Manitoba Hansard — 12 June 1991 (Sitting 63, 35th Legislature, 2nd Session)

35-2-63

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Second Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Halourable Denis c. Rocan Speslcer VOL. XL No. 63. 1 :30 p.m., WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12, 1991 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature LIB - Liberal; ND - New Democrat; PC - Progressive Conservative NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARR ETT, Becky CARR, James CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOM IAK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CUMM INGS, Glen, Hon. DACOUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUC HARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim , Hon. EVANS,Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary , Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon.

HARP ER, Elijah HEL WER, Edward R. HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALP INE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MclN TOSH, Linda, Hon. MI TCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZN IK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIM ER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROGAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon.

STORIE , Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary WASYL YCIA-L EIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington Crescentwood River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage la Prairie Ste. Rose Seine River Roblin-R ussell Selkirk Concord ia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Mi nnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas lnkster The Pas St. Norbert Elm wood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St.

Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Flin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River PARTY LIB ND ND LIB LIB ND LIB ND PC PC PC PC ND ND PC PC PC LIB PC PC ND ND PC PC ND LIB PC ND PC ND LIB ND PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC PC PC PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC ND PC ND PC PC ND ND

3240 LEGISLATI V E ASSEMBLY OF MANITO BA Wednesday, June 12, 1991 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDING S PRESENTING RE PORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Deputy Chairman of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Comm ittee of Supply has considered certain resolutions, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Rose), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TA BLING OF REPORTS Hon. James Downey (Minister responslble for A. E. McKenzie Co. Ltd.): Mr .

Speake r, I am pleased to table the Annual Report for A. E. Mc Kenzie Co. Ltd. ending October 31, 19 90. Hon. Eric Stefanson {Minister of In dustry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker , I am pleased to table the Suppl em e ntary Information , the 19 91-9 2 Departmental Expenditure Estimates for Industry, Trade and Tourism, and Fitness and Sport. *

(1335) MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Hon. Clayton Manness {Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I have a ministerial statement that I would like to make at this time. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in the House today and to announce that ov er 30,000 Mani tobans hav e purch ased a total of appro xima tely $3 80 mi llion of Man itob a HydroBonds Series Ill. This ex citin g init ia tive has pr ovid ed the opportunity for every family and every individual to participate directly as a builder and beneficiary in the Manitoba economy.

With the last three issues, over 80,000 Manitobans have purchased HydroBonds resulting in over $760 million being raised for Manitoba Hydro. In fact, Mr. Speaker, to date, over $62 million in interest payments have been paid out to Ma nitoba HydroBond holders, not including the interest payments to come from Series Ill. Mr . Speaker , this is money that otherwise would have left the province , money that is being spent here in Manitoba buying local goods and services and ge ner ating local ec onomic gr owth and emp loyment.

Manitoba Hydro is a powerful public asset for the people of the province ensuring all of us ef ficient and inexpensive electricity for our homes and workplaces now and in the futur e . With the issuance of HydroBonds, we can help ensure Ma nitoba Hydro remains strong with the full support of the people of Manitoba putting their capital to work in our province . Mr . Speake r, I would like to extend my gratitude to the people of Ma nitoba who have shown their over whel ming confide nce in their province by investing in Ma nitoba Hydro Savings Bonds and making this year's issue such a huge success.

I know members opposite will want to applaud all Manitobans who have seen fit to take advantage of this lending and borrowing instrument which, of course , allows all of us to extend a monetary pride in our province. Thank you. Mr. Gary Doer {Leader of the Opposition): Mr . Speaker, we are, on this side, just absolute ly pleased to see the conversion of the Minister of Finance on Crown corporations and their place in Manitoba society. It is like Paul going to Damascus. It must be the minister going to P.E.I. got a conversion on Crown corporations.

Remember the Tories a few years ago selling off some of our Crown corporations, Mr. Speak er. Remember the members opposite, some of whom sat on the front benches of the government-we are going to sell off the hydro dam. They wanted to privatize part of Hydro, and now we see the statement today from these latter-day people in terms of Crown corporations. What about the money that stayed in Manitoba with Manitoba Data Services before they sold it? What about that money?

What about the money that used to stay in Ma nitoba with the General Insurance Division, investment that went to schools and hospitals and other infrastructures?

3241 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA June 12, 1991 Mr . Speaker, we are pleased with the great -(in terjection)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Mr. Doer: We ar e ver y pleased with this philosophical change from members opposite about the worth and value of Crown corporations in our society in Ma nitoba. We are pleased that the bond issue is doing well, and we hope to see more conversions of the radical right-wing Conservatives to a more moderate approach in this document. Thank you. Mr. Reg Alcock {Osborne): Mr .

Speaker, I would certainly like to say that I, too, am pleased that 80,000 Manitobans have seen fit to invest in this province. God knows, it was necessary after what the NOP did. The bonds-- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Mr. Alcock: Unaccustomed as I am, Mr . Speaker, to sup port ing the Mi nister of Finance (Mr . Manness)- although I am a little surprised at the minister's statements about the money that is spent here in Manitoba, given that Manitoba Hydro is now purchasing things in Grand Forks and Fargo. *

(1340) Mr. Speaker, I do think there is an important aspect of this that certainly arose as we discussed the fina ncial situation of Man itoba with the bond-rating agencies in New York. They said it is imp ortant that Ma nitobans show that they are prepared to invest in this province, and they are doing so. I think the Mi nister of Finance (Mr. Ma nness) should be congratulated for that. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Biii 31-The Ombudsman Amendment Act Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr . Speak er , I would mo ve, seconded by the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Carr), that Bill 31, The Ombudsman Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur !'Ombudsman, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a fir st time. Motion presented. Mrs. Carstalrs: This bill is a necessary addition, I believe, Mr. Speaker, to a bill which was passed just one year ago and that allowed the people of the city of Winnipeg to, in fact, access the services of the Ombudsman. This particular act will allow people in rura l municipalities to do the same thing . We believe it is not something which is particularly political in nature. It just simply extends a service to all Ma nitobans. Motion agreed to. Biii 62-The University of Manitoba Amendment Act Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs {Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr . Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Carr), that Bill 62, The University of Manitoba Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'Universite du Manitoba, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr . Speaker, I regret that we must bring this bill to the attention of the House, but unfort unately, the Mi nister of Education and Training (Mr. Derkach) has made a nonpolitical event into now a political event. He has politicized the appointments of the student representatives to the Boar d of Go vernors at the University of Manitoba.

This bill will ensure that students elect their representatives, and those students, in turn, are chosen to be their duly elected representatives on the Board of Governors of the Univer sity of Ma nitoba. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, from the Westmount School Complex, twenty-four Grades 7 and 8 students, and they are under the direction of Mr . Dean Schofield. This school is located in the constituency of the Speaker of the Ma nitoba Legislative Assembly (Mr.

Rocan). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon. *

(1345) June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3242 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Whlteshell Management Plan Cottage Subdivisions Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, in 1982, a change was implemented in terms of the Whiteshell Management Plan, and mem be rs oppo site may recall some of the controversy in the late '70s on condominium proposals. I think it was called the Jarmoc proposal and other proposals that required a strong hand of the gove rnm ent to ha ve limi ts on pr ivate subdivisions in a high density provincial park.

We have learned and we have been hearing tor the last few months that the government has proceeded to change a subdivision and approve a subdivision in the same Whiteshell Provincial Park. My question is to the acting Premier: When did the cabinet change the provincial Whiteshell Management Park Plan, or was this subdivision approved by the Minister of Natural Resources contrary to the management park plan in the Whiteshell? Hon. Harr y Enn s (Minis ter of Na tu ral Resources): Mr.

Speaker, I am delighted to have the opportunity to respond to the honourable member and indicate to him that the Whiteshell Park was under active review last year. That review made certain recommendations. I shall read one of the recommendations into the record, that the 1983 plan will be revised to permit consideration of private land subdivisions in intensive recreation zones only provided that present development densities are maintained or reduced. That was a policy change to the management plan of the Whiteshell that is currently being distributed to all interested parties in the Parks system of Manitoba.

The provisional approval of the subdivision in question certainly meets that criteria and is contrary to the report carried by the Winnipeg Free Press that says that subdivision is being opened on private lands, period. That is not the case. In fact, Mr. Speaker, in this instance, this is a decreasing of the density of development on Dorothy Lake; one, quite frankly, that I would expect environmentalists and park watchers to applaud. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, environmentalists and other citizens who have been talking to us are very worried about the government proceeding on ad hoe private developments of higher density approved by the minister, whether they are based on merit, based on friendship or based on whatever else connection to the provincial Conservative government. I would ask the minister then, in light of his comments, why on April 26, 1991 , the supervisor of leases and permits for the Parks Branch of his own Department of Natural Resources says, and I quote: the government has halted development of any new cottage subdivisions. Mr.

Speaker, who is acting and communicating with the people of Manitoba consistent with the government's own Parks plan, the minister who says there is a paper out there somewhere for discussion or the government's Parks plan which has been communicated by the minister's own employees to the people of Manitoba? *

(1350) Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, the actions of that ind ividual quoted, indeed the actions of my colleague, the member for Rhineland, who was then minister responsible, was absolutely in keeping with the cou rse of action as defined under the management plan controlling the development within the Whiteshell Park. The same application for subdivision was made to my predecessor and was rejected pending further review and revision of the Whiteshell Management Park Plan. That review was undertaken in the year '90-91 .

That review has produced these kinds of recom me ndations, and it is under those recommendations that the provisional approval was given. I might point out, if the honourable member insists and wants to personalize this matter, that on the same lake, there is another individual with private property who has a similar request for subdivision of his property that is being denied.

For the record, because it will be public record, it happens to be an eminent Manitoban, a former chief justice of the province, Justice Tritschler, who owns property on the same lake, has repeatedly asked the former minister, myself, for the approval to subdivide his private land within the park. The approval has been denied for the reasons because I am following the recommendations of the Whiteshell Management Plan, that this would, in fact, be an increase in the density and in the use of that lake that has been described by my Parks planners as having maximum development. Mr.

Speaker, the subdivision under question decreases from 28 to 17 the amount of users on the

3243 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 lake, certainly well in keeping with the intent, well in keeping with the provisions of the Whiteshell Management Plan. Revisions Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the employee of the Department of Natural Resources was communicating to the public the actual policy of the government as it existed on April 26 where no subdivisions would be allowed. The question is-and the minister is using rec ommen da tions, dis cussion papers and ma nage men t plans in an interchan geable way - when did the cabine t change the management plan for the Whiteshell Provincial Park? What date did they change that and when did they change

Section 651 dealing with private land parcels within the park will not be eligible for cottage subdivision? When did they change it? Hon. Harr y Enns (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, firstly, I can indicate to the honourable member that the changes to the management plan are under revision at this time. The tentative approval granted is just that, and the tenants in question have been notified, were notified last September, that this was the intent.

It disturbs me, of course, that according to, regrettably, some of our environmentalist spokespersons in Manitoba, it is not an issue of being environmentally correct, it is a question---e nvironmentalists are upset with Enns' decision because it violates NOP policy. Since when does NOP policy be the end-all of all things right environmentally? They were 10 out of 10 on all environmentalist issues. Their policy, Mr. Speaker, was not to examine a major construction project like the Limestone under the environmental review. Our policy is different. I am disappointed, quite frankly.

I thought that my action ough t to be applauded by the enviro nmentalists in Manitoba because I am reducing, in this case, developmental pressure on a lake that is at maximum level. Immigration Consultants Independent Investigation Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radlsson): Mr. Speaker, the Conse rvative governme nt's approach to immigration will be encouraging the sale of Canadian visas and citizenships. I am going to table documents that show that an immigration consultant in Manitoba has tied the sale of a Manitoba business to a Canadian citizenship as a condition.

Given this relationship between the long- lasting problems in immigration policy in the country, the backlog of appeals, the relationship between those things to influence peddling and the brokerage of Manitoba businesses and conflict of interest, and in the interest of the ethnocultural communities, will the Minister of Cul ture, Her itage and Citizenship encourage her government to comm ission an independent inquiry into immigration consulting to show how we can change the system so that it will not be so easily exploited by this situation? Hon.

Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, I believe that very same question has been asked many, many times of different members of the government, and my answer will be the same as previous answers have been. In fact, there is an RCMP investigation ongoing; there is a Civil Service investigation ongoi ng. The results of those investigations will determine future action on the part of government. Ms. Cerllll: Mr. Speaker, we are concerned that the investigation is not going to be enough because I keep hearing over and over again that it is the tip of the iceberg.

Immigrant Refugee Appeal Board Staff Reductions Ms. Marianne Cerll ll (Ra dlss on): With the immig rati on consu lting business booming in Manitoba and in Canada, we are trying to increase immigrations. The government has decided to cut services. For the same mi nister: Was this minister consulted before the cuts of 11 staff from the immigrant refugee appeal board for Manitoba were made, and can she explain the impact of those cuts on Manitoba? Hon. Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, I guess the research by the NOP party from a newspaper

article this morning does indicate that they have no more idea than we do what cuts or reductions are going to be made, if any. There are hypothetical allegations in the paper, and in fact, we have no way of knowing whether they will take place. An Honourable Member: Oh, you do not know. That is a good answer.

June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3244 Mrs. Mltchelson: No, do you? Mr. Speaker: Order, please. • (135 5) Immigration Polley Negotiations Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radlsson): Mr. Speaker, this government is in negotiations with the federal gov ernmen t on immigr ation policy. Will the government tell the Ho use if the ne gotiations currently going on include family class and refugee class as well as their focus on the independent investor class? Hon. Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, I missed the first part of that question.

Could I ask if it might be repeated? Ms. Cerllll: I asked the question, if the negotiations currently with the federal government will include the family class and the refugee class of immigrants as well as the independent investor class? Mrs. Mltchelson: Mr. Speaker, our aim in Manitoba with an imm igration agreement is to ensure that we get our fair share of immigrants to the province of Manitoba.

That would be an increase from what we traditionally get or have been getting over the last number of years, even under an NOP administration, so in fact, we are going to be dealing and nego tia ting in our immigr ation agreement with all aspects of immigration. Health Care System Reform Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, on June 7, five days ago, the Minister of Health said in this House that the physicians of Manitoba would be partners in the changing, evolving and refo rming health care system in the province of Manitoba.

Well, it would appear from the comm ittees that have been structured by the minister that not only doctors, but administrators of hospitals will be involved in a number of is su es, in cluding the issue of underfunding our hospitals, forcing them to lay off nurses, the closing of emergency departments at our hospitals, thereby denying health care service to Manitobans and changing an acute care facility to a long-term facility. So much for the Conservative promise that they would never close an acute care bed.

Can the minister tell the House today why he is taking this approach to trimming the costs in health care instead of implementing genuine health care reform, which has been proposed in study after · study that this government has already received? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I apprecia te my honourable friend's question and her obvious interest in the issue of health care reform, because the exact process we have undertaken involving the CEOs of the urban hospitals, including Brandon General Hospital, is a process that is very new to Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, I might add to my honourable friend that, to the best of my knowledge, it is unique to Canada. No other province has the wealth of co-operati on that we enjoy currently in Manitoba to bring the chief executive offi cers of the major hospitals, which spend a very, very significant portion of the $91 5 million approximately that we are going to spend in the hospital system this current fiscal year, around the table to discuss issues that all have brought forward in terms of making the health care system work for the patients. Not every province has that opportunity.

That opportunity did not exist previously within this province, and we believe, and people in the health care system believe, it is by far the most reasoned approach to reforming the health care system that exists in Canada. Seven Oaks Hospltal Nursing Staff Layoffs Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): I would like to know how this minister thinks that he is going to be enhancing the health care to patients by a cut of 33 nurses and nurses' assistants at Seven Oaks, and will he tell the House today how many fewer patients will be treated as a result of those cuts. • (1 400) Hon.

Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I am glad my honourable friend has now focused in on an issue. Obviously, she is not very informed on the Seven Oaks proposal that hit the news. Now, Mr. Speaker, this issue was brought up some three weeks ago where my honourable friend the offi cial Health opposition critic was concerned about jobs in the nursing profession, notthe patients served in the hospitals.

3245 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 Seven Oaks has a proposal which will bring together panelled patients located throughout the hospital, provide the accommodation for those panelled patients in one area, so that the area can be staffed to provide long-term care and quality of long-ter m care to enhance the quality of care to those individuals, to just as many of them as before with no reductions in numbers, so you end up with a win-win situation. You contain costs and you provide better patient care services.

I hardly think my honourable friend in the Liberal Party would object to those two-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mrs. Carstalrs: Unfortunately, the minister has not explained to this House how patients are going to receive better care with 33 fewer nurses and nursing assistants delivering that care. Health Care Facllltles Emergency Room Hours Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Will the minister now tell us how the patients of Manitoba are going to be better served by the closure of 24-hour emergency rooms for certain hours of the day, because that also seems to be one of the areas to which this minister is now devoting a great deal of time and attention. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated to my honourable friend, she obviously does not understand the issue very well, because within the Seven Oaks proposal which they hope to implement October 7 of this year, there is an increased requirement of aides and other staffing levels of 21 to provide that kind of care to those individuals. That is why I say to my honourable friend, the quality of care will not be compromised in this issue. My honourable friend brings up a second issue of emer gency department operations. That is an issue that is currently being discussed at the Urban Hospital Council. Mr.

Speaker, we have received no recommendation on closures anywhere in the system, reduced hours anywhere in the system. We are asking, through the Urban Hospital Council, that all initiatives in health care in the hospital service delivery level be considered to assure-and I have told my honourable friend in the past that the guiding principles behind this is to provide service which guarantees patient care. Seven Oaks Hospital Nursing Staff Layoffs Ms. Judy Wasylyc la-Lels (St. Johns): Mr.

Speaker, I think it is becoming increasingly clear that the urban hospital authority with its 48 studies is being used as a cover by this minister for Tory cutbacks. On May 17 , I tabled -a s the minis te r referenc ed- in this House, the Seven Oaks Hospital document showing plans for significant layoffs of nurses and other cutbacks. I will table that document again, because we have not been getting straight answers, honest answers from the Minister of Health. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, to withdraw that remark. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw that remark- Mr.

Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, thank you very much. Ms. Wasylyc la-Lels: -a nd indicate that the minister has not been straightforward with this House or with the people of Manitoba. These cuts are political. As expressed by Nick Kalansky in the Free Press today, they are part of a decision- Mr. Speaker: Question. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: I will ask the minister, since he conveyed the decision to urban hospitals to cut $90 million at a meeting of February 21 , will the minister lift his demand for hospital cutbacks? Will he end the hardship being imposed on up to 40 nurses?

Will he stop jeopardizing patient care- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased my honourable friend brought up documents which she tabled yesterday. The document my honourable friend tabled is not the docum ent the Ur ban Hospital Council is considering in terms of issues. As I indicated to the media yesterday, the outlined issue my honourable friend flagged, which included the consideration of user fees, was rejected by government. It is not under consideration by this government, by the ministry of Health, by the commission.

My honourable friend knows that. Now, my honourable friend says, when are we going to bring some focus to the system. She uses

June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3246 the argument that she has constantly used incorrectly. There has been no $1 9-million cutback in hospitals. There has been a $70-million increase in hospital funding. In the narrowed opportunistic political mind of an NDP, $70 million more becomes a cutback, but that is not the case. Mr. Speaker, I want to tell my honourable frie nd-a nd I will after the next question. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: It is called giving with one hand and taking with the other, and that has been confirmed today by Nick Kalansky. Mr.

Speaker, I wantto ask the minister, since what we clearly have before us is the Alberta solution of layoffs and cutbacks in retaliation for a settlement of the nurses, is it not the case that this government is punishing the nurses by wiping out the gains made by the nurses in their settlement, by laying them off and by replacing them with nurses aides who are now covered by the Draconian measures of Bill 70? Mr. Orchard: Absolute balderdash, Mr. Speaker, absolute, unequivocal balderdash. Mr.

Speaker, my honourable friend, the New Democratic Health critic, is wanting to create an issue where she is trying to make a $70 million increase to hospitals a cutback, hardly an issue that anyone, any independent observer in the listening audience, would say is an accurate statement. I mean, not even the alchemist could make gold from lead. My honourable friend cannot make a cutback out of a $70 million increase. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the process that we are following is substantially different than the process that was followed October 23, 19 87, when then Health minister Wilson Parasiuk said the hospital budget plans had been approved. What was dictated to the hospitals in 19 87 by Wilson Parasiuk, NDP Health minister, was the forced closure of in excess of 110 acute care beds in the province of Manitoba to contain the budget. We have not undertaken any such measure. Mr.

Speaker, what we have done is we have asked the management of the hospitals within their existing contracts, their settled contracts, to work through management initiatives which will, as in the case of Seven Oaks and Victoria hospitals, provide better quality patient care to those panelled patients in those hospitals and, win-win situation, save some taxpayer dollars while delivering quality health care-n ot a bad combination. Ms.

Wasylycla-Lels: If the minister is saying that there have been no cutbacks, then the layoffs of up to 40 nurses do not matter, and the care of patients does not matter to this minister. How can the patients at Seven Oaks General Hospital be assured of quality care when these Tory cutbacks will leave nurses responsible for up to 30 patients at any one time and with incredible workloads? How is he going to assure quality patient care? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, if you would allow me the liberty of a lengthy answer, I could answer my honourable friend. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, members of the opposition have been allowing this minister liberty for most of this session, the last session, the previous session with his lengthy answers. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, I ask him to follow our rules and finally answer briefly and succinctly some of the direct questions instead of this meandering debate we get from the minister in the disguise of an answer. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised, I would remind all honourable ministers that answers to questions should be as brief as possible. *** Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, in the constrained time of Question Period, I know we will make up, because I notice we have 59 hours and four minutes left that we can dedi cate to the discussion of Health Estimates. I know my honourable friend will want to do just that, so she can have her fears and concerns allayed. Mr.

Speaker, I want to tell my honourable friend that the initiative at both Victoria and Seven Oaks hospitals will improve the quality of care for panelled patients throughout the hospital, because instead of being intermingled and sprinkled throughout the hospital, mixed with acute care patients, et cetera, they will be placed in wards where all panelled patients will be there. That allows staff to focus on appropriate program, service delivery and care, and it will improve, not decrease, the opportunity to provide those panelled patients, who are ther e tem porarily awaiting

- 3247 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 permanent placement in a personal care home, quality care. That is the objective of this exercise. • (14 1 0) Provincial Campsltes Staffing Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, it is clear, despite the government's claims to the contrary, that the cuts in Natural Resources staff and services are having a devastating effect on recreation and tourism in the province. Campsites in the Leaf Rapids, Lynn Lake, Thompson areas are being destroyed- a direct result of these cutbacks.

My question is for the Minis ter of Natural Resources: Given that these cutbacks are proving extremely harmful for the tourism industry in these northern areas, will the minister reverse the cutbacks and ensure that services are reinstated in these northern recreation areas? Hon. Harry Enns (Min ister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I am satisfied-and we have just concluded the exami nations of the Estim ates of the De par tme nt of Na tur al Resources- that we can, with the better use of personnel available to us, contain or provide the kind of services that the honourable member for Interlake speaks of.

We are for tu nate , indee d , that we have throughout northern Manitoba the kind of natural environment that attracts a large number of tourists. We hope to continue doing the same job that we have been able to do in the past years. Provincial Campsltes Staffing Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake): Mr.

Speaker, in the March throne speech, this government said it recognizes the tourism industry as a key to Manitoba's economic development, and I ask the Minister responsible for Tourism, can he tell this House how these devastating cutbacks in Natural Resources are going to promote tourism and economic development throughout Manitoba? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, the honour able Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), I believe, just answered that question in terms of looking into the situation, and if there is a problem, rectifying it.

In terms of our department, I have had a meeting with one group just this week expressing that very concern, and we have put together an internal working group to work with Natural Resources to look at rectifying it. So ce rtainly, if there is a problem, I anticipate it will be rectified. Provincial Campsltes Staffing Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, we have an approximately 12 percent decrease in tourism in Manitoba now. This minister is going along with what the Minister of Natural Resources is saying.

Will the Minister of Natural Resources tell this House how many more recreation spots in the province will be destroyed as a direct result of this department's cutbacks? How many more? Hon . Harry Enns (Mini ster of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I can tell the honourable member with certainty there will not be the mayhem and the chaos caused by an NOP Minister of Natural Resources, tha t went thr ough this province smashing barbecues, picnic tables, park stands wherever he could find them. What this Minister of Natural Resources will do- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please; order, please. The honourable member for the Interlake has posed a question, and I believe he would like to hear the answer, as I would. Mr.

Enns: What this Minister of Natural Resources is doing, and what this government is committed in doing, where there are situations like at Cranberry Portage, where the community has asked us to take over a campsite in a park and, in fact, are providing better service than we could provide, where private individuals, like the Springhill Ski Resort, asked us and took over the running of the ski resort and have increased the skiing opportunities by hours and days and have provided a better facility, or the Norquay Beach facility that is now being run in a first-class manner. Mr.

Speaker, the criteria for divestiture, and there will be divestiture taken from time to time, is simply this-that continued service is paramount and it has to be, if anything, improved. Health Care Facllltles Emergency Room Hours Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

June 12 , 1991 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 3248 Emergency care and acute care are the bloodline to any commun ity hospital. Yesterday, in the Estimates discussion, I asked the Minister of Health whether this government was considering closing the em ergency rooms in one or more of the hospitals. The minister did not deny that was a part of this government's agenda. Can the minister tell this House today why he thinks the emergency rooms, acute care, are not an essential part of a community hospital, and why he is going to save tax dollars on the backs of acute care patients? Hon.

Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): You know my honourable friend used to be quite good in his offe ring of reasonable suggestions, but he seems to be falling in the NOP trap of rhetorical display and I regret that. Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend posed the question yesterday. My honourable friend is not accurate in some of his

preamble to his statement this afternoon. What I indicated to my honourable friend is that, within the Urban Hospital Council's range of issues to be discussed with recomme ndations that meet the needs of the system, one of those issues currently being discussed by the Urban Hospital Council, which is all of the hospitals in the city of Winnipeg, is the hours of operation of emergencies.

I indicated to my honourable friend yesterday, I indicate to my honourable friend today, there has been no recomme ndation made regarding any change of hours in the emergency departments within the hospitals of the city of Winnipeg. Mr. Cheema: Mr. Speaker, the minister has set up a committee to look at the possibilities of shutting down or creating one acute care hospital extended care facility. The minister's statement to have one emergency room closed either partially or full time is leaving the evidence, is clearly indicating that this minister and this government is serious to cut health care funding.

I will again give him a chance to clarify which hospital is going to suffer because of the Tory cuts for acute care in Manitoba. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind my honourable friend that the hospitals in Manitoba are getting $70 million more to operate with this year. They wanted more than $70 million. They wanted $1 9 million more than that, which was not available from the taxpayers of Manitoba.

I simply want to inform my honourable friend, as he speaks on behalf of the Liberal Party in this province, we did not take the initiative that was taken by the gove rnment of Newf ound land, whic h happens to be a Liberal government, wherein they ordered, through their budgetary process, the layoff of some 300 nurses. The government mandated that, not the institutions. Mr. Speaker, that was because the financiers control the budget in Newfoundland. They do not do that in Manitoba.

We still have the opportunity in Manitoba to make intelligent decisions around the delivery of health care to protect patient care, to make services available throughout the length and breadth of this province in a reasoned and constructive refor m-m inded method of change, something my honourable friends have urged on me for three years. We are going to take their advice and do it. Mr. Cheema: If the closing of acute care and emergency wards is an intelligent decision, I think then we have to review the minister's intelligence. Mr.

Speaker, can the acting Premier tell this House what area of Winnipeg will suffer, and can he assure us that emergencies will not be closed on the politically motivated decision, so that The Maples, Wolseley, Kildonan, lnkster will not suffer because they did not vote right? * (1 420) Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, I regret my honourable friend did not show a little more courtesy to the chief executive officers of the urban hospitals in Winnipeg and Brandon because my honourable friend has said the council, which is dealing with a number of issues on which they are asking for advice and decisions from professionals, he has just said that all of those people, if they make a decision, are going to be political in their decision. Mr. Speaker, that is not the case.

I, quite frankly, cannot tell you what the politics are of the chief executive officers of the hospitals in the city of Winnipeg, and that is exactly contrary to any initiative we have taken. We do not go around insisting that someone produce a party card before they give us advice on health care. We have not done that at all, and when my honourable friend makes that accusation of the Urban Hospital Council, he does all of those dedicated people a disservice, as they did in their private mem bers' resolution. I wish he would

3249 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 apologize to those individuals who are working to make a better health care system in Manitoba. Income Tax Rate Setting Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. At the recent meeting of provincial and federal Fina nce min isters, there was agree me nt, in principle, to allow provinces to settheir own tax rates apart from the federal system. Unfortunately, Manitoba is a have-not province, both economically and financia l ly.

Un fort unate ly, this new arrangement could open the door to losing federal transfer payments in the future. My question to the minister is: What position has the Minister of Finance taken on this matter? Does he support the principle that each province should be able to set its own income tax level, or is he indeed apprehensive about this proposal? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I am glad that I was able, through some prompting, to have the member rise to ask this question because it was No. 1 on the agenda yesterday with his Leader, with respect to questions in the House.

It is an important issue and I stand here and will attempt to provide a full answer to it. Mr. Speaker, what is apparent is thatthe NDP, of course, is trying to catch this wave of disgust, by most citizens, with respect to high levels of taxation. I would say to them, they have no credibility. The NDP are synonymous with taxation, and I would say that nobody will convince the citizens of this nation that they are going to be able to change their spots. Mr. Speaker, what was worked toward yesterday, or the day before, was an understanding originally started by my predecessor, Mr.

Kostyra, back some years ago when he was given one alternative and that was to impose a flat tax, something called a 2 percent tax on net income. Everybody knows that this is a comprehensive tax that is sort of hidden. In essence, right now, if we took it into account as a per cent of fe der al tax, it would be upwards somewhere between 65 percent and 68 percent of the federal tax. Some provinces have it, some do not, and what is being requested by the provinces is a streamlined system that is in place for all, tax on taxable income.

It has been sought by the provinces now long before this government came into being, and the federal government now is prepared to address the question and is doing and preparing a technical paper on it. I understand they will be releasing that paper in short course. Mr. Leonard Evans: I would gather then from the minister's last statement that there is a technical paper being prepared by the Department of Finance, and it will be made available for public discussion, unlike the position taken by the Premier (Mr. Filmon) yesterday where he seemed to be very reluctant to make this paper available. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the minister Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) was not reluctant yesterday. The Premier would not have the knowledge that I have today with respect to that issue. Why does the member not be honest and state categorically that, of course, it could never be expe cted the Pr emier would have that informa tion when the ques tion was po sed yesterday? Mr. Speaker: The honourable government House leader did not have a point of order.

It was a dispute over the facts, but I would ask the honourable government House leader to withdraw the remarks that he has just allocated to the honourable member for Brandon East about being honest. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the member not to mislead the public and I withdraw the reference to being honest. *** Mr. Le onard Evans: Mr. Speaker, another question.

I realize it is a proposal, it is still a principle that we are dealing with, but nevertheless, will this proposed new system not lead to unhealthy competition among the provinces for business through tax incentives that could cause losses in corpora te tax revenues and also cause more confusion and complexity? I ask this question because this has been predicted by various tax experts at this time. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I have never seen those comments from so-c alled tax experts.

I do know right now, if the member wants to talk about different rates, right today, if we were to roll in our flat tax on top of our percentage of federal tax, in

June 12, 1991 LEGIS LAT IVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 3250 essence we would have a marginal provincial tax rate in the area of 65 percent to 68 percent as compared to 48 percent. An Honourable Member: Well, change it. You have four budgets, go change it, Mr. big talker. Mr.Manness: The Leader says change it. We did. We brought it down from 54 percent to 52 percent, Mr. Speaker, and if members across the way were not driving us to spend, spend, spend more on a daily basis, maybe we could even reduce it more.

The reality is there are dif ferences across Canada and what this proposal will do, if indeed it is accepted, it will, for once, introduce much greater simp licity into the tax form from a provincial standpoint so that the taxpayers know what they are paying vis-a-vis other provinces. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. Nonpolltlcal Statements Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I may have leave to make a nonpolitical statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Leave? Agreed. Mr. Downey: Mr.

Sp eaker, I rise today to cong ratu late Mr. Ovide Mercredi who was successful in his election yesterday as the leader of the Assembly of First Nations of this country; a Manitoba-born Native of the Grand Rapids area will have the responsibility of the stewardship of some 500,000 status Indians in this country. Many challenges lie before him as I am sure the people of this House realize. I want to wish Mr. Mercredi well in his endeavours as a national leader and wish him well in his efforts on behalf of the Native people of this country.

I, as well, want to acknowledge the tremendous showing of Mr: Phil Fontaine who has done an excellent job in the leadership of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs here in Manitoba. His leadership, I am sure, would have been equally as well received by the country and wish him well on the excellent showing of which he made, as well as the other candidates. I had the opportunity, Mr.

Speaker, to hear some of the speeches the other night and the excellent presentations that were made on behalf .of the Native people of this country, and I wish them well in their future endeavours in working to better all the interests of the Native people of this country. Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, could I have leave for a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave to make a nonpolitical statements? Leave? Agreed. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to join with the Minister of Northern and Native Affairs to congratulate Ovide Mercredi on his election last evening as the national chief. It was a long election process. I think what all Canadians must have been impressed with was the quality of each and every candidate who spoke to the delegates assembled, who expressed to them in eloquent language their aspirations for the aboriginal peoples of Canada, particularly important, I think, that recently we have learned of activities that may not always picture our aboriginal peoples in such a positive light.

What we saw yesterday and the day before that was clearly a people that can speak to all of us in this country, that have a message for all of us in this nation that we must listen to, that we must pay attention to and that we must move forward so that they are full participants in the Canadian political and economic life of this nation. We must say, I think, with clarity that we were particularly pleased of the two Manitoba candidates who ran.

Both Phil Fontaine and Ovide Mercredi were excellent examples of the skills required for the tough job that is going to be required by aboriginal leadership in the years to come. It is comforting, I think, for all of us to know that such competence is expressed by those people and that our aboriginal peoples are in such very good hands. Mr. Oscar Lathlln (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, could I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Agreed. Mr. Lathlln: Mr.

Speaker, I, too, would like to take the opportunity at this time to congratulate Ovide Mercredi for having been elected to the top office of the Assembly of First Nations. I was able to take

part in some of the activities that went on at the Convention Centre, which started Sunday and then through Monday and yesterday, as an observer and talking to different people. What

3251 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 struck me, as I spent partially the three days at the Convention Centre, was that who would have thought 15 years ago that the national media would be staying at the Convention Centre throughout the three days, at least the three days that I was there anyway. Who would have thought 15 years ago such an event like that would have been covered by the national media?

I remember as a young man, when I attended for the first time national conferences, there was never any attention paid to the aboriginal conferences by the media, and so that was the one thing that impressed me even last night. At two o'clock this morning, the national media was still present at the Convention Centre.

The most important thing that I wanted to mention here is the fact that aboriginal people-despi te the roadblocks, despite the obstacles, despite the situations that we have lived in over the past many years-have gone through a tremendous growth and development in terms of the education that we now have. We are now starting to graduate more university students. We are now starting to have more aboriginal lawyers, and we are now starting to have more aboriginal people becoming involved in the political system.

So in other words, throughout the differ ent stages of development, I think the aboriginal people have come a long, long way. • (1 430) I also would like to extend a very sincere thank you and sincere appreciation to Phil Fontaine for having put up such a credible campaign in his bid to become the national chief. I would say that both people were excellent candidates, but I guess I, too, also am happy for Ovide Mercredi. I am happy for aboriginal people across the cou ntry.

I am especially happy for aboriginal people in Manitoba for having one of their own people elected into the highe st office of the AFN because , after all, Manitoba has come to be known as a place of beginnings. Last June, I think, was the beginning of a new era for aboriginal people development, and as my honourable friend from Rupertsland (Mr. Harper) continually said in this House, things will never be the same anymore. So I thank Phil Fontaine for having entered the race and putting on an incredible campaign.

I also would like to thank the other candidates, Bill Wilson, Neil Starritt, Mike Mitchell and Bill Montour, again for having shown the interest in the affairs of aboriginal people. Thank you. Committee Change Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Oppo sition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Carr), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: The Maples (Mr. Cheema) for Osborne (Mr. Alcock). Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. ORDERS OF TH E DAY Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, before I call orders of the day, I wonder if there is a disposition to waive private members' hour today. Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House to waive private members' hour? No? Leave is denied. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, would you then call bills in the following order: first of all, second readings, Bills 61 , 63, 59, 64, and then adjourn debate on second readings Bill 44, Bill 5, Bill 19 , Bill 70. SECOND READINGS Biii 61-The Communities Economic Development Fund Amendment Act Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Mit chels on), that Bill 61 , The Commu nities Economic Development Fund Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur le Fonds de developpement economique local), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Downey: Mr . Speaker, I am plea sed to introduce The Com mun ities Economic Development Fund and to speak to the House today on second reading, Bill 61 , The Com munities Economic Development Fund Amendment Act. The existing Communi ties Economic Development Fund Act has created administrative and legal difficulties forthe fund due to its ambiguity. The terminology "remote and isolated communities" in the existing act has never been satisfactorily defined, and the geographical mandate for the

June 12 , 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 3252 lending criteria has never been clearly established to the satisfaction of the fund. The current act may be interpreted as a northern act; however, the word "northern" is not mentioned in its contents. Subsection 26.6 of the amendment act protects the fund on all loans that may have been considered ultra vires under the existing act. The government is particularly sensitive to meeting the changing needs of the people of northern Manitoba, and it was imp erative that a clear ma ndate to supp ort economic growth in this area be defined.

The Communities Economic Development Fund is especially focused on sma ll busin ess development. The main purpose of the amending act is to clearly define the geographical mandate of the fund. The focus of the fund will then support the economic development of northern Manitoba north of the 53rd parallel and including those communities under the Northern Affairs jurisdiction south of the 53rd parallel.

The government, at the same time, recognizes that certain programs supporting a class of industry may have a more encompassing geographical requirement and, therefore, the boundaries are extended to support all financial assistance approved in support of a loan program for the fishing industry. It further includes all financial assistance approved in conjunction with the Government of Cana da aboriginal economic development programs outside the city of Winnipeg.

Regulations establishing criteria for qualifying for financial assistance have been removed from the act and will now be set by by-laws and Orders-in-Council. This allows more flexibility in delivery of different classes of loans and allows the fund to adjust to changing economic conditions in keeping with the current economic climate. In

summary, the amending act addresses the following issues: Clear definition of geographical mandate; focus ·of northern economic development, especially per taining to small busin ess development and com mu nity deve lo pmen t corporations; removal of ambiguous terminology and criteria, replacing it with clear, descriptive language; removal of sexist language; criteria is simplified or removed from the act, allowing the fund to deliver various classes of financial assistance such as the fishing industry loan program. I, Mr.

Speaker, would hope that we have unanimous suppo rt on this bill so tha t the Commu nities Economic Development Fund can in fact clearly support those industries in northern Manitoba, the fishing industry and those connected with the aboriginal community that will enhance their way of life. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.S teveAshton (Thompson): I move, seconded by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Biil 63- The Northern Affairs Amendment Act Hon. James Downey {Minister of Northern Affairs): I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Mr.

Praznik), that Bill 63, The Northern Affairs Amendment Act; (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les Affaires du Nord), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, I will be brief in my introduction of The Northern Affairs Act. However, it does not in any way diminish the importance of the amendments which are being presented to the Assembly. I believe it has been some many, many years, approximately 14 years, since The Northern Affairs Act has seen any major amendments.

The staff, over the last few years, have been working with the people of northern Manitoba, the communities of northern Manitoba and have been bringing forward an array of recommendations. Major consultations have taken place with northern commun ities and basically, I believe, has the support of the majority of those community people. • (1 440) Mr. Speaker, one may say that it is to a large extent a major housekeeping bill.. I will say that to the greatest extent.

However, there are major areas of clarification of wording to remove any doubt as to whether the minister has taxation powers, and I want to make sure that is clear. There is the validation of the current practice in appointing a contact person in a new community and making sure that the authority is there. The clarification of a process that the minister can use to determine whether or not to continue the status of an existing community and how to change that status will be included in this act. Clarification of the councillor liability with respect to unauthorized expenditure or a councillor's misuse

3253 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 of powers; clarification of method in dealing with the vacancies in council; ensuring consistency of terms of office for incorporated councils as well as commu nity councils; prov ision for in-camer a meetings for councils to enable communities to deal with confidential ma tters in a fair manner; clarif ication of wording of some sections to remove doubt and possible wrong

interpretations, Mr. Spea ker, cla rifying the min ister's and the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council's powers relating to community elections and community expenses; add provisions for a penalty of an offe nce committed under the act, including some sections presently referenced to other legislation as these relate to administrative procedures of community councils; clarification of the powers of the minister and the LGD respecting assessment, taxation and fees in lieu of taxes, community election, administrative of election process, are all generally those of, as I said earlier, a housekeeping nature, Mr. Speaker.

I would encourage support for this bill as it has been some time since The Northern Affairs Act has been in fact brought before the Legislature. I welcome the debate which will ensue and would hope for unanimous support for the people of northern Manitoba and the passage of this bill. Mr.SteveAshton (Thompson): I move, seconded by the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Biii 59- The Workers Compensation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister responsible for and charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): Mr.

Speaker, I would move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Downey), that Bill 59, The Workers Comp ensation Amendmen t and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modif iant la

Loi sur les accide nts du travail et div erses dispositions legislatives, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Praznlk: Mr. Speaker, I rise today with the introduction for second reading of The Workers Com pensation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act. Both as Minister responsible for The Workers Com pensation Act and as Minister of Labour, I am most pleased with the advantages this fair and balanced bill confers upon employees and employers in our province.

It is the culmination of six to seven years of effort by several governments of Manitoba, and it will fittingly come into effect, I hope, with the support of this Legislature on January 1 , 19 92, the 75th anniversary of Workers Compe nsation operations in our province. Let me summarize the principal merits of this act.

Among other features, those of particular interest to the employees covered by the act will include: automatic indexation of all benefits by the full change under most circumstances in the average industrial wage; an increase of $7,500 in the covered wage ceiling, raising it to $45,500 indexed; an impairment lump sum award of up to $91 ,000, the largest in Canada; a generous program of benefits for survivors, including tax free annuities and special provisions in case of hardship, as well as the promise of the elimination of the uncertainty caused by the unfunded liability.

Employers will also benefit from this legislation with the removal of the unfunded liability over a period of years. As well, employers are assured of the clear demarcation between WCB and private cove rage and an end to the th reat of cross-subsidization and overinsurance; balanced, accessed information; a properly administered and fiscally accountable agency financially less bound to government; a WCB better able to protect the general class of employers against poor safety records or receivership of a few employers; and, in the end, a stable and competitive assessment rate.

If we are wise and generous in our deliberations, Mr. Speaker, on these provisions, I hope that we can lay a sure and jus t foundation for employer-supported insurance for injured workers in our province, as our predecessors attempted to do three-quarters of a century ago. As some members may be aware, it was in 19 16 that The Workers Compensation Act of Manitoba was enacted. That statute was based upon principles enunciated following the public hearings and study by Mr. Justice Sir William Ralph Meredith in 19 14 in the province of Ontario. Mr.

Justice Meredith-and this may not be well known to members of this House, particularly members of the

June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3254 New Democratic Party- was a former Leader of the Conservative Party of Ontario who had been elevated to the Supreme Court of that province before commencing hi s work on Workers Compensation. In fact, he once wrote, there are two kinds of socialists, there is a very bad kind and another kind not so bad. I hope members opposite belong to the latter group. (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) Meredith's report contained a number of forthright and insightful observations, some of which we should perhaps keep in mind today.

For example, Workers Compe nsation is a contract between employers and employees. As well, it is a social contract between employees and employers that rests upon a wider interest of society at large and, thirdly, that the state can ensure a neutral administration of the scheme. From such observations, Mr. Justice Meredith distilled a number of principles which yet today undergird Workers Compensation across Canada.

Firstly, compensation should be for work-related injur ie s ; two, it should be an entirely employer-funded program; thirdly, the state should administer that program; fourthly, there should be a system of collective liability; fifthly, that it should be broadly based, if not a universal program; and sixthly, that it should be a no-f ault program which has the effect of abolishing tort action against employers. These principles were alm ost im media tely implemented into law in Ontario by the then-and I would point this out to mem bers of the New Democratic Party- Conservative government of Ontario.

Perhaps because of their simplicity and balance, they were soon also enacted into law across Canada and, as I said a moment or two ago, came into Manitoba in 19 16 . Before I indicate further some of the more salient features of progress in the intervening years, let me turn for a moment to the main purposes of this legislation. Madam Deputy Speaker, members are aware of the fact that 50,000 or so accidents are recorded annually among the about three-quarters of the work force which is covered by the Workers Compensation Board in Manitoba. *

(1450) Perhaps 20,000 of these accidents annually result, sadly, in time lost from employment. About 600 lead, more regrettably, to impairment. These individuals will carry disfunctioning, disfigurement, a scar, the loss of a limb throughout their lives. Finally, between 20 and 30 of these workers are most tragically killed. Their survivors, of course, must bear that most irrevocable and heaviest of burdens. In the spir it of Mr. Justice Mered ith, this government cannot, and will not, turn its back on the needs of those injured workers.

Members of both sides of the House know and see, face to face, constituents who are hurt, maimed or have become ill as a consequence of accidents in the workplace. As part of this government's commitment to the social and economic infrastructure of Manitoba, we will maintain and strengthen this program so that working men and women will receive fair benefits in the unfortunate event of an accident. In considering Workers Compensation, however, we must also remember that it is supported entirely by the employers of Manitoba.

Nearly 19 ,000 of them pay premiums in the form of assessments to the Workers Compensation Board annually. Most of these firms are very small. Perhaps only 250 emp loy mo re than 10 0 workers. The overwhelming bulk of them employ less than 10 workers. The many small employers of Manitoba are, as we know, the source of most of the new job creations in our economy. As well, like workers, these people are our neighbours and friends.

They share the concern of this Legislature with the physical and emotional cost of injuries suffered by their employees and certainly want to ensure that they are properly covered by Workers Compensation should they be injured. Nonetheless, like other small business people everywhere, and this also applies to some extent to larger businesses, they have to be concerned with payme nts which they ma ke to the Workers Compensation Board, and the services which their injured employees receive in return. Employers have viewed, with increasing alarm, the dramatic increases in the unfunded liabilities at the board.

The total liabilities now stand at $550 million, while the cash reserves stand at only $330 million, leaving a deficit of $220 million accumulated during the period of office of the New Democratic Party. With cautious optimism, within the total program expenditure of $1 80 million annually, small annual operating surpluses were achieved in 19 89 of $7

3255 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12 , 1991 million and in 1990 of $2 million. I hope members opposite pay heed to that fact, given their record in Workers Compensation. These only go a very small way to reducing the unfunded liability. Such an unfunded liabili ty does not mean that a considerable amount of interest income-o r does mean that a considerable amount of interest income, which would otherwise be available, is foregone. Thus, present assessment rates must be higher than they would otherwise have to be.

This is what is meant by shifting cost from past to present and from presenttofu ture employers. -(in terjection)- Madam Deputy Speaker, I hear comments across the way, and I would remind them that when we came to power there were 200 boxes of active files in the basement of WCB that no one knew what was in them. As well, they did not even have enough telephone lines in at the board to take calls, so I do not think any member across the way can lecture this administration or the current administration at WCB on how to operate a workers compensation scheme in this province.

Ma dam Deputy Speaker, em ployers also witnessed substantial rate increases from 19 83 through 19 88. In one year, rates jumped 24 percent and averaged almost 20 percent annually over that six-year period. Had such increases continued over the past three years, then rates would have shot up to more than $4.08 on average per $10 0 for the general class of employers. Instead, since this government has assumed offi ce, rates have declined modestly and now stand, as members may know, at about $2.30 per $1 00 of payroll on average.

Such average rates, of course, conceal a wide range of premiums in practice, from le ss than $1 per $1 00 for retail stores and restaurants to above $1 3 for the logging industry. These rate s, of course, corr espond to the experience of these various classes of employers. Madam Depu ty Spe aker, this government, consistent with the principles enunciated when it was first elected, has maintained an arm's length relationship with the Workers Compensation Board. Mr.

Meredith's belief in board impartiality is thus, under this government at least, being maintained, although that was quite doubtful under the previous administration. Nonetheless, I would be remiss if I did not recognize in this Leg islatu re this government's goal that the WCB provide excellence in service. In this vein, we have been gratified to note that the reform efforts which have been going on at the board since 19 88 have taken place on a number of fronts. A whole host of policies have been adopted by a succession of boards of directors over the last three years.

A number of management and personnel changes have been made as well as automated systems introduced. A variety of program changes and controls have been implemented accompanied by reorganization. Finally, a number of service deficiencies are in the process of being addressed. I am not saying, Madam Deputy Speaker, that we have yet met our service goal of excellence and service. We still have a long way to go. At least we are on the right path. Naturally, it is in the legislative area in which gove rnment has the greatest responsibilities.

Our priorities in developing this legislative amendment package were that these would, in conjunction with board policy and practice: (1 ) provide a fair and reasonable benefit program to employees in Manitoba; (2) address the issue of the unfunded liability which the Provincial Auditor, among others, has repeatedly pointed out is illegal and which negatively affects the rates levied upon registered employers; (3) provide for competitive assessment rates within the Canadian context supportive of an expanding economy and work force in our province. Why then are such thoroughgoing legislative changes necessary?

The laws, enacted at the urgings of Meredith, occurred at a time when there was no income tax and, hence, no difference essentially between a gross wage and a net wage; no inflation and, hence, no need to index benefits; no other significant social programs and, hence, no need to integrate financial benefits among the programs; no other financial vehicles for delivering benefits such as various kinds of annuities; and not much difference between the loss of physical capacity and the proportional loss of wages, as most people were labouring people.

Madam Depu ty Sp eak er, since 19 16 no Legislative Assembly of this province has seen fit to modernize this law in a fundamental way. Rather, reform has confined to improving the percentage of income replaced. In 19 16 it was 55 percent of gross wages. In 1 923 it was increased to 66-2/3 percent of gross wages, in 1953 to 70 percent of gross wages and in 1956 to 75 percent of gross wages, or as well in changing a few clauses, for example to index pensions.

June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3256 Madam Deputy Speaker, I point out that none of those changes was brought about by Ne w Democratic Party governments. Ne ver theless, the whole system was extraor dinarily robust, but by the late 19 70s considerable pressure had been brought to bear upon it. Beginning with the New Democratic Party administration in Saskatchewan in 1979-and I hope honourable members opposite would note what their colleagues in Saskatchewan did in 19 79-a numb er of new app roaches to the problems of compe nsating injured wo rker s emerged.

The dual award system, a lump-sum impairment and separate wage loss benefit package came to replace a pension for life, done by the New Dem ocrats in Saska tchewan . A net income calcu lation came to replace gr oss income compensation, done by the New Democrats in Saskatch ewan. Rehabili tation for survivi ng spouses was provided, done by the New Democrats in Saskatchewan. The amount of covered wages was increased markedly and automatic indexation was introduced, again all done by the New Democratic Party in Saskatchewan in 19 79.

I should note that today, I understand, Saskatchewan is one of the few provinces with a very competitive rate system and virtually no deficit. In Manitoba, the impetus for change came from both em ployers and labour, resulting in the establishment of the tripartite Legislative Review Comm ittee from 19 85 to 19 87. This committee, as mem bers know, conducted public hearings and received many written and verbal prese ntations. The main views of the empl oyer and labour communities were thus catalogued and I believe still remained abundantly clear.

The then government of Mani toba respon ded to the LRC recommendations by establishing a staff team for workers compensation reform which began to study actual legislative proposals during 19 87 and 19 88. In 19 89, this gove rnment wound down the implementation team and transferred some of its responsibilities for planning to the Workers Compensation Board itself, while vesting other responsibilities in the Steering Commi ttee for Legislative Reform , an advisory group to the minister.

The steering committee consists of a number of technical advisors to the government, such as lawyers, actuaries and accountants, as well as several senior offici als from the Workers Compensation Board itself. * (1 500) During the term of the steering comm ittee's deliberations, the WCB established a number of docum ents indicating the likely im pact on its operations of some policy and legislative changes.

In particular, in 19 89, the WCB publis hed a comprehensive plan in which it laid out some of the financial consequences of adopting a number of changes to the legislation along the lines of the present amendments before us today. The members will be aware that beginning on April 18 , myself and Graham Lane, the chair of the steering committee and CEO of the board, have conducted a series of consultations with a number of interested parties. These include the Manitoba Federation of Labour, the Employers' Task Force on Compensation, the chambers of commerce, the Injured Workers Association, among others.

In response to these consu ltations and further di rections from myself and my caucus, the amendments which we are about to examine have been modified in some significant ways. I am particularly pleased that a hardship clause has been introduced for surviving spouses who are 50 years of age and older in the case of a fatality. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would now like to summarize, for the benefit of honourable members, the main elements of the proposals before turning to a brief synopsis of the technical amendments. The first major proposal is automatic indexation of benefits.

The amendmen ts propose that all benefits be indexed to the average industrial weekly wage, capped annually to a maximum increase of 6 percent. Where the average wage increase is greater than 6 percent, there will be a carry forward proposed of excess indexation into other years. Indexation initially follows a two year delay but is yearly thereafter. These amendments supplement a variety of ad hoe indexations which are currently in the act and, of course, provide for automatic indexation in many cases where there was never any before.

These stipulations also apply to current pensioners until they are age 65 and beyond for those spouses of fatality victims, a guarantee of pension integrity for these pensioners which have not had that for many years.

3257 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 Number 2: Increase maximum insured earnings. It is proposed that the maximum insured earnings be fixed at $45,500 for 1992, an increase from $38,000 in 1991 . This new level approximates 190 percent of the average industrial wage. It equates to that level forecast for Ontario in 19 92 and to the Canadian average. At this new level, I am informed that more than 95 percent of all those covered by the act will have their incomes fully insured. Number 3: Conversion of wage loss from gross income to net income.

Unde r this proposed legislation, an injured worker would receive 90 percent of average loss net income up until the date of retirement, death or return to work. However, after 24 months of accumulated benefits, the level of wage loss would be reduced to 80 percent of net income with the addition of 5 percent of income paid to a WCB administered pension plan as well as up to an additional 5 percent used to provide life insurance to the claimant.

As to the top-ups by employers, many of these currently allow a WCB recipient to take home more while on WCB benefits, particularly when tax consequences are considered, than when they were working. One must remember that all WCB benefits are tax free. As a consequence, this legislation is proposing that any top-ups which raise benefits beyond 90 percent of net income be deducted from WCB benefits paid.

The one exception to this is for employees where their employers are in the self-insured category where we propose a grandparenting to 1 00 percent of net income provided in cases wher e the current collective agreement in place in the self-insur ed industries provide a top-up. This offset provision also recognizes that the current system of paying 75 percent of gross earnings regardless of the number of dependents gives rise to severe inequities in that married or single persons with similar gross incomes are now treated the same despite the fact that their after-tax incomes are certainly different.

Under the proposed system, some individuals will receive more while others receive less. Gener ally speaki ng, low income ma rried workers with dependents will receive more while single persons with larger incomes with no dependents will generally receive less. I am sure even the New Democratic Party recognizes that there is an inequity in the current system and that should be redressed. Number 4: Lump sum payments for permanent disability.

It is proposed that a lump sum rather than a lifetime pension compensate for physical disability or loss of funct ioning, again, similar to the Saskatchewan model developed in 1979. Madam De puty Speaker, im pairm ents are gener ally calcula ted everywhere in North America on a percentage basis according to tables established by medical practitioners. Under the proposal for those whose impairment lies between 1 percent and 5 percent, a $500 lump sum would be paid. For those whose impairment lies between 5 percent and 10 percent, a $1 ,000 lump sum would be paid .

For those whose impairment percentage is greater than 10 percent, a $1 ,000 additional lump sum would be paid for every percent up to a maximum of $91 ,OOO. These amounts would be reduced by 2 percent a year for workers over the age of 45 to a maximum reduction of 40 percent. This stipulation takes into account the number of years of loss of functioning which the worker is likely to suffer. These amounts of up to $91 ,000 compensate for nonwage monetary losses. Members should note this is in addition to wage loss benefits, which the recipient would also receive.

As well, the recipient would receive vocational rehabilitation payments, medical costs, disability related ex penses such as vehicle and home modifications, prosthetic devices, et cetera. So an impaired worker would receive benefits from three sources: wage loss, lump sum, and all of the other different costs that they may incur for alterations to their home, medical care, et cetera. So the three come together. This lump sum may be granted at the recipient's request as a board administered annuity, that is on a tax-free basis so as to ensure ongoing availability of the capital.

I am sure that members of this House will be pleased to compare this amount to those provided in oth er jurisdictions. The gove rnmen ts of Saskatchewan and Ontario provide $22,600 and $65,000 respectively representing the range of other jurisdictions across Canada. As all members can see this is the most substantial plan anywhere in the country. I would remind members it would be indexed annually. Madam Deputy Speaker, the fifth major area, Fatality Benefits. This is an area where I am sure all members are concerned with compensating for grievous loss.

Under our proposals a surviving spouse may receive a lump sum of up to one-half of

June 12 , 1991 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 3258 the full impairment award or one-half of $91 ,000 equaling $45,500. This, too, will be reduced by a percentage where the worker was over age 45 but will also be indexed annually. In addition, a spouse will be entitled to monthly payments equal to the total wage loss to which the worker would have been entitled had he or she been totally unable to work. These payments will continue generally for a period of five years or until the youngest child is 18 , whichever is longer.

In addi tion, the surviving spouse is entitled to rehabilitation services in order to assist them in re-entering the labour force. If the spouse is 50 years or older and death cause is a hardship, as there is insufficient or inadequate family income, that spouse may elect to substitute continuing wage loss until retirement rather than receive the lump sum payment. Dependent children are also entitled to an amount of $250 per month compared to about $200 today. Amounts are also payable to adult dependents, for example, an elderly relative of up to an aggregate of $2,000 per month.

Some of these amounts may also be converted to annuities. In the area of Occupational Disease, Madam Deputy Speaker-compen sation for industrial, or as we now say occupational illness is an issue that has bedevilled Workers Compensation for many years. Indeed, Mr. Justice Meredith made some comments about the difficulties in this regard. Some of these difficulties arise because of the multifactoral nature of most diseases, which include the effects of lifest yle, nonworkpl ace expo sure and other confounding factors.

The standard test-did the accident arise out of and in the course of employment, given that this program is 10 0 percent employer funded and given the presence of other nonspecific di sabil ity compensation plans such as the Canada Pension Plan and employer long-term disability plan as well as coverage which may be obtained privately is cer tainly a test that fits the framew ork for occupational disease. I am pleased therefore, Madam Deputy Speaker, that these provisions address both the general issue of occupational disease and the more specific concerns with one disease, that being stress.

The amendm ents explicitly recognize occu pational disease within the definition of accident, albeit with a number of reasonable restrictions and exclusions. Among these is the restriction on compensating stress other than that arising from an acute reaction to a traumatic event due to the extreme multicausal nature of stress. Also occupational di sease coverage does not include ordinary diseases of life, a concept consistent with most North American jurisdictions.

Consistent with the general terms of the act, occupational disease is to be compensated where it arises, and I quote, out of and in the course of employment, but it must also be due to causes peculiar to the trade, occupation or the particular employment. * (1 510 ) In other words, we are basically defining the present practice or

interpretation of occupational disease in this legislation. The one significant change in this area of occupational disease arises in another area where the WCB administration is caught on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, industrial disease is covered if it arises out of the course of employment. On the other hand, the act currently stipulates apportionment when there are multiple causes. Under such criteria, how are causes such as myocardial infarctions with multiple causes to be adjudicated? Should it matter where the heart attack occurs or the immedia te circu mstance around the event?

What are the triggers or thr esholds for apport ionme nt- a significan t work-related cause, a dominant cause or any cause? Should the same tests apply to asbestosis for a smoker? What about psychological and stress conditions? Such uncertainty cannot be the basis for good public service or policy. We must also tread carefully so as to not charge all the costs of disease, no matter how tenuously related to the workplace, to employers. It is a tenet of public policy that the incidence charges should bear on those who can effect a diminution of that cos t.

But ho w can emplo yers affect the consequences of smoking, obesity, or other lifestyle practices short of not hiring such persons? Is that what we want? Should not society, in general, or the employee, bear a share? If so, how can we straightforwardly and equitably assess that share? It makes some sense to not saddle employers with the diseases of ordinary life which happen to all of us, including some employees. It also makes sense to me to apply a test suggesting that the disease to be compensable

3259 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 be peculiar to a process or workplace. This is something which the employer has in his/her power to remedy. Therefore, I am pleased to point out that our proposal is to provide compensation where the conditions of the workplace are the dominant cause of the illness. Consequently, we propose that the current apportioning provisions of the current act be repealed.

With regard to stress, members are likely to be aware that Hans Se lye's theory suggests stress can be a positive or negative influence on our lives, and that chronic stress, like other chronic psychological conditions or physiological conditions, is a product of many influences from before our working lives begin, from outside our working lives and from during our working lives. This level of complexity means that medicine cannot attribute cause to events, or even determine whether an event, if a cause, was a positive or negative factor. After all, not working can also be very stressful.

In light of this, I do believe this Legislature should be clear in dealing with stress. It should be limited to negative stress reactions to traumatic events at the workplace. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would now like to provide inform ation to member s respecting a number of the proposed technical amendments to the act.

These amendments, although not in and of themselves individually as important as the main components of the act, are nonetheless significant in their achievements with respect to protecting rights of workers, extending benefits, protecting rights of employers, controlling or reassigning costs and strengthening both the administration of the WCB and the level of appropriate control exercised by the government and the Legislature. Manitoba injured workers will, in my judgment, be plea sed to learn of the following pro posed amendments to the act: Number 1: A number of minor benefits have been enriched or extended.

The lump sum funeral entitlement has been consolidated and raised from about $2,800 to $5,000. As well, no offset has been provided for a like amount which is separately available from the Canada Pension Plan. Annuities are to be available to an injured worker or his or her surviving spouse in a number of circumstances. Finally, I would like to mention that the definition of worker has been expanded to include companions of the elderly. Nu mb er 2: A number of new rig hts and protections have been conferred on workers.

I am pleased to note, in particular, that workers may not be subject to coercion with respect to accident reporting. Where employers do so, they are subject to significant penalties under this proposed law. As well, worker s are entitled to elect to seek MPIC benefit s, where these are richer benefits, rather than WCB benefits in appropriate cases. Workers are also entitled to receive replacements for dama ged pr osthetic de vice s, dentu res , eyeglasses, clothing and the like in cases where there has been a personal injury on a no-fault basis.

As well, reasonable wage loss benefits may henceforth be paid to the worker where the loss or damage to a prosthetic device, eyeglass or the like prevents the injured worker from working. Finally, the vocational rehabilitation clauses of the act have been consolida ted and upgr aded to include preventative rehabilitation. Madam Deputy Speaker, the employers in Manitoba who are covered under this act will also benefit from a number of favourable amendments.

Costs will be more appropriately established and allocated, for example, the ability of a worker to elect or receive MPI C benefits where that is appropriate rather than have that born by the WCB system. As well, several provisions address the ability of the board to credit those with good safety records over and above their excellence rating while surcharging those with poor safety records, thus ensuring greater equity for those who support the Workers Compensation Board and ensure a safe workplace.

Also, Madam Deputy Speaker, the WCB and the appeal com mi ss ion may, under cer tain circumstances, charge for medical review panels and appeal panels where the request for the panel is deemed to be frivolou s . Under these amendments, the board will also be in a better posi tion to recover its ad ministrative costs associated with successful third party legal actions. Finally, the emp loyers are to be individually protected from high- cost fatalities, as these costs may be averaged over all fatalities. The legal rights of employers have been extended consistent, in some cases, with current practice.

For example, the experience rating system now in

June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3260 use has been enshrined under these amendments in law. Again, it is presently in use. As well, the waiting period for employers to file a report has been set at five business days rather than the current three. That comes with general recognition by all stakeholders that it is a more reasonable period of time. Finally, employer rights with respect to access to information are solidified through the employer having access to relevant medical information in support of an appeal.

To deny employers access to this information would mean that they would be approaching the appeal in ignorance of a number of issues under appeal. From current judicial opinion which is developing across the country, it would appear that at some point we would be forced to do this in practice by the courts rather than putting in our act at this time.

However, I can assure honourable members that we are protecting workers with a proper notification, process and appeal procedure which, in many ways, mirrors that currently in use in Ontario and which in fact I believe is probably stronger than the protections for employees that are currently in place in Ontario. The employer may also be protected through a variety of measures. Specifically, directors of corporations will henceforth be held responsible for unpaid assessme nts. As we ll, the unpaid assessments due to the WCB will receive priority in nonbankrup tcy situations.

Madam Deput y Speaker, as well, the WCB has, and I will describe in a moment, been granted considerably greater authority with respect to administrative flexibility. A number of impo rtant controls are also being proposed, one that the board must prepare an annual five-year operating plan and submit it to the minister along with the annual report. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) As well, we · are proposing that the Workers Com pensation Board, their annual report and operating plan have to be reviewed by a standing committee of this Legislature on an annual basis.

To date, ther e has never been that type of accountability to the Legislative Assembly. We are also proposing, Mr. Speaker, that the board may publish assessment rates rather than having to mail them individually to employers. The act contains stipulation which, while recognizing that unfunded liabilities may arise from time to time, it will require the WCB to recover any future shortfall with respect to one year over the succeeding three-year period. I would hope, with respect to this provisional loan, that a certain amount of fiscal stability will be brought to the operations of the board. Mr.

Speaker, as well, a number of program enrichments and improvements have also been introduced to the very considerable advantage of both empl oyers and injured workers. These stipulations include establishing a rate stabilization fund and a relief-of-cost fund. Finally, the new provisions allow for coverage to extend to all employees of the company including executive officers, but excluding only directors who may seek voluntary coverage. Mr.

Speaker, before I conclude, there is one other consideration that I would like to make, and that is with respect to the Legislative Review Comm ittee which existed from 1985 to 19 87 in Manitoba. I hope members of the New Democratic Party will pay heed to this information. Mr.

Speaker, let me compare for a moment the main benefit provisions in this proposed package to that of the Legislative Review Comm ittee that they established when they were in government. * (1 520) The LRC recommended a dual-award system and prospective wage-loss pension, In these ame ndments we adopt the dual -award system although the wage loss will be continually calculated over time rather than solidified in the form of a pension. The LRC's majority recommended wage loss at 90 percent.

Under these provisions, we adopt a 90 percent wage loss system for the first 24 months with a reduction to 80 per cent with approximately 1 O percent of benefits to make up that difference. The LRC recommended that the WCB set aside 1 0 percent of wage-loss benefits so that the injured worker might subsequently purchase a pension. We are providing that 5 percent in a pension with the option of recipients of topping it up to 5 percent. The LRC setthe maximum impairment level at $50,000.

As memb ers are aware , these provisions establish it at $91 ,000; however, the LRC did not make a recommendation regarding any reductions in lump sum according to age. Consequently, they are very close to one another although this is probably a better package than that recommended.

3261 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 The LRC also recommended that benefits be escalated annually and these provisions do so. The LRC recommended that the surviving spouse be entitled to a $1 75,000 lump sum. Under this act, we are providing for up to a $45,500 lump sum with continuing wage loss. If one calculates these totals and does some numbers based on a five-year period, it could range anywhere in reality from $1 60,000 to $500,000. Again, I think we have more than met those expectations. The LRC recommended the amount of $225 be provided to surviving dependent children.

We are recom me nding $250. Mr. Spea ker, the LRC recom mended that pre-accident earnings be adjusted for the special circumstances of younger workers. These amendments provide for special arrangements for youth and apprentices. Finally, the LRC, in majority, recomm ended that the maximum wage ceiling for coverage be twice the average industrial wage, while the labour minority recommended two-and-a-half times, both to be indexed annually. Maximum earning under these provisions are set at about 1.9 times the average industrial wage and are indexed annually.

I am pleased to say that with these provisions enacted into law, at least 75 percent of the 178 recommendations made by the New Democratic Party-in itiated LRC will have been adopted by either the government, or WCB itself administratively. Before closing, I would like to mention that the proposals, though not in the legislative context, have been provided to the statutorily established policy committee to the board of directors beginning in January of 1991 . They have had a chance to review those proposals, again, not in text but in proposal form . In closing, Mr.

Speaker, I would just like to remind this House, and particularly members of the New Democratic Party, that although I hear comments on a continual basis about a management agenda that this is not for workers, the vast majority of these provisions follow from a process that they began and bear the recommendations that were being made to them when they were in government. They may try to make some politics out of this. They may try to claim that this is not a fair package, but this package brings Manitoba into line with virtually every other province.

At least the majority of the provinces in Canada follows the lead that was taken by the NOP in Saskatchewan in 19 79 and implements a majority of the provisions that their own initiated review recommended. So if they are to get up on some sort of a political high horse to attack this as if this has come out of the blue, then I think what they are inviting is the label of hypocrite, because it certainly would not fit with the history of the development of workers compensation across Cana da. Thank you , Mr. Speaker , for your attention. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Biii 64- The Energy Rate Stablllzatlon Repeal Act Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld), that Bill 64, The Energy Rate Stabilization Repeal Act; Loi abrogeant la

Loi sur la stabilisation des emprun ts d'Hydro-Man itoba a l'etranger, be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, Bill 64 provides the legislative authority for the province to make a present value settlement with Manitoba Hydro respecting its remaining liability under the Hydro Rate Stabilization program and repeal The Energy Rate Stabilization Act.

The Energy Rate Stabilization Act was previously ame nded so that Manitoba Hydro assume d responsibility for fluctuation on all of its foreign currency debt by March 31 , 19 89, beyond the amount which has been amortized on the province's books. The province has established in its accounts the liability to Manitoba Hydro equal to the amount that the province has amortized on its books, in respect to the difference in value of Hydro's fore ign currency debt from the date of issue to the dates when Manitoba Hydro assumed responsibility for its foreign currency debt.

Bill 64 will allow the province to make a present value settlement with Manitoba Hydro, and thereby terminate the province's obligations under the Hydro Rate Stabilization program. This will permit The Energy Rate Stabilization Act to be repealed. Mr. Speaker, I will just spend a couple of minutes again reviewing the history of this particular piece of

June 12 , 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3262 legislation-and I am talking now about the act itself, it is presently in effect. The program was announced in the 19 79 Budget Address, and the pro gram was intended to guarantee a five-year fixed power rate for all Manitoba consumers other than bulk purchases and those on other separate contracts.

In order to facil itate this rate freeze, the government relieved Manitoba Hydro, as of April 1, 1979, of the risk associated with its foreign currency debt by charging interest on the debt based on Canadian equivalent rates in effect on the dates of issue of the debt. Mr. Speaker, I digress for only a second to indicate to members it was during this period of time that the Canadian dollar was falling as a rock against the other currencies in the world.

Of course, the NOP government previously had accepted the flir tation of borrowing in Swiss francs, in Japanese yen, in German marks, in European economic units of account, it seems to me or whatever the term is, in everything but Canadian dollars. They went for the cheap coupon rate and inevitably got trapped when the Canadian dollar dropped to below 70 cents. What the Lyon government of the day did, was said, okay, we will save harmless the rate payers of Manitoba Hydro from ha ving to me et these incredible foreign exchange losses.

In exchange, we will ask Manitoba Hydro to freeze the rates of hydro associated with usage. That is the quick history. The rate freeze on Manitoba Hydro was removed in 1984 but the government's undertaking to relieve Hydro of the currency fluctuation risk associated with its foreign currency debt was continued. That was a political decision made by the NOP in 1984.

In 19 87, The Energy Rate Stabilization Act was amended so that Manit oba Hydro assumed responsibility for fluctuation on outstanding and new U.S. dollar denominated debt as of April 1, 19 87, and for any other new foreign currency debt issued by or on behalf of Manitoba Hydro on or after April 1, 1987. The provi nce accepted liabil ity for foreign exchange losses with respectto Hydro's U.S. dollar denominated debt equal to the amount accumulated as of March 31 , 19 87, in its provision account for the Hydro rate stabilization program.

The province retained responsibility for the currency fluctuation respecting Manitoba Hydro's debt denominated in foreign currency other than U.S. dollars issued by or on behalf of Manitoba Hydro prior to April 1 , 1987. In 19 89, Mr. Speaker, this is the first time the new government brought forward legislation dealing with The Energy Rate Stabilization Act. In '89 that act was again amended so that Manitoba Hydro assumed responsibility for the fluctuation on its debt denominated in foreign currencies other than U.S. dollars which was issued prior to April 1, 1987.

The province accepted liability for foreign exchange losses on this debt calculated at March 31 , 1989, exchange rates. After this amendment, Hydro became responsible for the foreign exchange fluctuation on all of its foreign currency debt. I only say this as a backdrop to the import and the principle behind Bill 64.

It is complicated, I know, but what we are talking about are tens leading to hundreds of millions of dollars of exposure that the ratepayers of Manitoba Hydro and, therefore indirectly, the taxpayers of the province, have had to face up because of the flirtation-for the want of a better word-of borrowing what appeared to be at very low rates, coupon rates, but not having hedged the Canadian dollar, vis-a-vis the other currencies in which the borrowing took place. So, Mr. Speaker, I commend this bill to the House.

I hope that opposition members will see fit to give speedy and quick passage to this bill, as it now clears up part of our history associated with Manitoba Hydro and the borrowing program that Hydro followed for a period of time in the 19 70s which, of course, for the most part, has proven unproductive. Thank you very much. * (1 530) Ms. Becky Barrett (Welllngton): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), that debate on the motion be adjourned. Motion agreed to. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Biii 44- The Publlc Utllltles Board Amendment Act Mr.

Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Aff airs (Mrs. Mcintosh), Bill 44, The Public Utilities Board Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Regie des services publics, standing in

3263 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 the name of the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton). Stand. Is there leave that this matter remain standing? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave. Agreed. Ms. Becky Barrett (Welllngton): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to put some comments on the record regarding Bill 44 dealing with Centra Gas, put forward by the Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Affai rs (Mrs. Mcintosh). I think it is interesting, Mr.

Speaker, to note, first of all, that for reasons known only to the minister and her cabinet colleagues, that the bill was only introduced on May 15 for second reading despite the promises of her predecessor the former Minister of Co-oper ative, Consumer and Corporate Aff airs, the honourable member for Portage (Mr. Connery), that this bill was to be his crowning achievement in his legislative career. I would like to also state that the government is now demanding quick and urgent movement of this bill through the legislative process.

I would like to put on record our party's concerns about some of the elements in this bill, some of the potential problems that may arise out of this bill, should it be passed in an unamended form.

We are looking forward to debate in the House, reasoned and well-thought out debate on all parties, and also to the public hearing process where we understand that there will be a fair number of public groups that will be making presentations, and private individuals will be making presentations, on this bill, which has far-ranging impacts on, not only the Centra Gas company, but also individuals and private citizens in the province of Manitoba.

One of the things that strikes us on this side of the House is that when you look at Centra Gas and its rate of return, which I think is an important thing to do in this regard because Centra Gas is asking for the ability, and this bill is giving Centra Gas the ability to cut off delinquent accounts, I think one of the things that all people who are debating and talking about this bill need to take a look at is the necessity for Centra Gas to be making this request and the reasons behind the government's very quick and easy acquiescence to Ce ntra Gas's request.

Centra Gas and its predecessor, ICG Utilities, have enjoyed a profitable monopoly for very many years, a monopoly which has not gone unnoticed by the marketplace. In November of 1989, Mr. Speaker, Gr eater Winnip eg Gas Company purchased -( interjection)- ! am actually glad to hear the comments of the minister responsible on this issue. It has been a long time coming, and I am sure that we will be sharing a great many hours in front of the public in comm ittee hearings. We will refer this bill to committee hearings when we have completed our statements on the bill. -(i nterjection)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

The honourable Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintosh) will have ample opportunity to put her remarks on the record when she does close the deb ate. Right now, the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) has the floor. Ms. Barrett: In No vember of 19 89, Gr eate r Winnipeg Gas Company purchased all of the issued and outstanding common stock of ICG Utilities Manitoba Limited. Less than six months later, on April 18 , 19 90, West Coast Energy purchased all of the 99.9 percent outstanding common shares previously owned indirectly by Inter-City Gas Corporation.

This year, 1991 , just prior to the public board hearings in early February into yet another request for a rate increase, the name was changed once more, this time to Centra Gas. Members will recall the expensive advertising campaign featuring ads with a photo and comments of Cary Grant who we all know changed his name from a name that I cannot remember right now to Cary Grant and consequently went on to bigger and better things. I assume that part of the reason for the name change was to ensure that Centra Gas would be able to go on to bigger and better things.

Should this bill go through unamended, we are certain to see that happen, along with the large increases that the Public Utilities Board has already given to Centra Gas. We would like to put on record some of the financial information that has been given out in regards to Ce ntra Gas's financial situation which, as I stated earlier, is an important component when dealing with this bill which makes assum ptions about the need for Centra Gas to have the ability to cut off delinquent accounts. Centra Gas is not short of cash flow.

It has operating revenues in excess of $200 million a year that from this side of the House would appear to be a fairly substantial amount of money in and out in one year. Since 19 85, revenues have averaged well above $200 million

June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3264 per year. In the latest report, the operating revenue was $210 .6 million, up by 10 percent; operating profit increased by 25 percent to $23.5 million; and net income after tax increased by 31 percent to $9.5 million. Centra Gas is not exactly a poor cousin in the energy business.

One wonders at the need in these recessionary times when this government is making students take a $30 a month cut in their High School Bursary Programs, is making social assistance individuals who are attempting to go back to school and improve themselves so that they can get away from the cycle of poverty, a $30 a month cut bringing their monthly income to $210 . Putting that into the context, Centra Gas is not exactly hurting. Another element to the Centra Gas story is that the total customers exceed over 200,000 in Greater Winnipeg, almost all until recently having no option but to use ICG.

The firm has been indeed in a fortunate situation financially. They have not had to go onto social assistance, and they should be very grateful that they have not had to access the system that is available to the poorest people in our province. * (1 540) Another element that we would like to bring to the public's attention in this regard, which also talks about Centra Gas' role and need for being able to cut off individuals and companies with delinquent accounts, is Centra's own unpaid and delinquent accounts which are not entitled delinquent accounts but accumulated, unrecorded, deferred income tax.

This is a very large fede ral and provi ncial Conservative government way of taking taxes that are legitimately owed by profit-making corporations and deferring them so that the companies are not required to pay those taxes, can use that money to increase their profits and not be good corporate citizens.

At the same time that at the federal level over the la st year s the individual income tax paye r, parti cul arly the mode rate and middle-income taxpayer who does not have advantage of the tax loopholes that federal Liberal and Conservative federal governments have instituted over the last 30 or 40 years, those individuals are paying well over 50 percent of the tax revenue that the federal government takes in each year while profit-m aking corporations, of which Ce ntra Gas is certainly one, are paying less than 10 percent now.

I think when we put that in as some of the background on the discussion of the background of this bill, it becomes clear whose agenda is being followed here.

ICG's 1 989 Annual Report stated that they had an accumulated, unrecorded, deferred income tax bill, i.e., taxes that should have been paid, but were allowed not to be paid of $28,958,300, almost $29 million, a figure very close to the $30 million that this provincial government has added to its Social Assistance line in its provincial Family Services budget as additional funds that are required by this government because it has absolutely no job creation strategy, no funding put into helping people who have been laid off, people who do not have access to large corporations and their high profit margins.

It would be interes ting to note wha t this government could have done with just under $30 million in additional revenue, $30 million that ICG in 19 89 agreed was income tax that they legitimately owed to society. That amount of money, almost $29 million, was in one year up from $21 ,393,500. In one year, the deferred taxes owed by tha.t corporation increased by $7 million.

Now there has been some deregulation in the industry in the last little while and ICG/Centra has faced some competition for commercial accounts but has not recently faced the same pressures on the residential market, which until very recently has been captive to the bosses at ICG/Centra and the Public Utilities Board. The Public Utilities Board is now in the process of holding hearings on the direct purchasing of natural gas from brokers, agents or producers by Manitoba consumers.

Centra Gas Manitoba Inc., otherwise known as Centra, entered into a longer term gas supply contract with Western Gas Marketing Ltd. in 1988. The Public Utilities Board is requested to approve rates for gas pursuant to that contract. The current price under that contract expires October 31 , 1991 , and the rates to consumers may change thereafter.

The Public Utilities Board in previous public hearings has approved terms and conditions under which Centra offers direct purchasing arrangements to large volume customers, another area where ICG /Centra has ma de some interesting philosophical decisions that flow directly from their close alignmen t with federal and provi ncial Conservative thinking, which is, you charge large

3265 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 12, 1991 vo lume customers, i.e., large profit- mak ing corporations less, and small volume customers, i.e., residential users, many of whom are on fixed and low incomes, more per unit. A number of companies are now proposing to enter the Manitoba market with the intention of offe ring direct purchasing arrangements to smaller volume customers to enable them to participate in the deregulated market. A public hearing to review these issues is going to be held on July 16 and, if necessary, July 17 of this year.

We anticipate a fair number of individuals to make presentation before the Public Utilities Board at that time. If nothing else, we hope that these hearings will result in a situation where consumers will no longer be captive to the demands of a single monopoly for regular rate increases.

The request earlier this year to the Public Utilities Board by Centra for an increase of 12.5 percent in the residential monthly charge and a decrease of an average of 2.5 percent of commercial charges points to the priorities of the firm and also fits in very nicely with the ideology of the governments of the day, both provincial and federal.

As I spoke of earlier, it is a strange kind of a situation where, in an era where we are supposed to be saving energy, we are supposed to be talking about sustainable development, we are supposed to be talking about conserving our resources, it is saying that the larger you are, the more you use, the less we will charge you, and that the smaller you are, the less you use, the more we will charge you. There is an internal logic here, but it is not a logic that we advocate, nor are we in favour of any changes to the rates that will carry that on.

What this means again is that smaller individuals, moderate- and lower-income people, those on social assistance, will find their incomes decreased by a fairly hefty percentage when you are talking about a social allowance monthly income or you are talking about a minimum wage family or you are talking about the largest single increase in type of family, which is a single parent family headed by a mother living below the poverty line, when you are talking about families who are required to have two incomes in order to have even the most modest standard of living.

When you have an average of 12 .5 percent increase on their Centra Gas bill, that makes a big diff erence, a large differ ence. Another group of families that is going to be adversely affected by these kinds of rate changes are the families who are currently making use of the daycare system in our province. With an increase of 48 percent for infant day care spaces and almost 20 percent for preschool spaces, families just above the subsidy cut off line, mo de rate - and middle-income families are finding it very difficult to make ends meet and increases- * (1 550) Point of Order Hon.

Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): This is very much a technical bill. It deals with a process but, Mr. Speaker, what it does not purport to deal with is all the social problems of the day, even though there may be reason to discuss them and other issues. Certainly Bill 44 in its principles does not deal with those issues, and I think the member is straying far off base. I would ask you to bring her back to the purport of the bill. Mr.

Speaker: On the point of order raised, I would remind the honourable member for Wellington that the question before the House is The Public Utilities Board Amen dment Act, and I would ask the honourable member to keep her remarks relevant to said question. * * * Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, to get back to the increase of 12 .5 percent in the residential monthly charge, the same request before the Public Utilities Board was defended by the firm as necessary to cover costs of unpaid accounts.

All residential customers, as we all know, were given in their January bills an insert called "You Ought To Know," stating that the primary reason for the then upcoming rate increase request was because unpaid accounts were costing $90 per year for the average customer. Before the Public Utilities Board hearing even began on February 7, the former Minister of Consumer and Corporate Aff airs rushed in to defend the firm with his announcement that the government would be bringing in the current bill, which was finally brought in on May 15 . (Mr.

Ben Sveinson, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) Not surprisingly, far from withdrawing the rate increase, the firm then said they needed the money regardless of the legislation. At the hearings, my colleague, the consumer affairs critic for the NOP, questioned the figures put forward by the firm.

June 12, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3266 Under exami nation, representatives of the firm admitted that the $90 figure was at least $55 too high and perhaps even more than that. In fact, like all other uncollectable accounts of other businesses, these unpaid bills are tax deductible, another fact that the Ce ntra Gas would like the people of Manitoba to forget. (Mr. Jack Penner, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) The question members on this side of the House are certainly going to ask is why the Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Affa irs (Mrs.

Mcintosh) is merely monitoring her prices like her predecessor did. Either the rates are too high with the leg islation or the legisla tion is not necessary. Why the firm should be granted both the legislation and the rate incr

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-2-63
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 2nd hansardpdf 63.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0c3ea21689772e99ef0c9601626e1bb2b539d49e

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