Manitoba Hansard — 4 June 1997 (Sitting 55, 36th Legislature, 3rd Session)

36-3-55

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session- Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLVII No. 55- 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 4, 1997 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ASHTON, Steve Thompson N.D.P. BARRETT, Becky Wellington N.D.P. CERILLI, Marianne Radisson N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave Kildonan N.D.P. CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. Ste. Rose P.C. DACQUA Y, Louise, Hon. Seine River P.C. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. Roblin-Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary Concordia N.D.P. DOWNEY, James, Hon. Arthur- Virden P.C. DRIEDGER, Albert Steinbach P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. ENNS, Harry, Hon. Lakeside P.C. ERNST, Jim Charleswood P.C. EVANS, Clif Interlake N.D.P. EVANS, Leonard S.

Brandon East N.D.P. FILMON, Gary, Hon. Tuxedo P.C. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. Springfield P.C. FRIESEN, Jean Wolseley N.D.P. ' GAUDRY, Neil St. Boniface Lib. GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. Minnedosa P.C. HEL WER, Edward Gimli P.C. HICKES, George Point Douglas N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Pion N.D.P. KOWALSKI, Gary The Maples Lib. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar The Pas N.D.P. LAURENDEAU, Marcel St. Norbert P.C. MACKINTOSH, Gord St. Johns N.D.P. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McALPINE, Gerry Sturgeon Creek P.C. McCRAE, James, Hon. Brandon West P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane Osborne N.D.P.

MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. Assiniboia P.C. MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn St. James N.D.P. - MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. River East P.C. NEWMAN, David, Hon. Riel P.C. PENNER, Jack Emerson P.C. PITURA, Frank, Hon. Morris P.C. PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. Lac du Bonnet P.C. RADCLIFFE, Mike, Hon. River Heights P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. REIMER, Jack, Hon. Niakwa P.C. RENDER, Shirley St. Vital P.C. ROBINSON, Eric Rupertsland N.D.P. ROCAN, Denis Gladstone P.C. SALE, Tim Crescentwood N.D.P. SANTOS, Conrad Broadway N.D.P. STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. Kirkfield Park P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan Dauphin N.D.P. SVEINSON, Ben La Verendrye P.C.

TOEWS, Vic, Hon. Rossmere P.C. TWEED, Mervin Turtle Mountain P.C. VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. Fort Garry P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosano Swan River N.D.P. Vacant Portage Ia Prairie

, 4433 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, June 4, 1997 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Mobile Screening Unit for Mammograms Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of John Makowaychuk, Virginia Cork, Peter Zimmer and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unit for mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity.

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mobile Screening Unit for Mammograms Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense.

WHEREAS medical authorities have stated that breast cancer in Manitoba has reached almost epidemic proportions; and

WHEREAS yearly mammograms are recommended for women over 50, and perhaps younger if a woman feels she is at risk; and

WHEREAS while improved surgical procedures and better post-operative care do improve a woman's chances if she is diagnosed, early detection plays a vital role; and

WHEREAS Manitoba currently has only three centres where mammograms can be performed, those being Winnipeg, Brandon and Thompson; and

WHEREAS a trip to and from these centres for a mammogram can cost a woman upwards of$500 which is a prohibitive cost for some women; and

WHEREAS a number of other provinces have dealt with this problem by establishing mobile screening units; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has promised to take action on this serious issue. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unit for mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity. Obstetrics Closure-Grace General Hospital Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), and it complies with the rules and practices of the House.

Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense. THAT the obstetrics program has always been an important part of the Grace Hospital's mandate; and THAT both people in the community and a number of government studies have recommended against the further closure of community hospitals' obstetrics programs; and THAT as a result of federal and provincial cuts in the health budget, hospitals are being forced to eliminate programs in order to balance their own budgets; and

4434 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 THAT the closure of the Grace Hospital obstetrics ward will mean laying off 54 health care professionals, many of whom have years of experience and dedicated service in obstetrics; and THAT moving to a model where more and more births are centred in the tertiary care hospitals will be more costly and decreases the choices for women about where they can give birth. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Health (Mr.

Praznik) consider stopping the closure of the obstetrics program at Winnipeg's Grace Hospital. PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Committee of Supply Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Cha irperson of the Committee of Supply): Madam Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 50-The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy and Consequential Amendments Act Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (M r. Gilleshammer), that leave be given to introduce Bill 50, The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy and Consequential Amendments Act;

Loi sur l'acces a !'inf ormation et Ia protection de Ia vie privee et modifications correlatives, and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. I would like to table the Lieutenant Governor's message. Motion agreed to. Bill 51-The Personal Health Information Act Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Agriculture (M r. Enns), that leave be given to introduce Bill 51, The Personal Health Information Act;

Loi sur les renseignements medicaux personnels, and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. At this time, I would like to also table the message of His Honour the Lieutenant Governor. Motion agreed to. *(1 335) Bill 52-The Statute Law Amendment Act, 1997 Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (M r.

Stefanson), that leave be given to introduce Bill 52, The Statute Law Amendment Act, 1997 (L oi de 1997 modifiant diverses dispositions Iegislatives), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. Bill 56-The Family Maintenance Amendment Act Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (M rs. Mitchelson}, that leave be given to introduce Bill 56, The Family Maintenance Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur !'obligation alimentaire), and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4435 the House. I would like to table the Lieutenant Governor's message at this time. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members, firstly, to the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us this afternoon His Excellency Antonio Britto, Governor of the State of Rio Grande do Sui. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon. Also, seated in the public gallery we have forty Grades 5 and 6 students from the Van W alleghem School under the direction of Madelle Kim Peppler and Mr.

Bob Weber. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon). Also, twenty-five Grade 6 students from Dr. D.W. Penner School under the direction of Mr. Larry Schroeder. This school is located in the constituency of the Speaker (Mrs. Dacquay). Also, 10 visitors from Winnipeg Teen Touch under the direction of Ms. Joelle Page. This group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Broadway (Mr. Santos). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Manitoba Telecom Services Ownership Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader ofthe Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. On May 2, 1996, the Premier, in announcing that he was going to break his election promise and proceed to sell the Manitoba Telephone System, said: Our first priority is to ensure that Manitobans would continue to control the Manitoba Telephone System. Yesterday in this House, when we asked five months after the sale had taken place what was the percentage of shares that were indeed controlled by Manitobans, the minister stated that the information was not available.

In fact, he said it may be available, it may not be available. Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier what authority has the government maintained to ensure that his priority, his alleged priority of controlling the telephone system is going to be met. Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I think what is important to Manitobans is that they receive in their telecommunication services the highest quality of service possible at a reasonable rate, a very reasonable rate, that it continues to be evaluated by an independent authority such as the CR TC and that indeed the operations are centred here, that the employment is here, that-[interjection] Well, you know, the member who has some very, of course, deep socialist ideology, the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) makes the comment about branch plant.

No matter how often they are rejected by people throughout the world for their ideology, they continue- *

(1340) Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Filmon: The whole world, Madam Speaker- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Point of order, Madam Speaker. I listened very carefully to the comments of the Premier, and I think the Premier is definitely provoking debate with his comments. I think the Premier ought to be called to order to deal with the question as posed by the Leader and not engage in debate, because if he is going to engage in debate he is clearly going to lose. Mr.

Filmon: On the same point of order, Madam Speaker, very clearly, while I was attempting to answer the question of the Leader of the Opposition, I was being interrupted by the constant heckling of the

4436 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) and the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale). Madam Speaker, in response to the point of order, the phoney nonpoint of order that was raised by the member for Kildonan, I would not dream of debating or entering into a debate with the member for Radisson, because I do not believe in fighting an unarmed opponent. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please.

On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Kildonan, I would remind that all honourable members should respect each other when a member is either identified to pose a question or respond to a question. Indeed, other members should respect that member's rights and privileges, and I would also remind all ministers that answers should be direct and respond to the question asked. * * * system-our first priority is to ensure Manitobans will have control. Was he telling the truth then?

Was he telling the truth when he said on May 2 in this House, Manitobans will continue to control and own and operate their own phone system, or is he telling the truth now, today, that they do not have the authority to implement their promise that they made a year ago? Mr. Filmon: Of course, the member opposite is not telling the truth about what I did say during the last election campaign. When it comes to telling the truth, Manitobans have judged him, and that is why he is on the other side. The fact of the matter is, Manitobans still do control the Manitoba Telecom Services, and it will continue to be thus.

Mr. Doer: Of course, the mm1ster of tele communications could not tell us whether we controlled 50 percent of the shares yesterday and said he did not know whether that information was Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minister, to available. quickly complete his response. Mr. Filmon: So, as a consequence, I believe Manitobans are more concerned with the fact that they receive their services at a reasonable cost, that they continue to have the services here in Manitoba, that the employment is here in Manitoba and that any expansion will take place here in Manitoba.

The fact of the matter is, Madam Speaker, that all of the members of the board of the Manitoba Telecom Services are either Manitobans or former Manitobans, and their commitment is to providing these services to Manitobans at the best possible rate and in the best possible fashion. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I think the priority for Manitobans is people that tell the truth, and that is what the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) does every day, unlike the Premier.

Was the Premier telling the truth last year when he said-we know he was not telling the truth in the election when he promised not to sell the telephone I would like to ask the Premier-the Premier has repeatedly stated that he told the truth, but in the press conference on May 2, he confirmed that he did promise that he would not sell the Manitoba Telephone System during the last election campaign. How can the Premier be trusted on other issues of public importance, like Manitoba Hydro, when clearly he is prepared to say one thing before an election and do something else after an election campaign?

How can anybody trust this Premier? *

(1345) Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I do not know whether the Leader of the Opposition acts out of sheer ignorance or out of total dishonesty, but I can tell him that I did not say anything of the sort either at the news conference or during the last election campaign, and he knows it full well. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, the Premier-as is his wont to use the - -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4437 term "dishonesty" in regard to the Leader of the Opposition. In the context of MTS, that is not only unparliamentary but absolutely amazing. I would appreciate that you not only ask the Premier to withdraw that word, but admit to the fact he did not tell the people of Manitoba what he was going to do with the Manitoba Telephone System during the election. Why not just come out and say it, Mr. Premier? Madam Speaker: Order, please.

On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, the term "dishonest" appears in Beauchesne on both the unparliamentary list and the parliamentary list. However, the use of such words including "untruth" or "not telling the truth," by all members in this House does nothing but promote debate and cause severe disruption in this House. I would ask that all members pick and choose their words carefully. Orthotic/Prosthetic Services User Fees Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): My question also is for the Premier (Mr. Filmon), Madam Speaker.

It might surprise members of the House, but June is spina bifida month in this country. Imagine the shock of parents and of members of the Spina Bifida Association of Manitoba, who number up to 500, to find out the government had decided in their budget to claw back $400,000 from their pockets and the pockets of others and to charge a user fee for necessary services. I will table a letter for the Premier that went to the Minister of Health from the head of the association talking about the parents requiring bladder devices at a cost of $1 ,000 a year.

They are only allowed $500 a year for a chair; the cost of a chair is $3,000 to $15,000 a year. The Pharmacare costs have been eliminated, and then they decide in the budget to impose a user fee on these devices. Can the Premier answer how an item like that, that the minister is now back-pedalling on, gets through a cabinet that is supposed to be informed of the needs of Manitobans? Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): I think we discussed this matter a fair bit yesterday. I have no problem again entering into the discussion on this particular matter that the member raises.

There is no doubt that over the last number of years all provincial governments have been under increasing pressure in their health budgets. Reductions in federal contributions to health care, our own budgetary requirements forced governments all across the country to look at ways of ensuring that they can distribute the dollars they have across the system. In this particular item, as I indicated yesterday to the media-l think there was coverage of it-that in our whole area of support for devices, for medical equipment, we have a great deal of inconsistency.

It has developed over 30 years of ad hoc support in a variety of areas. So what I have said we are going to do before we move in any of these areas is, with Treasury Board, come up with a consistent policy across the system that is in line with what happens across the country. Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, did it ever occur to the Minister of Health, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) or the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Stefanson), in this development of this claw back on this tax on the sick, that, in fact, as we move from acute care hospitals to community based, these devices keep people mobile, keep people out of expensive hospitals, improve their quality of life, that in fact this is an investment and rather than increasing the taxes on the sick, you ought to be removing them? Did it ever occur to anyone on that side of the House to consider that? Mr. Praznik: Absolutely, Madam Speaker.

That is why, in fact, now we are attempting to develop a far more consistent policy, but let us not let the member for Kildonan leave the impression that a co-payment or deductible has not been part of the system across this country for many of these devices for years. In fact, in the area of Pharmacare, there has always been a deductible for Pharmacare; there has always been a deductible for eyeglasses in a variety of areas.

The point that I readily admit is that we have a very-and have had, over a number of governments over three decades, a very inconsistent approach in this area, one that is the result of, I think, a lot of ad hoc policy decisions. I think it is time we look at finding a reasonable approach to these areas to avoid the kinds of difficulties that the member has outlined.

4438 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 * (1 350) Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, my final supplementary to the minister-and it is indeed unf ortunate that he did not rule out that he would maintain this tax on the sick.

Did the minister ever consider or will he consider, before you decide to impose these taxes on the sick, that you talk to organizations like the Society for Manitobans with Disabilities, the Canadian Paraplegic Association, Independent Living Resource Centre, Cerebral Palsy Association, Muscular Dystrophy Association, Association for Community Living, Spina Bifida Association, all those organizations that are affected by this? You did not even talk to them before you imposed this tax on the sick. Will you at least talk- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Mr.

Praznik: Madam Speaker, I would not want to see the member get too worked up over this issue, because his point is a very valid one. The department had. in fact, entered into some discussions after the budgetary process. In bringing me up to date on their discussions, I also was not satisfied with the degree of consultation that had gone on. I share that same concern. As well, the advice coming from the organization that was directly affected by this issue on orthotics had another proposal that they made to us, and so that is why, in fact, we have taken the action that we have.

I have been in communication with the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), and we hope to be able to do a much better review in all of these areas, because ad hocking it is not the way to go. Queen versus Bauder Court of Appeal Decision Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St Johns): Madam Speaker, to the Minister of Justice: The Court of Appeal of Manitoba recently made a decision in the Queen versus Bauder that the accused, who was found to have sexually assaulted a child, was not a danger to the safety of the community.

One of the parts of the decision that we find most obnoxious and indeed truly a throwback was the conclusion by the court, the finding of fact, that the victim, a child, was a willing participant in the sexual assault. I ask the Minister of Justice if he can tell the House and Manitobans where did this finding of fact come from, since he knows the Court of Appeal does not make such findings of fact. Where did it come from? Did in fact the Crown agree that the victim had somehow consented? Hon.

Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, the decision, of course, has been one that has concerned my department very much. It seems to me that, in applying the law in that particular situation, the law makes Manitobans victims on the street or in the community and also appears to victimize people in our courts. If that is the

interpretation of the law, then I am very, very concerned. In fact, the department has indicated to me that they are of the opinion that an error of law has been made in that particular case, and without getting into the reasons mentioned by my colleague from St. Johns, there will be an application made by the department for kave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and that will be done shortly. Mr. Mackintosh: I think that goes without saying. There must be an appeal, but my question to the minister was what was the position of the Crown.

Did they agree to the conclusion of fact that somehow she was a willing participant to the sexual assault? What was the position of the Crown as to why this was even somehow relevant to the finding on sentencing? Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I think that it is not appropriate for me to get into the- *

(1355) Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I think I have clearly made my position known in respect of this particular issue. The department is very concerned that it is sending out a wrong message that somehow children can be victimized or exploited. We feel that that is in fact an error of law, that the

interpretation that the court made is not correct. In respect of the Crown's position, the Crown in fact took a position that incarceration was necessary, and -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4439 indeed that was the portion of the judgment that the court overturned. Victim Impact Statement Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Would the minister, who has still not answered both my first and second questions, also concern himself as to whether his own department is also sending out the wrong message and also consider was it the position of the Crown that there should not be a victim impact statement filed?

What is the position of the Crown in the filing of victim impact statements, which can really help the court and show the court what the victims of Manitoba are feeling when sexual assaults occur? Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): One of the things, Madam Speaker, that this government has been very proud of is its record in respect of enhancing services to victims. Both the member for Brandon West (M r. McCrae) and the member for Fort Garry (Mrs.

Vodrey), the prior Attorneys General, have been very strong in respect of ensuring that victims are made a part of the process, that they understand the process, that they brought-[interjection] The member for Crescentwood (M r. Sale) sits there sniping in his seat. If he has something to add, why does he not get up and say it after I have finished speaking, but right now I think the Chair has recognized me and I am answering that question. The victims, Madam Speaker, are very important.

We have done everything that we possibly can to ensure that they remain an important part of the process so that the judicial system understands that they too have a part to play. Court of Appeal Decision Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St Johns): A second series of questions to the Minister of Justice. This decision is of great concern, I hope to all members in this House and to Manitobans. It should be of great concern also, of course, to the minister. I ask him, would he please answer the simple questions that we posed?

Was it the position of the Crown that the victim, the child victim in this case, was a willing participant? Why did the Court of Appeal make that announcement in their decision? Where did that come from? Was there an agreed statement of fact to which the Crown was complicit? Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, in respect of this particular case, I have discussed the matter with the attorneys who represented the Crown. I understand the particular situation that led about to the entering of a guilty plea.

I believe that the Crown attorneys worked very, very hard in respect of securing that guilty plea, and that in fact was achieved. I am not prepared to discuss anything further in respect of that issue other than what may already be publicly known. Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister, who certainly openly spoke of this case on election day-and we ask him to again speak openly today-tell this House, if he will not answer what the position of the Crown was on the statement of fact, what was the position of the Crown then as to the relevance of the victim's conduct to the sentencing?

Why is all of a sudden the victim's conduct relevant to sentencing in a case like this? Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, there are all kinds of things that a court may take into account appropriately. It is our position, the Department of Justice's position that there were certain errors made in this particular case, that there were certain decisions that were wrong, and that is why we have appealed this to the Supreme Court of Canada. Mr.

Mackintosh: Then would the minister at least tell this House whether he has concerns that the perceived consent of a victim or the victim's conduct should be relevant or not when it comes to sentencing? Because clearly the Criminal Code in the 1980s was changed to ensure that the conduct of a victim in a sexual assault should not be relevant. Why is it relevant in sentencing? Mr. Toews: That raises a good point, and I think that is a point that I can answer very, very directly. Prior to the change in the Criminal Code, there was a specific provision that said that a child could not, under the age of 14, consent.

In my opinion, that was an appropriate law, that was the good law. Then what we had as a result of changes to the Criminal Code I think was a

4440 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 very dangerous erosion of the protection of victims, and that is what my concern is. That is certainly what I want my prosecutors, when they are arguing that case in front of the Supreme Court of Canada, to ensure, that even though the law might be weakened in that respect by the federal government's action, we in fact want to stand up for the victims as much as possible within our area of jurisdiction. * (1 400) Federal Transfer Payments Minimum Cash Payments Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Yesterday I asked the Minister of Finance (M r. Stefanson) about the cash transfers versus tax transfers in order to fund health care into the future. Given the fact that the Premier over the summer is going to be meeting with his counterparts from across Canada, it is important for Manitobans' perspective that we have a government that is going to strongly advocate that there has to be a cash transfer into the future, guaranteeing those five fundamental principles for health care.

My question to the Premier is: Will he today advocate and give the commitment to this Chamber that he will do just that, protect those cash transfer payments? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I find it difficult to be able to respond without a great deal of excess energy to the member for Inkster, whose colleagues in the federal government have been responsible for the largest reduction to transfer payments for health and education in Canada's history, who cut $7 billion of transfer payments for health and education to the provinces of Canada, over $220 million annually to our province.

It is a tragedy that they could get away with this and have the audacity to position themselves as being the protectors of medicare in this country. Unbelievable, Madam Speaker. So my short answer to the member for Inkster is: We will be advocating strongly on behalf of all Manitobans that the federal Liberal government stop the cuts that they have been engaged in over the past few years and restore the cuts so that we can indeed properly finance health and post-secondary education in this province in future. Mr.

Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, what we are asking the Premier is to take a very strong line in which he wiii not accept any sort of transfer from cash transfers to tax transfers. Someone like Premier Klein in Alberta, who now endorses Preston Manning, people who want to have a devolution of powers-wiii the Premier today stand up for Manitobans, take away the rhetoric that he just finished putting on the record and defend the cash transfers over the tax transfers? Mr. Filmon: Rhetoric, Madam Speaker. This is rhetoric that we have just heard from the member for Inkster. This is nonsense.

It is absolutely ridiculous that this member for Inkster, who was standing on the back deck there on Scotia Street handing the sandbag to the Prime Minister and supporting the Prime Minister, would have the audacity to try and get us off in a blind alley talking about tax points or cash. What we need is a federal government that stops the cuts to us so that we can, in fact, support health care. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, with a final supplementary question. Mr.

Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, wiii the Premier acknowledge what Manitobans need is a Premier who is going to stand up for the provinces that are going to rely on the cash transfers, provinces like the Atlantic regions, provinces like Saskatchewan, that cannot compete with Ontario, Alberta and B.C. on the Treasury Boards? This Premier has a responsibility to stand up for those cash transfers and stop playing the political games that he is entering into. Mr.

Film on: Madam Speaker, this kind of nonsense gives new meaning to the words "Liberal toady." Standing up here attempting to defend his federal government's cuts to health care and education in the provinces is what we do not need. We need a Liberal member of this Legislature who will stand up for Manitobans instead of always standing up to defend his federal cousins. We need a Liberal government in Ottawa that understands the harm that they have created by reducing transfers to the provinces, including their $220-million annual reduction in transfers to the province of Manitoba for health and education. - -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 444 1 Provincial Parks Passes-Private Businesses Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Natural Resources. Last spring this government introduced annual $20 passes for vehicles stopping within provincial park boundaries. Apart from discouraging tourism and being an annoyance for northern residents who live near the parks, the passes are also creating unnecessary red tape and economic hardship for businesses within the park.

For example, one lumber operation owned by the Petryk brothers of Cranberry Portage has been in operation before the Grass River Park was even thought of. Yet, the Petryk brothers are expected to have park passes for eight of their vehicles. When the fuel truck comes from Cranberry Portage, that truck is expected to have a park pass. When teenagers work for them, casual labour on Saturdays, those teenagers are expected to carry park passes in their vehicles, and so on. My question for the minister is: What is the minister willing to do to accommodate these concerns? Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, there are provisions that allow for businesses operating within the parks to obtain passes for employees within a reasonable number. There are also provisions to assist those who have fleets, delivery trucks operating in parks, that they would be given additional consideration. I suggest that, if the member has found an anomaly that seems to be unreasonable, we are always prepared to look at those. Mr. Jennissen: I thank the minister for that answer. I may have found an anomaly, and I hope the minister can answer this question.

There is a service station at the intersection of Highways 10 and 39, which is technically within the park, and I would like the minister to tell me: Where there are any vehicles stopping there for gas, does that vehicle technically need a pass or not? Mr. Cummings: Madam Speaker, I am not familiar with the location of the service station that the member refers to. I will be glad to pursue that if it is somehow sitting on the boundary or in a position that was unanticipated when this policy was put in place.

The fact is, Madam Speaker, for those businesses that are located further within the park's gate, there are a number of policies with some flexibility to them that are intended to allow people who wish to go in for a brief period of time and do business and then leave, that they can do that without any expenditure. * (1 41 0) Arizona Fitness Closure Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would like to respond to a question put on the record yesterday.

The question that was put to me was what was the date by which the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs received notice of the failure of the Arizona Fitness club. I would advise my colleagues here today that the department received one complaint on this issue and only one complaint. That complaint was logged on the 27th of May, 1997, subsequent to which the bureau responded quickly. Thank you. Madam Speaker: For the record, I assume the minister was responding to a question taken as notice. Bay Line Railway Future Status Mr.

Steve Ashton (Thompson): The Hudson Bay rail line and the Port of Churchill are important not only to northern Manitoba but particularly important to many Manitobans generally. Now that there will be a strong voice in Ottawa speaking out on behalf of the Bay Line in the form of our new M.P., Bev Desjarlais, I would like to ask on a co-operative note if the Minister of Highways and Transportation, perhaps in conjunction with the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr.

Newman), would be prepared to work with us as northern representatives to bring together representatives of the Bay Line and OmniTRAX to answer many of the unanswered questions about the future of the Bay Line rail line service under the sale to OmniTRAX, the American company that will be operating the Bay Line? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, the Johnny-come lately party has finally got on board with Churchill.

4442 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 This government has been advocating for months to achieve what is happening today. Somebody is committed to make that line operate for the good of moving product up and down, for the good of tourism, for the good of Akjuit, and that is a process this government has been supporting and endorsing and promoting for months and months, and now, finally, the NDP decides they want to get on board. Catch up. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, with a supplementary question. Mr.

Ashton: So much for asking for a co-operative approach with the provincial government. Perhaps I will try the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Newman), who was in Pikwitonei, a Bay Line community, with many northern representatives and perhaps had the opportunity to talk to them. Will he commit to work with northern representatives to bring together Bay Line officials, both councillors and mayors and OmniTRAX, to answer the many unanswered questions about rail service on the Bay Line under the sale to OmniTRAX? Will the Minister of Northern Affairs perhaps try that co-operative approach? Hon.

David Newman (Minister responsible for Northern Affairs): Madam Speaker, I will not commit to any specifics, but I will commit to good-faith dealings with the M.P.s that have been elected in the province of Manitoba if it contributes to the improvement of anything in Manitoba. Mr. Ashton: Will then the Minister of Northern Affairs support bringing together the Bay Line communities?

I am suggesting that what we do is arrange a meeting with OmniTRAX in a central location, perhaps either Churchill, Thompson or The Pas, to discuss the future of rail line passenger service, because there are no guarantees on passenger service. People are concerned the number of trains may be decreased to one per week or two per week. Will the minister perhaps work through his department with the mayors, councillors and northern representatives to work toward this meeting? Mr.

Newman: The northern round table has recently signed a memorandum of understanding between its component members who consist of George Mus wagon, the Grand Chief of MKO bands; Mayor Comaskey, representing the urban municipalities in the North; Bob McCiaverty, being their secretariat of the organization; and Sonny Clyne, representing the northern communities. I think that would be the appropriate vehicle to convene such a gathering. I would support that sort of convening and working with that organization that has been established to do that sort of work. Commercial Fishing Industry Net Mesh Size Mr.

Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, commercial fishing season has started this week. As you know, several new regulations were implemented last month by this minister. One of the new regulations was to allow the whitefish fleet to use 4.25-inch mesh instead of the 5 inch that was requested by the fishermen or the 4.75 inch that was allowed last year. My question to the minister: Why is the minister going against the recommendations of fishermen he met with, and who did he consult with before allowing the recommendation to go ahead with a 4.25-inch mesh? Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, I think I consulted with about eight to 10 different groups that came in from the various communities and representatives of the various fleet enterprises on Lake Winnipeg before proceeding with what are some very carefully thought-out changes in the fishery regulations for this coming year, the most important of which is that a limit was placed, in terms of the beginning of the fishery, to allow for the spawning to be completed in a more real sense.

The 4.25-inch mesh, I believe, in the north basin the member would be referring to is a very sustainable mesh size, and it is supported in the communities as the size that is being used as well. It provides uniformity. At the same time-and I see the member is shaking his head-the limit has been placed on the pickerel, sauger quota of 20 percent. Mr. Clif Evans: Why then did the minister not go back to the fishermen that he did meet with and advise them of his-as he had said in the previous answer-nonradical deviations they made from the recommendations they made, the fishermen, when the - -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4443 fishermen themselves in the past three weeks have been saying that 4.25 is beyond radical? Mr. Cummings: Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that some of the communities that I met with might consider this a radical change. This in fact is the mesh size, as I recall, that is being used in the communities, and this brings some uniformity to the area. The member and others who criticize this change conveniently overlook the fact that the whitefish fleet has been limited to 20 percent of its quota for pickerel and sauger.

This is a very supportable, very sustainable net size, and at the same time this, in conjunction with other measures that have been taken on the lake, creates what we hope is the basis for a sustainable development strategy to return this lake to its rightful production. Illegal Sales Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): What action is this minister prepared to take to address the concerns of the fishermen that he has met with regarding the illegal sale of fish, which I know has been raised with his office, previous minister, and is still an ongoing concern? What is he going to do? Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, obviously, illegal sale or capture of our resources is always a concern of the department. In fact, from time to time there are some individuals who would accuse the department of being draconian in its measures, but the fact is it was brought to my attention during that series of meetings that I had over the course of the winter with the various fishing interests, and I assured them that we would be doing everything we could to follow up in terms of enforcement.

The member may have missed it, but recently in the media within the last two weeks, he will notice there has been a series of charges that have come through the courts, and we have seen some very, very significant fines. One couple I am aware of received a total of $25,000 in fines just for the one couple, so I want to assure him that we will be enforcing the law. Arizona Fitness Consumer Protection Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Consumer Affairs and concerns the recent closure of Arizona Fitness club and his nonanswer of a few minutes ago.

Madam Speaker, the minister indicated that he acted quickly, but he does not say what he actually did. I would like to know what he is prepared to do for the latest victims that his department has once again failed to protect. Hon.

Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my honourable colleague, the member for Elmwood, across the way for asking the same question today that he did yesterday, because that gives me the opportunity to once more put on the record that the expeditious and effective work of the Consumers' Bureau was to contact the City of Winnipeg Police and to work in concert with the constabulary to investigate this issue and to ascertain whether in fact there had been any fraudulent activities committed upon the good citizens of Winnipeg in Manitoba.

So I can point to the effective work of our good civil service in this respect, and if my honourable colleague would like to give me another opportunity to extol our public servants, I would welcome the opportunity to do so. * ( 1 420) Fitness Clubs Consumer Protection Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Would the minister consider making it mandatory that, in the sale of such memberships at these clubs, all the members receive a copy of the limitations of The Consumer Protection Act and that the clubs be required to post such laws governing such memberships prominently in the clubs? Hon.

Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to advise my honourable colleague, the member for Elmwood across, that The Consumer Protection Act at the present time says, and I quote

Section 125(2) of the said act: "A seller shall not collect payment of the fee under any contract except by approximately equal instalments, no fewer than two in number and payable in approximately equal payment periods the length of each of which shall be the number of months obtained by dividing the number of months in the contract by the number of instalments payable thereunder." Madam Speaker, this is the state of the law and we, as the honourable member knows, the Consumers'

4444 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 Bureau is very assiduous to respond to any sorts of complaints that are levelled against any operation in the community, and if there was any further information on this, the bureau would be most eager to respond. Point of Order Mr.

Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, Beauchesne is very clear that answers should be related to the question that was asked, and while we certainly appreciate the fact that the minister has read the act or was reading it from his briefing notes, the question that was asked was very specifically about the kinds of safeguards and protections that should be put in place to make sure people are aware of the limitations of the protection that is in place.

I am wondering if you would like to ask the minister to give a very serious and direct response to a very good suggestion and question from the member for Elmwood. Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, it is somewhat surprising that this point of order should be raised. The question asked about the safeguards that are provided in our system here, and the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs was expanding on the details related to those very safeguards.

So I cannot quite understand what the honourable member for Thompson is raising by way of a point of order here, but I am sure you will look into it and find that he does not have a point of order. Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, the honourable member for Thompson does not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts. * * * Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS Direct-Line Hydro Power Opening Thicket Portage and Pikwitonei Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, on a nonpolitical statement.

Does the honourable member for Thompson have leave for a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I referenced earlier a very significant event that took place in Pikwitonei this past weekend. I was pleased to be able to join with the Minister responsible for Northern Affairs (M r. Newman), the Manitoba Hydro and elected representatives of Thicket Portage and Pikwitonei, along with many community residents, to celebrate the opening of direct-line hydro power in those communities.

I think what is significant to reference is the fact that there was, I think, a particular irony of the number of people being present-Bill Shanks who is regional manager for Manitoba Hydro who installed the first poles in the communities of Thicket Portage and Pikwitonei for diesel power in those days. Others were invited. I know Judy Kolada, a former co-ordinator with the Department of Northern Affairs who worked on much of the application that took place, and many of the people who have served as mayors and councillors over the years were either present at the opening or were recognized for their work.

I want to stress how important this is for the communities involved. I know it has been responsible for a lot of people being involved. This will mean that people will be able to have the same kind of access to electricity that many of us in the rest of Manitoba take for granted. If you compare the impact that it is going to have on the community, it is not only going to be a question of greater personal comfort but I believe a tremendous opportunity for the communities, the two communities involved, for economic development.

So, on behalf of Thicket Portage and Pikwitonei, two communities I am very proud to represent in the Manitoba Legislature, I want to congratulate all those who were involved in bringing direct-line hydro power, whether it be at the provincial government level, Manitoba Hydro, and most specifically, I want to really congratulate the people in those communities because they have persevered, they have worked hard, and I can tell you Saturday's event was a very joyous occasion and represented the great feeling of optimism for the future in Thicket Portage and Pikwitonei. So - -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4445 congratulations to those two communities, Madam Speaker. Student Volunteerism Sandbag Removal Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Madam Speaker, may I have leave for a nonpolitical statement? Madam Speaker: Does the honourable member for St. Norbert have leave for a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Laurendeau: With the flood, we have had a large amount of people coming out to work to do some debagging, and we have established a Green Team formula for doing some of the debagging. I would like to congratulate some of those students who came out on the weekend.

We had approximately 50 from Murdoch MacKay from the honourable member for Transcona's (Mr. Reid) riding, and we had another 185 from Springfield Collegiate from the Minister of Highways and Transportation's (Mr. Findlay) riding, as well as approximately another hundred students. They have now cleaned up approximately 99 percent of my community, which was probably the highest ratio of bags in the city of Winnipeg, and I think they deserve a great big hand of applause for the work they have done and also their ability to work together.

It brought the communities closer, brought the kids closer, and it gave me a better understanding of all the children within our community and within our province. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Access Programs-Graduates Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, do I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Madam Speaker: Does the honourable member for Wolseley have leave for a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Ms. Friesen: I would like to offer our congratulations to the 13 graduates of the Access programs at the University of Manitoba who were honoured at a banquet last week.

Madam Speaker, it has been a long journey for many of these students, and today we want to celebrate their immense achievement and to recognize the support of their families, many of whom were present with them that evening.

I would like to congratulate, in particular, Louise Bombay from Winnipeg from the Dakota Tipi, who graduated with a Bachelor of Arts; Wanda Ferland from Duck Bay with a Bachelor of Social Work; Donna Head from Cranberry Portage, who came through the IUN program from Flin Flon and graduated with a Bachelor of Social Work; Stephanie Hutchinson from Cormorant had a Bachelor of Social Work; George Kemp from Berens River, who graduated in Law; Vanessa Rupp with a BA in criminology from the Peter Ballentyne Band; Brenda Shinoff from Winnipeg, who graduated with Bachelor of Social Work; and Val Vint from Winnipegosis, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts.

In the Special Premedical Studies program, we congratulate Trevor Dandurand of Winnipeg, Sherry Lavallee of Boggy Creek. Finally, in the Professional Health program, we would like to offer our congratulations to Bonita Flett from Norway House, who graduated as a pharmacist; to Gilles Pinette from Ste.

Rose du Lac, who graduated in medicine; and finally, Norman Monkman of Winnipeg, who graduated with both a BSc and an MD and who has been accepted into the psychiatric training program at the Clarke Institute. * (1 430) I particularly would like to add a note of congratulation to Norman Monkman, whose mother was my student, and Norman himself, many years ago, babysat very welcomely my younger child. Madam Speaker, on behalf of all my colleagues on this side of the House, we congratulate them. We wish them well in their future studies and their jobs and in their place in the wider Manitoba community.

Transcona Schools-Concert Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): May I have leave for a nonpolitical statement?

4446 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 Madam Speaker: Does the honourable member for Transcona have leave for a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Reid: Last evening I had the opportunity to attend the Transcona Collegiate and John W. Gunn Junior High concert, entitled In the Mood. It was a concert whose participants were comprised of Grades 7, 8 and Senior I students performing both in bands and choir activities, and it was a very special evening.

This special performance by a number of very, very talented young people was very well appreciated and received by the residents of the community of Transcona. The evening starting with the Transcona Collegiate Institute jazz choir followed by the John W. Gunn trio and the Senior 1 band and proceeded to include performances by the Senior 4 students, including Amanda Ross, Wendy Dobson, Joy Henricks, JoAnna Cometa, LoriAnn Buhler and Melissa Mueller. This is a very, very well received evening, and I must congratulate not only the students that participated and the teachers themselves, Ms.

Judy Ruchkall, who is the musical consultant in the Transcona-Springfield School Division and also Jackie Crowell, the band instructor, and also the principal, Mr. Jim Beveridge, so I would like to congratulate all the participants and the staff of these schools that were involved and thank them very much for a very enjoyable evening. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

Motion agreed to. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) FAMILY SERVICES Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Wiii the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this

section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Family Services. * (1 440) When the committee last sat, it had been considering item l. (

a) Minister's Salary $25,700 on page 51 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass? Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Chairperson, I kept my comments extremely brief last evening when we wound up, because I thought that the Estimates were going to be passed and the time was running out.

But, given that we do have the opportunity today to spend a little bit of time discussing some of the comments that my honourable friend put on the record, I thought I just might take some time to expand a bit on our whole welfare reform initiative because I think that is where my honourable friend was being most critical in this department.

He seemed to be indicating that we have been meanspirited in our approach to trying to ensure that those that have depended on social allowances should have the opportunity, in fact, to gain meaningful employment through some of the initiatives that we have undertaken not only in our Department of Family Services but also through initiatives in the Department of Education and in our work with the private sector.

We all know that government is not going to be the vehicle for job creation into the future, that it is going to be the private sector that invests in our Manitoba community and our Manitoba economy that are going to be the generators of jobs and economic activity into the future.

So I think it is very important that the private sector understand and recognize that there are many of those that have never had the opportunity to have an attachment to the workforce and that are presently on our social assistance caseload that do indeed merit some consideration, as we look to trying to ensure that they are a part of the workforce in a very meaningful way into the future. So I do want to indicate that we have several initiatives that are underway that are very positive initiatives.

When we talk about caseload, the single-parent caseload that is part of the responsibility of the Department of Family Services, part of the provincial responsibility as it - -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4447 presently exists, I think we have been moving in the right direction. When I look to what some of the other provinces have done and are doing, I think, that our way has been a very balanced way. We have taken a very balanced approach to trying to ensure that those that we have targeted as employable are those with children over the age of six, in school full time.

When I look to moving in that direction, I see it as being a very humane way of moving when, in fact, most other provinces right across the country, including those provinces that are governed by New Democratic administrations. have taken some tougher approaches to single parents than we have.

In fact, the approach that we have taken is only to benefit those that in the past were never considered employable, where they were allowed to just be maintained or sustain themselves in a life of poverty on welf are until the youngest child turned 18, and then we would be presented with circumstances where women through no fault of their own reached the age of 30 or 40, their children were grown up. had turned 18 , and all of a sudden with no self-esteem, no skills, no attachment to the workforce. were expected to go out and get a job.

We all know that kind of a policy only contributes to a life of poverty on welf are for many women in our society, and that is not acceptable. It is not acceptable to our government, and it is not what we want to see. We want to see women in our province have the opportunity to have a workforce attachment, to be trained, and to develop the self-esteem and the ability to be productive and positive members of society.

That kind of a life impacts not only them, but it impacts their children, and when their children see a mom that is happy and feeling good about herself and a part of the workforce and making a meaningful contribution to community, to society, I think, that changes the whole attitude of the children in a very positive and meaningful way. So the direction that we have taken, I believe, is an extremely positive direction, and I make absolutely no apologies for the direction that we have taken as a government.

When I look to what is happening in other provinces, and I look to some of the decisions that other provinces have made, I kind of wonder where my honourable friend is coming from when he makes comments about the direction we have taken in Manitoba, because I know for a fact that-you know, it is fine to sit in the opposition benches and criticize government for decisions that they make, but in reality when you are in government and if my honourable friend ever has the opportunity to be in government, he will recognize and realize that he has to make decisions and be accountable for those decisions.

I know that his cousins in British Columbia, for instance, the New Democratic Party there which is in government has taken some very tough decisions and made many decisions that probably go a lot further than what we have gone in Manitoba. I do want to just read into the record a couple of comments that I have heard as a result of decisions that the New Democratic government in British Columbia has made.

I think one of the most significant issues that my honourable friend should be aware of is that, in fact there is dissension in the ranks of the New Democratic Party in the province of British Columbia as a result of a government that has had to make decisions. I just look at an

article from The Globe and Mail on Monday, March 3, of this year that says, and I quote: Party faithful wrap Clark's knuckles over welf are cuts, and, B.C. New Democrats flout party tradition by agreeing to accept corporate donations. That is the subheading under there. Can I just read a few paragraphs from the article, because I think it is extremely important to note what New Democratic governments do. They talk very dif ferently in opposition with a position that does not necessarily reflect what they do when they have to be accountable for their decisions when they are elected to government. It says in this

article from The Globe and Mail that New Democrats challenged-okay, just let me find my spot here: B.C. New Democrats delivered a slap on the wrist and a surprise to Premier Glen Clark's NDP government at their annual convention here this weekend. Despite a concerted eff ort to defuse the controversial issue, delegates voted overwheimingly yesterday to ask the government to revise several aspects of its welfare reform package that they believe make life worse for the poor.

4448 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 1997 * (1 450) There is a quote from someone from the New Democratic Party that says: This party has a historic tradition of standing with the poor and disadvantaged. Those are the words that New Democrats use, but, in reality, when they are faced with decision making, they are empty words and rhetoric, and although the party put forward a resolution and asked New Democratic Premier, Mr. Clark, to change direction, Mr.

Clark's response: The Premier and the party that made the decision in British Columbia agreed that there were some problems with the system but said that overall it had been a great step forward for low-income people in the province-and he refused to commit himself to making the changes that were demanded by his delegates from his own party. So that is reality, Mr. Chairperson, when you look at the difference between being in opposition and being in government.

When in opposition, you can be critical of absolutely every decision that a government makes, but when the reality is you are in government and have to make decisions and be accountable for those decisions, it is a completely different scenario. I look at other newspaper articles from the province of British Columbia, one here that talks about welfare category being abolished, and it says: The B.C. government has abolished the welfare category of unemployable recipient in a move that could save it miilions of dollars annually.

The category includes about 27,000 people who have varying degrees of physical, emotional or mental disability. It is suspected about 17,000 wiii face a cut of up to $96 a month in their living allowance, a move that would save the government up to $20 million a year. Human resources minister Dennis Streifel said Thursday, the government is not dropping the category to save money but because it stigmatizes people. Recipients with permanent disabilities will remain at $596, but others in that category will be reclassified as employable and will lose $96 a month. (Mr.

Jack Penner, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair) Now you tell me if that is the kind of policy, the kind of direction my honourable friends might take when they are in government. Mind you, when they are in opposition, they can sit back and say that we are a hardhearted, meanspirited government. I tell you that the direction that British Columbia has taken is much more severe than the approach we have taken in Manitoba. There is another newspaper

article from British Columbia that says: Welfare parents are worse off in the poverty-fighting program that has been implemented by the New Democratic government in B.C., and that a single mom living on welfare in Honeymoon Bay in British Columbia will have to make do with a little less money this year as a result of the decisions that that government has made. Here again, we have another

article from The Vancouver Sun that says: Welfare is to end for young people unwilling to learn job skills. Cheques will soon end for young B.C. welfare recipients unless they join a new program that helps them find jobs, but Premier Glen Clark denied Wednesday that the legislation translates into workfare for people between the ages of 19 and 24. So they can make these draconian decisions, but he says it is not workfare. Again, Mr.

Chairperson, I want to indicate that the approach that the New Democrats take when they are in government and have to make decisions is completely opposite to the rhetoric that we hear on a day-to-day basis from New Democrats that sit in opposition and do not have to be accountable for anything. They seem to want or think they can have it all ways. I think Manitobans see through that kind of rhetoric and that kind of comment that comes on a regular basis from my honourable friends that sit in opposition.

I think that, if you look at some of the positive comments that have come as a result of some of our initiatives with the private sector, we have an

article in the Winnipeg Sun, in the Business News, just this last month, in May of 1997, that talks about welfare innovation paying off in Manitoba. It talks about the program that we have developed with the Mennonite Central Committee, the Mennonite business community and Trainex that has, in fact, seen over a hundred individuals, some single parents, and some that are off the City of Winnipeg caseload. I think it is some 130 - -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4449 individuals that are in meaningful full-time jobs now as a result of that partnership. I had the opportunity to attend the first anniversary of that program, and they have an excellent, positive track record as a result of initiatives that have been undertaken. One single parent that I had the opportunity to talk to was just thrilled with the opportunity to have a job. There was a single-parent male that had been hired at Palliser Furniture who had two young children that had subsidized daycare spaces.

He talked about balancing work life, getting the kids off to daycare, and the challenges that he was presented with in trying to get his life together, but how excited he was about that chance and that opportunity. There was also an individual that came from a Latin American country to Canada, immigrated here, and because of the language barrier-he was Spanish speaking and did not have any English background, and was a very qualified individual-was unable to enter the workforce at the level that he was qualified to enter the workforce in some sort of a managerial position.

He also could not get a job because he was overqualified for many of the entry-level jobs that were available. Although he applied and although he tried, he just could not find employment. Through this program, he now has a position with Palliser, and he is doing some work. Because of his Spanish-speaking background, because Palliser is looking to expand, he is able to be the link and liaison for Palliser to expand into foreign markets. This was a very positive experience, and he was just elated at the opportunity to find a place of employment in a very meaningful way.

It also benefits one of the businesses in Manitoba that is growing, expanding and hiring more people. So there are those kinds of things that are happening, Mr. Chairperson, that I think really speaks to the direction that we have taken and the positive things that are happening as a result. I know that the Department of Education and Training has entered into many initiatives that are finding meaningful ways of employing and giving people that opportunity to have a work connection, a work experience, to earn a living, to pay taxes and to feel very positive about themselves as a result.

If we were the only place across the country, around the world, that was moving in this direction, I would welcome the opportunity to debate and accept the criticism from my honourable friend, but I know that we certainly are not. It is the direction that the world is taking. We all want people to have the opportunity to have a workforce attachment and connection and to feel that they are contributing in a positive way. Even if we look to the Labour government that was elected just in England last month, I note an

article from the Free Press just a couple of days ago, June 3. It says: In London, declaring life on welfare should no longer be an option, British Prime Minister Tony Blair announced yesterday single parents will be called in for job training once their children are in school. Blair hinted at penalties for single parents and young men who refuse training or job opportunities but gave no specifics. * (1 500) Mr.

Chairperson, that tells me that socialist governments right around the world are making the kinds of decisions that we have made here in Manitoba, that New Democrats have made in British Columbia, that Liberal governments have made in other provinces. So this is not an issue of party policy or party direction. This is an initiative that governments of all political stripes right across our country and right around our world are taking.

So I think it is rather hollow for my honourable friends in opposition in Manitoba who do not have to take responsibility, who are not held accountable for anything that they say, to be critical of the direction that we have taken in Manitoba. I just would like to also read into the record some copies of some letters that I have received from people that have written to those that have helped them find employment, single parents that have meaningful employment as a result of the Taking Charge! initiative or other initiatives that we have put in place.

I will not identify the individuals, but I will read into the record a couple of notes that have been received by those support workers that have helped find employment for individuals in our community. I quote: Just a note to say goodbye and to thank you from the bottom of my heart for your kindness and help

4450 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 19 97 throughout the couple of years I have been in need of assistance. It can be sometimes very frustrating as well as scary being a single mother, and cold, uncaring government offices can as well be very intimidating places. I try to thank you for all that you have done for me and my daughter. You opened doors for me that have helped me a great deal.

You got me into a coat-I cannot read this letter or this word-and helped me when I needed a clothing allowance for my job in a bank, as well as at one time helping me to get a hepatitis vaccine when I thought I was going to die. For these things I will forever be grateful. You always treated me like I was a person, always returned my calls and were always fair and kind. I hope you realize what a great help you were to me, and I hope peace and joy are with you always. Thank you very much.

That is from a single parent, a single mother, that was helped through a program, and I believe it was the Taking Charge! program, one of the programs that has certainly changed her life and the life of her daughter. Here is another letter I will just quote from, and it says: I never thought that I would be thanking you for making me fill out this job plan report, but I guess there is a first time for everything. In the beginning, I did not really care whether or not I found employment, because I knew I would have a job to return to within a fairly short time.

With each store I walked into, each dropped off resume or application and each conversation I had with a prospective employer, my confidence grew. I used to be afraid to apply for a job in fear of rejection. Now I look upon this as an opportunity for advancement and pride for trying to get off the system. Although I am starting my regular seasonal fall-time job fairly soon, I will continue to look for part-time employment during work simply because I am perfectly capable of working two jobs. Thank you for helping me to change my attitude to one of excellence.

So these are letters that have been sent to staff in the department, two individuals that have been part of the programs that we have implemented to try to ensure that people get off of social allowance and into meaningful jobs. You can tell by the letters that have been provided and that I have read into the record that indeed there are people that have benefited, that have their self-esteem built to a point where they have confidence in their own abilities to contribute to society. So I just wanted to put those comments on the record, because, Mr.

Chairperson, I think my honourable friend, from time to time, gets carried away in his own thought and philosophy that certainly is out of touch with the reality of what his party and their policies are when they are in government. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): The point that I would like to make on part of what the minister is saying is that I believe that this government's job creation goals are way too low. Now, I think that there are some good programs like the MCC training program, so I concede that you are on the right track with that particular program. (Mr.

Chairperson in the Chair) However, if you look at the numbers of people that are supposedly going to be hired from income assistance into employment programs, they are very small. Taking Charge!, I understand you are working with about I, I 00 cli ents a year; Community Services program, which is actually a City of Winnipeg program, 580 clients; Rural Jobs Project, 50; Opportunities for Employment, 150; Manitoba Conservation Corps, 100, for a total of I ,980, while there are at least 28,000 people who are deemed employable, including the numbers that the member for River Heights (Mr.

Radcliffe) included in his misleading letter to his constituents, which we have debated extensively here, where he said that they decreased their caseload from 13 ,888 to 12. 876. It was only after extensive questioning of the minister that we found out that he did not really intend to say that those are the number of people on income assistance in Winnipeg or Manitoba, just the number of single parents deemed employable, which he did not put in his rather misleading letter to his constituents.

So we know that there are between 12,000 and 13,000 single parents plus the City of Winnipeg case load of 16,000 people, plus people outside of the City of Winnipeg who are in families and deemed employable. So I think that the numbers of jobs that this minister plans to create or the number of people that she plans to move from income assistance to paid employment is very low, very minimal, pathetic even. - -

June 4, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 445 1 The one thing that this minister is not doing anything about, absolutely nothing except to make it worse, is the problem of poverty, particularly child poverty. The minister summed up her government's policy quite well. In fact, she took the words out of my mouth, because the minister said that I believe her government is hardhearted and meanspirited, and I could not have said it better myself. I was going to say this government is mean and extreme.

Last year we had a debate in these Estimates about Income Assi stance workers withholding cheques while they do investigations and, every time I raise this with the minister, she denies it, but I have had it confirmed by the staff at Winnipeg Harvest, who say that they get people phoning saying they have no money to buy groceries with and that their cheque is being withheld during an investigation. I know the minister does not want to believe me, but I would hope that she would believe the staff at Winnipeg Harvest.

The other thing that concerns me greatly, and not just me but people that have written documents, including documents for the government, is the connection between poverty and other social programs. We know, for example, that the Post] report, the health of Manitoba's children, had a lot to say about poverty and pointed out that there is a connection between, first of all, poverty and inequality and inequality and health outcomes, that when you have great disparities in income in a society or a country, those who are poor have poorer health.

They recommended that the food allowance within social assistance programs be increased to allow for adequate nutrition of infants as reflected in formula costs. What has this minister done? Instead of listening to a report commissioned by the Department of Health, she has reduced the amount of money, mainly through standardization, that children are getting, particularly children whose parents are on City of Winnipeg social assistance.

We also have had the Justice Hughes report about the Headingley jail riot, and I quoted extensively from that previously in Estimates, where Justice Hughes really went outside his mandate to talk about the causes of crime and the causes of gangs and talked about the poverty and the hopelessness and despair and how, if we are going to do something to reform our Justice system, we also need to address the root causes of crime, one of which is poverty. * (1 5 10) We also have a very interesting document, really an amazing document, amazing in that it was made public, called Trends, Issues and Innovations in Winnipeg's Human Care Services, a report on discussions amongst United Way of Winnipeg member agencies, dated February 1997.

They talked extensively about the problems of poverty and the problems that are presenting themselves to the United Way member agencies. In this report they said many people require basic physical support such as food, bedding and housing. Many children feel marginalized and need hope for the future. Many people need help to help themselves build a better life. Again and again agencies made the link between poverty and increasing need and stated that changes have affected individuals by impacting levels and availabili ty of services.

Agencies were concerned about increasing levels of anger and despair among young people, even in six and seven-year-olds. This hopelessness translates itself many times in involvement in gangs, petty crime and prostitution. They made comments such as, we are competing with gangs because they are perceived as having more to offer. They repeated that poverty and lack of employment opportunities had a particularly acute effect on young people, resulting in increased discrimination against young people, increased activities such as prostitution by very young boys and girls, increased involvement in gangs.

I could go on and quote more extensively from this document. They said there has been a shift in philosophy from a justice model to a charity model, and certainly this government is perpetuating that. Well, I could go on, but I will not. We could talk about the numbers of child ren living in poverty in Manitoba, which are not going down, which are considerable in the National Council of Welfare report. The number of children under 18 living in poverty in 1994 in Manitoba was 59,000, a 21 .7 percent poverty

4452 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 19 97 rate for chi ldren in the province of Manitoba. We are perpetually the second highest. We were the worst; now we are the second-worst in Canada, trailing Newfoundland. So I think that this min ister's policies have been a total failure when it comes to poverty. The only thing that she has done is contribute to poverty, and we know that the way to get families out of poverty is to have them off Income Assistance and in the paid workforce. That is certainly the best way.

But when it comes to job creation goals, this minis ter's efforts are far too low; in fact, I said before, they are pathetic. So, you know, the minister had an opportunity in this budget to make improvements. We know that they have $400 million in the Fiscal Stabil ization Fund, also known as the Tory re-election slush fund, and they could spend this money now. They do not have to wait until the election. They are probably going to use it to buy votes in the next election instead of spending it on child ren and improving Manitoba's abysmal poverty rate.

Instead they will use it for a tax break in the next election. We know that tax breaks do not put a lot of more money into the economy. What they tend to do is to help the rich. We know that, but that is the choice that they are going to make. But I think that Manitobans are concerned about the rate, particularly of child poverty. So I move that the salary for the Minis ter of Family Services be reduced to $1 17.20 per month, which is the same as the social assistance rate for children up to age six. Mr.

Chairperson: It has been moved by the honourable member for Burrows that the salary of the Minister of Family Services be reduced to $1 17.20 per month, which is the same as the social assistance rate for child ren up to age six. Any debate on the motion? Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): Mr. Chairman, I am just aghast that the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) would put the comments on the record that he has today.

They seem to be at odds with many of the things that I have heard him say in the past where I think that he praised the minis ter and the government for some of the initiatives we have taken. Today, for whatever reason, he puts comme nts on the record attacking the minis ter that are completely unfounded. I just cannot sit here and accept his characterization of the situation here in Manitoba.

Now I know that we have just gone through a federal exercise where my honourable friend's party talks about getting back into the taxing business and the spending business, of course, where they have promised at the federal level to increase taxes many, many times and to increase expenditures across government. I would have thought that at this point in history that my honourable friend would have learned that those were the ways of the '70s and '80s practised by the party of which he is a member, and these practices have been discredited and discarded right across the world.

Here my honourable friend, I think, has bought into this old theory brought back by his fellow travellers at the federal level, and I tell you, Mr. Chairman and members ofthe committee, that this simply is not acceptable. I do expect, of course, a higher standard of honour from my honourable friend consi dering his background, but every once in a while he disappoints me.

I know that I meet him at Folklorama venues where, again, of course, he is out of character from the way he portrays himself. [interjection] Well, my honourable friend comes to this commit tee and puts on the record things that are completely unacceptable and, I think, at variance with the facts and plays fast and loose with what the actual facts are, and, by and large, is very much factually inaccurate when he puts some of the things on the record that he does.

We know that he also was involved at an exercise down the street here where he marched with the casino workers a few years ago and comes here and portrays himself as some pillar of the community, and we see kind of an inconsis tency in the way he acts and the things that he says. So I do believe that this mi nister has brought about tremendous reform to the social allowance system, reform that is consistent with what is happening across Canada and in other provinces.

I expect that, if my honourable friend from Burrows has done his homewo rk on these things, he probably is aware of these things, but perhaps chooses not to put them on the record-chooses only to put on the record the things which tend to build his case. There is a lack of honesty - -

June 4, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4453 there, I think, in terms of the way he portrays himself by putting factually incorrect information on the record. Point of Order Mr. Martindale: On a point of order, Mr. Chairperson. The member for Minnedosa is attacking me personally and my motivation, and I would like him to be factual himself. If he thinks my information is inaccurate, I would like to be corrected, and I wish he would tell me what he thinks is ina ccurate, but not to attack my honesty. Thank you. Mr. Chai rperson: The honourable member does not have a point of order.

It is a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Chairperson: The honourable Minister of Labour, to continue. Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I would ask my honourable friend to be aware of what is happening in other juris dictions across Canada. In fact, this crosses over many departments as we look at governments around the country. In my new responsibilities, we inherited a situation in Workers Compensation where that particular arm of the Department of Labour was in debt by $232 mill ion, and I thought this was just a horrible situation.

I am pleased to be able to report that over the last number of years this has been remedied to the point where that debt has been completely paid off. So, when I was lamenting this fact with my colleagues from across the country when I first met with them in late January or early February, I came away feeling that maybe it was not so bad because in Ontario after the Rae days their Workers Compensation Board was $1 1 bill ion in debt, and that $1 1-billion debt was created after only four years in government.

Small wonder that in the province of Ontario where they remember a socialist government, they did not treat them very kindly at the polls in the recent exercise that was just completed. * (1 520) But I say to my friend he wants me to be more specific about where he is not representing the issues as they are across Canada. He completely disregards the fact that the governments across this country have had to deal with social allowances and, in many different jurisd ictions, have done many of the same things that have happened in Manitoba.

I would just ask my friend to recognize that governments of all political stripes have taken the opportunity to make these changes where the system encourages people, encourages people to seek employment, encourages people to find work, encourages people to take training. I think if he looks at the western provinces, two of them that are governed by fellow travellers of his, this is fairly consistent, yet he portrays this government as being the only one which is taking some innovative steps to get people back in the workforce and off social allowances.

So I would ask him to recognize this, that the programs that have been brought in are truly reforms and that they are intended to get people back to work and have people gain self-esteem and be able to support their families. I would be ple ased to ask the minister a couple of questions if that is in order at this time. I think that in all departments across government, in all departments, one of the true tests of relevance is if you compare the rates from one province to another, because it is fine for my honourable friend from Burrows to come to committee and say the rates have to be raised.

He knows the statistical basis on which child poverty numbers are generated but does not recognize that because the city of Winnipeg is a municipal jurisdiction of over 500,000 people, that the lines are drawn in comparing ourselves to cities like Vancouver and Toronto and Montreal, and that simply is not an accurate way of defining poverty in our country. The most true test, I suppose, is to compare our rates with nearby jurisdictions, and I would be pleased to ask the minister how the rates in Manitoba compare to rates in Saskatchewan.

Is there a great discrepancy between what recipients receive in Manitoba as compared to the province of Saskatchewan, whether there is a difference between the rates in the city of Winnipeg and in cities like Regina and Saskatoon and whether there is some level playing field between neighbouring provinces. Mr. Chairperson: The honourable minister, I would just remind the committee that we are to be speaking to the motion that is on the floor, that the salary for the

4454 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 19 97 Minister of Family Services be reduced to $117 .20 per month and so on and so forth. I would ask that the committee members direct their questions specifically to the-we should be talking about the motion rather than asking questions of the minister. Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, for clarification, as I read it, the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) has put on the record the social assistance rate for children up to age six, and I was simply asking for clarification of rates in Manitoba in respect to other provinces. Mr.

Chairperson: Is there leave of the committee for the question to be raised to the minister? [agreed] Mrs.

Mitchelson: It is unfortunate that I do not have staff with me here at the table because we are now on the Minis ter's Salary, and I do not have a lot of the details and a lot of the comparisons at my fingertips, but I notice with great interest that the motion that was put forward to reduce my salary to $1 17 .20 per month which is the rate for child ren under the age of six in Manitoba, those rates go-and I am pretty close to accurate when I say that the rates for child ren do increase as children get older, and many older children receive the rates of around $18 0 or $18 9 per month, if memory serves me correctly.

When you compare that to British Colu mbia, for instance, I know that the rates are $10 3 a month across the board for children. Now, you look at the cost of living in the city of Vancouver compared to the cost of living in the city of Winnipeg, and you tell me that a New Democratic government which reduced the rates in British Columbia to $10 3 per month per child reflects any of the rhetoric that my honourable friend has put on the record in the last half hour or so.

I mean, it is just unbeli evable to think that he, who has absolutely no accountabili ty for any of the comments that he makes because he does not have to make decisions and he does not have to be held accountable by Manitobans for any decisions that he makes, can talk about the meanspirited approach of this government when you look at the cost of living in our province, the tax rates in our province, as compared to the cost of living in British Columbia, in downtown Vancouver, where I know for a fact that the rents are considerably higher and the costs of many other items and articles are considerably higher than in the province of Manitoba, and yet the rates that they provide for children in British Columbia under his party which is in government is $10 3 a month.

Now, you tell me, Mr. Chairperson, how my honourable friend can sit there with a straight face and put forward a motion like the motion he has put forward.

I guess I am a little disappointed because I thought that my honourable friend would have done his research and would have looked into the issues in greater detail, would have looked into what is happening in the real world out there, not in his little-whether it be in his caucus office that dis cusses philosophy and how they think the world should be run and programs should be delivered, when we know in reality that New Democratic governments that have to make decisions have made decisions that are certainly more meanspirited than any decisions that happen in Manitoba.

So I thank my honourable colleague for that question, because it did allow me to put on the record what New Democratic governments do when they have the opportunity to address child poverty in the provinces that they govern. Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I thank the minister for that response, because I suspect that my honourable friend from Burrows knew what the situation was in the province of British Columbia but chose not to bring that into the discussion on ra tes. I, too, am disappointed that he would talk about the minister and the department and the government setting rates that he does not agree with.

As I say, the truest test of programs is to compa re with what other jurisdictions are doing. I suspect that the member for Burrows, who is a bright person, has done that comparison. I suspect that their army of researchers has provided that information for him. So it really is a question then what he chooses to put on the record and how he chooses to portray it. That is where my real disappointment is, that he would hide those facts, not choose to bring them forward, and this was a wonderf ul opportunity for him to praise the minister and praise the government. - -

June 4, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4455 * (1 530) Point of Order Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable member for Burrows, on a point of order. Mr. Martindale: On a point of order, I would like to ask the minister to refrain from making comments like this, because I am not hiding anything, and if he thinks I am hiding something, he should have some evidence. Nor did he point out what was factual after my last point of order, so I would ask him to temper his remarks, please. Thank you. Mr. Chair person: The honourable minister, on the same point of order. Mr.

Gilleshammer: On the same point of order, I accept my honourable friend's comments then that he was not aware of what the rates in other provinces are and that he did not put them on the record, because he simply did not know about them, and that he was talking about Manitoba rates in isolation of other provinces. Mr. Chair person: The honourable member for Burrows does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr.

Gilleshammer: I think maybe this is a good opportunity for him to learn about the rates in other jurisdictions then and to recognize that the truest test of these rates is to look at what people in British Columbia, the city of Vancouver are paying, to look at the rates in Saskatchewan and Alberta and accept that governments and departments do communicate with one another from time to time and that there is some consistency in these rates and, where they are not identical, of course, we are pleased that our rates are higher than they are in other jurisdictions.

I would think that this would be an opportunity for my honourable friend the critic for the New Democratic Party to praise the minister and praise the department in saying, you know, good for you, your rates are higher than they are in British Columbia, where the cost of living is higher, where the taxes are higher, and this is, I think, a sign of a minister who truly cares for the department and the citizens and the clients that she is responsible for.

To her credit, she has been able to stabili ze these rates at a level which does exceed what other governments, and governments, I might add, of New Democratic persuasion who, while they are in opposition, of course claim that they are going to do all sorts of things, but when they are faced with the reality of government and the reality of a Treasury Board and the reality of living within their means-I do not know whether they do have a balanced budget in British Columbia or not.

There was some talk about it before the last election, but, so, I mean, they have to take these things into consid eration too when they set the rates, because in a beautiful province like British Columbia where, of course, they attract citizens from other jurisdictions, from western provinces in eastern Canada, they have to be aware of what the rates are and be aware of what the rates are in other provinces.

Well, the province of British Columbia, of course, has been very innovative in the way they portray things, very innovative in putting forward proposals and policies of their government which, I guess to be charitable, one could say are sort of at odds with the philos ophy expounded here by my honourable friend from Burrows.

Iftheir research department has not had time to look at the rates in British Columbia and he has not had time to reflect on them, I would urge him to do that because, again, one of the truest tests of rates, whether it is within the Department of Family Services or right across government, is to look at what other provinces do when they are in government. Now my honourable friend from Burrows has had the advantage of being in opposition now for almost 10 years, and it is a tremendous opportunity-[interjection] Oh, pardon, me, just six and half years, but he can look forward to many more years in opposition.

It is a wonderful opportunity without having a lot of responsibility to be able to devote that time to doing the extensive research that is necessary to get a fuller understanding. I know that he has been a critic in that department for some time and, by and large, does an adequate job of it. I have heard him speak on a number of occasions where he has had a lot of praise for the

4456 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA June 4, 19 97 minister and praise for the civil servants who work within Family Services. I think in many ways he is gaining more of an understanding of the department and more of a respect for the job that has to be done in terms of providing for disadvantaged people within the province of Manitoba, but he has moved a motion dealing with rates and he has talked about the poverty line.

I did indicate in my first question some concern about his comments about the attempts by government and by the department to train people for work, and he, in a very disparaging way, said it was not enough, that there were only some 2,000 people who are participating in programs like Taking Charge ! and other urban and rural programs to find work for them. I am surprised that he would take such a negative attitude towards programs that are working.

I would remind him that these are the numbers of people that are participating in the program at any one time, and as there are graduates of those programs and people go into the workforce, there are opportunities for more people to come on board and take that training. So I would like to compliment the minister and the department for the tremendous job they are doing in creating programs, in conjunction with the municipal level and the federal level of governments, to be able to find meaningful programs which help people to find meaningful jobs.

Of course, this is a far cry from the reality of the 19 80s when members of the New Democratic Party had the opportunity to govern, and I believe their crowning glory was the Jobs Fund as a means of throwing money at these issues. Even the current Leader of the NDP (Mr. Doer), I think, spoke rather disparagingly of that program, where he said that they hired people to go out and count flowers and put up green signs, instead of using the resources of government to do adequate training programs. Mr.

Doer, at that time who was leader, I think, of the Government Employees' Union, criticized the party that he is now the leader of. Yet we have not seen him or critics or the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) bring forward alternatives other than to do more and to criticize that not more people are taking

part in this, and, of course, to raise the rates, again neglecting the fact that our rates our quite comparable to other jurisdictions in this country. He also mentioned in his comments a few minutes ago this whole issue of how you define poverty in this country, and it does raise another question in my mind as it relates to rates and to the way the department is doing business. It is my understanding that Statistics Canada is only one of the places that one can go to sort of define where that poverty line is. As I indicated earlier, I would like to ask the minister for clarification whether that Statistics Canada

interpretation and determination of poverty is the only way to determine that, and how it reflects to people living in rural Manitoba, for instance, when some of them are quite shocked and surprised when they are told that, because they are only making a certain income, they are at or near the poverty line. I am wondering if there is any information or research that has been done that would perhaps draw a truer picture of that, and a further supplemental question to that, are there any extenuating circumstances in Manitoba that perhaps make that particular test an inadequate one? Mr.

Chairperson: Is there leave of the committee for the question to the minister? An Honourable Member: No, no leave. Mr. Chairperson : Leave has been denied. * ( 15 40) Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Chairman, I am disappointed that the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) would be here to stifle debate and understanding on this issue.

I do not know where he is getting his instructions from, but I would have thought that there were areas of debate and discussion within the Department of Family Services that he would want to get further information on because he obviously does not have a good understanding of what the cross-Canada comparisons are, and does not understand some of the information put forward by Statistics Canada I would have thought that he would welcome the opportunity to gain more knowledge in that area and participate in that debate instead of just raising points of order to distract the committee when we are here to talk about this department and the work that they do.

So I know that he is going to have opportunities over the next coming years to do that research and get that understanding. -

June 4, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4457 As I say, I know there are other members of the committee that want to make comment and ask questions, but this is an issue that, I think, is of concern to all Manitobans. Unfortunately, because of the restrictive nature of the Estimates process, I guess, we are running out of time, and there may be are other priorities that the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) wants to discuss. But, just in closing, I would say how disappointed I am in him that he would bring forward a motion like this, knowing what a tremendous job the Minis ter of Family Services (Mrs.

Mitchelson) has done over the last number of years in leading this department, in providing innovative programs, new solutions that are being emulated by other jurisdictions and getting, I think, acclaimed from many sources for trying to find long-term solutions to the problems that exist in the social allowance system. So with those few remarks, Mr. Chairman, I would pass the floor to anyone else who wants to make comment. Mrs. Mitchelson: I just want to respond briefly to the comments that were put on the record by my honourable collea gue the Minister of Labour (Mr.

Gill eshammer) and certainly want to thank him for his support. I know that he set many of the policies in place in the Department of Family Services that continue to work today under his leadership when he was there, and I want to continue on. We have seen many positive things happen since we took government and have changed the way business is done in many areas of the Department of Family Services. So I thank him for his contribution before my time, and I also thank him for his comments and his support today.

But, you know, around the issue of the low-income cutoffs, although I did not have the ability to answer the question directly, I think it is very important that we put on the record some of the discussions that we have had on an interprovincial basis. As Ministers of Family Services, Social Services get together right across the country, and we are all in agreement with some of the comments that are raised from time to time about whether the low-income cutoffs are indeed a true measurement of poverty.

Although I know that they are used and they are the statistics that are gathered by Stats Canada-and I have even written to Stats Canada and asked the questions on what is taken into consideration as they gather the information and provide detail. Stats Canada has written and I do have a copy. I have a letter of response I have received from them, and I have shared it with members of the media from time to time.

I know that when I have been on Peter Warren's show, we had the opportunity to discuss this, and I have shared with him the letter that I got from Statistics Canada that came back and said that the low-income cutoffs are not a true measurement of poverty, but it is the best measurement we have. They do not take into consider ation the demographics, cost of living or any programs that any government has in place that might not be included in income. There are lots of programs, like the CRISP program in Manitoba, that are not taken into account.

What is not taken into account is any additional tax benefit that is provided to low-income families. So those things are not taken into account and they are not measured in the income when we look at the low income cutoff measurement. Also, they take all cities over 500,000 in population and lump them into one category, so that, for instance, Winnipeg is lumped in with Toronto or Vancouver, and they do not take into consideration the cost of living and any other factors that might impact what poverty might mean.

I mean, I would imagine if you are making the same income in the city of Vancouver as you were making in the city of Winnipeg, you would probably be quite a bit better of f in the city of Winnipeg, because the cost of living, the cost of housing is considerably lower. But that is not taken into account when the statistics are gathered, so that puts us at a disa dvantage. It also does not give a true picture of possibly what is happening in the province of Saskatchewan, because they do not have a city over 500,000.

There is a different standard for the city of Regina or the city of Saskatoon than there is for the city of Winnipeg. We are compared to Toronto and Vancouver. We are not compared to Regina or Saskatoon. The expectations and the poverty line is lower in Saskatoon and in Regina than it is in Winnipeg, but if you look at the cost of living, you would probably find comparisons very simila r in Winnipeg to Saskatchewan-or to Saskatoon or Regina. So they set the poverty line lower in Saskatchewan in those major cities than they do in the city of Winnipeg only because we have 500,000 people.

4458 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 19 97 So when you look at that, is that really a true and fair comparison when nothing else is taken into account or consideration? I guess, we can argue whether the low income cutoffs are a true measurement or they are not. I guess, the reality is we all have to recognize that there is poverty, and any level of child poverty is not acceptable in our country, in a country that has so much to off er to families and individuals. So how then do we start collectively to take a look at what we can do to reduce the impact of child poverty?

I guess, as a result of that discussion and as a result of premiers right across the country, regardless of political stripes, making this an agenda priority for First Mini sters' meetings-indeed, our Premier (Mr. Fi lmon) has made a recommend ation that we look at the issue of child poverty and try to determine how we can deal with it. We also recognize that there is a role for the federal government to play in trying to eradicate child poverty in our country and that there need to be some standards and some consi stent approach right across the country in dealing with this issue.

So our Premier has raised it, and I guess I might just comment briefly on why it became an issue on the national agenda for premiers, and that was because the federal Liberal government's decision to reduce transfer payments to provinces for health, for education and for social services. As a result of those reductions, that li mited the provinces' abilities to provide the kinds of programs that we needed to provide.

The premiers decided that, with the lack of a federal vision or any federal action on the issue, provinces would get together, and we establis hed a minis terial council with a representative from each province that was to sit down and look at the issue of child poverty and see whether there was a common approach that could be taken by all provinces to try to deal with the issue. As a result of that, we had a report to premiers that did indica te that we should be looking at some national standards, a national approach in recommending to the federal government that kind of approach.

So, as a result, the premiers forwarded a report that they all agreed to, regardless of political stripe, to the Prime Minister. I often say I am not sure whether it was timing or what, but the Prime Minis ter agreed with and endorsed the report and indicated that he would put his minist ers together with provincial ministers to try to look at dealing with the issue of child poverty.

The whole focus, there were three objectives to the approach that was to be taken, and that was to reduce the depth of child poverty, to ensure that people that were working were better off than on welfare, and also to look at the overlap in duplication and admin istration of programs between the federal and provincial governments so that we could save some money on admin istration and put that money into supports for families and for childr en. * (1 550) Those were the three objectives, and, as a result of that process, we now have an endorsement by the federal government and all provinces on a national child benefit that does in fact start to address the three objec tives of what our premiers directed us to do.

So I am really pleased that we have made a first step. Now the issue, of course, and the objective should be that no child receives support through the welfare system into the future, but every child in a low-income family, whether they be on welfare or whether they be a working family with a low income, should receive support on a standard basis from the federal government so that the federal government will provide support to children to take child ren out of the welfare system and put them on a level playing field across the country with a standard amount of support for a child, no matter where they live.

I think it is the right approach to take. I think that all governments of all political stripes across the country have endorsed the process that has been put into place and the new national child benefit. The one issue that we do have, of course, in this province is that we have heard the federal government talk about how wonderful this was and how this, I think, $600 mill ion that they have put in the budget is a down payment for children.

Well I might argue, and I think several other provinces would argue, that it is not a down payment, it is a partial repayment of what they have removed from provinces as a result of the reductions in transfers that they have made to provinces. What we want to see and what we are all callin g for as provinces is incremental stable funding from the - -

June 4, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4459 federal government and a commitment to that year after year till we get to a point where all chil dren are off of the welfare system and supported by the federal government, whether they be in working families or welfare families.

It is the right direction; I think we all agree it is the right direction to go, and what we need now is a commitment from the new federal government, or the renewed federal government, to ensure that the money they have committed in next year's budget is incrementally higher year after year after year until we get to a level where every child is supported outside of the welfare system by the federal government if they are in a low-income family.

So that was the objective, and that was the purpose, and I think we have accomplished in a fairly short period of time, given that it is the two levels of government that have been working on this process, an approach that we can all endorse and we can all agree to and we can all buy into. I think that has been a very positive step, but I wanted to discuss the low-income cutoffs, and it is an issue that all provinces have highlighted as an issue.

I am not sure whether there is any sort of consensus on what might be a better measurement of poverty because I think what we want to do is truly identify those families and those chil dren that are in need and ensure that the programming is there for those child ren to grow and to succeed. So there are some things happening.

I know that my honourable friend and I might get into some hair pulls or some discussion from time to time because, philosophically, we come from a different background, but I guess I want to stress, and what I really want to indicate is that regardless of whether it was the Liberal social services minister from Newfoundland or the New Democratic social services minister from Saskatchewan or- An Honourable Member: In Manitoba, a United Church minis ter. Mrs.

Mitchelson: Yes, as a matter offact, a very good man, but I do want to indi cate, regardless of what our backgrounds or what our philosophical beliefs are, we have attempted to work co-operatively. I think we have all endorsed the process and the outcome of that process, which will mean, ultimately, if the federal government lives up to its commitment of increased incremental resources year after year, that children will be better served right across this country as a result.

As I said, although my honourable friend and I may have differences in our approach or he may recommend a different way to deal with things, I know that my counterpart in Saskatchewan that is part of a New Democratic government and I are on the same wavelength when it comes to dealing with the issue of child poverty and how we approach that.

I do want to say that we may argue from time to time, but I think the Minister of Family Services in Saskatchewan and I have very much in common and support and endorse each other when comments are made around the table interprovincially, because we all know, we understand the reality as a party, as a government of different political persuasions but also having to make the right decisions for the right reasons for the people that we serve in our respective provinces.

So I just want to leave those comments on the record. probably have a couple of other things to say around-maybe I will leave it at that for now and see if there is any other comment or discussion. Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Chairman, I too would like to put a few remarks on the record with regard to this motion that is before us today. When I look at the motion, and the suggestion from the honourable member opposite is that the salary of the Minister of Family Services be reduced to $1 17 .20 per month, I react and say, how demeaning can one be?

I am incensed that anybody would suggest for a moment that this is the worth of our present Minister of Family Services, and in fact- Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): The high end. Mr. Radcliffe: The honourable member for Radisson An Honourable Member: Wellington. Mr. Radcliffe: Well ington, Radisson, whatever. Ms. Barrett: She will be furious. Mr. Radcliffe: -is indica ting that this is the high end of what she thinks the worth is.

4460 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 4, 19 97 As a newcomer to the political scene here, I am incensed that somebody would take such a personal attack against an individu al who has committed themselves to the public service. I just wanted to put on the record that I have had the distinct honour and advantage to be able to work with the minister of Child and Family Services when I was a backbencher, which was up until this January of 19 97, and I found that our current minister brings a skill and professionalism to her job as responsibil ity as minister. She has a professional background.

I believe that she brings a real knowledge and grasp of the topic but, more importantly, I think, as well, too often you see politicians, and politicia ns are perceived to perhaps have a fast and snappy answer or tend to be a bit on the glib side,

whereas I would point out to you and through you to our collea gues present that the present minister brings a sense of compassion and real understanding and grasp of the department which she leads. This was nowhere more evident than when we were debating and discussing the parameters for the review of The Child and Family Services Act, in which I had the distinction of playing a very small part, but this was done under the guidance of this minister. This minister is very analytical and perceptive.

She was aware that just because the Province of Manitoba, the government of Manitoba, in its wisdom had seen fit to pass legis lation some 10 years ago with regard to Child and Family Services that it was time for a review and readdressing some of the very human issues that were involved with the Child and Family Services department and touching on adoption, touching on child abuse, touching on many of the areas which were within her department.

I can tell you that I have never seen anybody who is more in touch with the advocacy groups, with the special interest groups, with the common indivi dual in the street, and who has greater feeling for these individ uals than our current minister. I think that- Ms. Barrett: She met them outside Beaujolais. Mr. Radcliffe: Oh, no, the honourable member from, I am not sure, was that- An Honourable Member: Well ington. * (1 600) Mr. Radcliffe: -not Riel, but Welli ngton she comes from, is it, is making another personal imprecation that is in fact trying to demean the dignity and the worth of this individual.

I have no problem. In fact, I welcome challenging coll eagues opposite to bandy opinions, phil osophy, ideas about in this Chamber and in these rooms but, in fact, when it descends to attacks of a personal nature, which this motion to me suggests, that in fact this is the worth of the indivi dual, then I take umbrage, and I must react.

I think that the critics opposite, it is their job to criticize, to be discerning, to look at the policies of our government, to point out the shortfalls, to bring to our attention, perhaps, individuals who are falling between the boards or issues that perhaps we have not considered. That is all fair ball, but when they bring a motion such as this, to reduce the salary of the minister and a minister who is so hardworking and so committed to her task, I think that this is totally unacceptable, and I am feeling compelled that I must rise in the defence of this mir.ister to speak to this.

I remember when the departed Mr. Orchard, I beli eve it was, made a motion that Mr. Plohman be paid $1 for his minister's salary. I was a practicing lawyer at that point on the street, and I heard that this was the practice in this House. I think that I would urge honourable members opposite to end this practice, that, in fact, it only reflects upon the originators of the motion, the people who propose this sort of motion. It speaks more of gamesmanship and chicanery than it does of

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-3-55
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 3rd hansardpdf 55.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0cd7e607554ef7644e4b25d3c94c4bf30f8a6512

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