Manitoba Hansard — 20 April 2010 (Sitting 31B, 39th Legislature, 4th Session)

39-4-31b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth 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. LXII No. 31B - 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, April 20, 2010 ISSN 0542-5492

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. BLAIKIE, Bill, Hon. Elmwood 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.

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, Hon. 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. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P.

MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MARCELINO, Flor, Hon. 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, Hon. Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas N.D.P. WIEBE, Matt Concordia N.D.P. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

1053 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, April 20, 2010 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 24–The Aboriginal Languages Recognition Act Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I move that Bill 24, The Aboriginal Languages Recognition Act, be now read a first time. This is seconded by the Minister of Education (Ms. Allan). Mr.

Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, seconded by the honourable Minister for Education, that Bill 24, The Aboriginal Languages Recognition Act, be now read a first time. Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased to introduce The Aboriginal Languages Recognition Act. This bill recognizes Cree, Dakota, Dene, Inuktitut, Michif, Ojibway and Oji-Cree as the Aboriginal languages of Manitoba.

This bill also addresses a fundamental concern, namely, that across Canada that many Aboriginal languages are at a verge of being lost forever, so we want to, obviously, give recognition to the importance of retaining Aboriginal languages in order for Aboriginal people to retain their culture. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt to motion? [Agreed] Bill 301–The Salvation Army William and Catherine Booth College Incorporation Amendment Act Mr. Doug Marti ndale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education and Literacy (Ms.

McGifford), that Bill 301, The Salvation Army William and Catherine Booth College Incorporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation le Collège William et Catherine Booth de l'Armée du Salut, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, the purport of this amendment is to add the word "university" wherever the word "college" exists now in the Booth College act. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] PETITIONS Ophthalmology Services–Swan River Mrs.

Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition: The Swan Valley region has a high population of seniors and a very high incidence of diabetes. Every year, hundreds of patients from the Swan Valley region must travel to distant communities for cataract surgery and additional pre-operative and post- operative appointments. These patients, many of whom are sent as far away as Saskatchewan, need to travel with an escort who must take time off work to drive the patient to his or her appointments without any compensation.

Patients who cannot endure this expense and hardship are unable to have the necessary treatment. The community has located an ophthalmologist who would like to practise in Swan River. The local Lions Club has provided funds for the necessary equipment, and the Swan River Valley hospital has space to accommodate this service. The Minister of Health has told the Town of Swan River that it has in sufficient infrastructure and patient volumes to sup port a cataract surgery program; however, residents of the region strongly disagree.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Health to consider rethinking her refusal to allow an ophthalmologist to practise in Swan River and to consider working with the community to provide this service without further delay. This is signed by E. Cotton, M. Cotton, J.E. Cotton and many, many others, Mr. Speaker.

1054 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Bipole III Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Carman): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows: Manitoba Hydro has been forced by the NDP government to construct its next high-voltage direct transmission line, Bipole III, down the west side of Manitoba, a decision for which the NDP government has not been able to provide any logical justification.

Since this will cost Manitoba ratepayers at least $640 million more than an east-side route, and given that the Province of Manitoba is facing its largest deficit on record, the burden of this extra cost could not come at a worse time. Between 2002 and 2009 electricity rates increased by 16 percent, and Manitoba Hydro has filed a request for further rate increases totalling 6 percent over the next two years. A western Bipole III route will invariably lead to more rate increases.

In addition to being cheaper, an east-side route would be hundreds of kilometres shorter and would be more reliable than a west-side route. West-side residents have not been adequately consulted and have identified serious concerns with the proposed line. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to consider proceeding with the cheaper, shorter and more logical east-side route, subject to necessary regulatory approvals, to save ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars during these challenging economic times. And this petition is signed by K. Jones, H.

Dunn, J. Dales and many, many more fine Manitobans. Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: Manitoba Hydro has been forced by the NDP government to construct its next high-voltage direct transmission line, Bipole III, down the west side of the province of Manitoba, a decision for which the NDP government has not been able to provide any logical justification.

Since this will cost Manitoba ratepayers at least $640 million more than an east-side route, and given that the Province of Manitoba is facing its largest deficit on record, the burden of this extra cost could not come at a worse time. Between 2'02 and 2'09 electricity rates increased by 16 percent, and Manitoba Hydro has filed a request for a further incr ease in rates totalling 6 percent over the next two years. A western Bipole III route will invariably lead to more rate increases.

In addition to being cheaper, an east-side route would be hundreds of kilometres shorter and would be more reliable than a west-side route. West-side residents have not been adequately consulted and have identified serious concerns with the proposed line. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to consider proceeding with the cheaper, shorter and more logical east-side route, subject to necessary regulatory approvals, to save ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars during these challenging economic times. Mr. Speaker, this is signed by G. Van Renselaar, I.

Kennedy and L. Kennedy and many other very concerned Manitobans. Whiteshell Provincial Park–Lagoons Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition: Manitoba's provincial parks were established to protect our natural resources and the environment for future generations. In July 2009 the lagoons in the vicinity of Dorothy Lake and Otter Falls in the Whiteshell Provincial Park overflowed, creating concerns that untreated sewage made its way into the Winnipeg River system and ultimately into Lake Winnipeg.

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1055 In addition, emergency discharges had to be undertaken at lagoons in the Whiteshell Provincial Park four times in 2005, once in 2007 and once in April 2009. Concerned stakeholders in the Whiteshell Provincial Park have repeatedly asked the provincial government to develop plans to address the shortcomings of the park's lagoons and to ensure the environment is protected, but the plans have not materialized.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Conservation to consider acknowledging that more timely action should have been taken to address the shortcomings with the lagoons in the Whiteshell Provincial Park in order to protect the environment. * (13:40) To request the Minister of Conservation to consider immediately developing short- and long- term strategies to address the shortcomings with lagoons in the Whiteshell Provincial Park and to consider implementing them as soon as possible. And Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by J. Dooley, K. Sim, J.

Machado and many, many others. Medical Clinic in Weston and Brooklands Area Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: Walk-in medical clinics provide a valuable health-care service. The closure of the Westbrook Medical Clinic has left both Weston and Brooklands without a community-based medical clinic.

We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows: To urge the provincial government to consider how important it is to have a medical clinic located in the Weston and Brooklands area. Mr. Speaker, this is signed by G. Cadigan, C. Munro, R. Romeo and many other fine Manitobans. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the Manitoba Enabling Appropriations and Other Appropriations Supplementary Information for Legislative Review, 2010-11 Departmental Expenditure Estimates. 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 from Dakota Collegiate, we have 20 grade 9 students under the direction of Jordan Bronsdon. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister for Education. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you all here today. ORAL QUESTIONS Manitoba Hydro Public Utilities Board Information Request Mr.

Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Over and over again over the past while, the Public Utilities Board, which is in place in order to ensure transparency and accountability for Manitoba's Crown corporations, has raised concerns about secrecy, lack of accountability, misspending and other mismanagement within Manitoba's Crown corporations. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier why it is that in response to very significant questions about the transmission project, Manitoba Hydro with political direction stonewalled the PUB, failed to provide any meaningful response on these serious issues. Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, our directions to Manitoba Hydro are always to comply with the regulatory requirements under the legislation of which constitutes the Public Utilities Board, and we, of course, support the Public Utilities Board in their rate-setting responsibilities. And we expect Hydro to co-operate with them and work that out in such a way that, if they have any commercial interests that they're sensitive about in terms of disclosure of information, that they sort that out with the Public Utilities Board. Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Public Utilities Board Information Request Mr.

Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, Mr. Speaker, the response to a

1056 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 five-point–six-point question about the bipole project is Manitoba Hydro has no current information on a hypothetical east-side route. That's the response. That's not compliance. That's not disclosure. It's not being forthright and candid with the PUB and Manitobans. It's stonewalling and it's stonewalling for political purposes. And the stonewalling at Hydro, Mr.

Speaker, has now moved over to MPI, and the PUB, in its report, issued with respect to secr ecy at MPI, says, given its limited jurisdiction, the board is unable to adequately test MPI's overall expenditu res and forecasts. They go on to say that, we're not able to assure ourselves that all costs incurred represent efficient and effective spending. I want to ask the Premier: Why are they so obsessed with maintaining this culture of secrecy and hiding the facts, the information and the finances from the Manitobans who have to pay the bills, Mr. Speaker? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): As I said earlier, we fully expect any Crown corporation regulated by the Public Utilities Board to comply with requests and requirements of the Public Utilities Board with due regard to commercially sensitive information and to sort that out with the Public Utilities Board. That applies to MPI as well. And, as you know, Mr. Speaker, they fully disclose all their financial information through their own annual reports and their quarterly reports. Mr. McFadyen: Well, Mr.

Speaker, MPI and the Minister responsible for MPI are failing to live up to their regulatory requirements, and that's been documented–it's been documented by the PUB in its most recent report. It goes on to say in that very same document: Further, with respect to MPI's overall financial position, the board cannot adequately test either results or forecasts, steps that the board considers necessary to adequately assist it in reaching a conclusion on the appropriateness of basic rates, premiums and fees. Mr.

Speaker, the PUB has said that they don't have enough data to be able to properly examine the finances of MPI. MPI is now in the business of retail–as a retail landlord, selling French fries, offering massages, stir-fries, milk shakes and muffins in their new headquarters. They've rolled the dice on a retail operation, and they've refused to provide Manitobans with most basic facts about their internal finances. I want to ask the Premier: Why the secrecy? What are he and his MPI Minister trying to hide from Manitobans? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the member asks a question about the role of MPI.

MPI is responsible to the Public Utilities Board for their public lines of operation and the rates they set related to that. The PUB gives a jurisdictional decision with respect to those rates. If they want additional information and there's a question of jurisdiction, there are mechanisms to address that. I understand that this will be going to the Manitoba Court of Appeal, and the Public Utilities Board and MPI will both have a full opportunity to present their views on this matter and to resolve it in a way that serves the public interest.

Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Public Utilities Board Information Request Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Oh, Mr. Speaker, for five years running, the Public Utilities Board has been concerned about MPI' s lack of transparency. And in their most recent or der, the PUB said, and I quote: The board has once again been unable to assure itself that all costs incurred represent efficient and effective spending. With its limited jurisdiction and MPI's lack of transparency as to the details of its overall costs, the board cannot be assured that the costs being allocated to basic are fair and reasonable. Unquote.

How can Manitobans be assured that Autopac rates are not set artificially high when this NDP government refuses to be transparent and accountable to the PUB? Hon. Andrew Swan (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act): It's a pleasure to put some comments on the record about the best insurance system in all of Canada, providing the best value for Manitoba consumers. The member opposite needs to understand that there are two separate areas in which MPI conducts its business. One is as a monopoly. Basic auto insurance, they do have a monopoly situation in Manitoba.

That is why the Public Utilities Board has the authority to set its rates, to examine any information that may deal with that monopoly. At the same time, MPI also has competitive lines of insurance. Manitobans have a choice on those lines of insurance. They can purchase MPI products.

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1057 They can choose to purchase other kinds of products. MPI has taken the position that is not information that need be disclosed to the PUB. Mrs. Taillieu: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Public Insurance annual report of 2008 indicates that Manitoba's insurance rates are the fourth in the country, not the best. Mr. Speaker, the Public Utilities Board has made a number of recommendations in the most recent order, most of which this government has ignored.

For example, the PUB said government should look at the responsibility–or possibility of discounting premiums on vehicles for retired seniors because they're not eligible to receive the weekly indemnity benefits under the personal information protection plan. They're paying for something and they're getting nothing, Mr. Speaker. So I'd like to ask the minister: When is this government going to stop treating Manitoba's seniors like their cash cow, and when are they going to start paying attention to the recommendations of the PUB? Mr.

Swan: Now the member is asking about basic types of insurance in Manitoba, which is governed by the Public Utilities Board. And if she will examine reports–if you'll examine the Public Utilities Board reports, she will see that MPI does comply with the Public Utilities Board. And when she's gone to her mailbox–I believe it's six of the past eight ye ars–she will have noticed in the spring she has received a rebate cheque from Manitoba Public Insurance. Try that with a private insurer, Mr.

Speaker. * (13:50) Because the Public Utilities Board has indicated its view of how much of a reserve should be kept by MPI, whether the rates are reasonable–and I'm very pleased that MPI has continued to maintain its rates while at the same time providing rebates to the member for Morris and everybody else who has MPI insurance in this province. Mrs. Taillieu: Well, Mr. Speaker, it's interesting that last year nobody got a rebate from MPI, and this year either. So why is that?

The Public Utilities Board has noted that a number of problems with driver and vehicle licensing, which the NDP government offloaded onto MPI in 2004. This NDP government has hidden this information from the Public Utilities Board, and they've offloaded that cost, which is $45 million over the last five years, to Manitoba drivers, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister tell this House: Are Autopac rates set artificially high because the NDP have offloaded driver and vehicle licensing on MPI and hidden the real costs to the PUB? Mr. Swan: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank the member from Morris for disproving her own conspiracy theory. The reason why there have not been rebates in the last two years is because the Public Utilities Board did not tell MPI to send them out. MPI listens to the Public Utilities Board and basic insurance issues, and that, I hope, will put that matter to rest. In terms of driver and vehicle licensing, indeed, Manitobans enjoy the best coverage at the best price in all of Canada, and every year, Mr. Speaker, it's the responsibility of MPI to put together its information to justify its basic insurance cost.

If the Public Utilities Board does not agree with that, then MPI will make the necessary change. The disagreement is with the competitive lines of insurance. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for Morris, on a new question. Mrs. Taillieu: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Well, the reason we didn't see a rebate in 2008, because it wasn't an election year, and I caution the member for putting false information on the record. Manitoba does not have the best rates in the country. Mr.

Speaker, by now, even the NDP must realize that their enhanced ID car d and enhanced driver's licence initiative has been a complete flop, and a costly one at that. They spent $14 million on this enhanced driver's licence, even though MPI did research and proved that it wasn't something that Manitobans were interested in, but the NDP forged ahead with this $14-million pet project. So, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the minister responsible: Are MPI rates higher than what they should be because NDP needs to pay for their wasteful enhanced ID cards?

Why are they hiding this information from the Public Utilities Board? Mr. Swan: Mr. Speaker, and let me try to explain again to the member from Morris. There have been rebates in many of the last few years, which have been ordered by the Public Utilities Board. Manitoba Public Insurance respects the words of the Public

1058 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 Utilities Board with respect to basic insurance and has sent out those benefits. It is also strange that the member from Morris, who represents her constituents in southern Manitoba, who were among the biggest proponents of enhanced driver's licences and enhanced IDs, and I believe the member was present the other night with the insurance brokers of Manitoba, who have been great partners in terms of the enhanced ID program, in terms of enhanc ed driver's licence. They tell us that it's a good thing for Manitobans to have that option. Mrs. Taillieu: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to draw the minister's attention to yet another example of MPI mismanagement from the public–PUB's most recent order. The number of MPI staff working for Autopac basic has gone from 1,365 staff in 2003 to 1,990 staff in 2009, and the number's projected to increase to 2,136, a 56 percent increase in staff. And, across MPI, there are 102 external consultants at MPI according to the PUB order–102 external consultants. Mr. Speaker, can the minister tell the House: Are Autopac rates higher than they should be because ratepayers are subsidizing the NDP's bloated bureaucracy at MPI?

Why are they hiding this information from the PUB? Mr. Swan: Mr. Speaker, I'm glad the member for Morris has put it clear on th e record that she hates public auto insurance in Manitoba,

whereas Manitobans know that they receive the best service and the best rates. Let me put some facts on the record for the members opposite who don't like MPI– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Let's have a little decorum here. Order. Let's have a little decorum here. I need to be able to hear the questions and the answers. Mr. Swan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will put some facts on the record which may be helpful to the member for Morris (Mrs. Taillieu) and others.

Manitoba–because we are hoping that we can all learn something in this House, and I think the members opposite would be well-advised and listen to the answer. Manitoba has experienced long-term auto insurance cost stability over the past 11 years, from 1999 to 2009, when their favoured private systems across the country have been jacking up people's automobile premiums. In Manitoba those rates have included–have increased only a 1.3 percent per year, and the past 12 years the corporation– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mrs. Taillieu: Mr. Speaker, what I hate is the waste and mismanagement of this NDP government. Mr.

Speaker, I want to return again to the issue that has been of the utmost concern to the Public Utilities Board: MPI's total lack of transparency and unwillingness to open its books. The PUB, which is acting in the best interests of Manitobans, has repeatedly asked this government to direct MPI to share information that the boa rd needs in order to set Autopac rates fairly. But for five years the NDP have refused to make MPI transparent and accountable.

So I'd like to ask the minister: Is the real reason he's refusing to make MPI more transparent is because Autopac rates are actually subsidizing MPI's competitive line or are they simply subsidizing MPI– NDP government spending? Mr. Swan: Well, Mr. Speaker, the fact is that MPI has operating costs which are half of those in the private system. MPI has returned–MPI– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Let's not try and shout one another down, please. Order. This is time for questions and answers.

If members don't want to listen to the questions or listen to the answers, I invite you back to your office again because this is the time for questions and answers and the person that has the floor has the right to be heard, and also I need to hear the questions and the answers in case there's a breach of a rule. So I'm asking the co- operation of all honourable members, please. The honourable minister has the floor. Mr. Swan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I point out to the member opposite that in the past 12 years the corporation has held the line or reduced premiums for auto insurance 11 times.

And I also point out that MPI pays out 89 cents of every premium dollar to Manitobans in the form of claims benefits. The Canadian industry average is just 65 to 70 cents of every dollar. If the member opposite wants to send money to Toronto or Montreal or New York she can try, but on this side of the House we support MPI. We have the best insuranc e system returning almost all of people's premium dollars to benefits for people right here in Manitoba, and I'm very proud of that fact.

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1059 Manitoba Hydro Public Utilities Board Information Request Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, the Public Utilities Board is seen as the protector of the Manitoba consumer. Checks and balances must be put into place for Crown monopolies like Manitoba Hydro. Prior to the upcoming rate hearings, the Public Utilities Board has asked Manitoba Hydro to answer some very legitimate questions.

Those questions asked Manitoba Hydro to compare the east-side line with the west-side line as it pertains to capital cost, operating costs, transmission-line loss, converter costs and capacity. Manitoba Hydro, Mr. Speaker, has refused to answer. Th eir response was one of total disdain and disrespect to the Public Utilities Board. * (14:00) Will the minister responsible for the Public Utilities Board not insist that Manitoba Hydro be fully compliant with the PUB's request? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): The minister responsible for the Public Utilities Board does what he should do, which is not interfere with the Public Utilities Board. It's an independent body. The members that are appointed are there to do their job without fear or favour, to ask the questions they deem relevant, and for the member to suggest that we should interfere would only cause enormous problems. And the member knows that, and he's pursuing a false path of trying to compromise the independence of the Public Utilities Board. Mr. Borotsik: Mr.

Speaker, the members of the Public Utilities Board are appointed by the minister. The minister is abdicating his responsibility. Rather than excuses, bluffs and bravado from the Prime– from the Premier or from the minister responsible, the minister should be asking for transparency and compliance by Manitoba Hydro. The Public Utilities Board needs the comparables to hold the utility accountable. To have Manitoba Hydro hide this information from the board is tantamount to contempt. If answers are not forthcoming, the upcoming hearing will be a farce and all confidence will be lost in the Public Utilities Board.

Will the Premier not insist that Manitoba Hydro provide that information so all ratepayers have the information from Manitoba Hydro? Mr. Selinger: I appreciate the enthusiasm with which the member has put the question. I thought it was pretty good. And I would say this, Mr. Speaker, we have always made it clear that the Public Utilities Board, as an independent body, has the right to demand what it wants for info rmation. We've always encouraged the Crown corporations to comply with that, subject to any concerns they have about commercial disclosure that would compromise their commercial interests.

They have the right to make those points to the Public Utilities Board. The Public Utilities Board has the tools to require compliance if they wish to do so, and we fully expect them to do their job, and we fully expect the Crowns to do the job, and we do not intervene politically, as the member has requested, to force them to do things that they think are inappropriate given their jurisdictional and legislative mandate. Mr. Borotsik: Mr. Speaker, talk about irony, talk about political.

One of the questions that was asked by the PUB was to confirm that the decision on the routing on the west side of the province has been mandated by the provincial government. Mr. Speaker, this Premier was the one that demanded that it go down the west side, but the answer, Mr. Speaker, that came back from the Manitoba Hydro was that the Hydro-Electric Board has determined that a west-side route for Bipole III was the best option to proceed with, given that the east-side route was not available. This Premier told them that the west–the east-side route was unavailable.

I'm extremely disappointed in the Premier's response. What is Manitoba Hydro trying to hide? What is the Premier trying to hide? And what is this NDP government, Mr. Speaker, trying to hide? Come clean. Why will the minister not insist that Manitoba Hydro provide the east-side comparisons? Mr. Selinger: Manitoba Hydro commissioned the Farlinger report. One of the important conclusions in the Farlinger report was that the decision on the bipole had broad public policy implications and they should seek direction from government on those broad public policy questions. They did that.

The government responded accordingly, setting out their views about the broad public policy questions and those questions resulted in the government suggesting to Manitoba Hydro that there were significant risks to the reputation of the corporation

1060 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 and to the product being sold to the American marketplace that could compromise Manitoba Hydro's future interest commercially. They also indicated their desire as a government to pursue the UNESCO Worl d Heritage designation on the east side for the betterment of all Manitobans, for the benefits that will be abundantly clear in terms of it being a carbon storehouse and for the protection of the integral pristine boreal forest on the east side. Those are all large questions for which the government has a responsibility to give their views.

Manitoba Hydro Bipole III Boreal Forest Impact Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the problem with the answer he's just given is that he wrote the letter directing the board of Manitoba Hydro before the Farlinger report was comple te and released. It was his directive. The report that came in afterward was designed to try to justify his decision after the fact, and that report, in fact, said that there's as much forest on the west side, in fact, more that's in danger as a result of this decision. The boreal forest runs from Alaska to Québec.

It's east, north and west of the lakes, Mr. Speaker, and they're going to cut more on the west side then they will on the east side. Why doesn't the Premier–why doesn't he just come clean and acknowledge the fact that he got a bunch of e-mails from Cape Cod, he got spooked, and that's what drove this decision, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the member has again missed the point of the entire opportunity to protect the pristine, intact boreal forest on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, a once-in- a-lifetime opportunity to protect that, to get a world- class UNESCO designation which will provide enduring benefits to the people on the east side as well as to all Manitobans. The members would like to just basically hack that apart with their rough-and- ready approach to the way they would develop bipoles down the east side of Lake Winnipeg.

Not only would it compromise the UNESCO World Heritage designation, as the Premier of Newfoundland discovered when he tried to put a hydro line through a UNESCO World Heritage Site called Gros Morne in Newfoundland, and he found that that was of such enormous consequence and controversy that he withdrew that decision. Surely we can learn from other jurisdictions on how to protect forest and how to develop hydro lines. On this side of the House, we prepare to learn and prosper. On their side of the House, they prefer to deny and pull us backward into the '90s. Mr. McFadyen: Mr.

Speaker, he needs to speak to his minister of highways, who's got out the chain saw and is ripping through the east-side forest as we speak. They're cutting down trees. They had dynamite when I was up th ere. They were blasting rock; it was flying in every direction. They're blasting the rock. They're cutting down the trees. They're mowing down the forest. He needs to get a report from his highways minister so in the House he gets his facts right. The former UNESCO chair says he's wrong. The CEO of Hydro says he wrong. In reality, what happened, Mr.

Speaker, is that he had years of studies done by the engineers and experts at Hydro, including the CEO of Hydro and others, who recommended the east-side route as being the only available option. And what happened, Mr. Speaker, is they got a bunch of e-mails from well-meaning but uninformed people in the United States who cranked up the e-mail machine as part of an NRDC fundraising drive. They got the e-mails, which he has refused to table so far to justify his decision.

And when he was confronted with a choice: Do I take the advice of the engineers, the environmental experts and the financial experts at Hydro, or do I make decisions based on e-mails? I'll go with the e-mails. Isn't that what he did, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Selinger: What we did was take the advice that came to us through the Farlinger report. We looked at the opportunities in Manitoba. The Farlinger report clearly indicated that there was more intensive development on the west side of the province and that there was not the intact boreal forest which is available and as yet unspoiled on the east side of the province.

So we had an opportunity to pursue both the UNESCO World Heritage de signation as well as additional reliability for Manitoba Hydro, additional reliability and addition al transmission capacity, because we plan to proceed past Wuskwatim to Keeyask and Conawapa to build our hydro-electric resources in Manitoba.

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1061 Now, the member seems to be concerned about the fact that there's a road on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. The road is a response to the fact that winter roads are no longer viable. That seems to be connected to climate change, which the members don't even acknowledge exists. Mr. McFadyen: The problem, Mr. Speaker, is that this forest that he claims to be so concerned about is being chain sawed and blasted as we speak, right now, by his highways minister, who obviously he hasn't spoken to. It's the hypocrisy of the position. The reality, Mr.

Speaker, is that there's boreal forest that's being cut through on both routes and, in fact, the total forest being cut on the west side is more than the forest being cut on the east side. The reality is that they got spooked by the NRDC, which is running this campaign, the NRDC which is opposed to Gull, opposed to Keeyask, opposed to Wuskwatim, opposed to power lines, opposed to Manitoba Hydro, but, Mr. Speaker, they do have a soft spot in their heart for clean coal. I want to ask the Premier: Why is he being intimidated by lovers of clean coal and haters of Manitoba Hydro? * (14:10) Mr.

Selinger: On page 7 of the Farlinger report, it clearly reads as follows: The forested areas of the west side are much more intensively developed than on the east side, with roads, rail lines, geotechnical survey lines and transmission lines, as well as forestry and mining operations. The west side has a long history of mining, forestry, hyd ro-electric developments, settlements and related infrastructure so they're not found in the core parts of the east side. The statements are very clear, Mr. Speaker. The member opposite would like to attribute motives to our decision.

The decision was one we made before the 2007 election and which we ran upon. The decision was to protect the east side as a unique pristine boreal forest to seek a UNESCO World Heritage designation for its ecological attributes as well as its cultural attributes, which give it double saliency when it comes to UNESCO World Heritage designation. At the same time, after years of neglect by members opposite when they were in office, we decided to pursue additional reliability for Manitoba Hydro so we could not only protect Hydro's electric provision to Manitoba but have increased exports so we're all better off.

Lucentis Medication Coverage Dispersal Sites Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, it took a great deal of pressure applied to the Minister of Health to a pprove the drug Lucentis to treat patients with macular degeneration. As of June the 1st treatments will be paid for by the Province. Manitoba, however, Mr. Speaker, was one of the last provinces to do so. There still seems to be a great deal of confusion, however. The announcement said that all retinal specialists could prescribe Lucentis through a program operating out of the Misericordia hospital.

To the Minister of Health: Does this mean that all injections have to be administered at the Misericordia or will all retinal specialists in the province be able to treat their patients at their own offices, as they have done in the past, fully paid for by the Province? Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I can let the member know that all retinal specialists in the province will have access to the new program with Lucentis.

It is starting at the Misericordia centre to begin with and as we develop the program it's our intent to phase it in across the rest of the province, but as the program begins it will be at the Eye Care Centre of Excellence at Misericordia to which retinal specialists will have access. Mr. Borotsik: Mr. Speaker, that certainly is one of the major concerns of the patients that suffer with macular degeneration.

If their retinal specialist, who they've been having treatments from over the past, don't wish to or aren't able to access Misericordia hospital, and they can still administer the treatment in their own offices, does that mean that patient, for the time being, will have to pay the $950 for the treatment to the retinal specialist at his or her office and not be able to get any kind of recovery from the Province of Manitoba for his time? Ms. Oswald: Mr.

Speaker, the No. 1 concern that we have heard from individuals who can benefit from the use of Lucentis, of course, was the coverage of the cost, and that's why, starting on June the 1st, that the Province of Manitoba will provide this program

1062 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 to Manitobans who need Lucentis. They'll be able to access the important treatment with no deductible and at no cost, indeed, the most affordable approach in the country. This approach is starting at the Misericordia centre of excellence. It's not like prescribing a pill, Mr. Speaker, it is an injection into an eye. It's a complex process that we're going to work through with professionals, and our intent is to phase out into other areas of the province.

The No. 1 concern that we heard was the coverage of the cost, and that's exactly what this program will do, the best one in the country. Mr. Borotsik: Well, it's obvious, Mr. Speaker, that the minister isn't listening to other concerns from patients who suffer from macular degeneration. They do have and have a confidence in their own specialist, their own retinal specialist, they have a confidence.

If that specialist does not access to treatment from Misericordia and has the treatment in their own office, I take it from the non-answer from the minister, that that treatment will have to be funded by the individual. Mr. Speaker, if that's the case, does the Minister of Health not believe that th at in fact is a two-tier health-care system? Ms. Oswald: And I'll say to the member again that when we announced this program to begin June 1st to cover all costs of individuals receiving a Lucentis treatment–no deductible, at no cost to the patient– that it will begin at the Misericordia centre.

It's a new program that's being developed. All retinal specialists in Manitoba will have access to clinic space at Misericordia. They're welcome to do that. Again, we're going to continue to work on this program and develop it and phase it out. For now, the program will be at Misericordia, the complete cost of which will be covered there, in hospital, as is the case for other hospital drugs. And we're going to continue to develop the program. For now, we're listening to the No. 1 concern of patients, which is covering the cost, which we're doing best in the country. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Kyoto Targets Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, Manitoba's Kyoto targets are to be reached by 2012 and involve a reduction of about 4.4 megatonnes of greenhouse gases. And yet, instead of going toward this goal of reducing emissions, the NDP government is going in the opposite direction and increasing emissions. In the past, when the Premier couldn't meet legislated financial targets, rather than meet the targets, the Premier changed the legislation. You know, what a world we would have if every time a criminal broke the law, the law was changed so the crime was no longer illegal. Is that what the Premier wants?

Now four times yesterday, the Premier was asked if he'd commit to keeping the targets instead of changing the legislation, but he wouldn't. I ask, again: Will the Premier commit to Manitobans that his government will keep their Kyoto targets rather than changing the legislation to cover up their failure to protect the environment? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, and I appreciate the member agai n raising the issue about greenhouse gas emissions. It is true that, in '07-08, they went up 0.2 megatonnes, 0.9 of 1 percent, and that was not the direction that we wanted emissions to go.

And it's also true that we have a commitment, through the legislation the member has referenced, to meet Kyoto targets by specified dates, and it is our intention to continue to pursue ways and means that will allow us to achieve those targets. Some of the things that we've done already are to bring in a biodiesel mandate, the first in the country, which builds on top of an ethanol mandate. We have very extensive residential energy-efficiency programs in the province now, commercial energy- efficiency programs, institutional energy-efficiency programs.

We've provided significant incentives for geothermal installations. Of course, Manitoba Hydro is always looking for ways to continue to offer hydro-electricity throughout North America to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. So we will be taking a number of initiatives to continue to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Manitoba. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, for almost 10 years, I've been calling on this government to have a real plan for reducing emissions in each major area where greenhouse gases are being produced in Manitoba, as for example agriculture.

And, yet, in 10 years, the NDP have not yet produced a coherent, comprehensive plan for reducing agricultural emissions and, as a result, agricultural emissions keep on going up and up. In fact, they're up 34 percent since 1990.

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1063 I ask the Premier: Is he really committed to meeting the Kyoto targets, and when's he going to present a real plan for reducing agricultural emissions, or is he going to weasel out of the targets by changing legislation? And why is the Premier, if he wants to reduce agricultural emissions, reducing staffing in his agro-environment sector by $176,000? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the member raises important issues about how to reduce agricultural emissions.

There are many very positive practices in the agricultural sector already, which have created a solid base to start from. For example, zero-till practices, that many farmers follow already, not only for the protection of soil erosion, but also to protect the amount of emissions that come out of those practices. It should be noted that we contribute 3 percent of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions, and we are 3.8 percent of the population. So we all–we start in a very favourable position.

And from that favourable position, we look for additional opportunities, including in agriculture, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the future and, at the same time, to allow agriculture to continue to thrive in Manitoba. Brian Sinclair Death WRHA Information Release Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, for over 34 hours, Brian Sinclair sat in an emergency at the Health Sciences Centre, given no attention. And the government did its best–the Minister of Health did her best in terms of trying to spread misinformation and cover up exactly what had taken place. Mr.

Speaker, I've received a very disturbing e-mail–and it raises a great deal of concern–from a family member of the late Brian Sinclair. WRHA still refuses to release critical information, information dealing with security videotapes, internal e-mails and others. * (14:20) I'm looking to the Minister of Health and asking the Minister of Health: Will she instruct the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority to co-operate and start releasing all critical information that's relevant to discovering why it is this most serious tragedy has ever occurred in the province of Manitoba, and it is likely the worst incident, Mr.

Speaker. Will the minister come clean and tell the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority to start releasing the information? Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): I can inform the member that the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority has already long since committed to release all materials to the inquest that's going to be held very shortly. Forest Firefighting Purchase of Water Bombers Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, the fire program of Manitoba Conservation has already reported 50 wildfires so far this year. Conditions now are warm and dry.

Northern Manitoba could well be threatened with a very active forest-fire season. Can the Minister of Conservation please inform the House today what our government is doing to improve our ability to fight fires? Hon. Bill Blaikie (Minis ter of Conservation): Mr. Speaker, this morning I was glad to join with the Premier (Mr. Selinger) and the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure (Mr. Ashton), who announced that four new water bombers will be added to the province's forest-fire fighting arsenal.

The new 415 triple-drop water bomber aircraft from Bombardier Aerospace will be a substantial upgrade to our equipment, and they'll be faster, they'll carry more water and they're going to make a big difference when they are deployed. And the first one will be delivered to Manitoba in October, and we look forward to that delivery and the delivery of three other new vehicles as an addition to our fleet. It's part of our long-term commitment to protecting Manitoba communities and Manitoba forests. And, while I'm at it, Mr.

Speaker, I will want to compliment all those who are involved in the forest firefighting service here in Manitoba. Oil Industry Transportation Concerns Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, rural Manitobans in the agriculture and oil industries of southwest Manitoba are concerned with this government's lack of infrastructure support for these industries during the spring season. These industries are greatly generating economic benefits for this government, yet this government is failing to acknowledge their needs, particularly in the ballooning petroleum industry. As an example, Mr.

Speaker, of where no direct cost to government would be incurred, can the minister of transport te ll concerned citizens and

1064 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 truckers of petroleum to the Cromer pumping station whether or not he is alleviating traffic on PR 255 this spring by allowing empty trucks to return on Highway 2 via Highway 256? If so, will this practice be continued in the future or is it only a one-year reprieve? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, one of the things that the Department of Infrastructure and Transportation is doing is keeping up with the tremendous growth in this province.

I'm very proud of the growth in southwest Manitoba, and I want to acknowledge–I know the member has raised issues with regards to that. Mr. Speaker, members opposite may not want to listen to the answer on this, but I certainly welcome– now we've had discussions with the member opposite about some of the impacts in terms of particular routes out there, but I want to put on the record–a lot of this, again, is because this province is growing and that includes our petroleum sector. And that's why we have increased the highway construction budget fourfold since we came into government in 1999. Mr. Speaker: Order.

Time for oral questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Aboriginal Circle of Educators Awards Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to recognize four Manitobans who are recipients of this y ear's Aboriginal Circle of Educators Awards. Every year the Aboriginal Circle of Educators recognizes individuals who pass on Aboriginal traditions to children and youth through education. When Manitoba's Aboriginal people succeed, the diversity benefits all of us, which is why it is important to recognize leaders and teachers who are dedicated to working with Aboriginal youth.

Sharon Conway is currently a provincial education consultant for the Manitoba Métis Federation. She has worked as a teacher in the Winnipeg School Division and developed Aboriginal curriculum for all grade levels. She has also created a number of provincial teaching manuals. In addition, Sharon was asked by the Manitoba Métis Federation to co-ordinate Standing Tall, a community initiative to keep students in school. Robert Riel, another award winner, has had a long career in education. He has worked as a teacher, a librarian, as well as vice-principal and principal at Niji Mahkwa School. Mr.

Riel is passionate about education and provides students a firm foundation in their cultural heritage. R obert also serves on a number of division committees and is chair of the Aboriginal educational committee for the inner city district. Shirley Delorme Russell will graduate this spring with a degree in education and a diploma in Aboriginal languages. She currently works at the Louis Riel Institute helping students to find financial assistance for pursuit of education. As a result of her community involvement, Shirley has received over $50,000 in scholarships and bursaries.

She also develops teachers' resources and does presentations on the Métis people. Dr. Raoul McKay has taught Aboriginal culture and history at both the high school and post- secondary levels. He was involved in the creation of the Indigenous Studies program at McMaster University, the Métis exhibit at the National Museum of the American Indian, and Dr. McKay was the founding head of the Native Studies Department at the University of Manitoba. Raoul was also a founder of First Voice Multimedia and believes in using multimedia as a way to educate others about Aboriginal culture.

I would like to congratulate each of these individuals on their outstanding leadership that they provide to their community. Thank you. Arnold Spohr Hon. Jennifer Howard (Minister of Labour and Immigration): Mr. Speaker, Winnipeg and the world recently lost an artistic icon and inspiration to many, and I stand to recognize that individual, Arnold Spohr. Mr. Spohr, known internationally as a tenacious artistic force, grew up in Winnipeg's North End. He discovered at a young age that he had a talent for artistic expression.

An accomplished pianist, Arnold attended his first ballet as a teenager and was instantly captivated. He quickly became a leading dancer and, as his talent flourished, his presence in Winnipeg's art scene became widely known. In 1958, he became the artistic director of the Royal Winnipeg Ballet, the first Canadian to lead a professional Canadian ballet company, a title he retained for 30 years. His relentless pursuit of perfection led him to study teaching methods and choreography in England, the Soviet Union, Asia, Europe, South America and Australia, and earned his

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1065 troupe international acclaim on the world stage. He was described as a giant, who put his heart and soul into his vision. His dedication is responsible for making the Royal Winnipeg Ballet an internationally renowned institution. Mr. Spohr led the company to excellence through taking chances on innovative Canadian ballets, such as The Ecstasy of Rita Joe , mounting full-scale classics such as Swan Lake and supporting the careers of world-class ballerinas. He helped dancers tell Canadian stories as well as revitalizing the ballet canon.

The ambitious Spohr was recognized for his work numerous times. He won a dance magazine award for his enormous contributions to the growth of dance, possessed several honorary doctorates and won the Governor General's Performing Arts Award, the Molson Prize and the Canada Dance Award. He was a well-deserving member of the Order of Manitoba and a companion of the Order of Canada. Mr. Speaker, Arnold Spohr's contributions to the art of ballet will be missed, but his legacy will continue to live on in the spirit of dance in Manitoba and around the globe. I invite all members to recognize his accomplishments.

Thank you. National Victims of Crime Awareness Week Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, every member of this House knows the devastating effect that crime has on in dividuals every day across our province. Each time someone is victimized, they lose a feeling of security of their own home or they are afraid to leave their house at night. Many people who have experienced crime are bullied into staying quiet or fear that they have nothing to gain from coming forward.

However, we know that hearing from victims and allowing them opportunities to share what happened helps strengthen our justice system and provides an opportunity for closure. This is why we need to all participate in events such as the National Victims of Crime Awareness Week which began on Sunday. Crime and its victims take many forms. There are seniors who are taken advantage of; there are women who experience sexual assault; and there are children and youth who are exploited by people who are close to them. Crime does not discriminate based on age or race and the effects permeate throughout our society.

However, it is important that we help all people who have experienced crime mitigate the feeling of victimization, and help them recover from their experiences. This week, all across the country, events are being held not only to recognize the victims of violence and crime but that encourage our communities to support these individuals as they grow and regain their confidence.

For every example in Ottawa, there is a national–for example, in Ottawa there is a national symposium called Every Victim Matters that includes seminars on the impacts of crime and how it provides services to individual victims and to their families. Mr. Speaker, it's also important that we recognize victims of crime by working to prevent the same actions from repeating themselves.

By incorporating the experiences of victims it is possible to build a stronger and more resilient justice system that protects future generations of Manitobans. * (14:30) I ask all members of this House to join me in recognizing the victims of crime and preventing the cycle of violence by providing support to victims and strengthening the arm of justice in our province. Thank you very much. Poppa Rick's Kettle Corn Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, entrepreneurial spirit is often what drives local economies and unites community members.

Today, I would like to recognize Poppa Rick's Kettle Corn, a little business in my community of Cranberry Portage that is making a big impression. Run by Rick and Pat Petryk, Poppa Rick's Kettle Corn was established last summer after their nephew was extremely successful with a similar venture in Winnipeg. Rick and Pat were on a quest for a new avenue in life and saw a niche market for the tasty treat in the North, so they decided to take a chance. After purchasing their equipment, business began to take off.

They started by selling their kettle corn in the Flin Flon Walmart parking lot, which raised their profile in the area. Soon after, they were being invited to set up shop at different community events. The art of popping kettle corn is half the allure for their customers. The Petryks set up their equipment under a canopy, and with the right measurements of corn, sugar and oil, the kernels are popped until they are ready to go through a sifter and

1066 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 be bagged, sealed and sold. The result is a mouth- watering serving of fresh popcorn. I should know as I'm personally addicted to their excellent popcorn; I've eaten bushels of it. Summer will be an important time for Poppa Rick's popcorn and they will launch this season by attending a leisure show in Creighton in late April. Following that, Rick and Pat will travel from event to event in their motor home, selling their popcorn at events such as the Flin Flon Trout Festival and the local market garden.

As well as enjoying local support, Pat and Rick are also great ambassadors for the community. When they head south, they have the opportunity to distribute pamphlets promoting northern businesses. Mr. Speaker, I'm proud when local business owners succeed with their endeavours, backed by community members who believe in them. Congratulations to Rick and Pat Petryk on their success, and I look forward to seeing them at events throughout the summer. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Joyce Coulson Mr.

Leonard Derkach (Russell): Today, I rise to acknowledge the contributions to our community and to our province by Joyce Coulson of Sandy Lake. Joyce Coulson is the 2010 YWCA Women of Distinction Award winner for her volunteer efforts in the Sandy Lake and surrounding area. Joyce is a retired schoolteacher who was recognized for her excellence, her passion, her leadership and her inspiration as a community leader and a volunteer. Joyce is a tireless worker for her community and for her students and also for the elders in her community.

Joyce was nominated for her volunteer efforts by the R.M. of Harrison Councillor Doreen Stapleton, and Sandy Lake resident Dorothy Maluk. Joyce has always been known for her positive attitude and her passion for horticulture and local history. People who have come to know her–to know that if Joyce took on a task, it would be done with excellence and always on time. Joyce has a talent for storytelling and can bring history alive as she involves her local community in portraying local historical events.

Joyce is a member of a number of community organizations and has served for a number of years on the board of the Sandy Lake Personal Care Home. Joyce is described as a very unique and unequalled ambassador for the South Parkland community and for Sandy Lake. I have known Joyce for a number of years and have come to know her as a community leader who is well respected and tremendously appreciated by the entire community and beyond. I'd like to, today, congratulate Joyce on receiving this well-deserved recognition and the award that was given to her by the YWCA Women of Distinction dinner. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) House Business Hon. Bill Blaikie (Government House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker, a number of announcements having to do with House business. First of all, pursuant to rule 31(8), I'm announcing that the private members' resolution to be considered next Tuesday will be one put forward by the honourable member for St. James (Ms. Korzeniowski), and the title of the resolution is the Canadian Rangers program. Mr. Speaker: It's been announced that the private members' resolution to be considered next Tuesday will be one put forward by the honourable member for St. James.

The title of the resolution is Canadian Rangers program. Mr. Blaikie: And I'd also like to make a rather lengthy announcement, which, I hope, will please the honourable member from Russell, announcing a series of meetings for the year 2010 for the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. All meetings will begin at 7 o'clock, unless otherwise noted: May the 5th, at 5 p.m., to consider the Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Workplace Safety and Health, dated February 2007. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Labour and Immigration, Deputy Minister of Labour and Immigration.

May 19th, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Province's Management of Contaminated Sites and Landfills, dated October 2007. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Conservation, Deputy Minister of Conservation,

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1067 Minister of Finance, Deputy Minister of Finance, Minister of Local Government, Deputy Minister of Local Government. And the Auditor General's Report–Special Audit: Rural Municipality of La Broquerie, dated March 2008. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Local Government, Deputy Minister of Local Government. June 2nd, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative Assembly–Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 1, Meeting Manitoba's Obligations Under the 1997 Treaty Land Entitlement Framework Agreement. Witnesses to be called: the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, Deputy Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, Minister of Conservation, Deputy Minister of Conservation. August 18th, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2008, The Public Accounts for year ending March 31st, 2008: Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4.

The Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2009, and the Public Accounts for the year ending March 31st, 2009: Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Finance, Deputy Minister of Finance. September 22nd, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative Assembly, Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 2, Personal Care Homes. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Health, Deputy Minister of Health. October 20th, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative Assembly, Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 3, Assessment Services Br anch. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Local Government, Deputy Minister of Local Government. November 3rd, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative Assembly, Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 4, Members' Allowances; and the Auditor General report, Operations of the Office for the fiscal year ending March the 31st, 2009. November 17th, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Follow-up of Previously Issued Recommendations, a review dated March 2010, with specific sections for consideration. And witnesses to be determined, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Okay, it's been announced, the series of meetings for 2010, for the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. All meetings will begin at 7 p.m. unless otherwise noted.

May 5th, at 5 p.m., to consider the Auditor General's Report–Audit–I have to read it all back into the record: Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Workplace Safety and Health, dated February 2007. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Labour and Immigration, Deputy Minister of Labour and Immigration. May 19, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Province's Management of Contaminated Sites and Landfills, dated October 2007.

Witnesses to be called: Minister of Conservation, Deputy Minister of Conservation, Minister of Finance, Deputy Minister of Finance, Minister of Local Government, Deputy Minister of Local Government. And the Auditor General's Report– Special Audit of Rural Municipality of La Broquerie, dated March 2008. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Local Government, Deputy Minister of Local Government. June 2nd, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative Assembly, Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 1, Meeting Manitoba's Obligations Under the 1997 Treaty Land Entitlement Framework Agreement. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, Deputy Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, Minister of Conservation and Deputy Minister of Conservation.

August 18th, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2008; the Public Accounts for the Year Ending March 31st, 2008: Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4, The Auditor General's Report–Audit of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2009, and the Public Accounts for the Year Ending March 31st, 2009: Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Finance and Deputy Minister of Finance. September 22nd, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative

1068 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 Assembly, Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 2, Personal Care Homes Program. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Health, Deputy Minister of Health. October 20th, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative Assembly, Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 3, Assessment Services Br anch. Witnesses to be called: Minister of Local Government and Deputy Minister of Local Government. November 3rd, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Report to the Legislative Assembly, Audits of Government Operations, November 2009,

Chapter 4, Members' Allowances; and the Auditor General's Report, Operations of the Office for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2009. And, November 17, to consider the Auditor General's Report–Follow-up of Previously Issued Recommendations, a review, dated March 2010, with specific sections for consideration. And witnesses to be determined. * * * Mr. Blaikie: At this time, then, I think it's appropriate for me to announce that the House will now go into Estimates. Mr. Speaker: Okay, orders of the day. We will now go into Committee of Supply.

And in the Chamber will be Executive Council; Room 255 will be Health; and Room 254, Water Stewardship. Will the respective Chairs go to their appropriate rooms. The House will now resolve into Committee of Supply. Madam Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) WATER STEWARDSHIP * (14:50) Mr. Chairperson (Mohinder Saran): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply will now resume with the consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Water Stewardship. As had been previously agreed, questioning of the department will proceed in a global manner. The floor is now open for questions. Mr.

Leonard Derkach (Russell): When we left last day, we were talking about the lakes on the west side of the province and some of the problems that are being encountered by residents of the areas and, specifically, we were dealing with Sandy Lake, and I think I received adequate information from the minister that, indeed, there is a willingness for her department to sit down with the municipality and also the Department of Conservation to try to arrive at some solution.

And I hope I am not putting words into her mouth, but I think that there was some acknowledgment that perhaps this might be a good way of at least not perhaps resolving every issue, but getting to an understanding of what needs to happen in that area.

But I'd like to ask a question regarding the three Salt Lakes near Strathclair that are in the municipality of Strathcl air where there has been, again, a situation of high water where a significant amount of damage has been done to the–not only the land surrounding the lakes and the roads, but to the trees, the natural vegetation of the area and, although the water level is not as high this spring, the problem seem to exist by an artificial block in the South Salt Lake where a road had been built and no culvert had been placed into the road at the point of the creek that allows for the outlet of South Salt Lake .

The municipality was forced to close a ditch that they had deepened in order to allow the water to be released in South Salt Lake. And several reasons were given for the problem. One was that because the community was putting its sewage into the Middle Salt Lake, that, indeed, it was causing a problem in terms of the fecal count for–that was found in South Salt Lake. When we did the tests, Mr. Chair, as a matter of fact, the opposite was found. That, indeed, that did not have an impact on the lake.

And then there was a complaint that was lodged against the community by a former member of the department of environment, a staffer, a former staffer of the department of environment, who seemed to have much more sway with the department than did local residents and local municipal people. And this individual happens to live on a–the south shore of South Salt Lake. And my question is, although there are natural outlets for the lake that were inadvertently blocked in dry years when water levels were low, why the municipality was not allowed to ease some of the pressure causing the water then from South Salt Lake

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1069 to cut a swath through a fa rmer's field after it had been seeded? Hon. Christine Melnic k (Minister of Water Stewardship): My understanding of the situation is that the R.M. of Strathclair has applied for an environmental licence. There is still some outstanding information. I don't know the specifics of that but that is my understanding of where everything is in the process. Again, you might want to put your questions to the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Blaikie), who, I understand, is coming to Estimates at 2:30 this afternoon. Mr.

Derkach: But therein lies the problem again. We've been shunted back and forth between the Department of Water Stewardship and the Department of Conservation. And it is my understanding that it is the Department of Water Stewardship through staff in Brandon, I believe it is, who have been involved in the process.

And there are such inconsistencies in the responses that keep coming back to the area that–and I can witness that, indeed, these inconsistencies have been there–that we need to somehow, again, co- ordinate proper communication between the staff in Brandon, the Water Stewardship Department, and perhaps the director, and Conservation, in order to get a proper resolution to this because, what happens at the end is, it's innocent residents who suffer as a result. I have a farmer who lives on the–just on the north side of Highway 16, who's had his hay supplies and water for two years.

And he can't get to them to even get those feed supplies out. His name is a Mr. Moffatt. Reg Moffatt, and he, I think, has appealed to the government on several occasions. Last spring he couldn't even get into his yard because of water inundating his driveway that has never been underwater. This year, he was forced to build it up but thankfully, the high water levels are not as severe as they were last spring. So we've got some alleviation from the problems that way.

But I think for the longer term, and I think we've got a bit of time now to be able to start a proper assessment or communication of the situation as it exists there. There are still roads underwater on the north side of the North Salt Lake, and I'm wondering whether there is a way in which, instead of my just going to the Minister of Conservation, if there's a willingness for us to work towards a co- ordinated effort to resolve these issues on that lake. Ms.

Melnick: Well, again, I would give the same suggestion as I gave yesterday for the other issue that we were talking about as for the R.M. of Strathclair to, in fact, call a meeting with Water Stewardship and Conservation. I know the local folks up there have met with the R.M. of Strathclair on a number of occasions–now, I don't have the exact number in front of me, but several times, okay?–and get everybody around the table together. * (15:00) Mr.

Derkach: I thank the minister for her response and certainly will take that suggestion under advisement and inform the municipality that perhaps this is a good way to proceed. I have one more lake that I want to talk about, two actually, but I think the other one is–Lake of the Prairies, we'll talk at the end, but Thomas Lake is still suffering from high water. There is a road threatened that connects th e one residential area to the other. The municipality has been trying to build it up. The RV park is still underwater and the cottages are still threatened by water at their doorsteps.

There are no beaches left becaus e they've been inundated by water. And I'm wondering–again, this is in the R.M. of Strathclair. These municipalities don't have the wherewithal to do the expensive environmental assessments that they've been required to do, and so we have to find another solution. And, once again, if the minister is agreeable, I will certainly communicate to the R.M. that, perhaps, this is another situation where a co-ordinated effort can be undertaken between the departments and the municipality. Ms.

Melnick: Well, again, it is the same R.M. so, perhaps, both items could be put on the agenda for one meeting, and maybe there could be some movement on that. It is my understanding, again, that there has been application made for an environment licence under The Environment Act. Again, my colleague the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Blaikie) might have more information, and that they're still waiting–I understand Conservation is still waiting some information, so. Mr. Derkach: I thank the minister for that.

Jackfish Lake–another lake at Sandy Lake, the community of Sandy Lake this time–Jackfish Lake is one that touches on the Rolling River First Nations. I can tell the minister that I witnessed first-hand a dwelling at– on the First Nations that was completely surrounded by water within 50 feet of the house. Wells have been contaminated in that area, and, once again, it's

1070 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 the same issue in that area. High-water outlets that have been not so much silted over, in this case, but probably have been worked through with equipment and have caused a block in the water's ability to get away. The First Nation people, I know, have talked to the department, and now this has become almost an issue between the federal government and a provincial jurisdiction and the municipality.

But I will–this is in the R.M. of Harrison, again, and, once again, it's the last of those lakes that is suffering from high water, and, in this case, we've got contamination of wells and water supplies for individual homes. Ms. Melnick: If I could just get clarification. The member talked about Rolling River First Nation. Is that, in fact, where the wells of concern are and the home is? Mr. Derkach: Certainly, I can provide that information for the minister. I'd be happy to do that. Ms. Melnick: That would be helpful. I'm also wondering if he might want to talk to his colleague, the federal member.

Where it is a First Nation, there may be actions that could be taken through the federal government to help ease the situation there. Mr. Derkach: Yes, and I have addressed this with him already and I think that's why there has been some discussion about whose responsibility this is. And I don't think anybody's running up to the plate to say, well, we'll look after this. But I will continue that. Ms. Melnick: So, again, I'll take that under advisement and, if the member could keep me updated on any information that he gets about the situation, I'd appreciate that, too. Mr.

Derkach: Last problem, Lake of the Prairies, and we know what kind of issues that is. That is not something I can address at this table in a short period of time, but it's one that has been ongoing for years, even when we were in government. And the reality is the lake is and the regime of it is out of control.

And it has been for the last five years, because we either experience high water levels or extremely low water levels, and it's very difficult for people from Winnipeg to judge what the level of the lake should be at either in February, March or April, as we move into the spring season, depending on how much moisture there is in the upper reaches of the Assiniboine and the Shell. And, right now, the lake is so low that it's impossible–or will be impossible–to launch a boat into the lake from the existing boat launches that are around the lake.

I was there on the weekend and I can tell the minister that it will take an enormous amount of water to fill the reservoir. There is a longer-term solution that is required, and I'm wondering whether or not the minister and her department have, outside–besides the leaf gates that have been talked about for years, whether any serious look has been given to the additional reservoir at Zelena that would provide easement for flooding downstream and, also, for water supply for the southern part of the province, and whether there's been any consideration.

And I know the environmental issues that surround dams, but this is one that was engineered in the '60s, when Shellmouth was created. It was supposed to be one that was developed, but never was. And it's–I think it's the sort of the thorn in the side of the water problems in that part of the world. And I'm wondering whether the minister can enlighten us on any work that has been done to try to stabilize, at least, the level of the reservoir at Shellmouth. Ms.

Melnick: I just wanted to make sure the member from Russell knows that it was two or three years ago that we struck the Shellmouth operations liaison committee. And his comment about Shellmouth being controlled by people from Winnipeg isn't entirely accurate in that there are representatives from the Lake of the Prairies Conservation District on that committee. There are– well, we struck it a few years ago, so this could be a new rendition of something that perhaps had–you had tried a while back. But there–we wanted to make sure that there were local reps. So there is representation from Lake of the Prairies CD.

There are two reps representing downstream concerns. There's a representative of tourism and cottages, as well. So these–this committee meets as needs be. They talk about what they perceive will be happening, particularly during the spring runoff, and actions have been taken as early as January. For example, last spring, I know we began the drawdown in January, so that there wouldn't be–well, we were trying to minimize the effect downstream, which the member knows very well and has spoken of those issues in other discussions.

So what I wanted to point out was the presence level of Shellmouth reservoir, as of April 20th, 2010, is 1,398.5 feet. It has risen 5.5 feet so far this spring. The level is still rising slowly, and is expected to crest at 1,400 feet in mid-May, even with the continued dry weather. While this level is somewhat

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1071 below the summer target level of 1,402.5 feet, it is adequate to meet water supply needs along the Assiniboine River–we believe for the rest of 2010, until the spring freshet in 2011. So, if dry weather does continue, we'll have to look at how these releases will be changed. We'll be working with the committee. There may have to be more significant releases, but we'll be working with the committee at that. We're hoping that we will return to a–average weathe r conditions, and that that will help to level off.

But I think it's important for the member to know that we are working with the local folks on this, and they're making decisions as they believe are best to be made. Depending on the weather conditions, you know, it's sort of a feast and famine situation. Last year was the feast, in that there was water absolutely everywhere. And this year we're dealing with a–certainly a different scenario. So we're working with the local folks to try to make sure that the upstream folks are–that the water levels are healthy for them, as well the downstream folks, and that can be a bit of a balancing act. Mr.

Derkach: I'm very aware of the local committee that's put together and, you know, there is a bit of an issue. We have representation from the CD who have staff on the local committee that have no idea, no understanding of the lake because they have no experience with it at all. Their staff is–come from outside of the area and have no experience or knowledge with it. The best people on the board are those who live in the valley and understand the–what the water really does in the lake and in the rivers. * (15:10) And Mr.

Alvin Zimmer, as a matter of fact, who's been on the board since–well, he was on the former advisory board that was struck when I was minister and still continues on the–on that board, is a little frustrated, as some others are, but continues to work because they–they're not blaming government or anybody like that for wh at is happening there, but they are understanding that because of the amount of water that comes into that lake in a short period of time at given times of the year, that it's very difficult to control unless you have somebody on-site all the time. It can change that quickly.

And simply, there are people who are phoning Mr. Warkentin, I think, all the time in the spring to either raise or lower the gates. And I think there's–for every call that comes in to lower the gates, there's another one coming in to raise the gates. So I think there's a lot of work that is required at the local level, but it requires somebody on the ground in our region. Having somebody come out of Dauphin to change the regime of the dam is not an ideal situation, especially when this dam is responsible for supplying such a vast amount of water for downstream users.

And it is a very critical structure in our province. And not to have somebody on the ground there, I think, is a shortfall and certainly doesn't provide the kinds of management that that area should have in terms of the water supply and the water control for the entire region. And there's so many people that depend on it that I think it requires more attention than has been given to it over the course of the last few–or number of years. And once again, I'm asking the minister whether or not her department perhaps could take another look at this and establish a better protocol for the management of that regime.

Ms. Melnick: Well, a couple of points there. Certainly, the representatives that we have on the liaison committee, many of them live in the valley. One lives almost adjacent to the Shellmouth Dam itself. Just to explain that the person who operates the gates is actually an MIT staffperson who works the gates based on the recommendations from the liaison committee. So it's not someone up in Dauphin sort of making their own decisions on how things should be organized. And that's–I'm not sure what the member's saying. Maybe he could put it on the record if he's– wants to when I finish this statement.

But there is a lot of connection between the way that the gates are managed and the recommendations by the Shellmouth operations liaison committee. So I think we just need to clarify that. Mr. Derkach: Just finally, you know, I understand how the process works and I understand how the system works. I'm just ex pressing a frustration, I think, that has been expressed to me by members of the committee, by even staff from government, who have indicated that it isn't ideal for–whether it's MIT or whoever, whichever department of government–to control that.

1072 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 I know the liaison committee has some say in it, but they are not the ones who make the final call. Those final calls are made by Mr. Warkentin as to whether or not–and that's based on a lot of factors, and I understand that. But what I'm saying is there would be a much better understanding of the impact of the dam if, in fact, the person were to reside in that local area. And that's my final comment, and I don't really expect a response, but I certainly welcome it anyway. Ms.

Melnick: Well, we have been working with the committee and we've recently developed guidelines to operating the dam and to–and those guidelines take into account information coming directly from the committee, information coming directly about water flow, expected levels of precipitation, et cetera. So the member's right when he says there is a lot that goes into these calculations. And again, we're working with local people. Do we always get it absolutely right every time?

Well, maybe not, but we certainly try to, and when I look at what the department and Manitoba dealt with last spring, again, I congratulate everyone who put in such an effort. This spring is quite a different spri ng. It was quite different than what we anticipated. We anticipated a lot more flow. That's more getting into a Red River discussion, I suppose, but just to make the final point, that guidelines have been developed in consultation with the committee, and it's those guidelines that guide the monitoring and the adjustments to the gate. Mr.

David Faurschou (P ortage la Prairie): Just to follow up with my honourable colleague for Russell, is there any work being done on the Zelena Dam proposal at the present time? Ms. Melnick: As the member would know, there has been a lot of discussion ove r what is the most cost- effective way to deal with these flows, and it was, in fact, established quite some time ago that the gates on the Shellmouth was the most effective way of monitoring the flows as well as cost-effectiveness. Mr.

Faurschou: I do, though, want to enter one additional consideration th at we're all aware of, the success of the Asessippi ski hill and the number of cottages and that that have been developed in the area over the course of the last 10 years. There is another dynamic in the Shell River there that potentially should be considered by the department as another additional resource that would emanate out of the construction of the Zelena Dam. I just would like the department to recognize that potential in their deliberations as to what is and is not cost-effective within expenditures.

I don't expect the minister to comment on that. I just wanted to state it for the record. I would like to ask the minister to clarify the relationship between her department and the Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation as it pertains to watercourses, either natural or manmade here in the province of Manitoba. Is it–my understanding correct that your department is responsible for any roadway or any bridge crossing, traversing any manmade or natural watercourse in the province of Manitoba? Ms. Melnick: That, in fact, would be an MIT responsibility. Mr.

Faurschou: I t v e r y w e l l m a y b e a n M I T responsibility for the actual physical structure, but my understanding is that your department must give the nod, must give the licensing or permitting to whomever is constructing th e structure that traverses a watercourse here in the province of Manitoba. Ms. Melnick: Just to clarify, I think you're certainly on the right courses. The Department of Water Stewardship would license any crossing that diverts water, changes the flow in any way. The exception would be we don't license MIT crossings, but we do provide hydraulic analysis. * (15:20) Mr.

Faurschou: So then a crossing over a manmade provincial drain would require permission from your department because, effectively, it would require installation of culverts, which could be defined as a encumbrance on the water flow, so, therefore, a definition of diversion could be employed? Ms. Melnick: Is the member inquiring about a specific instance? Mr.

Faurschou: Well, I'm trying to clarify the relationship between MIT and Water Stewardship and–because we've been bounced back and forth now for close to eight months, and after inquiries were made, thought pattern was developed and correspondence began to flow on October the 22nd. The response was received April 14th from the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Ashton), which was originally sent to your department.

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1073 But the bottom line of all of this, regardless of whose responsibility it is, for the record, there was a publicly concerned farmer that allowed removal of a crossing for the benefit of the Province, to allow the expansion–development and expansion of the Edwin drain. The understanding with the landowner was always that if he ever required access to his property, that the crossing would be reinstalled.

Now, even though it's not in writing, I think it is incumbent upon the government to be held to the honourable– doing the honourable thing, insofar as it–it's even more convoluted ‘onsofar’ as that even if the farmer went and constructed the crossing to the specifications as required by the Infrastructure and Transportation Department, because now it is being constructed on Crown properties, which is the Edwin drain, the crossing would therefore become the property of the Province even though it was paid for by the farmer.

The farmer would be willing to invest in it and his banker backing him in the investment if the property did not revert to the ownership of the Province. So it's really–the Province is having it both ways here, and I–we received the final–final– determination stating that because there is an access crossing across the Edwin drain 0.4 kilometres from the point of proposed crossing, therefore it is denied.

So there, lie in, I would look at anyone around the table to say that to access the laneway into your garage, it is fine to drive 0.4 of a kilometre and then back 0.4 of a kilometre to get into your garage on your own property. It just does not make any sense to me, and I'm certain anyone that I explain this situation to is left shaking their head. So I don't expect the minister to respond today, because the correspondence, the ink is just barely dry.

But I would really, re ally appreciate–because it means a lot to access your own property, and even though the crossings that are in existence now are to other family members, that should not be a consideration. We are all individuals and whether it's my father, my sister, my uncle, this is my property and I should have access to it and should not be reliant upon my immediate relatives to access my property. So I leave it with the minister and the very learned members of her staff to, please, reconsider. Mr.

Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I just have a couple of other areas that I wanted to touch on before we, hopefully, are able to close down the Estimates today on watershed–Water Stewardship here. Not that I hope we do, but there are a lot of questions but I know that others have Estimates time as well, and I don't want to take the minister away from her busy

schedule any longer than we have to as well. But a couple of quick things in regards to the flooding or flood potential that took place this spring. Can she just give me an update on what happened to the ice cutter that went through the ice? And in regards to–and whether there are any changes planned for the use of that type of machinery? Ms. Melnick: The ice cutter in question is a prototype. It was a remote-controlled ice cutter and you know when you're using a prototype, sometimes you try to push the limits. You try to see what the limits are. Clearly, we pushed a little too far. We are planning to raise it.

We didn't send the frogmen down right away. There was a large ice flow at the time and the flows are still quite high on the river so we want to go with worker safety on this, and we know exactly where it is so when the conditions are best for the frogmen to go down and bring it up, we will bring it up. It will be reusable. It is quite a hardy machine. We will be putting a flotation device on for next year. I wanted to bring to the member's attention that this year the ice cutter s cut an unprecedented 26 kilometres of ice. We were trying very hard to mitigate any ice jams that may have developed.

We also have the–kilometres or miles?–4,500 kilometres of ice cut and the Amphibex cut 18k, both Amphibex. So, we were looking at a spring–we were anticipating the spring to be much more active than it was. We did have an evap orative melt rather than a liquid melt, which helped because we knew that down south the precipitation was 300 times more than what would be considered normal. So we were anticipating quite an active spring, as I said, and we wanted to have all the tools out that we could. And again, I want to congratulate the corporation, the north Red water corporation, for the work that they did in this.

We had Mayor Walaker up two, three weeks ago now at the floodway inlet. I took him to the Benson building, and he was very impressed with our arsenal, I guess you could call it. And again, you know we're doing things in Manitoba here on flood mitigation and ice mitigation that's just not happening anywhere else in the world. So, we'll pull it up. We'll get it ready for next spring and this time, we'll add a flotation device.

1074 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 Mr. Maguire: Does the minister–I know she's indicated some changes on the type of machinery and the flotation devices and that sort of thing, that will be used in the future. Can she provide me with any kind of changes that might be planned in the flood forecasting for Manitoba, just in relation to potential of flooding, that might have occurred in the last year, or that they're thinking of doing for the future? * (15:30) Ms. Melnick: In the area specific to flood forecasting, there have been three new staff added. These individuals are very highly qualified.

They have Ph.D. and Master's degrees. They are–have been studying in water resource modelling as well as meteorology, so, very highly skilled people have joined Water Stewardship and certainly I welcome them. We have done more in hydrologic and hydraulic modelling to get a sense of how the water might move, how the water, you know, when you get to forecasting, there's a real science there as you look at not only what's happening in the main waterways but in the feeders, we would call them, the different linkages up to the main waterway, so, looking at those as well.

We have been making more use of the satellite imagery that we've been able to acquire. So there's a lot of bits and pieces that get into flood forecasting, including the weather forecast, which can be one of the main determining factors when you're looking at how the thaw will happen, when and where it will happen and what the result will be.

One of the interesting–one of the most interesting points for me this year was how the Red River south of the border, because of a Colorado low that had hung over the eastern side of the Red River, all of the tributaries from the eastern side of the Red River had thawed and gone into the Red River before the tributaries on the west side, which was quite unusual, and quite an interesting weather pattern to watch. Mr.

Maguire: Just in relation to the department and the list, has she submitted, or has her department submitted a list of priority projects to the federal government with respect to some of the flood mitigation issues or protection issues that arise? Ms. Melnick: There was a very detailed list sent on June 24th, 2009, to the federal government by the– from the provincial minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, now the Minister of MIT. There have been meetings between the lead minister of–from the federal government, from Manitoba, Vic Toews. The Minister of MIT has met with several federal colleagues.

We had hoped that an announcement would have been forthcoming some time ago, actually, but unfortunately that hasn't happened, so any support that the member could give us provincially with his federal counterparts to make the announcement to start to really get the work under way would be much appreciated. Mr. Maguire: Yes, I–well, if the minister could just outline for me a couple of the projects that she may have referenced to the ministers–to the federal government, that would be helpful.

And, while I'm at that, I'll ask her if she has had–if dredging of the Red was one of those and whether there's been any discussions with the federal government lately on that issue? Ms. Melnick: Well, I believe it's 10 or 12 years ago now, the federal government determined they would not be dredging in that area, and that certainly is a concern by the folks up in that area. They have, again, spoken with the lead minister for Manitoba, Vic Toews, several times on this. I understand that there's been some positive response from the federal minister, but we haven't seen the action yet.

So I think if the member, again, could approach his federal colleague to work towards restoring dredging–one of the things that, if the member went out to see the ice as it was moving, as it was breaking up, a lot of the ice had actual mud on it, and that's termed dirty ice. Well, the ice was maybe two feet thick this year, it wasn't as thick as it was last year when it was three or four feet thick, but that means that the silt has built up to such a level that the ice is actually scraping over the silt to move northward into Netley Creek.

So I think if the federa l government could come back and begin a dredging program in co-operation with the local R.M.s, that could prove very helpful in the spring and help to move the ice out. It may be part–it may become part of an ice mitigation–an ice- jam mitigation strategy where particular areas are well dredged in the fall and that would allow the ice to move more easily out during the spring. Mr. Maguire: Has the minister's request included that the federal government help pay for dredging of the Red? Ms. Melnick: The dredging is in fact the responsibility of the federal government. So again, I

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1075 know that there have been discussions with the mayors and reeves of Selkirk, St. Clements and St. Andrews with the federal government to restore the dredging program here, and I hope that they'll be very successful. Mr. Maguire: So I'm assuming that the minister's letter to the federal government has requested the federal government to reinstate dredging at the mouth of the Red? Ms. Melnick: I understand there has been some discussion. I've had some discussion with Vic Toews about this as well.

It really is the call of the federal government, and we are hoping that they will, in fact, come to that area. We do have a–the Amphibex is actually a dredging machine, so the m achine is there, and if we could have the federal government partner with the local R.M.s and the City of Selkirk, we could see some great improvements, I think, in the springs to come. Mr. Maguire: I know the member is just–I don't want to beleaguer this, but the–you know, has the minister, in written form, asked for the federal government to do some of this dredging again? Ms. Melnick: There has been discussion with the R.M.s.

They may have written, I'm not sure; I'm not privy to all the correspondence that has gone by. But again, there–I have had discussion with Vic Toews, and I hope that the federal government will come back to their federal responsibility in this area where there has been floodi ng again this year. North Breezy Point was underwater. We were very relieved to see that, this year, neither cottagers nor Emergency Measures workers were put at risk in any way. The flooding, I understand, has receded from there.

But again, the dredging that has been requested by the local people may in fact be part of the strategy that we can apply throughout Manitoba. Mr. Maguire: I'm assuming then, from the minister's answer, that she hasn't formally written to the minister asking for the federal government to be involved in dredging in the Red, so I'll just leave it at that. The question is: Can the–can an Amphibex, as far as the minister knows, be used for any kind of dredging purposes? * (15:40) Ms.

Melnick: The Amphibex is, in fact, a dredging machine, and we've been working with Normrock– they've been great partners–to develop them into ice- breaking machines , but the actual primary function of an Amphibex is, in fact, dredging. They are used throughout the world. I believe in southeast Asia they've been used quite a lot. And so, by using the Amphibex as a dredging machine–we used it last–late last summer up at the mouth of the Portage Diversion, in fact, to move a lot of the silt that had developed through last spring's flooding out of the–out of that area.

So we know that they can work well, and, again, I would call on the member to ask his counterpart in the federal government to restore this. And, certainly, we would appreciate seeing dredging happening, because one of the things that we try to do is work on a preventati ve measure, which is why we cut so much ice, why we broke so much ice this spring. And anything that can be done to ease the flow of ice and water in the spring, I'm sure, would be greatly appreciated. Mr.

Maguire: No doubt the minister has indicated that, you know, it's just a–I have no problem with seeking support, but, when the minister hasn't even written a letter to the–asked for such dredging purposes to be put back in place by the federal government, it's hard for me as an opposition member to seek that support from them as well, even though we have. The people that live on the north side, and the member–minister just referred to it a little while ago in the Breezy Point area and others that were flooded, not this year but la st year in that area, had a great impact on their homes and locations.

And, of course, there's been some great movement in moving those homes out. There's been an impact on the operations of an enhanced capacity floodway on flooding in their region, and I wanted to ask the minister: What type of monitoring is the Province doing in that region north of Winnipeg now to measure the impact of the floodway in that region? Ms. Melnick: Previous to acquiring the environmental licence for the expansion of the floodway, the provincial government did a study. And the folks upstream, the coalition, also did their own study.

Now the government study showed minimum impacts downstream, both in terms of ice flow and

1076 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 water levels. The study done by the coalition–the people upstream–showed a different result. So the CEC hired KGS to do a study in this area and it showed–the KGS study, in fact, agreed with the government study showing very little impact of ice and water levels. And it's my understanding that that study was made public, and that study was completed before the environmental licence was, in fact, given to the provincial government to expand the floodway. Mr.

Maguire: Well, just–more in relation to some of the issues, I guess, that have happened since the floodway was changed and in the last two years, particularly, the coalition that the member–or minister–refers to for the flood protection north in other areas, as well, would like to see some changes to the floodway operations to help better control the volumes of water going through the floodway and through their area. And I'm just wondering if the minister can outline any changes planned to floodway operating procedures that would help them in that area or if there are any plans. Ms.

Melnick: The environmental act calls for a review of the operating rules and we are, in fact, undertaking that now. There would be opportunity for anyone to bring any sort of concern, any sort of issue on the operating rules to those–to that review and it would be given very serious consideration. Mr. Maguire: But as of now, then, the minister has no plans to change the operations of the floodway operating procedures in those areas until that report comes in at least? Ms.

Melnick: The operation of the floodway is a very serious action to take, the decision to raise the gates, the decision to lower the gates, and when the floodway gates are in operation, there is fluctuation of the gates that happen around the clock whenever necessary to maintain the state of nature upstream. So different levels of flow go through the floodway at any given time. It would not be astute or appropriate to make a change without very, very serious consideration as to how and what effects those changes would bring, which is why we're going out to the public.

We're encouraging people to be involved in the open discussion, in the public discussion about operating rules and encouraging people to come forward with any concerns they have. The decision to change any of the rules would be given a lot of very serious consideration and we would have to look at it from many, many different angles. So, until this is complete, there will not be a change in the rules. Mr.

Maguire: Another practice that was used in the last couple of years was two dikes, Madam Minister, in regards to the tubes that were used to put up more quickly than sandbags and that sort of thing, for sandbag dikes. Can the minister indicate whether she thinks that was a good tool, whether they've been effective or not? And some of these local people were concerned about their effectivene ss, I guess, and I just wondered if the minister could expand on their–on the use of them and their viability. Ms. Melnick: I think the member is referring to the tubes, the water tubes? Yeah. Mr.

Maguire: Yes, I am. * (15:50) Ms. Melnick: So there's two. There's the aquadams and the tiger tubes. So we found that in '09, two-thirds of the inventory, the provincial inventory, was utilized. Also, some of the R.M.s had purchased tubes before that time which they had fully utilized. We find them particularly effective for rapid deployment. We find them effective for overland flooding. We have found them effective as compleme ntary diking to existing sandbag dikes. So there seems to be a lot of deploy– pardon me, a lot of use to them. They're not the be- all and end-all.

We have a variety of tools in the tool chest that we need to pull out whenever we can, and they certainly are one of them. Mr. Maguire: Can the minister indicate to me–I think, last year in '09 during the middle of the–you know, during not the middle, but because of the impending flood that was there and the crisis that we were facing with–that the government purchased $2-million worth of the tubes last year. Ms. Melnick: Water Stewardship was not purchasing flood tubes during '09. Mr.

Maguire: Was she or her department involved in the decision to purchase those or to have them used in the–or can she clarify whether it was the municipalities that actually paid for them? Ms. Melnick: The municipalities paid for some they had purchased beforehand and I believe during. The–

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1077 I think the question might be best put to the Minister of MIT. Mr. Maguire: I'll check that, Madam Minister, but it was my understanding that there were others bought this spring as well in that area. And so I just wondered if the minister could elaborate on–for me as to how many more were purchased this spring. And, of course, I don't believe they were needed or used this spring, but correct me if I'm wrong on that as well. Ms. Melnick: Again that was dealt with through MIT, so perhaps these questions would be better put towards MIT. Mr.

Maguire: So her department has no say in how they're used? Ms. Melnick: We work in deployment. There was a situation on Peguis First Nation and Fisher River First Nation last year where not only the river water rose quickly but the overland flooding was of concern, and we had deployed 60 tubes on a–through one of the trailers. Yes, one of the CERT trailers was deployed to Peguis last year. We were looking at overland flooding this year, wanting to make sure that the same situation–I forget the exact number of houses that were negatively affected on Peguis First Nation and Fisher River First Nation.

But there were many homes that were affected, more by the overland flooding than by the waters rising. So that was the precautionary step that w e w a n t e d t o t a k e t h i s y e a r w a s t o m a k e s u r e t h a t flood tubes were available wherever they may be needed, not only for the river flooding but the overland flooding as well. Mr. Maguire: So does she know who–can the minister tell me who purchased those tubes? Ms. Melnick: T h a t w a s M I T . S o t h a t ' s w h y I ' m directing you towards MIT, yes. Mr.

Maguire: She just referred to the compensation eligibility of some of the homeowners in that area, and I'm wondering. You know, some of them indicated that they weren't eligible for the buy-out program. I wondered what kind of input her department had in regards to the buy-out program. Ms. Melnick: The homes that I was referring to are, in fact, on reserves, so that would be a federal responsibility. Mr. Maguire: Just a couple more issues then, Madam Minister. In relation to today's news and the ice shacks, and, of course, it's not just today's news, the ice shacks and the river and that sort of thing.

Can she just provide us with a strategy that the department is examining to help tackle this issue? Ms. Melnick: Again, that would rest with the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Blaikie). Mr. Maguire: The nitrate issue in regards to the removal of nitrates from the waste-water treatment plants in the facility of Winnipeg, does that fall under her jurisdiction or is it the Minister of Conservation's as well? Ms. Melnick: That would rest under the Environmental Licensing Act, again, under Conservation. The Prem ier (Mr. Selinger) has referred the question to the CEC.

We have not received–the government of Manitoba has not received a response from the CEC yet. Mr. Maguire: Yes, I was asking the minister some questions with regards to the legal opinion that I was–that she had sought from her department on the conservation districts. I wonder if I can get a bit of a follow-up from the minister on some of those questions that we raised yesterday.

I filed a–or we filed a FIPPA request asking for the following information, and I want to just quote this so it's on the record: The copy of the legal opinion obtained by the Department of Water Stewardship within the last five years pertaining to its involvement with the conservation district program. For example, this could include an opinion related to the CD funding formula, an opinion related to the management or organizational framework between the department of Manitoba's–department and Manitoba's conservation districts, or an opinion on the CD program framework for the future document. End quote.

And I know that, you know, we were denied access, told that the department had obtained legal opinions implying that there was more than one of these legal opinions sought, and that the total cost, as I mentioned yesterday, was over $4,400. It was actually $4,483.20. And I know that the minister was either being a little bit coy or evasive yesterday and so I wondered, you know, she did provide–she didn't provide any meaningful details about why these legal opinions were secured. And so, perhaps she, you know, after a 24-hour period to reflect on it, might be better, more prepared to be forthcoming today.

1078 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 20, 2010 And so I wonder if these, were these legal opinions obtained related to the conservation district funding formula and any possible changes to the level of funding that the provincial government will provide to the CDs in the future? Ms. Melnick: If the member would like to ask me any questions about the areas that he just touched upon, I'd be happy to answer them. Mr. Maguire: And so the minister's saying that it wasn't, or it was related to the changes to the level of funding that the provincial government provides the CDs? Ms.

Melnick: Well, again, if the member wants to talk about level of funding, we can talk about that. There has been a lot discussion held with individual CDs, with MCDA, there is the–the report is on the website. It is an outstanding issue that is being worked on by MCDA, AMM and Water Stewardship, so there is ongoing discussion about funding. I did talk about the increases to the le vel of funding, over 107 percent increase since 1999. There, of course, has been a hundred percent growth in the CD program.

And the funding formula which the member was also asking about yesterday does remain 75 percent paid for by the Province with 25 percent paid for by the local municipalities that put that remaining funding in. So that's pretty much the discussion we had yesterday and I don't know if he wants to talk more about the funding formula or– Mr. Maguire: I'll simply ask then if that's why you sought a legal opinion. If it was around the area of the funding formula. Ms. Melnick: Well, I think that the member knows that discussions will be had that, if a legal opinion's necessary, it is sought.

It is information that is provided to anyone who seeks a legal opinion. What we're talking about here is about the funding formula of the CDs, as the member had questioned about. And the answer is that we are looking at the formula, we're looking at, you know, when new CDs come in, we're also talking about maintaining the 75-25 percent. So that's–if that's the issue, we can continue to discuss that. Mr.

Maguire: Well, if not, then, Madam Minister, were the legal opinions obtained related to the management and the organizational framework around the department and the Manitoba conservation districts establishment? * (16:00) Ms. Melnick: Again, if he wants to discuss the conservation districts, any issue, that would be fine, but I think we discussed this quite thoroughly yesterday. I think he's kind of going over the same issues as yesterday. Mr. Maguire: Well, Mr.

Chairman, we can make it quicker if the minister wo uld answer the questions and just tell me whether the legal opinions that she got were related to things like the CD funding formula or the management organizational framework. I'm trying to na rrow–drill down and be as specific as I can for her on those issues, but she's evasive in her answers and so I am going to continue to ask whether or not, you know, she won't answer the question, what did you seek legal opinions for? Yesterday she asked me to be more explicit and so that's what I'm trying to do today.

And I'm just trying to be forthright in relation to those areas. And so, you know, if it isn't the CD funding formula or related to the management or the organizational framework, were these legal opinions obtained related to a possible downloading of programming or services from the provincial government to the CDs themselves?

For example, in the draft June '08 document, the conservation district program framework for the future discussion document, it states, and I quote, "Many stakeholders felt that the goals and objectives went too far in transferring provincial resource management responsibilities to CDs, such as drinking water protection, surface water management and water quality . . ." End quote. So I'm simply asking the minister, was the department trying to secure legal opinions related to its own liability if it were to transfer some of these responsibilities over to the CDs? Ms.

Melnick: I think the member is maybe not–is hearing the answer, not really wanting to hear that the discussions that were held around the framework document were held with CDs, they were held with MCDA, AMM and other stakeholders. There were a lot of different issues that were being discussed, there were very good discussions that came forward. If he wants to discuss any of those issues further, that's fine. We have–I think we had a pretty thorough discussion yesterday about these, about the CDs, about the process and there was a very open and

April 20, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1079 transparent discussion ab out what changes in the framework might be brought about. To the specifics of individual topics, there was a lot of discussion around the funding formula which I have assured him will not be changing. I think he might be looking for a way to make it seem as though we are trying to reduce the funding formula, reduce what the provincial government is providing to the CDs. And I have assured him many, many times that that is not the case.

If that's the real question, then that is the real answer is we're maintaining the 75-25 percent funding formula. Again, there's been increase of over 107 percent and that's the way the funding formula sits now. He might be looking

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-4-31b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 4th hansardpdf 31b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0dcf6d2f167d1b2803cbbde7c77637603248f877

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