Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 11B (39th Legislature, 1st Session)

39-1-11b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LIX No. 11B – 1:30 p.m., Thursday, September 27, 2007

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

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

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

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

461 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, September 27, 2007 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 10–The Family Maintenance Amendment and Inter-jurisdictional Support Orders Amendment Act Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 10, The Family Maintenance Act and Inter- jurisdictional Support Orders Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'obligation alimentaire et la

Loi sur l'établissement et l'exécution réciproque des ordonnances alimentaires, be now read a first time. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Attorney General, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance, that Bill 10, The Family Maintenance Amendment and Inter-jurisdictional Support Orders Amendment Act, be now read a first time. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, this bill will assist individuals in dealing with recalculations as well as dealing with inter-jurisdictional awards to help Manitobans to recover maintenance and other support payments. Thank you. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Bill 17–The Firefighters, Peace Officers and Workers Memorial Foundations Act Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I move seconded by the Minister of Labour and Immigration (Ms. Allan), that Bill 17, The Firefighters, Peace Officers and Workers Memorial Foundations Act;

Loi sur les fondations à la mémoire des pompiers, des agents de la paix et des travailleurs, now be read for a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Lemieux: Mr. Speaker, this legislation establishes three new foundations that will create tributes in memory of pea ce officers, firefighters and workers who have lost their lives on the job. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bill 209–The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): M r . Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Eichler), that Bill 209, The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr.

Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, this bill recognizes the historic significance of Provincial Trunk Highway 44 as the first Trans-Canada Highway in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] PETITIONS Provincial Trunk Highway 2–Glenboro Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

These are the reasons for this petition: As a result of high traffic volumes in the region, there have been numerous accidents and near misses along Provincial Trunk Highway 2 near the village of Glenboro, leading to serious safety concerns for motorists. The provincial government has refused to construct turning lanes off Provincial Trunk Highway 2 into the village of Glenboro and onto Golf Course Drive, despite the fact that the number of businesses along Provincial Trunk Highway 2 have increased greatly in recent years.

We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To urge the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Lemieux) to consider implementing a speed zone on Provincial Trunk Highway 2 adjacent to the village of Glenboro. This petition is signed by Dale Naismith, Kim Robinson, L. Blaine and many, many others.

462 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Provincial Trunk Highway 10–Forrest Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition: Provincial Trunk Highway 10 separates two schools and residential districts in Forrest, Manitoba, forcing students and residents to cross under very dangerous circumstances.

Strategies brought forward to help minimize the danger pose either significant threats to the safety of our children or are not economically feasible. Provincial Highway 10 se rves as a route for an ever-increasing volume of traffic, including heavy trucks, farm vehicles, working commuters, campers and the transport of dangerous goods. Traffic levels are expected to escalate further due to projected industrial expansions. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To urge the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr.

Lemieux) to act in this situation by considering the construction of a four-lane highway that will bypass around the village of Forrest. This petition signed by Catherine Wilcox, John Howden, Valerie Robertson and many, many others. Provincial Nominee Program Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: Immigration is critically important to the future of our province, and the 1998 federal Provincial Nominee Program is the best immigration program Manitoba has ever had.

The current government needs to recognize the backlog in processing PNP applications is causing additional stress and anxiety for would-be immigrants and their families and friends here in Manitoba. The current government needs to recognize the unfairness in its current policy on who qualifies to be an applicant, more specifically, by not allowing professionals such as health care workers to be able to apply for PNP certificates in the same way a computer technician would be able to. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier (Mr.

Doer) and his government to recognize and acknowledge how important immigration is to our province by improving and strengthening the Provincial Nominee Program. This is signed by D. Ferrier, H. Regaldo, A. Sarte and many, many other fine Manitobans. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to table the 2006-2007 annual reports for the Manitoba Agricultural Services Corporation and for the Food Development Centre. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today Angel Stoyko, Lionel Crowther, Carol Wilson, Deb Woodman, Alex Forrest and the executive members of the United Firefighters of Winnipeg who are the guests of the Minister for Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Lemieux). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you all here today. ORAL QUESTIONS West Side Bipole Power Line Environmental Study Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, the Premier, by his directive to Manitoba Hydro, which is our province's most valuable Crown corporation, is going to create $500 million in debt for the next generation of Manitobans. He's going to waste 100 megawatts of precious clean energy which entirely negates all of the wind power currently in existence in Manitoba and at least half of the capacity of a Minnesota coal- fired power plant. His proposal is to run a west side line that is going to go down the west side of the province in the vicinity of eight First Nations, two provincial forests and Riding Mountain National Park with no

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 463 environmental study, no consultations on the west side and no consideration for what's in the best interests of Manitobans. Half a billion dollars in debt, no environmental study, impacts on west side communities, Mr. Speaker, and the reason he has provided is that he's worried about pressure from foreign activists. So my question to the Premier is: Why is he allowing American activists to bully him into selling out the people that he was elected to represent, the people of Manitoba? * (13:40) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, any transmission line of any site has to go before a Clean Environment Commission. It will study the impact of the proposed transmission line. It will not be a decision that we would second- guess because, as a quasi-judicial body, it will study the issues of First Nations. It will study and evaluate the issues of the heritage rivers, two of which obviously are on the east side that we considered in terms of our preference, one of which is on the west side, which, of course, is the Red River. It already has an existing transmission line across it.

It will consider the fact that on the west side there are 90 years of mining, highways, economic development, as opposed to a majority of the boreal forest on the east side. It has not had development, Mr. Speaker. It must consider, under

section 35 of the Constitution, the views of any First Nations community. East, west or through the middle of the province the existing corridor has a considerable amount of loss through the Interlake with the existing transmission capacity. The new technology will have less loss. We may, as the CEO has indicated to us, have even greater potential for markets on the west side with Saskatchewan and Alberta. But all of these issues the members opposite would know that the debt ratio has gone down under our government, and it's gone down because we have built dams.

We are in the process of building more, but he makes statements about renewable energy. Mr. Speaker, they were ninth in Canada on energy efficiency when we came into office. The energy efficiency standard in Canada of independent evaluation has now got Manitoba No. 1 on energy efficiency. We closed down the most polluting coal plant in Canada that was operated by members opposite in Selkirk. The most polluting coal plant in Canada was closed down by our government because we do care about the environment. We don't just talk about it, like members opposite. Mr.

McFadyen: The Premier has campaigned on running the line down the west side of the province. He says that he had a commitment and an endorsement from the people of Manitoba. Now he seems to be saying that maybe it will not be the right decision, and so he's talking out of both sides of his mouth. He's either in favour or he's against. We don't need the slippery flip-flopping on such an important issue, Mr.

Speaker, so all his answer to that question does is demonstrate that he's directed the corporation to plough ahead with a decision without the benefit of environmental studies, which he has admitted have not yet been done. Mr. Speaker, the Premie r makes reference in his comments to power sales to Alberta, and I would encourage him to–[interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. McFadyen: I would encourage the Premier (Mr.

Doer) to read his clippings, because if he did, he would have seen a news story three weeks ago, September of this year, that Alberta is moving ahead with tendering for a nuclear plant to supply power to the tar sands, a nuclear plant in excess of 2,000 megawatts, Mr. Speaker. So he's dropped the ball. Alberta's moving ahead down a different path, and this whimsical, fanciful idea of power sales to Alberta when Alberta's going down a different path is a complete non-answer to the question. Now, the Premier has said, and his Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger) has tried to make the case that we're talking about untouched forest on the east side of the lake. The fact is–and I'll table the maps– there are three existing transmission lines that run through the east side, through the boreal forest, all of them through the boreal forest, all of them on the east side. Yesterday, the Premier said in the House that there would be 800 kilometr es of trees on the east side, much less than the west side, which is 550 kilometres, which is at odds with what the CEO of Hydro said in committee. When asked the question, the CEO of Hydro, Mr.

Brennan, said a rough estimate of a length of boreal forest that would be traversed by an east side bipole 3 is 750 kilometres, not the 800 kilometres that the Premier said, and a rough estimate of the length of boreal forest that would be traversed by a west bipole is 800 kilometres, Mr. Speaker. This is Mr. Brennan:

464 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 800 kilometres on the west, 750 on the east. So, clearly the Premier needs to explain the discrepancy between what his Hydro CEO is saying and what he and his Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), who's known for making false statements, are saying in the media.

I want to ask the Premier: Given that he's proceeding with a policy of wasting half a billion dollars, wasting a hundred megawatts of power and cutting down at least as ma ny trees on the west side as the east side, all because he has this idea of a Taj Mahal legacy and he's got visions of American activists, why won't the Premier put the interests of the people of Manitoba first and set aside his Taj Mahal fantasies and his fears of American activists? Mr. Doer: There are so many f actual errors in the

preamble of the member that I want to start by correcting him. First of all, on the issue of stating a preference and making a proposal and the issue of decision-making for purposes of licensing, we were in favour of the floodway expansion. We put that forward to the Clean Environment Commission. That did not mean that the Clean Environment Commission was going to license what we were in favour of. We were in favour of expanding the dam capacity of Manitoba, and we proposed that the Nelson House-Wuskwatim partnership proposal on the Burntwood River go forward.

That did not mean that the Clean Environment Commission was going to license it. I am shocked that a member opposite, a Leader of the Opposition doesn't know the difference between a proposal that goes to the Clean Environment Commission and the licensing. In fact, Hydro itself, not just the government, reviewed the licensing obstacles for both routes, all three routes. The cheapest route is the Interlake route. The most accessible area is the Interlake route. The problem is it's the least reliable in the sense that the two lines or the third line would be too close to existing lines.

But the cheapest route is the straightest line and we've always acknowledged that. Hydro themselves have identified licensing issues on the east side and, yes, on the west side. The boreal forest area is a part of reviews. The numbers, I believe, are 580 on the west side on boreal forest and 800 on the east side. The access issues, also according to the CEO, the vast majority of access is already there with existing rights-of-way, with highways, transmission lines. I mean, you only have to go to either side to know the difference of economic development between the two sides, Mr. Speaker.

I want to make it very clear to the member opposite that– Some Honourable Members: Oh. Oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: I want to make it very clear that a proposal on the floodway did not mean a licence. A proposal on Wuskwatim did not mean a licence. A proposal on either the west side or the middle or the east side still requires a complete review of the Clean Environment Commission. That is not anything else except consistency. I know that's a strange word for the member opposite.

Floodway proposal licence, Wuskwatim proposal licence, west side proposal: Clean Environment Commission determines the environmental validity, and, by the way, Mr. Speaker, there are also issues that have to be dealt with by the PUB that deals with anything related to rates. Both are quasi-judicial bodies and both will take an independent review of the proposals, Mr. Speaker. * (13:50) Mr.

McFadyen: The Premier's often said that turning up the volume doesn't make the song any better, and I heard a lot of bluster, the wall of sound from the other side, but within that wall of sound nothing even resembling a response to the issue or the question. It's the old cheap shot, the cheap shot artist whenever he gets onto an issue he doesn't want to have to respond, Mr. Speaker. He has put forward a proposal against the advice of his Hydro executives. He's jammed it down the throat of the corporation against their advice. He's right; they've done the analysis on licensing issues.

They've raised potential issues on the east side, and presumably they're looking at the fact that they've got eight First Nations, two provincial forests, Riding Mountain National Park and hundreds of kilometres of boreal forest on the west side proposal, Mr. Speaker. So for him to presuppose and take a government position that they're going to waste half a billion dollars, 100 megawatts of energy without any study to back up the environmental case shows exactly how political and how flimsy this decision is.

Now the Premier says he's worried about boreal forest, and if we look back just before the election, in that flurry of pre-election spending that the

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 465 government embarked on, I've got a news release April 5, 2007. The headline is "Province moving forward on first leg of all weather road for the east side of Lake Winnipeg"–$15 million. [interjection] The Premier's the only one smart enough on that side not to clap at this stage, Mr. Speaker. So the east side road going up Lake Winnipeg, they're going to build a ro ad, 90 kilometres of pavement from Manigotagan to Bloodvein.

They want to put in another 80 kilometres of pavement from Bloodvein to Berens River, 170 kilometres of pavement through the east side boreal forest in addition to three existing power lines, three existing winter roads. So to summarize, $500 million in debt. He's sending out his highways minister with a chainsaw along with the Member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) to cut 170 kilometres of forest on the east side. He's sending his Hydro minister out with a chainsaw to cut 800 kilometres of forest on the west side.

They're stoking up the coal plants in Minnesota all because the Premier is seeing ghosts of American activists, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Premier: Why is he knuckling under to the loony left, to the American activists, defying common sense? Why isn't he standing up for the people of Manitoba? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, I'm quite surprised that he would call Xcel power the loony left. It's one of the major customers of Manitoba Hydro. It has to go before a regulatory body for the purchase of power in Minnesota.

There are a lot of very active people in Minnesota but we're talking about customers. We're talking about commercial customers. I know members– [interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: You know, there's the member heckling. Mr. Speaker– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: They wouldn't know very much, Mr. Speaker, about commercial relationships because they did not build the Limestone project. They did not sell the Limestone power. They did not generate the $600 million to $700 million that has allowed Manitoba to have the lowest hydro rate.

The only thing they did in office was mothball and then criticize, mothball and criticize, mothball and criticize. That's their policy. That's been clear to Manitobans. I would point out that we do have plans for east side roads. We're not also misinforming people to say if there's a transmission line, and this is what we inherited is a myth in 1999, there would be a $400 million road. Hydro clarified that for us. It would be a very small investment. We actually went out and told the truth to communities rather than misleading them. Also, Mr.

Speaker, which is a very important point, when it comes to dealing with highways in remote and northern areas, it was this member that shamelessly went to Arthur-Virden and promised to take the same amount of money in highways which we've increased with bridges, take the same amount of money and take the money from the north and move it to southwestern Manitoba. Now he's told in an editorial if he wants to talk about it you're not fit to be Premier and don't ever show up in Thompson, Mr. Speaker. Child Welfare System Policy Enforcement Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Family Services has failed to establish clear priorities for our child welfare system. He has failed to enforce his own legislation. Yesterday, he stated that safety is job one, yet this policy is clearly not being put into practice. The minister's incompetence is failing our children. Will the minister acknowledge that he's failed to enforce his policy and failed to ensure the child's best interests are put ahead of all other considerations? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr.

Speaker, to reiterate what I had said yesterday, and I can expand on that one, the child protection system is in place in Manitoba to do just what its title says, and that is to protect children. First of all, there is legislation in place to provide the ability of the state, through agencies, to intervene in families, an extraordinary power. As well, there are powers in there for the courts, but throughout the legislative foundation of the child protection system is the very clear mandate and the overriding responsibility of child protection. Mr. Briese: Mr.

Speaker, a policy means nothing if it has not been put in practice. Gage Guimond's

466 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 safety and well-being were not put first. He was moved out of a safe foster home because other interests were prioritized. I ask the minister: Since Gage Guimond's death, has he personally issued a clear, written directive to all Child and Family Service workers explicitly stating that safety comes before everything else? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, in the tragic death of Gage Guimond, which weighs heavily on all of us, allegations have been made and some very serious concerns are certainly th e subject of independent analysis.

It's very important that any loss like this, wherever that may be, be analysed with independent eyes and we ensure, if there was any misapplication, any faults, any gaps discovered, that t h e y b e a d d r e s s e d . W e h a v e t o e n s u r e t h a t w h e n there is a loss like this, such deaths are sentinel events, and we learn from them, correct matters, have accountability, and make sure we make a better job– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Briese: Mr. Speaker, the minister's mismanage- ment of this issue is having tragic consequences for children. It is shameful.

I will once again ask the minister, as I did yesterday: Will he take action today and enforce the policy? Will he issue a written directive and do whatever it takes to make it absolutely clear to all Child and Family Services staff that a child's well-being always outweighs his other priorities? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, safety is job one. It's insulting that the opposition is charging that child protection workers in this province do not follow the law, do not understand and follow the core foundation of the child protection system, which is child protection. That is throughout the legislation.

It's the very foundation of it. Indeed, the Authorities legislation, when it was unanimously agreed to by this House, set out that child protection is the paramount concern. Mr. Speaker, what this government is doing is making sure that the work that front-line child protection workers are obliged to do is backed up with front-line relief, w ith greater training, an information system that works, and making sure that the foster parents are there to ensure that our children are indeed well protected. * (14:00) Hollow Water Cottage Barricade Government's Response Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): M r .

Speaker, it's been two weeks since the barricades went up near Hollow Water and there appears to be no end in sight. The Minister of Conservation (Mr. Struthers) won't negotiate with Hollow Water until the barricades are removed, and the Minister of Justice will take no action on the illegal barricade. So I ask the Minister of Justice: If he doesn't have the courage to enforce the law, why won't he at least ask the Minister of Conservation to negotiate the removal of the barricades? Hon.

Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): On this side of the House, we've always felt that negotiating with people involved is always the best course of action. I'd like to indicate, Mr. Speaker, to do otherwise, in fact, as the Minister of Justice, would be inappropriate. I want to quote from the Ipperwash inquiry, recommendation 71, page 357, volume 2: The power of the responsible minister to direct the OPP–and in this case it would be the provincial police force–does not include directions regarding specific law enforcement decisions in individual cases. Mr.

Speaker, the former premier of Ontario found out, unfortunately the hard way, that neglecting that particular– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Hawranik: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Conservation (Mr. Struthers) stated yesterday that he's in no position to enforce the law. The Minister of Justice is in a position to enforce the law, and he uses that excuse as not directing the RCMP. However, Mr.

Speaker, in 2001, the Department of Justice directed the RCM P to conduct a criminal investigation in regard to the findings of the Auditor General in the Morris-Macdonald School Division, and I table for the minister's own use a copy of that government news release. So, I ask the Minister of Justice: If he can direct the RCMP to conduct a criminal investigation of school trustees, why can't he ask for a criminal investigation of those responsible for erecting an illegal barricade? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure if the member gets the point, bu t the RCMP are there. The

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 467 RCMP are there conducting their business as the RCMP should. To quote from the conclusions of the Ipperwash royal inquiry: ". . . the provincial government had the authority to establish policing policy, but not to direct police operations." I'll repeat: "not to direct police operations." Mr. Sp eaker, it is not in the jurisdiction of the provincial government to direct police operations. Mr. Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, according to

section 423 of the Criminal Code, it is illegal to block or obstruct a highway, and I table for the minister's use that particular page in the Criminal Code. The barricades erected by Hollow Water are clearly illegal, and both the Minister of Conservation and the RCMP Sergeant Doug Ashton agree with that statement. Illegal activity, yet the Minister of Justice ignores it and condones it. What kind of message is he sending to Manitobans? The message he's sending to Manitobans is that the law can be broken without consequences. So I ask the Minister of Justice: Why has he failed to enforce the law? Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, if I had my choice between taking directions from the members opposite or the police, 100 times out of a hundred I would take my direction from the police. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I remind the Member for Lac du Bonnet that, for example, the Monnin inquiry found evidence of criminal wrongdoing by members of the Conservative Party but said there is no use prosecuting the members of the Conservative Party for their wrongdoings because they've been punished enough. They've been punished enough by the Monnin process.

I just want to point that out to the member opposite in case he has a comment on that particular matter as raised by Chief Justice Monnin. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Member for Tuxedo has the floor. Hollow Water Cottage Barricade Cottage Lot Draw Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday in Estimates the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Struthers) admitted that there's a problem with the cottage lot draw process. The process in the eastern area has been delayed due to the illegal blockade.

The Minister of Justice has refused to do his job, which is to ensure that the law of our province is upheld and enforced. As a result, many of the applicants in this process have been left in limbo. Well, the Minister of Conservation agreed to urge the Minister of Justice to uphold the law so the applicants are not left in limbo. He knows there's a problem. Is he prepared to do something about it, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, the Prosecutions division of the Department of Justice is an independent body.

It would be inappropriate for the minister to order prosecutions. It is also inappropriate, and I quoted earlier from the Ipperwash inquiry where their former Conservative Premier of Ontario was testifying and was found to be in error. It is not in the realm of a provincial government to order police to do their job. Police have the duty to investigate and to make determinations according to their abilities, and it would be wrong in the parliamentary system for any of us to do so otherwise or to order them otherwise. Mrs. Stefanson: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I guess what the Minister of Justice is saying then is that it is the policy of this government not to ensure that the law is upheld when it comes to blockades in our province, because that's what he just said. The cottage lot draw process has been hijacked because the Minister of Justice is refusing to uphold the law and, as a result, many applicants in the process have been left in limbo. The minister has asked everyone to be patient. The Minister of Conservation has asked everyone to be patient, but for how long? Until his Minister of Justice figures out what his job is, Mr.

Speaker, to uphold the law in this province. How long will that be? Mr. Chomiak: To quote further from the Ipperwash inquiry, and I quote from page 675: "Incident Commander Carson knew of the Premier's desire for a quick resolution to the occupation," as did other members of the OPP directly involved in the policing of the occupation. Quote: "This was unfortunate and should not have occurred," page 676. "The provincial government had the authority to establish policing policy but not to direct police operations." Mr. Speaker, many of our ancestors came from a place, my father included, where the government told

468 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 the police what to do. We do not want to create that here in our democracy. Mrs. Stefanson: Well, I'm glad, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Justice has now just declared for this House and confirmed that it is in fact the policy of this government not to uphold the law when it comes to blockades in our province.

That is extremely unfortunate, because there are many people out there, including residents of the Ayers Cove cottage developments who have expressed their concern that they may not be able to access their cottages to winterize them before freeze-up. If this were to happen, they could face costly expenses due to frozen plumbing. A spokesperson for the Minister of Conservation was quoted in the local paper as saying, and I quote: "We are asking for people's patience." Mr. Speaker, could the Minister of Conservation please stand before us today and explain how long people have to be patient for in this process?

Will they be able to have access to their cottages in time to close them up before the winter freeze? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I've already stated clearly, the member may not recognize that there is a fundamental difference between the operations of the police and the operations of our parliamentary system. To breach that gap would be inappropriate and unadvisable. The police do their duty and I will listen to the police before I will listen to the member opposite. For example– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to quote again from the Ipperwash inquiry: "The power of the responsible minister to direct the OPP," in this case the RCMP, "does not include directions regarding specific law enforcement decisions in individual cases." Mr. Speaker, to do otherwise would be to allow the government in power to direct the police to investigate whatever they wanted, and as I said earlier, many of our relatives and ancestors came to this country to avoid precisely that kind of directive, dictatorial power. It is our duty in this Legislature to preserve that difference. * (14:10) Manitoba Economy Competitiveness Mr.

Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the CFIB's business barometer, they measured a tiny little thing called optimism. The CFIB has said that Man itoba businesses are less optimistic today and are less optimistic about the future than they were in late spring and early summer. However, our neighbours in Saskatchewan are optimistic. We're falling behind in all economic areas and now we're even falling back in optimism, which is a scarce commodity in this province. Mr. Speaker, when is this minister going to stop looking in the rear view mirror and prepare Manitoba for the future?

When is he going to start making our province competitive even with lowly Saskatchewan? Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): [inaudible] characteristics as the member opposite. They always have to denigrate somebody else to make their point. In this case the Member for Brandon West has denigrated the province of Saskatchewan to try and score political points in Manitoba.

If he's honourable, or wants to be honourable some day, he will immediately apologize for attacking the hardworking people of Saskatchewan, and trying to attack the hardworking people of Manitoba who have created more jobs in this province in the last seven months, contrary to what he said the last time he asked a misinformed question. Mr. Speaker: Order. There's two comments I want to address in the honourable minister's answ er. All members in this Chamber are honourable members. All members will be treated as such. I ask the honourable member to withdraw that comment that he made. Mr. Selinger: Mr.

Speaker, I withdraw that comment. Mr. Borotsik: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your ruling. I appreciate that and, by the way, there was no denigration to Saskatchewan. Quite the opposite, by the way. The minister can run, but he can't hide from the facts. Manitoba has the highest personal tax rate in the west, higher than Saskatchewan's. Manitoba has the highest corporate tax rate in the west, higher than Saskatchewan's. Manitoba has the only payroll tax in the west. Saskatchewan has none. It seems the

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 469 minister is in his perpetual state of denial; even Saskatchewan is eating our lunch. Is the minister comfortable just sitting back and seeing our competitiveness erode? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the relevant comparisons are the following: Our property taxes are far lower with our property tax credits in Manitoba than they are in the jurisdictions to the west of us. Our taxes on property for farmers have been reduced by 65 percent in the last budget, contrary to the experience to the west of us.

Our small business tax rate is the lowest in the country, and we have guaranteed that it will stay that way for over 90 percent of businesses. The tax rate is the lowest in the country. The member would do well to read the budget and acknowledge that. Trans-Canada Highway Twinning Project Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, the incompetence of this NDP government is obvious to Manitobans through the minister of transportation and government services, as he broke his own 2005 promise to twin No. 1 highway west in 2006. Saskatchewan does have four lanes open today. He failed.

After eight years, and with only 50 kilometres to build over those eight year s, can the minister today guarantee, with only a few more days of paving weather left in this fall, that this western

section of Highway No. 1 will be twinned, paved and open this fall for the safety of all Manitobans? Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, for the first time in our history we have a plan with regard to transportation and infrastructure in this province: $4 billion over 10 years. This question, coming from a Member for Arthur-Virden, when his le ader, during the election campaign, announced to take money out of northern Manitoba, I say shame on him. He should have handed in his resignation as a critic to his leader for making such an outrageous comment. Mr.

Maguire: It's just too many broken promises, Mr. Speaker. Earlier this week, the minister said No. 1 would open, weather permitting. In 2005, the minister said it would open in 2006. In 2006, his Premier (Mr. Doer) said it would not open in 2006. Eleven kilometres of pavement have been unused on that road for the last 14 months. Saskatchewan is using their four lanes as I speak. Mr. Speaker, Manitobans are cynical. Can the minister be believed this time or is this just another empty promise like the NDP promise to end hallway medicine? Mr.

Lemieux: It's our government that has proceeded with the four-laning project to Saskatchewan. It will be completed this fall, Mr. Speaker. I just want to inform the critic for the opposition in making a lot of statements with regard to a vision in transportation we're the government, Mr. Speaker, that has brought forward that $4-billion, 10-year plan. The critic opposite has made a lot of comments with regard to his leader and where they're going with regard to transportation.

I just want to reiterate the fact, again: How can anyone in Manitoba, and we represent every corner of this province and build bridges and roads in each corner of the province, where they've ruled out, taken a big marker and crossed out the northern part of Manitoba and said they don't care about northern Manitoba. Take all the money out of the north, put it into the south. Shame on the critic. Shame on the critic of the opposition. Bill 203 Debate Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of Question Period, the Premier talked about the importance of our environment.

The Premier had an opportunity this morning through Bill 203, The Phosphorus-Free Dishwashing Detergent Act, to actually do something about Lake Winnipeg. Passage of that bill would likely do more for Lake Winnipeg than the previous six years of efforts of this government. We look to this government to demonstrate some leadership and respect the value of private members' bills. We ask the government why it is that they would not allow for government members to debate and ultimately vote on Bill 203 which would do so much for Lake Winnipeg. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, today, we were involved in an environmental announce- ment. We were involved in Healthy Living. We were investing with the city of Winnipeg on the old Marconi line in northeast Winnipeg, a bicycle- walking path, that will be in that quadrant of the city,

470 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 ultimately, will go right up to the Perimeter Highway. So, certainly, we had our responsibilities and we take them seriously. I think the idea of banning phosphorus is a proposal that we support and I want to make that clear. Our first goal is to get a national phosphorus ban because–[interjection] The member opposite, when she's at the yacht club in Kenora, will note that the water in Lake of the Woods actually flows through the Winnipeg River into Lake Winnipeg. We actually also know, Mr.

Speaker, that water from Edmonton, Regina, Calgary also comes this way. We believe, Mr. Speaker, in the phosphorus ban, and we applaud the Liberals for raising it and we support it. But we desire to have a national bill, hopefully, in place soon. If not, we will bring in a more comprehensive proposal building on the positive idea that the members opposite have proposed, because we can go it alone in Manitoba and we're willing to do that. The other issue, and I might want to raise that in a second question, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, may I have leave to finish my two supplementary questions? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave to finish his two supplementary questions? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been granted. Order. We're dealing with House business here and I need to be able to hear. It's been agreed for th e honourable Member for Inkster to continue. * (14:20) Private Members' Bills Debate Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I'm, in part, encouraged by the response from the First Minister and would add to that.

We have The Apology Act, and another government minister who has talked about the merits of that particular piece of legislation. So we have private members' bills that are there today that could make a positive difference in the province of Manitoba. Why would the Premier not acknowledge that particular bill as his other ministers have and recognize the value to allowing these bills at least to go to committee where the public can provide input and Manitoba can show some leadership? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): M r .

S p e a k e r , t o conclude my answer for the first question, the whole issue of cost is a very important issue. The phosphorus ban on the detergent is more expensive. The products are more expensive. They're coming down. The action of Québec noted two days ago that Manitoba and Québec are going to lead. We would prefer to have a national policy and Ontario and Saskatchewan and Alberta involved because we know the products will go down. We actually care about some of the more moderate income people. So if we can get the ban, which we support, and the lower cost, which we support, that is a more ideal situation.

We also are looking at bans on fertilizer for lawns in terms of phosphorus free. There're lots of good sales going on, but I would also point out to the member opposite, he does not need legislation to apologize in this Chamber. Phosphorus Free Dishwashing Detergent Commitment to a Date on Ban Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I refer members to read Tuesday's Hansard. Mr. Speaker, the private members' bills moved by the Leader of the Libera l Party suggests that the implementation be for January 2009. Would the Premier (Mr.

Doer) today make the commitment that he will have, if the federal government does not do it, an implementation date of January 9, where, in fact, phosphorus dishwashing detergent would then be illegal in the province of Manitoba? Would he agree to that? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, we have no difficulty with moving towards those targets.

As the Premier already indicated, we not only want to bring forward a bill that includes some of the aspects, or all of the aspects, of what members have brought forward, but we want to do more and we want to do it in a national interest. And on that same line of co-operation, I wonder if the leader of the third party will ask his member from Inkster when he's going to live up to his commitment in this House that he's going to resign his seat, Mr. Speaker. If the investigation shows, and

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 471 it has shown, that there's no fault in this regard, will the leader of the third party now ask the member to resign his seat as the Memb er for Inkster said on several occasions he would do, both in this Chamber and outside of this Chamber? Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Order. Before we move through Members' Statements, I'd lik e to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us from George McDowell School 63 grade 5 and 6 students under the direction of Leah Moskaliuk.

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Ramadan Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): I rise today in recognition of Ramadan, the holy month of the Muslim calendar. It is a time of worship and introspection for Muslims to commemorate the revelation of the Qur'an through Muhammad. During Ramadan, Muslims cannot eat or drink from the first light of dawn until sunset. The fast is then broken with a prayer and Iftar, a meal.

Manitoba is one of the most diverse provinces in Canada and is home to a variety of cultures, races and faiths. The Winnipeg Central Mosque on Ellice Avenue is an important pillar of our vibrant multicultural society and enriches the community through its continual cultivation of peace and respect. The mosque was officially opened in October of 2004 and is now attended by over 500 Muslims from throughout Winnipeg and the surrounding area. It is a religious centre for Muslims from over 40 countries, from recent immigrants to those who have resided here for several generations.

The mosque opens its doors to community events, schools, other religious groups, social organizations, media and political leaders. The mosque is managed by a council of dedicated volunteers who, with the support of community members, work to contribute positively to the cultural and spiritual fabric of the urban community. I'm proud to be the representative in this House for such a culturally rich area of the city of Winnipeg. We should all be proud to live in a province where everyone is free to celebrate their beliefs and holidays.

Manitoba's Islamic community remains true to the core tenets of Islam while also becoming a key part of our cultural mosaic. Mr. Speaker, I wish, with sincerity, a happy and peaceful Ramadan to all Muslims in Manitoba and hope that all prayers during this holy month are answered. Thank you. Hockey Day in Canada Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): The citizens of the city of Winkler, the many staff, parents and volunteers have developed a distinguished reputation in providing the community's youth with access to sports, most notably hockey.

Yesterday this commitment was recognized at the national level with Winkler being named as the host of CBC's Gemini award-winning Hockey Day in Canada taking place on February 9, 2008. The theme for Hockey Day in Canada this winter is "the journey," which suits well the city's history and role in sport. The recent success of a number of Winkler area natives, including Brent Krahn, Eric Fehr and Stanley Cup winner Dustin Penner and the continued support for the Flyers Jr.

A team, echoes the larger evolution of Winkler from a small hardworking agricultural community to the thriving centre of opportunity that it has truly become. Hockey Day in Canada will provide an excellent forum for the citizens of Winkler and the surrounding communities to celebrate their legacy of dedication and success in hockey. In between CBC's NHL coverage, the program will showcase local personalities and highlight their involvement in the hockey community.

Popular CBC sports commen- tators Ron McLean and Don Cherry, as well as long- time favourite Dick Irving, will join a host of former NHLers for the day-long coverage of the event, which will also feature a match between the Selkirk Steelers and the Winkler Flyers. Amidst the excitement, en ergy and exposure that will be sure to characterize this event and captivate the city, it can be easy to overlook what Hockey Day in Canada tells us about Winkler's journey as a community.

The success of th e city's young hockey players on the world stage and the vibrancy of the community's embrace of hockey demonstrate a history of a strong community foundation which has done an excellent job of fostering opportunity and of supporting its youth in sport. Today I want to recogn ize Mayor Martin Harder and Deb Penner, Community Events Co-ordinator,

472 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 for the work that they have done in making this such a success. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Cole Choken Mr. Tom Nevakshonoff (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in the Chamber today to recognize the accomplishments of a young Aboriginal man named Cole Choken whose family hails from a community in the Interlake constituency, the Lake Manitoba First Nation. On September 8 of this year, Mr.

Choken completed a run for the prevention of diabetes on the steps of this very building which he began a thousand miles away in the city of Calgary, a mere 33 days prior to that. Following the example set by Terry Fox and the Marathon of Hope, Cole ran 40 kilometres a day, a feat very few of us can even begin to comprehend. But his journey truly began a long time before that when, at 310 pounds, he realized he was quite likely destined to succumb eventually to diabetes as many of his family members already had.

Obesity and a sedentary lifestyle are linked to the onset of type 2 diabetes, and Aboriginal people have a higher predisposition toward it than does the general population. Cole Choken is a changed man because of his courageous initiative, and he should be held up as an example to us all. Each and every one of us has a personal responsibility to be as productive a citizen as possible to the betterment of our society as a whole. If we all performed to the same degree in our lives as has this young man, then truly the world would indeed be a better place.

On behalf of the people of Manitoba, I thank and commend Cole Choken for his accomplishment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. * (14:30) Dr. John Dick Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Carman): I would like to take this time to recognize an exceptional individual with Manitoba roots. John Dick grew up on a family farm near Culross with his parents, Rudy and Olly Dick, and five brothers and sisters. I attended school with him and can honestly say he had a love for learning, which was more than some of us did. Today's he's a prominent cancer researcher. Cancer is the leading cause of death in North America, and the results of Dr.

Dick's research impact the lives of many patients and their families. After many years of study and research, John successfully completed a doctorate degree from the University of Manitoba. It was through his res earch work that Dr. John Dick discovered stem cells and its impact on the growth of cancer. With this innovative discovery, new therapies and approaches can be taken toward chemotherapy by targeting the stem cells as the root of cancer. Over 115 articles in peer magazines have focussed on Dr. John Dick's research.

In addition, Time and Scientific American magazines and the New York Times have acknowledged his impact on cancer research. His numerous awards include the Michael Smith award for excellence from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Robert L. Noble prize for excellence in cancer research from the Canadian Cancer Society, and he was awarded the Premier's summit award in Ontario, also being named a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. Dr. Dick now lives in Ontario with his wife, Lorna, and their son and daughter.

He holds the position of senior scientist at the Toronto General Research Institute at the university health network. He is also professor in the department of molecular genetics at the University of Toronto and the Canada research chair in stem cell biology. It is with great pride that I recognize and thank a most distinguished Manitoban and a Culross native. Dr. John Dick is a world leader in cancer research, and there is no doubt that his work saves countless lives. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. India Day Celebrations Mr.

Bidhu Jha (Radisson): I rise before the House today to congratulate the Indo-Canadian community of Manitoba on another wonderful India Day celebration at the Manitoba Legislative Building attended by over 500 people of our city. This year's event served to commemorate the 60th anniversary of India's independence, which took place on the 15th of August, 1947. Since holding its first elections in 1952, India has become the world's largest democracy.

With over one billion people, practising five major religions, diverse subcultures and 18 different official languages, India is also progressing very well on other fronts, Mr. Speaker.

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 473 This year was our fourth annual India Day celebration which was co-chaired by the Member for Fort Garry (Ms. Irvin-R oss) and myself. The afternoon began with the singing of both the Canadian and Indian national anthems followed by colourful dances performed by members of the Jhankaar school of dance, some of whom were as young as four years old. The 60th anniversary was also marked by a slide-sh ow presentation depicting India and Pakistan's journey of division and independence, which brought back many sad memories of their division. Mr.

Speaker, I appealed to the people who attended the India Day celebrations to embody India's basic philosophy and message of non- violence and peace. India's success toward becoming an economic power of the world suggests that it is possible to achieve economic prosperity yet build a high value of humanity and social justice in a country. I am proud that we celebrate India Day at the Legislative Building every year. Mr. Speaker, I believe that one of Manitoba's greatest assets is the diversity that immigrant communities bring to the province.

I believe that celebrating our diversity through passing our culture to our children is one of the most important undertakings of this generation. Celebrations like India Day are a vital part of this process. I would like, therefore, to congratulate and commend India Association executives and other Indo-Canadian organizations, many volunteers who put much effort– Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable member's time has expired. Mr. Jha: Can I take leave for just completing? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr.

Speaker: Leave has been granted to the honourable Member for Radisson. Mr. Jha: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So I would like to congratulate many members, many volunteers of different organizations from Indo-Canadian groups who put a lot of effort and personal resources into making this annual event very enjoyable and successful. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORTATION * (14:40) Madam Chairperson (Marilyn Brick): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply will now resume consideration of the Estimates for the Department of Infrastructure and Transportation. As had been previously agreed, questioning for this department will proceed in a global manner. The floor is now open for questions. Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Madam Chair, I would just like to turn it over to my Member for Springfield (Mr. Schule r). He has a couple of questions. Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): I have one question, and that has to do with the twinning of Highway 15 from the Perimeter to 206. It's a very heavily travelled road.

It's been discussed for a long time about twinning that section, and I was wondering how far along the department is with the planning of the twinning of 15 from the Perimeter to 206? Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): I thank the member for the question, and I'm sure he has an appreciation for the challenges that we have in Manitoba with regard to our infrastructure. We know it; we've recognized it; we put a lot of money towards it. And, as was proven yesterday, with our announcement on bridges, we're not prepared to just stand still with our feet in concrete.

We're willing to move ahead and put more money into bridges and into our infrastructure. The department monitors our highways and, I think, the reference that's being made on Highway 15 as going from the floodway essentially to Dugald, and not just from the floodway to 207. Our department has looked at this particular stretch of highway. We've monitored the traffic counts, for example. We're continually monitoring this particular stretch of road . But, as the Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler) will appreciate, there are a lot of highways that have a lot of traffic on them all over the province.

It's not just Highway 15. Yet Highway 15 continues to receive regular maintenance, and I know he's aware of that. But what

474 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 he's asking for is to add two more lanes, or make it four lanes, which is, of course, very, very costly. But maybe I should also stress that our five-year plan, or that $4-billion 10-year plan, is not just talking about building new; it's also talking about renewing our roads and our bridges. It's not just about building new. That's something that every year we go through a whole process of reviewing requests from each area, each territo ry, if you will, on their priorities, and what they see is something that we should be looking at.

But all I can say at this point is that the department continues to monitor that road, doing all the things to make sure they ensure it's safe, safe as humanly possible, and not necessarily going ahead with twinning at this time. Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Carman): The question is for the minister and in regard to No. 2 highway. I just want to warn him, to start with, please don't throw your shoulder out patting yourself on the back for the work that's going on there. We do appreciate that, and there haven't been any complaints due to construction this summer. The highway is scheduled to be rebuilt in three sections.

It's being done right now, Elm Creek to Fannystelle, and then Fannystelle just east of Starbuck and then on to Oak Bluff. Have the contracts been let out yet for the next phase, or if not, when will they be? Mr. Lemieux: Well, I thank the member for the question. PTH 2 and 3 are going to be receiving, over the next number of years, almost $60 million worth of work. Certainly, it's not about patting myself on the back, even though some people are saying we should be taking credit for it, I really look at this differently, quite frankly. This goes back to 2002.

We did the consultation process, went around the province, and the MLA for Transcona (Mr. Reid) and the MLA for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) and the MLA for Flin Flon (Mr. Jenni ssen) were part of that committee. They spent a lot of time talking to Manitobans as to what they need to do. Madam Chair, 2 and 3 consistently came up as highways that people felt needed some work and we recognize that. We've seen it. We've heard from the R.M.s of Macdonald and others. We've addressed McGillivray Boulevard.

We've tried to put–I can't recall just off the top of my head the amount of money we put into McGillivray, but we're also looking, as was pointed out, into 2 and 3. So almost $60-million worth of work. I hesitate to even say that it may be even more than that, depending on what happens with asphalt. I mean, that's the kind of investment we're talking about that's going to go into 2 and 3. Have tenders gone out yet? No. No, they have not. Mr. Pedersen: Can you give me a time frame for when tenders usually go out?

I understand there will be a public process for when they go out, but what is the time frame for those tenders, so that we can watch for that? Mr. Lemieux: Well, I don't want the MLA for Carman to get tired of hearing about the process, the 2020 Vision process, going back to '02, but I need to repeat this because at that time, what came out of the recommendations were essentially three things: One, put more money into roads and bridges and to renew the infrastructure plan overall; No. 2 is try to tender a little early if you can for the benefit of the industry. Get it out in the fall if you can do that.

Also, the third one was–well, it was tender, more money and also, I think overall, is allow Manitobans, give some kind of advance notice. Have some planning over more than just one year; have five years or ten years. So that's what we've done. So we've lived up to each one of those. So just to let the MLA know that we have an ad

schedule that goes out, generally, I would say, around or before Grey Cup as a kind of a measuring stick to let the industry know what projects are going to go out. Then we tender the jobs out into the new year. But this project is broken up as rightly pointed out by the member. It's broken out into phases. So just the next phase will go out. The actual tenders won't go out until the new year. Okay. Mr. Pedersen: Madam Chairperson, for the minister, I have one other question in regard, when he mentions Highway No. 3 and the R.M. of Dufferin.

The highways infrastructure department have had many discussions with the R.M. of Dufferin about a turnoff at th eir industrial park just east of Carman. Is there anything that I can take back to the R.M. of Dufferin in regard to what's happening there, highways department's position on that? Mr. Lemieux: Well, I had the former MLA, Mr. Rocan, at my doorstep almost on a weekly basis talking about this, but I could give you the letter that I sent back to the R.M., that the policy has always been if that industry built on our highways, they

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 475 would be responsible for turning lanes. A good example of that would be, let's say Wal-Mart in Winkler and so on, could be a co-op store in Lorette, where they've had to pay essentially for their turning lanes.

That has always been a policy, that if you're going to build on our highway system, the companies and businesses should be prepared also to put turning lanes in. * (14:50) Having said that, I believe as a Province there are exceptional times, because we believe that transportation plays a dual role, not only making sure that the roads are safe and so on, but also it's an enabler for industry and for business. It's important for trade and so you wouldn't want to hinder a grain elevator or some site as a result of them looking at let's say $150,000 to make turning lanes.

They would look at this as not enabling them to build there. So there might be occasions where one would look at it but this is not one. I mean, I sent a letter back. I want to be forthright about this. I sent a letter back to them telling them, no, there really is not an opportunity for this. If they want turning lanes–and actually it's probably even more than that now. I understand it's becoming so busy that they really almost need turning lanes or they're going to be required to put them in. I know this is not going to make them very happy.

This may give them some heartburn at the fact that it's going to cost them some money. But there are some sa fety issues around that particular area. I can provide the member with a letter that I've sent to them, but I just want to reiterate the fact that there are no changes with regard to the policy, in a sense, with that corner. Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I'm not exactly sure how far the minister explained or talked about Highway No. 2, because as the Member for Carman (Mr. Pedersen) was speaki ng, he was of, course, speaking about No. 2 running through his constituency.

It also runs through the constituency of Morris all the way into Winnipeg, as a matter of fact. So I apologize if I'm asking the same question over again, but in terms of the rebuilding or resurfacing, hopefully rebuilding of Highway No. 2, is that project planned to go all the way to the Perimeter Highway? Mr. Lemieux: The answer–the quick answer is yes. But the other piece that I did mention to the MLA for Carman was that McGillivray Boulevard, as we know it, or Highway No. 3 going into Winnipeg, has also received considerable amounts of money over the past–I would say this past summer.

I don't know if that's been completed now; it was about a year ago. So the answer is yes. But there is a continuation of that highway. It goes right into Winnipeg and that work has been done. I know the R.M. of Macdonald and others, not only are they extremely pleased with the work that's been done, but with most R.M.s, as I've discovered since 1999 being an MLA and Cabinet minister, that is not going to restrict them from asking for more. You know, it's what have you done for me lately in the arena of politics. But I understand that.

So we're continuing to have dialogue with the R.M. of Macdonald, talking about what do we do to address that particular corner. You know, is it going to be a cloverleaf? What kind of turning and access lanes are there going to be there? So the dialogue will continue but you're talking about cloverleafs that end up costing anywhere from $30 million to $40 million, just a rough guess. But it's big dollars.

It's something that–yes, you want to take care of the safety side of it, but you also have to be prudent with regard to making sure that whatever you're going to do there it's going to last for, you know, 30, 40, 50, 100 years. Once you put them up they generally stay there for a long time. So we are very pleased to be able to work on McGillivray and also do a lot of work on 2 and 3 as well. Mrs. Taillieu: Madame Chair, yesterday we finished off the day and I was asking questions in regard to the–it's called a shoo-fly, but it's basically a detour around the culvert replacement that's happening on Highway No. 1.

I don't know that we finished that conversation because I was asking how much that's costing to do that and the feasibility of doing it that way as opposed to diverting traffic onto the opposite side of the highway, possibly as was done in the case on Highway 75. Then the length of time of the project, how long can you expect that the work will be going on there? Mr. Lemieux: I'll give a short answer. I believe I'm repeating what I said yesterday, that only one side is being replaced. People are looking at it.

I hesitate to talk about monies because, I believe, on this particular project, we haven't tendered that out. If you tell someone, oh yes, it's going to cost you $500,000, well, guess what the tenders will come

476 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 back at? $500,000 or more. So I believe we haven't tendered that out yet. We haven't put a dollar figure attached to it. I'm not sure if the MLA is asking how much the detour would cost to put it in. Because I can't–I'm not prepared to talk about how much it's going to cost, or the investment it's going to take to replace those box culverts because the tenders haven't gone out yet. I guess, just on a clarification, is it the cost of the shoo-fly or the detour? Or is it the cost of what is it going to take for a couple of those culverts? Mrs.

Taillieu: It appears that work has begun on that project. Construction has begun there in building that shoo-fly because there is a lo t of gravel work that's ensuing right now. I guess I'll ask the question in a general term then. Is it more feasible to do it this way? I'm wondering about the feasibility and the cost of doing it this way as opposed to diverting traffic down the other side of the highway, and that would take into consideration the length of time that this needs to be in place.

So, for example, if it only needed to be in place for a couple of weeks to replace the culvert, does it not make more sense to divert traffic rather than build a new section? I guess, in generalities, that's what I'm asking. Mr. Lemieux: I'm not an engineer, and not many of us around here are. But there are a few that point out to me that, often–you're correct, it's cheaper to divert the traffic to the other side, but not in the case where there are high volumes of traffic like No. 1 highway.

Often the department will use another route or a bit of a diversion to guide traffic around, or a shoo-fly just to divert the traffic, and spend the money doing it. So I think I would be safe to say, even though I don’t want to give a specific dollar figure of what these tenders will be at, including the work that's going to divert the traffic and the road that it's going to take to do that, it's probably anywhere between $4 and $6 million, the whole project that we're looking at doing: a couple of box culverts in two different areas and including the road that's going to be used to divert traffic.

So the answer is, it's usually less expensive to put traffic over on the other side, but not where there's large volumes of traffic. Mrs. Taillieu: I understand that the minister has announced a number of projects ongoing with bridges in the province and funding for bridges. I'd like to specifically ask about the Baie St. Paul Bridge out near Poplar Point, actually. There was weight restrictions put on that bridge quite some time ago which causes the local population to have to drive about 10 kilometres out of their way.

So, of course, that impacts on their ability to haul grain, et cetera, and the school buses, and all of that. So can you just update me as to what's happened with that particular bridge? Mr. Lemieux: I know not all Manitobans are aware of the great announcement we made yesterday with regard to putting more monies into bridges. But I'll use this opportunity just to let people know that may not be aware of it. * (15:00) The announcement was putting more money into bridge inspections and also rehabilitation and fixing bridges: an extra $125 million going into our $4 billion, 10-year plan.

That was all part of the Vision 2020 consultation group led by the MLA for Transcona. But, having said that, on this particular stretch on this bridge, we met with the R.M. and met with and consulted with community members. They expressed the importance of this bridge. We have tried to do what work we could, and the long and the short of it is that it's not satisfactory. We can't just, if I can use the term "nickel and dime," to try to fix the bridge. We're going to have to do a better job of it, and I'm not sure if we're going to be tendering that out in this tender

schedule and putting that out, but it's something I know that we've looked at, of doing a better rehab job on that particular bridge. If it's not going to be part of the tender

schedule that's going to go out before Grey Cup or around Grey Cup time, we'd certainly be looking at it in the very near future as opposed to at the end of the five-year capital plan. It would be in the earlier side. As the MLA points out, it really needs some work, and it's something that our department has been in close conversation with community members as well as the elected officials in the area. Mrs. Taillieu: Can you just indicate where it might stand in the queue? Mr. Lemieux: Well, currently, if you take a look at the document that we've put out, our five-year plan, I don't believe it's listed there, any part of the plan.

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 477 There are a number of different bridges and structures that are on that plan. I don't believe that it is there, but this is the flexibility that's also built into that five-year budget, and it has to be there because there are structures that are coming up. They may be recognized for work by ou r inspectors. This is one that people have been monitoring on an ongoing basis, so we're looking at doing it. I think realistically probably in the year of '08 we're looking at doing some major work on that particular structure. Mrs.

Taillieu: Well, I thank the minister for that answer. I know that there is a number of roadways around the province that are needing attention. We know that, but of course it's incumbent on me to ask about the ones in my constituency. As I mentioned yesterday, I know there's been extensive work done on Highway 75 and there's more to come, but I'd like to ask the minister about the plans for the town of Morris, raising the highway on the north entrance to the town or whether there are plans to go around th e town or where that particular project stands at this time.

I know there have been conversations about a lot of different studies as to what's the best thing to floodproof that area, but– Mr. Lemieux: Well, to date I haven't received an update as to what study or what people are looking at. I'm looking forward to receiving that because we said we were hoping to be able to have more information by the engineers and people who are looking at it by this fall. I mean, if you're technical about it, I think winter starts on December 21, but I won't play games with words, but I'm hoping that in the very near future I'm going to get some information on it.

What we're looking at is, do we actually raise Main Street? Now, Main Street in Morris needs to be done. You know the Premier has mentioned this repeatedly. We've met with the mayor. We've met with Mr. Martens, Herm Ma rtens with the R.M. of Morris as well. I think everyone is in agreement. We need to do it. It's part of 75. We've committed to doing Highway 75 and doing a better job, and the member is correct. There's a huge discussion going on, I understand, in the community. Do you have a bypass going around the community? Do you raise the bridge? Do you raise Main Street? Main Street needs to be redone.

What that means, not being an engin eer I'm not sure exactly what that means in technical terms, but I think all of us are in agreement it's a major community right on Highway 75 and we're going to do something about it. This maybe ties in also, just to put it into perspective, when we talked about the box culverts on the west side of Headingley. Highway No. 1 has about 12,000 vehicles per day going on it. Highway 75 south and Highway 75 south of Winnipeg has about 5,000 vehicles per day.

So, when you take a look at the traffic, even though No. 1 highway has more than double the amount of vehicles, Highway 75 south still is our major artery to the United States. Minnesota, North Dakota have also deemed this I-29 being a major route coming north too, bringing goods and tourists, quite frankly, into the province.

Morris, I don't have any specific information today, what is going to happen or what the recommendation is to happen, because we made a commitment to the mayor and to council and others that we would try to keep them in the loop; when we had some more information to let them know that– kind of the way we're going to be proceeding–we'd be letting everyone have that information. Mrs. Taillieu: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks to the minister for that answer. I just met with the mayor and the council this summer, and that's one of the questions that they are still mulling over as to what will happen there.

Another question that they raise: when the reconstruction of the Highway 75 going through the town occurs, they will need to do extensive repairs of the town infrastructure that is under the highway because that would be the time to do it, is when you're doing the highway. They express some concerns about having the ability to be there with–in terms of the money needed to do that. So it, I think, would be very beneficial to know a time frame so that they can prepare for that eventuality.

So, if the minister does have any kind of time frame in mind, or in the future will have, I'd appreciate if he would let me know or at least let the town of Morris know so they can prepare for that. That is not a question, actually, but I'll continue on. Having acknowledged Highway 75 and Highway 1 and Highway 2 and Highway 3, I also have to speak on Highway 59 that goes straight from, well, all the way through your constituency, Mr. Minister, and– Madam Chairperson: Excuse me, just for a moment. I'm sorry, I'm just having a hard time

478 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 hearing the Member for Mo rris, so I have to ask committee members just to allow the Member for Morris to be heard. Thank you. Mrs. Taillieu: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm speaking about Highway 59 and the need to twin that highway, I suppose, all the way down to the border. There are a number of communities down there and, certainly, travelling down Highway 59 all the way down to St.

Malo, where there is a provincial park that is very well frequented in the summertime, both from people from Manitoba and around the province, but from other areas out-of- province and from the States. Recognizing that Highway 59 has, I think, a huge traffic volume, and it is single-lane, and there has been a number of accidents there–and I know that there has been some twinning of Highway 59–I'm wondering if the rest of Highway 59 south is in the five-year plan. Mr. Lemieux: Well, let me just say that I believe, since we became government, I think it was close to $35 million spent on Highway 59.

I think it was $14 million one stretch. I think $17 million the next stretch. I'm just using rough numbers, but we've spent quite a bit of money, invested a lot of money into Highway 59 south. It currently is, just south of Ile des Chênes, Manitoba. But the MLA is correct. There's a huge amount of traffic, but the traffic really tapers off after Highway 52. The turn-off, as you're going south, if you turn and go east to Steinbach, right from that corner, the traffic goes from the thousands down to the hundreds. So there's a huge drop, and there's always been a discussion as to do you twin it to St.

Pierre and then do you bypass St. Pierre, and then go to St. Malo; do you keep going to the border. * (15:10) There are huge implications on what they're going to be doing in the United States because, in my previous comments with regard to 75, the states of Minnesota and North Dakota, a lot of them are using I-29 as their major north-south now. I know as the Province of Manitoba we've said that we believe that, well, that Churchill is at the northern end of the International Mid-Continent Trade and Trans- portation Corridor.

Down in Monterrey, Mexico or Manzanillo, Mexico is at the south end, and there's an artery or the spine of North America goes down the centre; 75 and I-29 and I-35 make up that corridor. So our intent is to look at not only tourism, but trade and the esthetic driving of our citizens and others, so that is where we've put our focus. And I have to tell you that because Morris is in the physical landscape of where it's been built, they are in a low spot, and when there's any kind of high water, the water tends to stay there, as I'm advised, longer than elsewhere.

People have argued, is there a different way to bypass or to go around Morris and do you fix those roads up, including Highway 200 has been mentioned by a number of the local citizens. Highway 59, in fact, it has been argued, do you take the new Letellier Bridge that's going to be built there some day and head east and then get to 59 and head north. So you are actually bypassing a lot of the flood areas, because Highway 59 tends to stay dry a large portion of the time. But huge amounts of dollars have been spent on not only Highway 59 but Highway 75.

Large investments by our government, and we've made a commitment in the five-year plan to look at Highway 59 north to Grand Beach and we're working with Brokenhead First Nations community at looking at twinning. And I don't want to belabour the point, but a lot of dollars have gone into investments in our infrastructure in the province, and it all started–well, it didn't all start, but a great deal of it had to do with the consultation process that the MLA for Transcona (Mr. Reid) led along with the MLA for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen), the MLA fo r Selkirk (Mr. Dewer).

That had a huge impact on the kinds of guidelines and direction that were needed to put together a plan for the first time in Manitoba's history, a multiyear capital plan that had the dollars to back it up. I appreciate the question coming from the MLA for Morris (Mrs. Tailleau). Both she and I and others have met with many elected officials and citizens and–how can I put this? Everyone wants a four-lane highway and, you know, in reality, even today in Question Period the MLA for Arthur-Virden (Mr.

Maguire) was asking about a four-lane highway and when is it going to be done, and it will be done and completed this fall. But I believe what we're going to be caught in, in the next number of years in our history, is that we need renewal of our system. It’s the highways that exist, the bridges that exist. I believe that's where the pressures are going to be for us in Manitoba. So I just want to put that on the record as well. Thank you. Mrs. Taillieu: Yes, I think that we recognize that there are a number of roads and bridges that need attention, but if you don't lobby for them and bring

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 479 them up, then they don't get attention. That's kind of the way it goes, so we have to keep asking for specific areas. I want to ask a question in regard to signage on the highway, any highway. I have been informed that an R.M. wanted to put up a sign "Engine Retarder Breaks Prohibited," and they ordered three signs and the cost of the signs was $112 each. They wanted to put up these signs because of the sound from the trucks as they slowed down, and it was annoying, I suppose, to some of the local residents.

However, the Department of Transportation said they couldn't put up these signs, but they had to order the same sign through the department and that same sign that they bought was $900. So I'd like to ask the minister why he wants to charge the R.M. $900 for a sign that they really only had to pay $112 for? Mr. Lemieux: Well, again, you know, people can just put up some broken down, old, wooden sign up on the side of a road, or sometimes you need– I'm not using this as what they were going to do. No, it's not specific to any particular group or this particular community.

But there are specifications, whether it's reflective material on a sign that's needed for safety–for the average citizen, you may not think much about signage and, if much thought goes into it, but a lot does. The amount of wording on a sign, the reflective material on the sign, the dimensions of the sign, that's really important.

So you might be able to pick up a sign for $112, but in reality the sign that's going to last there for a long time and be the proper sign that drivers can see for safety reasons might be the $900 sign, and that's the reason why departments like Transportation have experts that know and study this area of safety. It's an important area. Mrs. Taillieu: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can the minister say what company they use for their signs, for the Department of Transportation signs? Mr.

Lemieux: Well, thank you, and I've been advised that the department certainly will be acceptable of signs as long as they meet certain specifications, and that's what I was trying to get at with regard to dimensi ons, wordage, reflective material on the sign. The Conservative government of the 1990s, my recollect ion anyway, privatized signage and so about every five years we tender that out, so it's the low bid that gets the sign job. I believe currently it's located in Dauphin.

But it was privatized by the Conservative government of the '90s, and it's low bid that gets it, and about every five years it goes out. Mrs. Taillieu: Well, thank you. I will check into this further and bring further in formation to the minister. I have been informed by the municipality what company that they ordered the sign through and I've heard that company's name mentioned around the table here, so I know it's one that the government does business with. So I will confirm with them specifically why they were ordered that they could not use the sign that they ordered which cost them $112.

They had to order a similar exact same sign, according to what I was told, but they had to get it from the department of highways, or Transportation, I should say, and it was going to cost $900. So I will be bringing further information to the minister on that and hopefully we can come to some arrangements that are agreeable to the municipality. Just one more question. I know that there has been some discussion about the intersection of the Perimeter Highway and Highway 330 which goes south to La Salle because of the railway crossing there, the gas storage faci lity there.

On the other corner there's an anhydrous facility, on the other corner there's a seed plant and a lumber company. So there's the intersection with–and many people have said that that intersection is kind of like an accident waiting to happen. Of course, we did have a very serious accident there with a car-train not that long ago, but that particular area does seem to create some concern, and I'm wondering if there's any plan to perhaps do some controlled intersection or lighting at that intersection of 330 and the Perimeter Highway. * (15:20) Mr. Lemieux: I thank the MLA for Morris for the question.

This does raise a question, and I think it’s a serious question about development just outside of Winnipeg in many ways. You have the community of La Salle which is growing. You have a lot of other communities, one that I live in just outside east of Winnipeg. They are growing and they have huge infrastructure needs that come along with it. You have communities like La Salle and you have other communities where you have turning lanes that break up in a boulevard area where you have a break between both lanes going east and west.

There are some challenges about turning lanes like that and I know when we're able to do the–you know we're looking at doing some work there. I don't

480 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 think we're talking about lights necessarily but we're certainly talking about doing some work at that particular intersection, at least at this point. Mrs. Taillieu: Thank you Minister. I'm glad to hear that there's going to be some attention paid to that particular intersection, but just to clarify, the people that met about that intersection were not residents of the town of La Salle. They were the people that have the businesses on the corners that I was just speaking about.

They were very concerned because of the safety, because of all of those particular things that I just mentioned at that corner if there was some particularly bad accident wh ere there was a train, a car, there's gas there, there's anhydrous. It just poses the perfect storm in the right conditions, and why I'm bringing it up is not to do with the development or anybody that wants to live outside the city of Winnipeg. They have every right to do that. It's not about that. It's about that particular intersection and the safety that it imposes. It compromises safety for anybody travelling that

section of highway, whether they're from Nova Scotia or New Brunswick or Alberta or somewhere from Winnipeg. It's that intersection with all of those things around it that cause me to be concerned and not only myself but the people that are representative of the businesses around that intersection. One further question I'd like to ask the minister is: In regard to the $40 million that was designated for the refurbishment and rebuilding of the Manitoba Developmental Centre in Portage, how much of that money has flowed? Mr. Lemieux: I'll have to let the MLA know when I'm able to have that material.

I don't have any government services people with me at the moment. Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): The questions I want to deal with are in a lot of urban centres in rural Manitoba the highway is the main street or goes through the town. When there are any major repairs done on those highways, there's usually some very old infrastructure of the municipality and under it, water lines, sewer lines, those types of things.

Firstly, I'd like to know how much co-ordination you do with those communities when you're planning to do some work on those roads, and also, if you give enough heads-up to those communities so that they can maybe get some infrastructure funding or something in place to–these are very costly projects. If you don't replace these aging infrastructures that are under those highways, the year after you put them in you're cutting them to replace stuff. So I'd like to know what co-ordination is done, how you work around those problems.

Madam Chairperson: I just wanted to clarify for all members that questions that come through need to go through the Chair. Thank you. Mr. Lemieux: Well, the question is an important one. In the consultation process of 2020, that was one thing that came up, some lead-time planning. We've heard a lot of rural municipalities, towns, villages and communities in Manitoba, including AMM, say that for the first time in Manitoba's history they actually have a five-year plan rolled out, a vision as to where we want to go.

Now granted, a lot of communities who may not appear on the five- year plan may not be overly joyed at this point, but there is some flexibility built into the plan that can address some emerging needs. That means it could be a structure, a bridge or some other particular structure that needs to be addressed related to Infrastructure and Transportation, and we can do it. When I refer to a document, Manitoba's Highways Renewal Plan 2007-2011, that we put out with $2 billion for five years and then $4 billion for the 10 years, that's why that plan is truly important. Municipalities asked the MLA for Transcona (Mr.

Reid) to, please, have a five-year plan put in place and the money to back it up and try to get the tenders out early, so people know where they're going with regard to a plan and a vision. We've got that now, and, now, of course, the challenge is to be able to have the industry able to gear up fast enough to be able to meet all the money that's there and the projects that have been laid out. So we're pleased to have the plan and I know that the municipalities and towns and villages and cities in Manitoba are as well. Mr.

Briese: What I'm trying to reach with the question is, is there co-ordination between the departments of government when we're dealing with infrastructure which falls under rural development and highways? Is there some co-ordination in the departments to try and work those projects at the same times? Mr. Lemieux: The good example might be that there are some communities that are looking to do sewer and water, for example, and we'll defer a project. In fact, some people will tell us, you know, we want to repair our sewer line and we need to do that for whatever reason, be it age or other reasons.

It can be the expansion of the community, whatever their

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 481 reasons are. We'll defer a project and work closely with the community to be able to do that. The departments, all departments, do have a communication network that's built between people within government, within those departments, that talk to each other to try to co-ordinate it. I don't know if the MLA has an example of maybe where this hasn't happened. I would sure like to be apprised of it because, you know, it's not perfect. No system is ever perfect.

You just hope that you're able to do the best you can to make everything work and work in a co-ordinated way, in a way that you're not, well, a term that's used is a "throwaway." You don't want to build a project necessarily and then have to come back and dig up a new road that you just paved because someone, a year later or two years later, has to dig it up to put a sewer line in. So the answer is, yes, people work closely together and hopefully with those communities as well.

But I think the key, quite frankly, is when we're talking about the Department of Infrastructure and Transportation, one of the main reasons why–I believe the Premier (Mr. Doer) pointed this out– Infrastructure and Transportation was put together– and, in fact, the Heavy Construction Association and the industry have asked that we do that. Why exactly was the co-ordination of this? Not only to co- ordinate activities in infrastructure but also get a better bang for your buck because you will know what's going on with regard to tenders in many different areas and you can get a better handle on the money.

That was kind of a key point. If my recollection is correct, it may not be, but that was pointed out, I believe by the Premier at the time when we made the new Department of Infrastructure and Transportation. It was co- ordination of activities also taking a look at the tendering and having a better view of infrastructure and the cost overall. Mrs.

Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): I was quite interested in hearing the minister talk about flexibility and a five-year plan and all those good things, but I have a couple of questions that leave me to question whether there is that five-year plan in place. * (15:30) As he's aware and highways staff are aware, the Highway 2 bridge was closed for a good part of this year. I was approached through one of my meetings with councillors in the R.M. of Oakland and the Town of Minnedosa, or the Wawanesa area, that there was some discussions regarding the bridge maintenance.

I just need some clarification from the minister if this is proper process. The bridge is obviously going to need to be maintained and repaired, but is it common practice for discussions to occur regarding Highway 340? I guess to get around to the question is this individual was approached by the minister's department saying that if the community of Wawanesa and the R.M. of Oakland take over the maintenance and repair of the bridge on Highway 2, then he could see what he could do to make sure that 340 is given a higher priority in being paved. I find that rather concerning. The bridge was repaired.

We really appreciate it, but we need to be talking about– is this part of the new announcement that came out on bridge repair and support? Is offloading the responsibilities to municipalities? Mr. Daryl Reid, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair Mr. Lemieux: I thank the member for the question. We are, as was mentioned, putting more money into bridge infrastructure repairs and inspections, and a new announcement that adds more money to the provincial budget.

But I have to say that, with regard to that particular structure– in fact, there are a couple of structures there on No. 2, also 340–that one is, I use the term, a heritage bridge. It's a beautiful old timber bridge, it was, and the community has been in discussions with the department about exactly that. If they take it over, is there something else that the department could do, whether that's asphalt work or some kind of other work, because if the community wants to preserve that heritage bridge and keep it, that's something that is really important?

I know there are other works in the region that are taking place and I just want to put on the record, just for the information of members of the Chamber and others who are listening. Today the MLA for Minnedosa brought a petition in about the community of Forrest. We met with the community of Forrest; consulted with them. We looked at an underpass under the road and overpass No. 10–what should we do there? We have made a commitment that we're going to bypass the community of Forrest, and we're going to do so, I believe, starting next year, with its land purchase and design.

So I appreciate the member getting petitions from residents, but I hope the member would also clarify with those residents that want to put their name on a petition that it's a done deal. The Province is doing it, and we're going around Forrest. We're

482 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 also looking at possibly passing lanes on No. 10 north. So, not to take away from the petition that's come in to the Chamber, but it's already done. We're doing it through consultation, through the community. Well, it's a done deal. I know the member is saying it's not done when I'm telling the member if she takes a look at the five-year capital plan, it states right in there that we're going to be doing it.

So she can bring in as many petitions as she likes and that's great, but please inform the people that are signing it that the Province is doing it and it's going to be done. But, with regard to those bridges, we look forward to working with the community, and when we had to close down that road, we made some changes not to force traffic to go down No. 3 and go further south. We allowed traffic to use restricted roads and lifted those restrictions to have truck and trade travel at a different road, even though we lifted the restrictions or increased the restrictions amounts in order to assist trade.

Also, I contacted the mayor, I believe it was, of the community when we had to do that, and he understood that this occurred fairly quickly and that he appreciated the quick response to what we were doing. Mrs. Rowat: Just so that the minister is clear on my question, the bridge in question is No. 10 bridge and–I'm sorry, on No. 2 highway, the bridge on No. 2 highway is the one that was in question when the municipality was approached to say: If you take over the maintenance of that bridge, we will look at paving 340.

I take issue with those types of things happening, because if you do have a five-year plan, this community has been working really hard to have 340 paved. Yes, the petitions have come forward, but they've come forward through individuals within the community, and it's their right to put a petition together and have the government aware that this is something that they want government's attention to. I believe it's their right through a democratic process.

Now, I guess the question to me is why would the department want to be looking at trying to offload the responsibility of a bridge, especially when the government thumped its chest on how important and how committed it was to the bridge infrastructure and how much money they were pouring into it, and in the same breath they're trying to offload the responsibilities of a bridge within a community onto a municipality. Then putting out a carrot saying: Well, if you consider this, then we will look at 340, which is something that the community has been fighting for.

The community of Shilo, the community of Wawanesa, Shilo residents, people through PPCLI have been writing and requesting this to be considered. If it just takes one conversation, a meeting outside of a meeting, to make that happen, I'm really concerned. I believe that this should be done in good faith. There should be a plan, and I've indicated during the election that I don't really believe that there is a plan, and this has just confirmed that. There seems to be a question of flexibility here.

With regard to the people in the petition on Highway 10 and around the Forrest area, the only reason that that community put together this petition, Mr. Acting Chair, was because the minister did not want to meet with the community. They'd asked for meetings over and over and did not receive a response back from the minister. So they felt that this was one avenue that they could take to respond to the inaction of this minister in not wanting to meet with them.

So the petition was actually created and implemented and presented because there was no communication being provided to the community at the time that they wanted to discuss what the Province was presenting. I was at the meeting that the minister references when he met with the community and looked at the underpass concept. At that meeting, it was clearly outlined by the community re presentatives there that an underpass was not an acceptable option. An underpass, with the water table being as high as it is, would not be a solution that would work within that community. But money was spent.

Money was put out to do a study which the community says, and still says, was not required, that they knew right from the start that that water level was too high and would not be an option. So back to that petition, that petition came forward because there was not an opportunity to meet with the minister to share their concerns about where this project was going and how it was going. With regard to the status of the bypass at Forrest, I'd like to know what the status is on this project. There've been announcements made. Has land acquisition process started? Where are they at on this?

Is this something that will be on target or is it going to be like the No. 1 highway where we see continual announcements with changes of dates? Mr. Lemieux: Well, obviously, I've touched a sensitive button, and I know the MLA does a lot of hard work in the constituency. I don't want to take

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 483 away from that. But I also want to say, there's a number of questions that have been raised, so I'll try to go through them in a logical way. Number 1, everyone has a right to bring petitions in no matter what political stripe is in government, and we accept that. I've never said that that's a problem. What I did say is that maybe the MLA wants to point out, when she receives the petitions, that the project has been announced, has already moved forward, and it's going to be done.

Not only that, let me just point out if you'll check Hansard, on the one hand the MLA says the minister didn't want to meet. On the second si de, she says: Well, I was there when the minister was meeting with the community. * (15:40) If you want to check Hansard just to point that out, you'll see that on two sides of it; there are two mixed messages here. On the one side, the minister didn't want to meet with the community, and the second, she was present when the minister met with the community.

Not to make too fine a fine of it, but I take a great deal of pride in making my rounds and making my way around the province of Manitoba meeting with hundreds of individuals and municipalities, and this community was no different. Also, the department met with the community trying to resolve this. And I think a good solution to this was the community said: Mr. Minister, we think that the tunnel may not work. The department, please listen to us. We don't think the tunnel will work or an overpass will work. And so we listened to the community.

What we are doing is we're going to bypass the community and take the traffic away, from splitting the traffic between the two schools. I think the MLA would agree it's a great solution, but it was put forward by the community, and we're proud of the fact that we're doing this. With regard to PTH No. 10 around Forrest, grade, base and pavement, it's approximately $2 million in 2008 and '09, plus land acquisitions of another $200,000, plus utilities $400,000. So it's about a $2.5-million project that's going to take place, and I believe the residents of Forrest are going to be truly pleased with this.

And I also take exception with regard to Highway No. 1, the twinning going west. That highway is going to be opened this fall. Also, the MLA for Arthur -Virden (Mr. Maguire) mentioned how Saskatchewan opened the highway. That's not correct. They opened it for a short period of time, as I understand it. I've been advised to do work on the other side. It's currently not open. If the MLA for Arthur-Virden wants to go check today to see if it is open, they just opened it up temporarily. But, having said that, I just want to clarify the record just to make sure that the reco rd is clear.

As a minister I take a great deal of pride meeting with people, and I don't want to take away from the Member for Minnedosa's hard work as an MLA. I know she does, but I just want to point out that I work equally as hard to represent the citizens of Manitoba and the portfolio that I have. Mrs. Rowat: No. The minister is incorrect. He met with the community representatives. That would be the stakeholders way back in, I guess, a year and a bit ago. They had additional questions. This was a community group that had questions of the minister when the decision was made to do the bypass.

This community had made probably three or four e-mail requests, three or four telephone requests. They then approached me and said: How do we get the attention of the minister? He does not want to meet with us. This is coming from the community. This is their decision, and this is how they felt they wanted to communicate, and they believe that the deal was not done. They needed to have input in what they wanted to see happen within their community and feel that they were not being listened to.

I appreciate what the minister is saying, and I will stand by my community in saying that they felt that they were not being represented. So I will stick to continuing to put that petition forward because that is what they've asked me to do. I do consult with them before I go into session, and that was their choice, and it was their petition. As a representative, I'll read that petition until we run out of those petitions. As for the status of the land acquisition, could you tell me where you are at specifically on that project? Mr.

Lemieux: As I said, I didn't want to put too fine a point on it, but there has been a lot of consultation. The petition says: Would the minister please listen and the government of Manitoba and bypass the community. We are doing it. We've listened, and it's going to happen.

484 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 With regard to land acquisition, I believe there were a number of homes that need to be acquired, a piece of land to the west, on the west side of Forrest. I understand that those negotiations are ongoing, and I understand that they're quite successful, so I don't believe that land acquisit ion will necessarily be a challenge. Sometimes it is. Whether you're building a new bridge or repairing a new bridge or trying to replace that bridge, sometimes land acquisition is a challenge, as well as building new roads or twinning highways.

I understand there's a lot of co-operation here. It's not a case where people feel they've won a lottery just because it's been announced that there's going to be a new highway to bypass a community. I understand there's a lot of co-operation from the parents, from the community, from the landowners wanting to get this done. We equally want to ensure the safety of the students and the people of the community of Forrest.

Forrest is just literally five minutes away north of Brandon, and there are a lot of people who work in Brandon, whether it's a new shift at Maple Leaf or at a growing community like Brandon, and they like the idea of being able to commute back and forth. We recognize that, and we want to ensure that safety is paramount. If I could just add, Mr. Chairperson, that the department here–and the minister's not patting himself on the back–the department has really listened to the community.

When they said, could you put up those speed signs, not just, don't put up a sign that says slow down to 80 or 60 or 50; could you put a flashing speed sign, like a radar sign. When you're driving up, it’s a reminder to traffic: put on the brakes, because there's a reason to slow down. The department has made that, as I understand, more of a permanent item until we can get the bypass completed, just to, again, be of assistance to the community.

So I believe we're working with the community; we've taken their suggestions; we're doing everything we possibly can, humanly possible, to try to address this and expedite it as fast as we can. Mrs. Rowat: I guess I'm getting a non-answer for the status of the land acquisitions. There's none that have been completed, but it looks like there's been discussions. I know that the resident on the west side of the highway is not overly excited about acquisition and that, but I'm just going to leave it as, it's on my radar screen, it's on my community's radar screen.

I'll continue to ask questions on that and watch the progress of that, but we are being optimistic in that area. Just a maintenance issue on Highway 2 coming through the community of Souris: there were some repairs done on that highway, and I've had calls from town council, and also, residents within the community of Souris, who are very disappointed with the work that was done. Highway 2 goes right through the community of Souris. It's been extremely patchy, an embarrassment to the community leaders there.

If the minister would be so kind as to have a look at that and review that, I think that it needs to be looked at again before fall gets too far along the road. I live in that community, and I do agree with the municipality or the town on that. It was actually brought up by the R.M. of Glenwood, as well as the Town of Souris at both of my meetings, so you know, please–you're doing some work on the highways in around the communities. Please have another look at that and give it consideration. Mr. Lemieux: Well, I thank the MLA for Minnedosa for the suggestion. We'll certainly take a look at it.

I'm not appraised of what is the work that's taken place there specifically, but we certainly will take a look and make some inquiries with regard to Souris, and take a look at the area. I know that as a department, the department in the Brandon region, in the Brandon area, they'll work very closely with the communities and they'll try to– not only when we put a tender out or put the money out–we want to make sure that the job is done right. Sometimes, even, the municipalities are able to piggy-back on what we're doing, because there's a paving crew there or there's a company there doing some work.

They'll often have some of their streets done and so on. So we try to work closely with the communities and try to work with them in a way to figure out what's the best advantage for the taxpayer overall, and sometimes it really works out; it’s a real win-win for the community, to be able to do some extra work as well. It's something that we'll look into and certainly be able to get back to the MLA on.

Just a quick note, I mean, when I take a look at the Highway 10 plan overall over the next five years, I'm reminded that there's over $60 million are going to be spent on Highway 10, and many would argue that that's not enough. But Highway 10 is an important artery going to the United States, back and forth and into northern Manitoba, so you know, again, the MLA raised the question with regard to land acquisition. I don't want to negotiate in public

September 27, 2007 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 485 and I never will. Those negotiations are ongoing, so I can't get to the specifics as to how much money is being offered, or not, or where they're at, but we'll certainly appraise her as we proceed, to try to keep the MLA in the loop as to where we're going. Mrs. Rowat: Thank you, Mr. Chair. * (15:50) One other question: Rapid City, when I met with the community there, I learned something that was rather interesting, and I didn 't realize, but every road going into that community has restrictions.

So, at certain times of year when restrictions are in place, it's questionable how goods can come in and out of that community. A helicopter's not an option. I don't understand how every single road going into that community can have restrictions, and I don't know how that community can do business with, you know, trucks coming in. I don't know if the minister is aware of that and if his staff are aware of that. Do they have some options or solutions for that community? Because that's a big challenge. Mr.

Lemieux: I'll try to be courteous in my response, but I believe the MLA is incorrect again with regard to this issue. I don't think all the roads are restricted. I'll try to be fair on this answer. I pointed out that the MLA is incorrect; at least I'm advised, I think; I believe. But it's something that all MLAs take suggestions from their local elected officials, and sometimes the elected officials are not clear as to whether they know at a particular time whether a road is or not, so I always give the benefit of the doubt to all the MLAs asking questions.

They're doing the work on behalf of their communities, and sometimes the communities, when they pass on information, don't have the exact facts, you know, in an up-to-date way. So I will ask my department, and possibly, before my Estimates are complete, I'll be able to answer more fully and then the MLA will be able to pass that information back to those communities. We're certainly taking a look at it right now just to see if you're correct. If you are, it is a concern, no question about it, but I've been advised that that's not the case.

I'll try to get back to you through this forum in the next while, while I'm doing my Estimates, to try to clarify that. Mr. Maguire: I just want to reiterate what the Member for Minnedosa has just indicated. You know, we're talking about at Rapid City, with the map in front of me that I have, it's dealing with Provincial Road 270 and Highway 24. I think those are the ones that would be restricted heavily in the springtime. Mr. Chair, I have a number of questions that I want to go through with the minister's concurrence today.

We can move along quickly on those, and one of them deals with a circumstance around the Brandon airport in regard to air traffic in that area. I know there are a number of questions. I'd provide him with an opportunity to provide us with an update on the situation with rural airports around Manitoba, with Brandon's airport, also with the city of Winnipeg and the new airport authority here, his role in any of that that he wishes to comment on at this time as well. But the situation with Brandon is one of developing further business opportunities in that city.

It's one of safety, and it's one of being able to use the medivac better. I'm talking about whether or not the government would consider an instrument landing system in Brandon, an IL S system for the city of Brandon. It would meet the needs of the whole surrounding area.

I'm aware that NAV CANADA is supposed to be the one responsible for capital investments, I believe, in that kind of a situation, but if they aren't willing to do that, there is another area that the Province is then responsible for maintaining and operating along with the city, and I wonder if the minister has ever had anyone approach him about the Province being involved and putting up the capital and having someone else deal with the operating because, perhaps, the operating might end up being a greater cost than the investment in capital.

I would just ask the minister to comment on that if he could, as well as some of the other airport projects that he has. Mr. Lemieux: Well, No. 1, the Province is not responsible for Brandon airport. NAV CANADA or Transport Canada may want to infuse or inject monies into Brandon airport. There was a day when Canadian Air used to fly into Brandon, and I think many remember it fondly, those days that you could actually go into Brandon, fly into Brandon. There are a lot of impor tant issues around that because the community of Brandon is growing, and it's not going to stop. It's going to continue to boom and grow.

I know that many who have flown into the Brandon airport, it's in very good condition. At least I understand, since the last time I've gone there, but there was a day when Canadians–there used to be

486 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 27, 2007 regular flights from a na tional air carrier into Brandon. I think people look upon those days fondly because, if you're going to be a major player in a major city, people expect to have regular air traffic, and this is not just traffic flying inside of Manitoba, but actually international.

People used to be able to take flights out of Brandon and go to the United States, as I understand it, or go longer distances more west than east, or east and west, but you had an option and Canadian was actually looking at that and it's regrettable that those kind of things have happened. The Province of Manitoba, certainly, at this time it's certainly not prepared to inject huge amounts of money into Brandon airport. It's something that Transport Canada offloaded a lot of those airports onto the municipalities in those communities and they took them over.

Now, lo and behold, what happens a number of years later? they find out there's a huge bill with repairing their airstrips or the navigation systems and so on. So maybe the MLA can speak to Mr. Tweed. He's, I believe, on the transportation–I don't recall the proper name coming out of Parliament to Canada, the transportation committee of Canada. He's the Chair, and this may be an opportunity to talk to Mr. Tweed about what the current, the new Canadian government is going to do about the airport in Brandon.

As a provincial government we're responsible for, I stand to be corrected, I believe 24 airports in the province of Manitoba. We are proud of the fact that we're doing as much as we possibly can to assist those airports and to work with them to ensure that not only on the esthetics side that landing strips and the airports are well taken care of. Indeed we actually have staff at a number of those airports which NAV CANADA or Transport Canada certainly are not putting staff there but we have taken it upon ourselves to have staff at the airports. We also put a lot of money into the upkeep of those airports.

So we're proud of the fact–now I know talking about airports in northern Manitoba might be a sensitive issue, talking about the North, but I'm not going to go there. I know the MLA for Arthur-Virden well, and he has a good understanding of the north. That's why I made my tongue-in-cheek comment at Question Period t

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-1-11b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 1st hansardpdf 11b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0cf1142485a4c4a970a67dca7a7fd537688ac194

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