service remains open in Falcon Lake and residents get timely notice when that ambulance service is going to be disrupted? Hon.

Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): As the member knows well, as we discussed during Estimates, we work very diligently with the community of Falcon Lake to ensure that any suspensions in service are very short and are covered by the surrounding area. Certainly we know that historically our investments in emergency medical services are very clear. We have worked very diligently to ensure that we increase response times through the investment in the Medical Transportation Co-ordination Centre in Brandon. We have invested several millions of dollars in replacing the entire fleet.

We know that, just recently, we anno unced the primary care paramedics course so that we can increase that complement of paramedics. School Divisions Property Developments Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): In the aftermath of the Seven Oaks School Division land development fiasco engineered by the Premier's former campaign manager, we have great concern about the ability of this government to manage new property developments. They've decided to get into the development business once again with the Waverley West subdivision, Mr. Speaker.

We have great concern about their ability to manage, on behalf of Manitoba taxpayers, this subdivision. Now they've introduced a bill, Bill 21, that's going to divert any profits from the subdivision, and we don't know yet whether there will be profits, but if there are, they'll be diverted from that into a political slush fund which we are concerned will be used to meet unfunded liabilities and deficits that they've run up in other areas of the Housing Department. I've spoken to the families in St. Norbert and Fort Garry, in Seine River, in Southdale, and, of course, in Fort Whyte, Mr.

Speaker, who are concerned about the pressures on their neighbourhoods created by new development. These families in St. Norbert, Fort Garry, Seine River, Southdale and Fort Whyte are concerned that money is being taken out of their communities and put to some unspecified need. Of course, in Fort Whyte we have the need for a high school. We've got transportation problems and other issues facing the south end of the city.

Will the minister agree to withdraw Bill 21, use any profits that they get from development for local needs so that local residents can deal with the pressures being created by those developments on their communities? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): All revenues, Mr. Speaker, are covered under the

summary financial budget. Instead of having two sets of books, as we had with the Conservatives, we now have one set of books for all of Manitobans. Point No. 2, we believe that sitting on a land bank inside the city of Winnipeg was not the wisest use of land and availability for citizens of Winnipeg. We had a recommendation from former mayor, Murray, which we agreed to. We also had a concurrence from the exis ting mayor, Mayor Sam Katz, and we are proposing in the legislation–it

1308 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 hasn't been passed by the Legislature–that all funds from, if there are profits, be redirected to affordable housing, particularly in the inner city. We think that's a good balance to develop the density of housing and the affordability of housing in Winnipeg. I would also point out that when we came into office there were no housing projects outside of the Perimeter Highway. When the former mayor was in office, there were no housing projects in Brandon.

I'm pleased that we've introduced that as well in terms of a vision for affordable housing all across Manitoba, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Gio's 25th Anniversary Ms. Jennifer Howard (Fort Rouge): Mr. Speaker, I rise before the House today to recognize the 25th anniversary of Gio's, which is being celebrated this week. As the clubhouse of the non-profit organization, the Oscar Wilde Memorial Society, Gio's has been a cornerstone in Winnipeg's gay and lesbian community. It has existed in many locations over the years.

Its current home at 155 Smith Street is within my constituency. The Gio's board and volunteers are dedicated to improving the quality of life for gay and lesbian people and their supporters throughout the province. They've fulfilled this objective by encouraging and supporting community development through cultural and sporting events, as well as supporting other non- profit organizations. Mr. Speaker, 25 years ago Gio's founders envisioned a community centre in which members would be welcomed into a safe and supportive space.

In its early years, Gio's merged existing educational and social service organizations such as a lending libr ary, resource centre and telephone line with its licensed clubhouse so that it could serve as much more than a meeting place. The board and members of Gio's have always been faithful to the original vision of an organization that gives back to the community. To this end they created a registered charity called Gio's Cares that has raised thousands of dollars to support people living with HIV and AIDS. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank Gio's and their board of directors for the role they've played in supporting the gay and lesbian community in this city for nearly three decades. I especially want to pay tribute to the founders of Gio's who, in an age when coming out could mean the loss of a job, a home or a family, bravely worked to create a gathering place for an entire community. Thank you. * (14:20) Hazel M. Kellington School, Neepawa Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Mr. Speaker, as a parent with children who attended Hazel M.

Kellington School in Neepawa, I was not surprised to find this wonderful school had been honoured nationally for its excellence in education. I would like to congratulate the teachers, staff, students and parents of HMK school for being featured in Today's Parent magazine. The talented and dedicated teaching staff work as a team to provide quality education to our students. Each of them deserves our appreciation and, as a community, we were proud to see one of their own honoured in this capacity. Their colleague, Heather Douglas, was named in the magazine as one of Canada's terrific teachers.

Heather is a middle year s teacher specializing in physical education. She was praised in the popular publication for her inventive approaches to improving accessibility an d enjoying of physical education. Her progressive and innovative teaching methods have made gym class a rewarding experience for her students, motivating them to improve their health and personal goals. Heather designed a movement spectacular which combines a dance performance and exercise. Her love of both children and music is inspiring.

Heather was also awarded the Manitoba Physical Education Teachers' Asso ciation Middle Years Award for 2005-06. The creative and energetic approach to education can be found in all aspects of HMK school. The school has adopted the practice of identifying and working with the individual needs of students. They tailor learning to provide for the best educational experience possible. The accolades bestowed on both the school and Heather Douglas are well deserved. Their contributions and imagination exceed everyday expectations, serving to enrich the quality of education in Neepawa and in our province. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1309 Collège Sturgeon Heights Collegiate Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): Mr. Speaker, the rededication of the former Sturgeon Creek and Collège Silver Heights collegiates was an emotional and inspiring ceremony. The spirit of both institutions is alive and well in the new Collège Sturgeon Heights Collegiate. It was a touching experience for me as the MLA representing the former Collège Silver Heights Collegiate to pass the honour on to my colleague the Member for Assiniboia (M r. Rondeau). I was also pleased that the Minister of Education (Mr.

Bjornson) was able to attend, as well as the members for Minto and Kirkfield Park . It was a pleasure to hear both the Member for Minto (Mr. Swan) and the Member for Kirkfield Park (Ms. Blady) speak as former Huskies on their fond memories of Collège Silver Heights Collegiate. I was so proud and impressed that all students embraced the rededication w ith such maturity and optimism for the future. The rededication was able to bring together two distinct communities that will now be able to go forward united. The school board also handled the very challenging change with sensitivity and dignity.

The public consultations were essential for parents and residents to have their concerns heard and to allow the community to transition to the new school. Doing the right thing is not always the easiest or the most popular option. The board of trustees are to be commended for their foresight. Students at the new Collège Sturgeon Heights Collegiate will have increased access to a variety of programs. One parent I spoke with was delighted that her daughter would be able to take vocational courses that the former school was not staffed to offer.

All students will benefit from increased course offerings and the ability to become well-rounded students with developed skills in both the academic and vocational streams. I wish to extend special congratulations to the members of the band and their director Blaine Workman. Their steadfast commitment to improving their community has made the transition to the new entity of Collège Sturgeon Heights Collegiate easier for staff, students and parents. I would ask that all members join with me in congratulating the staff, students and community for the successful rededication of Collège Sturgeon Heights Collegiate.

It is exciting to see two great academic traditions unite t ogether. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. James Ehnes Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to take this opportunity to recognize one of the finest jewels in Manitoba's musical crown. The talents of Mr. James Ehnes, a concert violinist, are truly extraordinary. Mr. Ehnes, who was recognized in his youth as a musical prodigy, has parlayed his expansive broad talent into a blossoming career that has already elicited international critical acclaim. The Daily Telegraph of London referred to Mr.

Ehnes as "one of the most gifted and sincerely expressive artists to have emerged in recent times." In the past three years, he has received the prestigious Amy Fisher Career Grant, won a Juno Award, received an honorary doctorate from Brandon University, and was made a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. Mr. Ehnes has become one of the world's most foremost concert violinists. A recent Free Press headline read, "Manitoba's own James Ehnes." However, I must object to our province's hasty appropriation of the dazzling violinist. Mr. Ehnes is indeed a product of Brandon, Manitoba.

Of course, the city of Brandon is proud to share his music with the rest of the province, Canada and the world. We only ask that the community in which he cultivated his musical talents is able to retain our own special ownership of the rising star. Mr. Ehnes was born and raised in Brandon and the prodigy received musical training from a Brandon University professo r at an early age. While his talents have carried him far from the Wheat City, his parents, Barbara and Allan, still call Brandon home.

Despite all of the success, James' persona remains consistent with his humble prairie origins which makes him an excellent ambassador for the city of Brandon and the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, I would like to thank Mr. Ehnes for his exemplary representation of our province and wish him luck in his future musical endeavours. United Way 2007 Fundraising Campaign Mr. Bidhu Jha (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the good work of the United Way here in Winnipeg and to commend them for the successful kick-off of their 2007 fu ndraising campaign. I had

1310 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 the pleasure of attending this event and witnessing the impressive sight of 40 teams from media outlets, local businesses and the government competing with one another to pull a Boeing 727 and a McDonnell Douglas DC-9 airplane. After raising $15.5 million last year, the goal of the 2007 campaign is to raise $16.5 million. All the money raised is then distributed among the over 60 local organizations which received financial support from the United Way.

The United Way is an organization that works to improve life and to strengthen society by engaging individuals and mobilizing collective action to address the needs and concerns of our community . Especially, the United Way of Winnipeg works with the local organizations to reduce poverty, engage youth and build neighbourhoods. The example set by the United Way demonstrates that much can be done when we work together towards a common goal. As I spoke at the event, Mr. Speaker, it is a co-operative, collaborative, collective way, the United Way and the only way to pull forward.

I am pleased to be able to congratulate the organizers on the success of their kick-off and thank them on behalf of members for their continued work in building a stronger community right here in Winnipeg. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. GRIEVANCES Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker– Mr. Speaker: On a grievance? Mr. Schuler: On a grievance, Mr. Speaker. I wish to raise an issue of great concern to all Manitobans and it has to do with the Seven Oaks School Division, the Swinford Park debacle that took place.

Over the last week, I've had the opportunity to spend some time with the Minister of Education (Mr. Bjornson). I know that, after having spent some time with him and laying out the difficulties of the entire fiasco, he now has a greater understanding of what took place. * (14:30) It stems from a not-approved subdivision. A school division decided to proceed with a housing development, something clearly not within its mandate, something that it was not supposed to be participating in, and then spiralled downward.

What concerns us, and I laid it out in great detail for the minister, was that there were certain areas of complication. First of all was that on a Friday, or pardon me, on a Monday, May 3, ther e was a transfer of documents. It actually goes before that, Mr. Speaker, and I apologize, this is very convoluted, and that has to do on May the 1, when a letter, a complaint, was received by the City of Wi nnipeg, by the minister's office, by various individuals, from someone complaining about this development being put on by the Seven Oaks School Division.

Interestingly enough, the following Friday , all of a sudden there was a flurry of activity, even though the complaint hadn't been received until the Monday, asking for approval for this subdivision. I've asked the minister now on numerous occasions for the letter that was written by the Seven Oaks School Division staff and their solicitor, asking or requesting the Public Schools Finance Board to confirm, in writing, that Swinford Park had been approved, and we are still waiting for that letter.

But it's interesting how on Friday, April 29, all of this information is requested, although the complaint doesn't come in until the following Monday. That was a definite area of concern. We know that the former campaign manager, the Premier's (Mr. Doer) campaign manager, one Brian O'Leary, the disgraced campaign manager, was involved with this, and what became very worrisome and of some great concern to those who've read the Auditor General's report, a fantastic document, though she's made it very clear, very clear, that she is not a watchdog, that that's in fact the role of the opposition and the Legislature.

But she lays out the time line very, very clearly. What is odd about this is that, when that request that evidently was made on April 29, although the complaint first came to light on the following Monday, when it actually went in front of the board, there seemed to have been mass amnesia to whether it was there or how it got there, what it read and so on and so forth.

In fact, if you look on page 25 of the Auditor's report, you will find in the third bullet that: "the May 5 Motion Record noted above, normally completed at the meeting, did not identify the presenter, mover and seconder." The whole situation keeps getting more and more convoluted. We find out, then, that not just were two books being run simultaneously, and one was on the residential development, one was on the

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1311 school side, there's actually two audited statements, which is strange by half. It is something that is normally never done. Two books are usually not run. It is not something that we want to see. We don't want to see it in private business; we don't accept it in non-profit organizations. But somehow the Minister of Education has convinced himself that this is normal practice to be running one project on two sets of books. Here are the financial statements. I've listed them in Hansard as of last week. Clearly, a great concern.

What we find is that there was supposedly, on the residential development, a surplus, but if you look at the other set of books, that there was a substantial loss. So, again, it's the same project, two sets of books. One side shows $500,000 surplus. The other side shows $800,000 loss, which shows a substantial loss in all of this, and we've laid this out for the minister and indicated to him that there were other areas.

I would refer this House to page 22 of the Auditor General's report in which it made it very clear that, first of all, the school division went out and asked for tenders for purchasing of property. They then found out that there was a lot of money to be made. The planner comes to the board and says, reject it, we can make a lot of money, and really it brings into question the ethics of the entire project. That's why I ask the minister, who will be held to account? Is it going to be the superintendent, the former disgraced campaign manager of the Premier (Mr. Doer)? Is it going to be the school board?

We find out that there was this mass amnesia that took place. I asked the minister, for instance, was school trustee, Ross Eadie, was he one of those who could actually remember what took place at that board meeting, or was he one of those who forgot? Which one is he? What this does, if the minister and his government aren't more forthcoming, is it really casts a doubt on a lot of individuals because names are not forthcoming. The Auditor made it very clear that it was not her responsibility to do that. That is now a public forum.

I think it's very important for all taxpayers to know who could remember what came in front of a board meeting and who didn't. What we asked the minister was to hold someone accountable. Someone was to be held to account. His answer was, well, I appreciate that the barn door was left open, the horses have all fled, and now we've slammed the door shut. We've put new locks on, we fixed the fence, and that's it. That's not good enough for this Chamber, Mr. Speaker.

We believe that there must be some oversight over this entire fiasco and that those who are responsible should at least receive some kind of admonishment. They should receive at least some kind of discipline. But what the minister wants to do is walk away from this because it is chock-full of NDP supporters. That's the problem with this entire fiasco, that the minister and his government are washing themselves of this. They want to see nobody held to account because every time they hold someone accountable, it means it's going to reflect on them and their government.

That's unfortunate for the taxpayers, not just of the Seven Oaks School Division, but of all taxpayers because, as I laid out in Hansard very clearly, in the end, somebody is going to have to pay for this debacle. It's either going to be the taxpayers of the school division or the taxpayers of Manitoba. But somewhere there's going to have to be someone who pays. Mr. Speaker, that is why today Bill 214 was introduced; that's why I introduced it, The Public Schools Amendment Act, which deals with what school divisions can and can't do, what they should or shouldn't do.

I would ask members of this Chamber: Look at that legislation. It now makes it very clear, not just what they may or may not do, but what they shouldn't be doing, and that is being developers with the public's money, with money that should be going to students, to teachers, to education. Mr. Speaker, I leave the House with this troubling matter and look forward to hearing other comments in the near future. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Ste. Rose, on a grievance? Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Yes.

I think there are quite a number of things that I could bring a grievance forward on, but I'm choosing to bring it forward on the proposed bipole line with the route that this government has chosen. I heard the First Minister (Mr. Doer) on several occasions in his responses today talk about wise choices and wisely-thought-out and things like that. I may not be one of the three wise men, but I certainly have gained some country smarts over the course of my life, so I'll try to approach this issue. When we're doing a project of this size and this scope, we need to make sure that we have made the

1312 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 right decisions. They have to be responsible economically, and there has to be a payback on what we're doing. This whole issue seems to me to be driven by some reasons that aren't even admitted. We hear a different excuse every day that it's brought up in the House, and we find an answer for that excuse. So another excuse comes up the next day. There are economic benefits to the line, I presume, almost anywhere it goes, except that, in one case, it costs a half a billion dollars more than the other case.

A straight-line route down the east side of Lake Winnipeg obviously makes the most sense for a line. We know that there are some environmental concerns and securities con cerns, but those concerns were overcome when we ran the two bipole lines down between the lakes, and they would be here too. There's certainly a lot of room there for that line to come down the other side and allow the UNESCO biosphere project. * (14:40) I see great returns in the area if the bipole line goes down the east side where it should go for the economic benefit of the Aboriginals of the area.

The reserves would have some employment out of clearing for the line and helping to build the line. I would see a road tied into the whole process, and we would get an east-side road. We're talking about two separate projects here and adding more to the cost. It would certainly, I think, tie in as a good project and provide an all-weather road to those remote communities. I think one of the major considerations, and it's been brought up in the House, is the line loss when you go an extra 300 to 400 kilometres.

That line loss is supposed to be projected in the neighbourhood of about 100 megawatts, which is the equivalent to the whole wind farm that's at St. Leon. Why build the wind farm and then lose that amount of power by going the longer route with a line? I've toured the Kettle generating station on several occasions, and each of the turbines in that station produces about roughly 100 megawatts. That's like turning off one of those generators strictly on the line loss. We're here to do the best thing for Manitobans.

I realize, occasionally, there are outside influences that do have a bearing, but we're here to make the best decisions for the people of Manitoba. The best decision is obviously the east-side route for that bipole line. The costs are less, the impacts on the environment are less, because, if we come down on the west side of Lake Winnipegosis, we're going to cut just as many trees to put the line in because of the extra 400 kilometres it has to travel. That's just not acceptable. I don't think anyone has paid any attention to any forward planning on the west-side route.

The east- side route, I believe, probably has some studies. I haven't seen them, but there would have to be because it's been talked about for 20 years. So I expect there are some studies on it. Coming down the west side, you talk about impacts, and who's going to be supportive, who's going to be holding community meetings and having their say on the whole process. The west side, there are First Nations, quite a number of them, that will be somewhat impacted, and besides that, on the west side it will come through a lot more farmland to get to its destination. That will result in a lot of anxiety there.

That's privately held land that agreements and purchases and all the other things that go with it, easements, will have to be made on. I believe that this government has failed to even consider the implications of coming down the route they've chosen. I know that an environmental study will have to be done, but usually that is a long drawn-out process, and I wonder if this is the only route they're going to consider or whether they will consider environmental studies on both sides. There's obviously room on the east side for both the UNESCO biosphere development and the new bipole line.

It seems to me that the sale of this power is going to be to the east and to the south. Once again that adds to the point that it should come down the east side. It's closer to the markets that are there. I understand that there's a necessity to develop an east- west grid at some point and I know that some money has been allocated to the studies for that, but you might as well take–once again line loss and cost of building the line, follow the shortest route, save the people of this province money.

When they talk about a $500-million extra cost amortized over 40 or 50 years the interest will add up to another half a million dollars or more and then it becomes a billion-dollar extra cost to build that line where they're proposing. Right at the present time we're seeing Manitoba Hydro suggesting approaching the Public Utilities Board or maybe already approaching them to

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1313 increase rates, and it would certainly appear to me that if they proceed with this line where it's proposed, we'll see the rates continue to rise over and over and over again. It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that the government of this province give some serious consideration to the choices they've made and does the right thing and switches to the other side with the eastern side line. Thank you very much. ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Mr. Speaker: As previously agreed to, the Committee of Supply will move to room 255 to consider Committee of Supply.

Would the Chair please proceed to room 255. House Business Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you canvass the House please to see if there's an agreement to move the following Estimates from the Chamber into room 255 for consideration after Enabling and Other Appropriations? The Estimates to be moved are the Estimates for the Civil Service Commissi on, for the Employee Pensions and Other Costs and for the Legislative Assembly. Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement to move the following Estimates from the Chamber into room 255 for consideration after Enabling and Other Appropriations?

The Estimates to be moved are the Estimates for the Civil Service Commission, for Employee Pensions and Other Costs and for the Legislative Assembly. Is there agreement? [Agreed] Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, concurrent with the sitting of the Committee of Supply until its completion, I wonder if you would call bills in the following order: 16, 3, 18, 17, 13, 10, 8, and then revert to the order that bills appear. Mr. Speaker: Okay, we'll be doing second readings on the following bills: 16, 3, 18, 17, 13, 10, 8; and, if there's time, we will proceed with the rest in order as they're listed on the Order Paper.

Okay, I'm going to be calling second reading, Bill 16, The Statutory Holidays Act (Various Acts Amended). SECOND READINGS Bill 16-The Statutory Holidays Act (Various Acts Amended) Hon. Nancy Allan (Min ister of Labour and Immigration): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Healthy Li ving (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that Bill 16, The Statutory Holidays Act (Various Acts Amended), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor has been advised of the bill and I table the message. * (14:50) Mr.

Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Minister of Labour and Immigration, seconded by the honourable Minister of Healthy Living, that Bill 16, The Statutory Holidays Act (Various Acts Amended), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor has been advised of this bill and the message has been tabled. Ms. Allan: In the interest of expediency, I will refer the House to my second reading speech of April 18, 2007. I'd like to reference my remarks in this Chamber on April 18, 2007, regarding our new proposed holiday.

Since last spring, a contest was held among Manitoba schools to name the holiday, and we have announced that the new statutory holiday will be called Louis Riel Day. That name is the winner from the many entries we received from schools throughout the province as determined by the MB4Youth, a committee of the Department of Education, Citizenship, and Youth, made up of highly engaged and articulate young people. I would like to thank them for their participation and all of the schools who participated with their suggestions. With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend this bill to the House. Mr.

Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I'm pleased to be able to put a few words on the record today about Bill 16, The Statutory Holidays Act. Because of this act, we'll be having another holiday, next February 18, 2008, but, as my colleague reminds me, it won't be for everybody because some people will still have to work. That's the nature of what happens with

1314 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 statutory holidays. People do need to work on those holidays because people still demand services on those days. Of course, that poses some problems for small businesses with very low margins, and it is an additional cost to them. Something that I would like to speak to as we go along. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, the way the holiday came about is somewhat interesting in that the first time the minister was asked about this bill, she had no intentions of bringing forward a holiday in February.

Within a few weeks, just after that, after our leader of our party said that he would be in favour of a holiday, the government minister and government changed their mind and very quickly embraced the idea of a new holiday in February. Of course, we know the reason for that is that, with the radio station involvement and the petition and the much-touted holiday, the wide support was out in the public. The NDP saw this and thought, well, we better get on board with that one. Subsequent to that, we had legislation brought in that would see a holiday coming in February.

The minister has said that the holiday is to be called Louis Riel Day. Certainly, we know that several schools participated in the choosing of that name, and we do want to congratulate and commend the school children who took some time to actually be involved in the process. We think that that was worthwhile. When we had proposed that there be a holiday, we had taken it upon ourselves, too, to do a survey as to what the holiday should be named. Family Day came up as a possible name. I think the reason for Family Day is because, you know, we do have this holiday in other provinces in Canada.

We have a holiday in Alberta, and we have the holiday in Saskatchewan. We know that the one in Alberta is called Family Day, and we know that it would be nice to go and have a Family Day here so we could go visit our family and our friends that are out in Alberta, and maybe we could have a holiday together. I think that the idea of the holiday put forward initially, I believe, by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) has merit. It certainly is something that people will look forward to.

The long stretch between New Year's Day and Easter is a long, cold stretch, and I know that many people would like to have a day to spend some time with relatives and friends and enjoy some outside activities. But, having said that, I know that when we proposed the idea of this statutory holiday, we also recognized that there was going to be a significant burden for small businesses. We felt that this holiday, when announced and when it actually would come about, should be with some offsetting tax reliefs, Mr. Speaker.

I think that anybody that's been in a small business, or worked in a small business, or owned a small business, or had anything to do with business, knows that the bottom lines, the margins, are not always there, and the fact is that this holiday is going to cost businesses a significant amount of money. I think that we needed to look at–and I would encourage the government to do so–at the idea that we proposed which was reducing the payroll tax and reducing the PST, Mr. Speaker. I think that we need to recognize that there are a number of businesses in this province that this does impact on very significantly.

We have to understand that small business is the backbone of our economy in this province. We cannot afford to drive small businesses out of Manitoba. We need to encourage small businesses to come here, to stay here, the owners and the people working in those businesses to stay here and raise their families here, and for them to do that, there has to be a competitive edge in terms of other provinces.

I just want to, also, say that supported by people like Dave Angus, the CEO of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, felt that it was necessary to do some consulting with the business community, and it is a cost to business. He recognizes that, as do his members. The same with the president of the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce and, of course, Shannon Martin, from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, has pegged the amount that this is going to cost the economy and the cost to businesses in Manitoba at $157 million. That is a significant blow to the economy.

So, while some of us may enjoy having another holiday in the middle of February–and I think a lot of people will enjoy that–there are a lot of people that it is going to impact on and significantly, and I think that that needs to be recognized. I think that the government did a poor job of mitigating the significant problems that it posed to some of the small businesses. Having been in business myself, an owner-operator of a small business and a small number of employees, I know that working on stat holidays, it was an additional cost, and certainly it is an impact. I think that we should encourage the

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1315 government to look very seriously at what offsetting proposals they may have for small business. I also want to say the idea of this holiday, even though it came up just in the last year, the Member for Portage la Prairie (M r. Faurschou) has often spoken about his idea of having this holiday, and he's had this idea for some time. He got the idea from travelling to Alberta to visit his family and friends out there and recognizing that they called it Family Day, and he thought it was a good idea to have a day set aside for families.

So there certainly has been talk of this bill for quite some time. Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair It's just interesting that the government only jumped on board with this bill once they realized the Opposition Leader (Mr. McFadyen) had said that he thought it was a good idea. Mind you, a good idea with the appropriate tax reliefs in place to offset, but, certainly, the government thought, well, you know, the opposition likes this bill and it's very popular. An election's coming; we better get out there before they do on it.

So we'll bring in a bill; we'll have a new holiday and, of course, we'll take credit for it, because that's exactly what the NDP have done many times. We've proposed some good pieces of legislation, and they just don't give credit where credit is due and decide that they deserve all of the credit. * (15:00) I asked the Minister of Labour (Ms. Allan) in Estimates about it, and she went on and on about, well, you know, we consulted, and that the Leader of the Opposition just said we didn't need consultation. So I said, well, you can't sort of have it both ways.

I mean, if the opposition's idea is a good one and people support it, then you have to give credit where credit is due. If somebody says they don't like it, well, then, you can't just blame it on the opposition. I mean, you have to accept the blame for your own decisions. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, it's an interesting process that's occurred here with the flip-flop of the minister, originally saying, no, there'd be no new holiday and then within tw o weeks, yes, there would be a holiday.

Very quickly a bill was prepared before an election because, of course, we do recognize that there are a lot of people that think that this is a very good plan. Certainly, there'll be people that will enjoy that day and others that will have to work because, as we know–I think all of us know that a holiday is the time when we think, well, we will go and get things done that we need to do, but we need people working to have those things done for us. Of course, if you're the one getting the holiday, you say, well, we have a new holiday and I don't want to work.

I want to go out and do my shopping, and people in the shopping centre will say, but I don't want to work; I want to be at home so I can do something else. So, eventually, what happens is when people do need to work on the stat holidays, there is a cost involved. Th ere is a cost. There is a cost to businesses for the overtime payment and for the time off that these people will need to have.

So that's significant and I don't know if the minister actually did any kind of consultation with the business community to find out how much it was going to cost them and what they would like to see as an offset to mitigate the hardships that would be caused to many businesses because of this bill. As I said, Madam Deputy Speaker, we do have a new holiday, February 18, 2008, to be called Louis Riel Day, and I'm sure that many people in the province will be looking forward to celebrating that new day.

I know many people will be saying, well, here I have to work on that very first holiday that I will not get because businesses, or some businesses at least, will still be open and be required to provide people in the workplace. Madam Deputy Speaker, again, I want to congratulate the schoolchildren that participated. I'd also like to say that, again, we had to put out a survey ourselves, the opposition, to see what suggestions people would come up with in terms of naming the day.

I certainly want to thank anybody that submitted the ideas that they did and participated in the process, which, I think, is important, to get participation from a variety of people in the province as to what they think the holiday should be named, when they think it should happen. Again, I can't say strongly enough about what impact it will have on them as a small business and what steps can be taken to mitigate the pressures that will be brought to bear because of that. Certainly, we recognize that right off the bat because when we said yes we thought the stat holiday would be a good idea.

Yes, but recognizing that there were certainly a number of businesses that would be impacted and the need to provide some forms of tax relief to the businesses so that they did not feel the impacts of this legislation the way they

1316 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 will feel it under the way the bill is proposed by the NDP, Madam Deputy Speaker. But we do look forward to hearing presenters in the committee to see what people will have to say. I know there are some people registered, and I certainly hope that there will be people there to speak about the bill and to see what they have to say, to see how they feel about the consultation process, and how they feel about any mitigation that was done to offset some of the definite hardships that will be enforced, forced on some small businesses in Manitoba.

So, with that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would say that we support the idea of the new stat holiday, Louis Riel Day, in February, beginning in 2005, but we certainly would have liked to have seen this come forward with some meaningful tax relief, as we would have proposed. So, with that, I look forward to hearing what Manitobans have to say in committee and look forward to the holiday next year. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill 16 which is to provide for a new stat holiday for Manitobans.

I believe I can fairly claim some credit for this initiative because I was the first leader to call for a new stat holiday, and I was quite pleased to see that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) came in board in support of this proposition. The NDP were clearly last this time. There's no debate on this one.

It's true that my initial call related to Manitoba Day to celebrate the history of the province, but clearly the final result which we have before us today, which puts it in February, is an excellent resolution of this issue, and I'm pleased that we're actually naming this after Louis Riel which, consistent with my initial suggestion, is a celebration of an important part of the history of our province. I believe that, you know, this will be important day for Manitobans for a long, long time into the future. I think it is an important statement in terms of Métis people and the role of Louis Riel in our province.

The commitments and the initiatives that Louis Riel took with regard to making sure that people in Manitoba were treated well, in setting up a provisional government and, indeed, as Louis Riel was in fact in charge of that government on the day that Manitoba became a province, Louis Riel can appropriately be considered, and was, the de facto first premier of the province. So, certainly, this is a worthy initiative. It is a good initiative, because all of us feel the need in cold, Manitoba Februarys to have an opportunity to have a little bit of extra joy in celebration and be in a good mood.

Certainly, the timing is a very good timing, also, from the respect to Festival de Voyageur. The Festival de Voyageur celebrates the contribution to Métis people in Manitoba, celebrates the culture, the traditions, the heritage that Métis people have contributed to our province. So the timing here will work very closely with the Festival du Voyageur and certainly provide, I believe, an extra reason for Manitobans to know about, to celebrate this particular area of our history. * (15:10) I think it is important to note that we have, of course, many different cultural and ethnic groups in our diverse population.

Some might ask why should we celebrate one versus another perhaps. But, certainly, what we are doing in celebrating here is providing an example, a celebration of some of our particular backgrounds, and in celebrating this, in fact, we pay a tribute to all the cultural and ethnic groups which make up the mosaic which is Manitoba. This kind of approach can certainly lay the groundwork for a global-based Manitoba which looks out at the world because of the wonderful array of different cultural groups and different backgrounds which make up our incredible province. Thank you. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Deputy Speaker, I, too, just want to add a few words to Bill 16. It is worthy of note in terms of the statutory holiday for February being widely accepted amongst the general population. I know it's very popular within my own constituency. I think that the overwhelming support for the statutory holiday is a good reason for us to move forward and to ultimately see this bill become law. The name is something which I don't know if it would have been my first choice, but I respect in fact the process. There have been some other names that have been floated.

My personal preference would have been that of Family Day because I do believe that we need to put more emphasis on our families. It's one of the reasons why back in September I had written or e-mailed, I believe, and faxed the Premier (Mr. Doer) to acknowledge the importance

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1317 of our grandparents by proclaiming a Grandparents Day on the first Sunday after Labour Day. This is something that the United States has been doing since the late '70s. I know at times we've seen private members' bills dealing with grandparents inside the Legislature. I just don't think we do enough to appreciate the importance of families in the province of Manitoba, and that's the essence of why it is I thought it might have been kind of nice to have that as the day. Most importantly, I do believe it's important that we have the statutory holiday.

I listen to my leader talk about the origins of the idea. I remember very clearly the response from the government of the day when we suggested that there be some form of an additional statutory holiday, whether it's a half day, a full day, and so forth. The government, in essence, attempted to laugh the idea off completely.

Now, here we are and the only thing we know for sure is that this is definitely not a New Democratic idea, but, true to form, as we have seen other members' bills and other ideas, whether it's the Liberal Party or the Conservative Party, where something is brought up and the NDP won't support it unless, of course, it's their bill or their idea.

Who are we to deny Manitobans that statutory holiday because, true to form, as in the past, we recognize a good idea when we see a good idea and therefore we have no problems in terms of supporting the idea of having a statutory holiday in February and be very sensitive to the fact that I think that the Minister of Labour's feelings might have been a little bit hurt because she's not able to claim a full 100 percent credit? But maybe she can share some of that glory with other members of the Chamber because she can't really take credit for the idea.

That's something that we all know, but we do acknowledge the importance of passing the bill. Thank you. Mr. Speaker in the Chair Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill 16. On September 25, when the Minister of Labour reintroduced this bill, it was a different situation from the time that I'd first seen it. When I'd first heard and seen of this, I was involved in a small business and probably had a little bit different perspective than I do today. However, I think the holiday would have been better named as a family day. I think that would have been appreciated by all in Manitoba.

However, I also understand the process that was used and, certainly, I think that process deserves accolades. I guess I can't argue with the Louis Riel Day as it was pointed out it does fall during the Festival du Voyageur. However, while we support the proposed holiday, I'd like to also point out that it was the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) that first brought this forward, to my knowledge. Perhaps I can be corrected , but that's how I first became aware of this.

Also, with moving forward with a bill of this nature, there are certainly some impacts, and the impacts on essential services definitely need to be addressed and they raise challenges. They raise scheduling challenges and especially with small businesses. Perhaps these businesses just close; however, in the agricultural communities, we have essential businesses that have to be there and the cost of those businesses as we go forward, the cost of doing business then on statutory holidays becomes an economic burden to many of the operations.

When you're looking at paying one and a half or twice the normal wages or going rates for a service in our industry with small margins, Mr. Speaker, it really is a hardship in many cases. When I first heard this and during the election campaign, I asked then what our platform would be on this. There was definitely a move to bring in a tax system much similar to that in Saskatchewan or perhaps looking at a reduction in the payroll tax to offset the type of hardship that would be brought forward with this type of a bill. I'm just wondering, the minister did a fine job of soliciting for a name for the day.

I'm wondering, however, if she did as good a job at soliciting in how she plans on financing that type of a day for the individual businesses, all the businesses in Manitoba.

I think of the postal service where those individuals don't get to enjoy that holiday at the same time that I do, or the bus drivers, for instance, in the city of Winnipeg and throughout Manitoba that won't get the opportunity to enjoy that holiday at the same time that I do, or perhaps the school boards that need to finance those type of holidays that really is a direct taxation to people in Manitoba. * (15:20) So I'm wondering if the minister has given some thought to whether a meaningful tax break could be brought forward to help offset these costs.

It has been pointed out by a number of people, or at least some people today that the cost to local businesses–

1318 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 and when they say local bu sinesses, I assume that that means within the city of Winnipeg–but the local businesses in all of Manitoba that there would be a cost to local business of $157 million. That's a considerable amount of change, Mr. Speaker. So I would challenge the minister responsible for the bill today that I am willing to support the bill, but I'm challenging that minister to come forward with a meaningful reduction in tax to offset the cost to the businesses.

The businesses with one staff or two staff definitely have a serious challenge and a serious issue. The scheduling of shift work with large companies and even with small companies or delivering the services is definitely an issue, Mr. Speaker. So, again, the challenge is out there. I hope that the minister responsible for this bill has given it some thought and will speak to her colleagues about a meaningful reduction in taxes. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr.

Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 16, The Statutory Holidays Act (Various Acts Amended). Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Bill 3–The Healthy Child Manitoba Act Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth (Mr. Bjornson), that Bill 3, The Healthy Child Manitoba Act;

Loi sur la stratégie « Enfants en santé Manitoba », be now read a second time and be referred to the committee of this House. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor has been advised of this bill and I table his message. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the Minister of Health, seconded by the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth, that Bill 3, The Healthy Child Manitoba Act, be now read a second time and be referred to the committee of this House. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor has been advised of this bill and the message has been tabled. Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Healthy Living): Mr.

Speaker, in the in terests of expediency, I will refer the House to my second reading speech of November 27, 2006, and recommend this bill to the House. Thank you. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I won't defer to expediency. I do want to put a couple of comments on the record regarding this particular piece of legislation. I know my colleagues are urging me on to expound on this particular bill. Certainly, when you look at the program, the Healthy Child program, I can say, you know, as a new parent, relatively new, not so new anymore. I feel like, you know, Canada's new government.

I guess after a year, you can stop referring to yourself as new, I suppose. But, having a son who's one year old, I did learn quite a lot about the need to have an education in terms of what young children need. There isn't really a manual that you take home from the hospital. When you leave the hospital you go home with the skills that you've either intuitively learned or that perhaps your family has pa ssed on. I recognize that my wife and I certainly ca me from a very fortunate situation. We had all the support of family, of a large, extended family and we were in a privileged, I would say, position, Mr.

Speaker, when it comes to coming home with a new child, but also recognizing that many others in Manitoba and, indeed, right across our country aren't fr om that same privileged situation and don't have the same sort of support system that my wife and I were blessed and happy to have around us. So there is a need for government, and I certainly don't always stand up and advocate for government being involved in everybody's life.

I do believe, both as a small "c" and a large "C" Conservative, that there are times that government shouldn't be involved in an individual's life, but, of course, there are also times when there is a need for it, particularly when we look at the protection of children. There is a need for government to have some involvement to ensure that those who don't have the same sort of a start or the same sort of understanding or the same sort of extended support system around them can get the information they need and that help extended then to those children who also need it.

As I think many members in this House have said, I don't think this is a political issue. Many members of this House have said that the best thing we could do for children is to ensure that they have a good start, a healthy start, and to get them into a proper environment.

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1319 Certainly, we've seen too many tragic examples in Manitoba in recent years about situations where children aren't in the proper caring and loving environment. Certainly, we want to ensure that we do all that we can to prevent those tragic situations from happening. I'm clearly in support of the Healthy Child Program. I know that members of the previous government, the Conservative government, were also in support of the program. I really haven't heard anybody in Manitoba who's opposed to the program.

I don't know that there was ever a concern that it was in jeopardy, or that somehow it was under threat. The Minister of Healthy Living (Ms. Irvin-Ross) can correct me. Perhaps she's been hearing others out there who wanted to dismantle the program or do something other than continue to support the program. But I believe, not to put words in the mouth of the Member for River Heig hts (Mr. Gerrard), but I believe the Independent member, the Leader of the Liberal Party, would also say that he supports this particular program. He'll correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure, but I do believe that he would support it.

So, when you look around this Chamber, you know, the New Democrats support the program, the Conservatives historically, and have shown they'd support it, when they were in government, and the Liberals, I'm supposing, are also in favour of the program. Yet the minister, I guess, felt the need to enshrine this into legislation for some particular reason and to add another level of bureaucracy to it, even though it didn't seem to be in peril. It makes one wonder what the genesis or the origin of this particular legislation was. I think there's some suspicion around this Chamber.

Maybe it's not a topic of coffee shop conversation around Manitoba, but I do believe that there are many who wondered whether or not the government, prior to the election, a few months prior to the election, were sort of sitting around and saying, well, what pieces of legislation can we bring forward to the Legislature in advance of the election that will sound very positive and that certainly nobody could oppose to both (

a) it would look like we're doing something and that we have some sort of a robust agenda, and (

b) that there wouldn't be strong opposition either from the political opposition or from Manitobans at large. This is probably why this bill came forward because entrenching a program into legislation that really isn't under threat, really hasn't been considered for anything other than support, seems a little strange, and then adding that extra level of bureaucracy to it. I'm not sure that it will necessarily enhance the program, and I don't think that there was necessarily need for pr otection of the program because it didn't seem to be under threat.

This isn't the first time, unfortunately, that we've seen the government look for pieces of legislation that did very little or didn't change substantially the current situation in Manitoba, bring them to the Legislature just to try to get some sort of a positive feedback, some sort of a positive response from it. You know, you can look at a number of different analogies, I suppose. The Member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson), I believe, raised an issue regarding beaver protection in the Legislature last week, the Beaver Deceiver program.

One wonders if the government is going to be bringing forward a bill, the Beaver Deceiver act, to enshrine that program into legislation to make sure that it doesn't get trampled upon or doesn't get changed in any way even though I don't think there are many people looking to change that program. We've seen it from the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak), from the Government House Leader, who brings forward legislation on Public Accounts. It's already in our rules, Mr.

Speaker, that you need to have six meetings of Public Accounts a year, and yet the government now decides, oh, well, let's put that into legislation because it might look like we're actually doing something more than what's happening currently today. Well, that seems to have backfired on them as I know that there are editorialists and others who are interested in this issue, and there are probably more people interested in the issue of Public Accounts than the members opposite would believe. * (15:30) But, certainly, they've come forward and said, well, this doesn't seem to be a robust piece of legislation.

It doesn't really change the current situation which isn't working well. So, somewhere, prior to the election, ther e was clearly a meeting of NDP minds, not that that's an oxymoron or a contradiction, but there would have been a meeting of NDP minds somewhere to discuss what kind of legislation we need to bring forward prior to election, and I think that is where th is piece of legislation was born, Mr. Speaker. It was hatched, it was conceived from the notion that we need to bring forward legislation that sounds good and that doesn't have

1320 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 any controversy to it as we roll forward to an election. So, here we are, looking at this particular piece of legislation. I know that there's been editorial comment in one of the daily newspapers here in Winnipeg suggesting that this is just simply going to add a level of bureaucracy to a program that's already working fine.

It wasn't n ecessarily being looked for changes; it might just simply grow and grow and grow, and we might have a lot more people being paid more money to do what was already existing in the program and already existing without any sort of controversy or any sort of threat that it was not going to be continued on with.

So, I mean, I would encourage members opposite, as we look forwar d to the next four years, to start to look at different pieces of legislation that actually do something different than what's being done here in Manitoba today, and then move Manitoba forward instead of simply putting forward pieces of legislation that are designed to have us look as though something is going on here in Manitoba. I know the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger) was in Steinbach last week giving a pre-budget consultation meeting, and certainly I know he heard clearly from residents about the many challenges that we have in that community and the lack of attention that he and his government have paid to the Steinbach constituency. In fact, and I'll tie this back in, Mr.

Speaker, because I know you'll be looking for a tie-in, but in fact I thought it was interesting that when the Minister of Finance posted on his overhead display the highway construction that had happened in the riding for the last seven years, the only thing he had up there was the redoing of an intersection on Highway 311. That's all he can come up with was the repaving of an intersection in seven years on Highway 311. Isn't that shameful that he could only find that one small example of what happened in the constituency? But, going back to this bill, Mr.

Speaker, how this relates to the topic at hand is, you know, one can imagine maybe the Minister of Finance–and I don't want to give him any ideas because he probably already has ideas–but maybe he's looking at legislation and saying, well, we should bring in legislation that mandates the pre-budget consultation meetings, the pre-budget consultation act, even though nobody is saying that the pre-budget consultations shouldn't be there. Nobody is saying that they should be taken away, but let's bring in another piece of legislation so that they can put it on the Order Paper.

I've probably got the attention of the Government House Leader now, thinking, this is a great idea. You know, we're going to put it on the Order Paper; we're going to have the pre-budget consultation act. Everybody's going to think we're doing something when, really, nothing more is being done than was being done before. So, Mr. Speaker, there's where I think the concern is for Manitobans , you know, when there' area lot of other ways that the government could be expending their time and their energy, and in some extent their resources, on things that are important.

I raised in Question Period just earlier today the issue of two pediatric doctors who are leaving the province. You know, there's some irony, some disappointing irony, to the fact that the same day the Minister of Healthy Living (Ms. Irvin-Ross) reintroduces the Healthy Child Manitoba Act, we're losing two pediatric doctors here in Manitoba. What better way to keep children healthy than to ensure that these pediatric doctors would be here? I'm not going to estimate, Mr.

Speaker, how much time or energy a department has spent on putting together a bill, but, clearly, there's some time and energy that it takes to put forward a bill to ensure that the minister is briefed and understands all the different issues that are going forward there. Instead of putting forward a bill that enshrines something that's already happening, what if that time and energy had been put in place to keep those two pediatric doctors in Manitoba to work to ensure that the health system for young children was a strength and that we weren't losing those doctors?

So there's a sad irony, I think, that on this same day that we're debating this particular bill, we also know that children's health isn't improving in Manitoba; it's actually worsening because we're losing some of these medical specialists that we need to keep here in the province of Manitoba. There are parents, I think, who would either be concerned that their children might develop some sort of a disease or need these sorts of professionals, or that already have this particular affliction and they want to ensure that these doctors stay. So I would encourage on a go-forward basis, looking forward, not back.

Some might say, Mr. Speaker, on a go-forward basis that the minister looks toward bills and ideas that are actually improving Manitoba, changing something of substance that we don't have here today, whether that

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1321 would be addiction treatment, for example. I've talked to the minister about this, or other particular issues that fall under her narrow, but in some ways, certainly, important ministry that she focusses on those so that Manitobans can see the benefit of the work that she's putting forward. So, clearly, Mr. Speaker, we will not be opposing this particular pi ece of legislation.

We've always, as Conservatives, stood for ensuring that children get the best start that they possibly can in life whether that's a political statement, whether that's a personal statement, and I know looking at the full benches here on our side of the House that there are many, many members who have children, who raise their children, and they know the importance of ensuring that those young people get the best start that they can. So we will always continue with our support in ensuring that those young children get a good start.

P e r h a p s i n s o m e w a y s o n e w o n d e r s i f t h e government isn't protecting themselves from themselves. Maybe they're bringing in this legislation because we know that there was no opposition on this side of the House and I doubt that the Liberal Leader had opposition, Mr. Speaker. [interjection] I look forward for the Member for Brandon East (Mr. Caldwell) assuming his rightful Cabinet position, and we can have this debate in Estimates. I know it's been a long summer of lobbying for the Member for Brandon East with letters and articles in trying to ensure he secured his seat.

So, when he reaches that, we can have the discussion about this particular act, and I can ask him, maybe he's bringing forward the opposition to the Healthy Child program. Maybe it was that member. Maybe it was the Member for Gimli (Mr. Bjornson) who was concerned about the Healthy Child act, and so the minister said, well, we have to protect ourselves from our own caucus members; let's bring in this legislation and entrench it so that no New Democratic member can pull out this important program ever again no matter how long they're in government. But I can tell you, Mr.

Speaker, not only will we not oppose this particular bill, but when we're back in government we'll ensure that not only does the Healthy Child act remain in place, but that the program get stronger each and every year we're in government. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on Bill 3, The Healthy Child Manitoba Act, and I recognize that the Conservatives are saying that they're not the opposition.

Well, we are the opposition here, and we recognize that we have to do a job, and we have some major changes that we're going to suggest to this act because, quite frankly, it needs a bit of an overhaul. I would say that–let me start by talking about what we suspect are the two reasons for this bill. First of all, the Doer NDP government has a less than stellar record when it comes to child health. That has been well documented in a report titled Six Lost Years, an assessment of the record of the NDP in their first six years with regard to child health. I don't need to go further than that.

The NDP needed, therefore, a publ ic relations statement suggesting at least that they were doing something to improve the health of children, because their record was so terrible that they recognized that they needed to do something that would give them some positive public relations in this area. * (15:40) Second, I believe that the NDP recognized that they had done a very poor job in their first eight years, and, clearly, that there was a need to make some internal changes whic h reflected the fact that they'd been so unsuccessful when it comes to improving the health of children and, therefore, that they'd better do something.

Yes, they have got a Healthy Child Committee of Cabinet, and they've decided now that they're going to be handing out some grants to try and get some support and some changes in terms of child health in Manitoba. Well, the problem, however, is that when we look at the record–and let's look at this–the NDP's record when it comes to the health of children has been somewhat dismal.

When we held the hearings about the health of children, I remember hearing the incredible story about children who were born under the government of the NDP who had tremendous problems with dental caries, not just one child, but whole communities of children born under the stewardship of the NDP who, by age two, were having such severe dental ca ries that they needed to have surgical procedures in order to help them out.

They had to fly many hundreds of miles, some of these children, from their home communities to get surgical procedures to correct the problem which should have been prevented by good stewardship and good government before it ever developed to such a shocking extent.

1322 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 I remember hearing and seeing the problem demonstrated in photos, demonstrated in children, who had such a severe problem with dental caries, again under the watch of the NDP, that they were literally crying when they tried to eat because they were so badly off. This shouldn't be happening in the province of Manitoba, but, sadly, it is happening and continues to happen in the province of Manitoba in the year 2007.

It is a tragedy of enormous proportions, a tragedy on which we are spending a lot of money having surgical procedures for very young children which are totally unnecessary because the prevention, the adequate support for the health of children, has not been there in the way that it should be there. Mr. Speaker, I can give another example. This is in terms of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders. All of us in this Chamber, I believe, want to see the incidence of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders reduced dramatically from what it is.

All of us in this Chamber, I believe, want to see children identified as early as possible so they can be helped and that families can be helped, instead of the tragedies which occur in our province on a daily basis because children are not identified early and families are not being helped adequately when they have a child with FASD. But, as the Minister of Healthy Living (Ms. Irvin-Ross) described just the other day, she doesn't yet have reliable numbers for the incidence of FASD in Manitoba. You know, Mr.

Speaker, it's sort of extraordinary when the federal government can have a study and get the work done to have the incidence determined for FASD in Stony Mountain Penitentiary, but this government can't even do the work to give us clear numbers, accurate numbers, solid numbers, for the incidence of FASD in the children in Manitoba. We need to be doing the work to identify and to help these children. We need to make sure that no child falls through the cracks. Sadly, under the system at the moment, we are having lots of children fall through the cracks.

So I believe that one of the things that needs to be done is to make sure that we have these solid, accurate measures of inci dence of problems like FASD. There was, at one point, a registry, but the funding for that was cancelled under the previous government and has never been reinstated. Sadly, the movement in this direction has been very slow, so that there hasn't been a lot moved forward in terms of determining even the incidence of FASD among children in Manitoba so we could start to address this issue and know whether m easures that are being taken actually have an impact on the incidence. Mr.

Speaker, there are a number of elements of this bill which as they are put now are highly unsatisfactory. Let me give you an example. It's totally wrong and inappropriate to have an annual report every five years. They won't have a report until they're out of government. They don't want to be accountable. We need a report annually, every year, outcome data with good solid information, not just some PR document five years from now. This is a disgrace to have this set up without a proper annual report and without clear indications of the important things which are going to be in the annual report.

Second, one would expect that the Manitoba Institute of Child Health, a very important organization in our province, would be mentioned here and that they would at least have a representative on the committee the government is setting up. Certainly this is something which one would expect would be a basic ingredient, that the provincial Healthy Child Advisory Committee would have a representative from the Manitoba Institute of Child Health with some assurance of solid scientific background and understanding of child health represented on this committee. I believe we have already seen, Mr.

Speaker, that time and time again, we need to ensure–and we've talked about this with regard to Manitoba Hydro and other committees with appointments, that they need to be done in a way that is appropriate, but they also need to be done in a way that is going to provide a report to the legislative committee. This is so important, that that report and the advisory committee should report directly to a committee of the Manitoba Legislature, not just to the minister.

We certainly should have the provincial Healthy Child Advisory Committee reporting to a committee of the Legislature, so that the members and the chair of the committee can be asked questions directly. This problem, under this government, of a lack of accountability, a terrible lack of accountability has to be changed. We need to have accountability in this province. We are not getting now. We need to have it. Things must change. I suggest, Mr.

Speaker, as we have talked about on numerous occasions, that one of the fundamentals in this whole area, as we've talked about earlier as Liberals, is to set up a specialist network dealing with maternal and child health, just like there is CancerCare Manitoba, that there needs to be a formal

October 15, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1323 provincially reporting province-wide maternal and child health specialist network set up to help co-ordinate activities to make sure that the integration of education, research and care is ongoing. It is sad the NDP government has not recognized and incorporated in this document some of the essential changes that are needed if this is going to work in a better way than it has worked in the last eight years. The health of our children is very, very important to all of us. It's important to us as citizens.

It is important to us as parents and grandparents and other family members. It is important to us as members of our community. It is important, not only for children in one part of the province, but for children in all parts of the province, irrespective of where they are born or live or reside in Manitoba. * (15:50) The health of our children is very, very important. That, Mr.

Speaker, is why it's so important to do a good job on this bill, and that's why it's so important to make some changes that will improve the bill and improve the work of Manitoba and Manitobans in improving the health of children in our province. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 3, The Healthy Child Manitoba Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Bill 18–The Forest Health Protection Act Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 18, The Forest Health Protection Act;

Loi sur la protection de la santé des forêts, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor has been advised of this bill and I table the message. Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Attorney General, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance, that Bill 18, The Forest Health Protection Act, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor has been advised of this bill and the message has been tabled. Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, it's very clear that the protection of forests and the ability to be flexible in terms of those responses apply to not just Manitoba but to all jurisdictions in western Canada. We've seen the infestation of numerous forms of disease and pesticide into ou r forest systems that, in other times and in other places, have not existed in Canada. The ability of the province to function effectively and to function expeditiously with respect to these infestations is tantamount to the protection of our forest, both the economic and the health and well-being of our forests.

This bill, together with other actions of our government, has moved towards promoting and improving that response in both an expeditious and economic fashion. One needs only to look at the devastation that's occurred in British Columbia and Alberta with respect to spruce budworm to recognize the significance of what we have to do. With those few words, I commend this bill and its passage to members of this House. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr.

Speaker, I'm happy to be here on behalf of our side of the House to put a few words on the record with respect to The Forest Health Protection Act, and I'm sure the minister will at some point be willing to put his words on the record with respect to this bill. I would hope he would, anyway. Mr. Speaker, we certainly agree with the intent of any bill that helps to reduce any potential health threat to our beautiful Manitoba forests.

Certainly we see the purpose of this bill is to protect Manitoba's trees and forests from existing health threats such as Dutch elm disease, as well as invasive threats that have not yet reached Manitoba, such as the mountain pine beetle and the emerald ash borer. Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair The bill prohibits people from bringing invasive forest threats into Manitoba, and allows the minister to prohibit or regulate the entry of certain forest products that might carry those threats. I know that the Member for Steinbach (Mr.

Goertzen) was speaking earlier about–and perhaps a precedent was set with respect to legislation in this Chamber when, on almost the same day as pediatricians leaving our province, a bill called The

1324 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 15, 2007 Healthy Child Manitoba Act was introduced, Madam Deputy Speaker. This is a similar precedent here; here we see on the same day as a bill being introduced, The Forest Health Protection Act, that the Manitoba government is proposing a hydro line down the west side of Lake Winnipeg, Madam Deputy Speaker, that will go right through Riding Mountain National Park and cut down all the trees or many of the trees in there to allow for a power line right through our national park, which includes many fo rests.

I think I find it passing strange that they would introduce such legislation at the same time as talking about cutting down many of our trees in one of our national parks. Riding Mountain National Park puts us on the map here in Manitoba. I find it unfortunate that at the same time with their introducing something called The Forest Health Protection Act that they would be looking at cutting down trees in one of our national parks, Riding Mountain National Park. Madam Deputy Speaker, we all agree that the threat of invasive species cannot be taken lightly.

One can only look at the devastating effects in both British Columbia and Alberta and other areas of many of these outbreaks of invasive species such as the mountain pine beetle. In Manitoba there are already a number of insects and diseases that affect the health of our forests. These include spruce budworm, spruce beetles, dwarf mistletoe and western gall rust, to name just a few of these. Manitobans have seen first-hand the devastating damage that Dutch elm disease is taking, and we support, on this side of the House, ongoing efforts to deal with this very serious problem.

As our climate changes, the increasing migratory nature of some invasive species represents a real threat to Manitoba's forest resources. However, enforcement of government legislation will depend on the number of officers employed by Manitoba Conservation. There have been questions in the past about staffing issues and financing for this department for a number of years. I hope as they bring forward this legislation, Madam Deputy Speaker, that they will have the proper enforcement in place to ensure that our trees are truly protected.

While it's important that infested trees be removed as quickly as possible, it's impossible that this legislation not lead to conditions in which individuals and companies can take advantage of the opportunity to clear-cut sections of forest without restraint. This would be to no one's benefit, obviously. Regarding compensation, this legislation says a person is not entitled to it, but the provincial government may consider it if it is, quote, fair and reasonable in the circ umstances. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think when governments use those types of terms like fair and reasonable,

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-1-19
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 1st hansardpdf 19.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0c38e08fc8d0754d2b5ba0ccead9761974a91f3b

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