Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 29 (36th Legislature, 2nd Session)

36-2-29

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLVI No. 29- 1:30 p.m., Mon day, May 6, 1996

Name ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HELWER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWA Y, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. McGIFFORD, Diane MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon.

MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEWMAN, David PALLISTER, Brian, Hon. PENNER, Jack PITURA, Frank PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RADCLIFFE, Mike REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack, Hon. RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis SALE, Tim SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STRUTHERS, Stan SVEINSON, Ben TOEWS, Vic, Hon. TWEED, Mervin VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosann MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMB LY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Pembina Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St. Johns Elmwood Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Osborne Assiniboia St. James River East Riel Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Morris Lac du Bonnet River Heights Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Crescent wood Broadway Kirkfield Park Dauphin La Verendrye Rossmere Turtle Mountain Fort Garry Swan River J.>aJ:t)' N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C.

N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. Lib. Lib. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

1759 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, May 6,1996 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Home Care Services Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of L. Cayer, K. Coventry, K. Bickerton and others requesting the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services. Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Richard J.

Carr, Michelle Cordell, Renu Selijoaut and others requesting the Premier and the Minister of Health to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Home Care Services Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen). It complies with the rules and the practices of the House (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Yes. Madam Speaker: The Clerk will read. Mr.

Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT on at least six occasions during the 1995 provincial election, the Premier promised not to cut health services; and THAT on December 16, 1995, a plan to privatize home care services was presented to Treasury Board; and THAT this plan calls for the complete divestiture of all service delivery to nongovernment organizations, mainly private for-profit companies as well as the implementation of a user-pay system of home care; and THAT previous cuts to the Home Care program have resulted in services being cut and people's health being compromised; and THAT thousands of caring front-line service providers will lose their jobs as a result of this change; and THAT profit has no place in the provision of vital health services.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services. Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli). It complies with the rules and practices of the House (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Yes. Madam Speaker: Yes? The Clerk will read. Mr.

Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT on at least six occasions during the 1995 provincial election, the Premier promised not to cut health services; and THAT on December 16, 1995, a plan to privatize home care services was presented to Treasury Board; and THAT this plan calls for the complete divestiture of all service delivery to nongovernment organizations, mainly private for-profit companies as well as the implementation of a user-pay system of home care; and

176 0 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 THAT previous cuts to the Home Care program have resulted in services being cut and people's health being compromised; and THAT thousands of caring front-line service providers will lose their jobs as a result of this change; and THAT profit has no place in the provision of vital health services. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services.

Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Broadway (Mr. Santos). It complies with the rules and practices of the House (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense? Yes? An Honourable Member: Yes. Madam Speaker: The Clerk will read. Mr.

Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT on at least six occasions during the 1995 provincial election, the Premier promised not to cut health services; and THAT on December 16, 1995, a plan to privatize home care services was presented to Treasury Board; and THAT this plan calls for the complete divestiture of all service delivery to nongovernment organizations, mainly private for-profit companies as well as the implementation of a user-pay system ofhome care; and THAT previous cuts to the Home Care program have resulted in services being cut and people's health being compromised; and THAT thousan ds of caring front -line service providers will lose their jobs as a result of this change; and THAT profit has no place in the provision of vital health services.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services. *

(1335) Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). It complies with the rules and practices of the House (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense.

THAT on at least six occasions during the 1995 provincial election, the Premier promised not to cut health services; and THAT on December 16, 1995, a plan to privatize home care services was presented to Treasury Board; and THAT this plan calls for the complete divestiture of all service delivery to nongovernment organizations, mainly private for-profit companies as well as the implementation of a user-pay system of home care; and THAT previous cuts to the Home Care program have resulted in services being cut and people's health being compromised; and THAT thousands of caring front-line service providers will lose their jobs as a result of this change; and THAT profit has no place in the provision of vital health services.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1761 Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services. Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Yes. Madam Speaker: The Clerk will read. Mr.

Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT on at least six occasions during the 1995 prov incial election, the Premier promised not to cut health services; and THAT on December 16, 1995, a plan to privatize home care services was presented to Treasury Board; and THAT this plan calls for the complete divestiture of all service delivery to nongovernment organizations, mainly private for-profit companies as well as the implementation of a user-pay system ofhome care; and THAT previous cuts to the Home Care program have resulted in services being cut and people's health being compromised; and THAT thousands of caring front-line service providers will lose their jobs as a result of this change; and THAT profit has no place in the provision of vital health services.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services. Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense.

THAT on at least six occasions during the 1995 provincial election, the Premier promised not to cut health services; and THAT on December 16, 1995, a plan to privatize home care services was presented to Treasury Board; and THAT this plan calls for the complete divestiture of all service delivery to nongovernment organizations, mainly private for-profit companies as well as the implementation of a user-pay system of home care; and THAT previous cuts to the Home Care program have resulted in services being cut and people's health being compromised; and THAT thousands of caring front-line service providers will lose their jobs as a result of this change; and THAT profit has no place in the provision of vital health services.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services. Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense.

THAT on at least six occasions during the 1995 provincial election, the Premier promised not to cut health services; and THAT on December 16, 199 5, a plan to privatize home care services was presented to Treasury Board; and THAT this plan calls for the complete divestiture of all service delivery to nongovernment organizations, mainly private for-profit companies as well as the implementation of a user-pay system of home care; and

1762 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 THAT previous cuts to the Home Care program have resulted in services being cut and people's health being compromised; and 1HAT thousands of caring front-line service providers will lose their jobs as a result of this change; and THAT profit has no place in the provision of vital health services. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Afinister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to consider reversing their plan to privatize home care services.

PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Committee of Supply Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Chairperson of Committees): Madam Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted a certain resolution, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Brian Pallister (Minister of Government Services): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the 1996-1997 Departmental Expenditure Estimates Supplementary Information for Legislative Review for the Department of Governm ent Services. *

(1340) INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bi1117- The Government Essential Services Act Hon. Vic Toe ws (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, on the Notice Paper today is notice to introduce The Government Essential Services Act (Loi sur les services gouvernementaux essentiels). I am wondering if I might have leave to give ftrst reading to the bill today. Mada m Speaker: Does the honourable Minister of Labour have leave to give fust reading of Bill 17 appearing as notice on the Order Paper. Some Honourable Members: No. Madam Speaker: No? Leave has been denied.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Manitoba Telephone System Privatization-Confl ict of Interest Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Acting Premier. Madam Speaker, it has been reported that the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System has expressed an interest and has stated his intent to purchase private shares in the Manitoba Telephone System.

We believe it is the minister's sworn responsibility to deal with the public interest as the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System, and to deal with the issues of equity and price on behalf of the people of the province rather than being interested in purchasing the shares on a private basis. I would like to ask the Acting Premier whether in fact the minister's statement to buy shares in the Manitoba Telephone System is not a conflict of interest and the minister should be asked immediately to put the public interest as paramount rather than his private interests. Hon.

Glen Findlay (Minister respon sible for the administration of The Manitoba Telephone Act): Madam Speaker, I want to assure the Leader of the Opposition that the public interest is fust and foremost. I was asked a point-blank question: Would you be interested in buying shares? From a point of view of showing support for the company, I say, yes, if I am allowed to. If in the prospectus and the Manitoba Sec urities Commission I am allowed to, I would very gladly invest, but only if I am allowed to as a citizen. My position now is to advocate on behalf of the public, be sure that the process is handled responsibly.

If I am

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1763 given that freedom, I believe it is a very good investment. As many Manitobans have said in the last few days, it is a very good investment. Since it is a very good investment, all Manitobans who are eligible should have the right to do it, and that applies to members on this side. We will wait and see what the verdict is in terms of the prospectus and the view of the Manitoba Securities Commission. If they say I cannot, I will not, but ifl am allowed to, I think it is a good investment. Mr.

Doer: I am quite shocked with the answer of the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System. If he does not know whether he is in contravention of

Section 18 (1) of The Conflict oflnterest Act dealing with cabinet ministers that overrides a government-appointed securities commission in terms of their decisions, if he does not know whether he is in conflict of interest of The Conflict oflnterest Act of Manitoba, I would like to ask the Deputy Premier, or the Acting Premier, will he now make it clear for people who apparently do not know their role to represent the public interest rather than their own interest, that it is totally wrong and illegal for a minister of the Crown to be making individual, private purchases dealing with the public asset that that minister is responsible for in establishing a price on behalf of the public?

Is that not quite clear under

Section 18 of the conflict -of-interest guideline? Hon. Glen Cummings (Acting Premier): Madam Speaker, let me assure the Leader of the Opposition and members of the public that this government and ministers are absolutely committed to making sure the process is followed, that any legal requirements imposed on us are followed. I think if there is anything that we might be guilty of, it is enthusiasm with getting on with the job on behalf of the public of Manitoba. * (1 345) Mr.

Doer: The only enthusiasm we see from members opposite is to break their promise and to sell off public assets based on brokers who get commissions for selling those same assets. I would like to ask the Acting Premier of this province-[interjection] Well, I know the members do not understand that the asset, the telephone system, is not their own Progressive Conservative asset, it is the public of Manit oba. I know they do not understand it, but I would expect that the Acting Premier would understand it.

Section 18 of The Conflict oflnterest Act deals with insider information.

Given that it is only this government and this cabinet and this cabinet minister that has all the Wood Gundy reports and given it makes it very clear that you cannot represent the public interest in the morning and your individual private interest in the afternoon, would the Acting Premier make it clear today that the government and cabinet and the minister responsible will be only involved in the public interest, and that is in terms of the public telephone corpomtion, not involved and prohibited from making private purchases of shares because it is indeed a conflict of interest? Mr.

Cummings: I think the member opposite doth protest too much. Absolutely there is a commitment on this side of the House to make sure that the public interest comes first as it always has, and it always will. Headingley Correctional Institution Staffing Levels Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opp osition): Madam Speaker, I have a new question to the Acting Premier. Last week and throughout last weekend the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey) had repeatedly said that staffing levels were not responsible for the riot and the injury that took place at the Headingley Correctional Institution.

She maintained that position all last week. In fact, I asked the question about the 25 staffing persons on the evening shift on the security positions versus the 19 to down to 16 that were taking place at the Headingley Ins titution, and she said over and over again, staffmg levels were not an issue. In light of the fact that we have a serious situation in this province where the line correctional officers are saying staffing levels are an issue and will be an issue in their discussions with the government, who is telling us the truth, the Minister of Justice (Mrs.

Vodrey) who says staffmg levels are not an issue or the line correctional officers who tell us staffing levels and the deployment of staff are a very, very serious workplace safety and health issue for line correctional officers? Ron. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : The issues which have been raised

1764 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 by the correctional officers in relation to their concerns, we have made it absolutely clear, wherever there are issues which they are raising in the area of safety and security, we are more than willing and will be dealing with that issue. There are now committees in place which will start to deal with these issues as they are brought forward. We on the government side have named our representatives to the committee and government has made it clear that we will exarnirle the issues which are being brought forward.

Some of those issues, we understand, may be a ratio of staff issues, a ratio of correctional officers to program individuals. These issues we have made a commitment to examine with the correctional officers. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask again the Deputy Premier this same question. The minister has maintained over last weekend and all last week and in this House, in Hansard she said staffing levels were not an issue. Now we hear the correctional officers are saying that staffmg levels are an issue.

Was the Minister of Justice wrong when she told the public of Manitoba and the correctional officers that staffmg deployment was not an issue? Are the correctional officers now correct when they say that they have been raising this with the government, the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey), getting nowhere except talk from the governm ent, no action, Madam Speaker? Is the government now saying the correctional officers are correct and staffing deployments are a legitimate issue to be resolved, contrary to what the Minister of Justice said last week? Bon.

Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, for the information of members opposite, I would indicate for the House that we met with the M GEU this morning and we understand that the safety and health process has been agreed upon by the MGEU and the government. That is no longer an issue. The independent review is no longer an issue, and the resignation of senior officials in the Department of Justice is no longer an issue.

The only issue in dispute between the MGEU and the emplo yer is the issue of a separate bargaining unit, and we have indicated that we will sit down and work out some kind of a process in terms of discussing whether that is an appropriate course of action. *

(1350) Minister of Justice Resignation Request Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the Minister ofLabour did not answer any of the questions dealing with the public issues that are before us here in this Chamber. Many members of the public are telling us-and, I am sure, telling members opposite-that we have a Minister of Justice who is out of touch with reality, who maintained a position last week that the staffmg levels were not an issue in terms of the riot. Now we are hearing from the government that it may be an issue, contrary to what the Minister of Justice said.

We heard all kinds of things from the Minister of Justice, as we always do, a person who talks one way and acts another in terms of the reality of the situation here in Justice. I would like to ask the Acting Premier, in light of the fact that many discrepancies have now developed between the Minister of Justice, who is out of touch with her own department and the public and the safety of correctional officers, will we get the resignation from the Minister of Justice because she misled us on the staffing levels last year? Bon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, absolutely not to the resignation. However, let me tell you the areas where we have received information which supports a position of the information I received regarding staff ratio. We have examined, first of all, grievances. There were some grievances which have been pending. None of those grievances dealt with health or safety issues. They dealt with issues relating to sick benefits and also disciplinary action. We examined the Ombudsman who had, to my knowledge, approximately 47 cases.

None of those cases before the Ombudsman dealt with the issue of health and safety. I can also tell you that the issue of workplace safety told us that there were no outstanding orders. So before the Headingley disturbance, we had committees which were in place which were working with the institutions. We have made a commitment now, a

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1765 very finn commitment with our correctional officers, that we will deal with the issues which they have been bringing forward. There is a committee in place. We have named individuals. Those issues now are no longer part of the dispute of why those officers are not reporting for work. Headingley Correctional Institution Range Barriers Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

One of the knee-jerk denials of this minister to the Headingley riot that we have heard about is that the staffing levels, the inmate-to-staff ratio, was not a cause of the riot. So when we alleged last week, Madam Speaker, that the steel barrier wall which divided cell block 1 into two parts was recently removed, she said we were inaccurate and indeed her spokesperson said that no such barrier ever even existed. My question for the minister is: Would she get out of the way of the truth here and now admit that her department, in fact, removed this barrier, doubling the ratio of inmates to guards?

This is a cover-up. Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, let me just say to the people of Manitoba that there is no cover-up whatsoever, and that the issues which have been raised will all be thoroughly reviewed through a number of different areas. They will be reviewed through the internal investigation; they will be reviewed through the independent review; and they will be reviewed through the committee which was originally named the back-to work committee or Rebuilding Headingley Committee.

I understand that there was a comment which was reported in the media regarding one of my senior officials commenting on the wall and, Madam Speaker, I do not believe I made any comment on that whatsoever. However, I can say, in relation to the wall, there does seem to be some disagreement an10ng the correctional officers about whether or not that wall should be there or should not be there.

What is very important to us is that the correctional officers actually name the individuals they would like to have operate on their behalf-! believe they have done scrand that we get down to work, that we get down to the business of restoring Headingley to being an active institution. * (1 355) Mr. Mackintosh: Madam Speaker, if there is no cover up, would the minister explain this diagram which I will now table, which was created in around 1988 by the former systems and policy analyst for Headingley, which shows, by golly, that there is a barrier right there, the barrier in question. Why this cover-up?

I will also table the minister's response in this House to this specific question. Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, as I said, I understand that one of my officials spoke about a wall, and I have been speaking with information which I received. However, the issue is there is no effort to cover up. In fact, the effort of this government is to bring forward information and to deal with the issues. In order to do that, we have to have both sides at the table, both sides have to participate. We have made a commitment through the Workplace Safety and Health report which came down yesterday.

There were four recommendations to that report, and this government has supported all four of them. So where there are issues to be dealt with, we will be dealing with them and we will be dealing with them in a very full manner and expect to continue as quickly as we can get on with it. Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister also explain why the former supervisor of services at Headingley tells us that he was directed to oversee the taking down of the steel barrier about two years ago? Can anything be believed from this minister? Will she now resign? Mrs.

Vodrey: Madam Speaker, no, I will not resign, and now to the matter of the real issue. The real issue is to restore our institution to be a working institution, to be an institution of rigorous confinement. In order to do that, we have to have both sides at the table. This governm ent, Madam Speaker, has taken every step along the way in response to what the union has put forward in terms of their issues. Some of

1766 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 their issues dealt with health and safety matters. This government has agreed to examine each and every one of those. We will be looking at the committee. Some of the issues which have been immediately removed from the table are issues such as range bars, and as of last week that was clear. On that issue, by the way, that was only going to be dealt with by the committee at the institution dealing with it. The issue that is outstanding now is the issue which the Minister of Labour (Mr.

Toews) has raised and that is, will there be a separate and apart bargaining unit for correctional officers? That is the only issue outstanding at the moment. Manitoba Telephone System Privatization-Conflict of Interest Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, on Thursday, \\ithout any mandate from the public, without any consultation what soever, this government announced the sell-off of the Manitoba Telephone System, a public asset that we have held in this province since 1908, and the lack of concern for Manitobans is probably best exhibited by the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) who said that Manitobans are the shareholders in name only, which will come as a big surprise to one million Manitobans. I want to ask some very serious questions to this government about the process it is following, without any mandate whatsoever, in selling off this asset.

I would like to first ask the minister once again, since he had the opportunity earlier in Question Period to deal with the question of conflict of interest, does he not see there are some very serious questions involved with his statement today, given the fact that this government has already indicated it will not announce any of the details of the share offering until after this matter is dealt with by the Legislature in November? Does he not see that as a serious conflict of interest in his position and role as Minister responsible for MTS? Hon.

Glen Findlay (Minister responsible for the administration of The Manitoba Telephone Act): Madam Speaker, I am expressing the enthusiasm many Manitobans are expressing. It will be a good investment for Manitobans. It is well received by Manitobans as an opportunity. I want to be very clear to the member, if there is any degree of conflict or even any hint of perceived conflict, I will not be purchasing shares.

I am just an enthusiastic Manitoban who thinks it is a good deal for Manitobans, and I am surprised the member opposite does not see it that way because many indivi duals in Manitoba have spoken up and have said they are enthusiastic at the opportunity to invest in Manitoba, and I as a Manitoban believe in that principle. But I will be very clear to the member, any conflict of interest or any perceived conflict of interest, I will not even come near it. But if I am allowed to, as an enthusiastic Manitoban, I would like to. Mr.

Ashton: Madam Speaker, I will try again, and I will ask the minister. does he not see that there is a definite conflict of interest with

Section 18( 1) of The Conflict of Interest Act, and how does he expect Manitobans to believe anything other than that Tory friends gaining from inside knowledge will happen when he refuses to release information about the share price until after this matter is dealt with by the Legislature in November? Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, there is a due process that has to be followed. Legislation will be introduced. Once the legislation is passed, then the prospectus can be put together. The prospectus is then filed with the Manitoba Securities Commission. That is the process. Printization-Public Hearings Mr.

SteYe Ashton (Thompson): Well, as a final supplementary, I am just wondering, if the minister does not understand the difficulty with conflict of interest, will he at least commit the government to public hearings to be held throughout Manitoba and a referendum, something that has been requested not only by many Manitobans but by rural municipalities and by even members of the Chamber of Commerce, will he at least give Manitobans a say on the future of their telephone company? Hon.

Glen Findlay (Minister responsible for the administration of The Manitoba Telephone Act): Madam Speaker, I think it has become very clear to the member opposite, Manitobans support very strongly the initiative taken by this side of the House. They support it very strongly, and if he looks- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System, to complete his response.

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1767 Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, there is a lot of support out there from Manitobans. We will be presenting to them as much information as we can as fast as we can. Their speakers' bureau has been set up at the Manitoba Telephone System for any interested group that wants to have further information that can be presented to them. Madam Speaker, through the due process of legis lation, there will be first reading, second reading, there will be committee stage and then there will be third reading.

That is the normal process, and that is the opportunity for a lot of public input. But I want to remind the members opposite, we are getting a lot of information that would indicate-and certainly a lot of it is public now-that Manitobans support the initiative because we have protected the rights of Manitobans to have a preferential position in owning the phone company on into the future. * (1 400) Headingley Correctional Institution Reforms Mr.

Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Madam Speaker, I would like to table three reports to reference my question: a 1983 report, a 1989 report and a 1996 report in regard to Headingley Corr ectional Institution. Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. The three reports I tabled call for prison reform. To quote the '83 report: If this or future government administrators are not prepared to show leadership, then anything we or countless committees of the future recommend will not come to pass. Madam Speaker, leadership in managing reform has been absent.

Prisoners have rioted and guards are walking off the job. My question for the Minister of Justice is: Instead of trying to find scapegoats, will the minister accept responsibility and tell the people of Manitoba why these reforms did not work? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, certainly this government has brought in a number of reforms which we believe are in the interest of public safety of Manitobans. We have brought forward reforms which deal with the issue of temporary absences.

We have brought forward reforms which deal with whether or not someone at the end of their sentence can serve a reduced time. It is our opinion, they should not unless it is earned. Madam Speaker, we have brought forward a number of reforms. We have also made it very clear that we would like inmates within our institutions to work a full day, and that the opinion of this government is that there should not simply be idle time within our institutions but that time should be put forward working a full day. That is what we have said; that is exactly the way we are proceeding. Mr.

Kowalski: Will the minister acknowledge that the '83 and '89 reports, which said guards should not be frozen out of the reform process, were ignored and that her department continued its closed-door policy, killing the reform process before it even got started? Mrs. Vodrey: No, I totally reject what the member has brought forward. There are committees operating in each one of our institutions which deal with issues which correc tional officers wish to bring forward and they are discussed with management, so in fact there is a mechanism.

However, Madam Speaker, if that communication process was not effective and if that is one of the issues which correctional officers want to bring forward for discussion, then we have made it clear we are more than prepared to discuss it. Our goal is now to look at the situation that has been brought forward. We want to make every effort to make sure that our institutions are effective, and we will continue to work with our correctional officers to do that. That is the commitment that has been made by this government; that is the commitment that to my knowledge has been accepted by the union. Mr.

Kowalski: Will the minister agree that because her department failed to manage reform, they are responsible for the Headingley riot, and now Manitobans have to foot a $2-million clean-up bill? Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, the member has arrived at his own conclusion far ahead of any independent review, far ahead of any internal review. In his mind, you

1768 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 would need no review. In his mind, he has decided on the reasons. This government wants to make sure that we have a very detailed view and report of exactly what led up to and what occurred at the time of the Headingley disturbance. That is why we have, in fact, the two independent reviews, one internal review and one indep endent review, which I expect to be announcing very soon. The Minister of Government Services (Mr.

Pallister) will be able to provide much mon! detailed information on how exactly we are covering the: damages which were done to Headingley jail, and I am sure in a further question he will be more than happy to outline those issues. Central Health Services Back-up Services Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, last fall the government gave out a huge contract to do home care services to Central Health Services in the amount of $650,000.

Can the minister explain why the government home care service has to provide back-up service to this private company and is that not illustrative of what the problems will be in the private home care industry if we let this government have its way? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health) :: Madam Speaker, I think the member said something about last fall a contract being let. I do not recall any outpouring of concern on his part at that time. I do not recall any outpouring of concern when a contract was let to do home intravenous therapy services from the St. Boniface General Hospital.

The honourable member is a Johnny come-lately . Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, why would the minister not hold off his privatization scheme until we would have an opportunity to examine this Central Health contract which the government slipped through and which we were forced to get by going through Freedom of Information? Mr. McCrae: Nothing of the kind is the reality, Madam Speaker. In fact, the Seven Oaks project report dating back to February of 1995 was certainly not something slipped through. We had a great big press conference over at the Seven Oaks General Hospital.

The honourable member for Kildonan was there, smiling his approval for evel)thing that was going on then. He is a Johnny-come-lately. Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, my final supple mental)· to the minister: If the minister's privatization plan is so great for the people of Manitoba, why would the minister not hold off the privatization until they had an opportunity to examine the Central Health contract which has not yet expired, which is having lots of problems where the government sen"ice is forced to provide back-up?

Why would the government not be willing to take that plan, study it for a year. then go back with their proposalLbecause they have no evidence to justify priYatization. Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, the position of the New Democrats, as enunciated by the honourable member for Kildonan, their Health critic, and I quote: go back to the system we had in the first place. Now he wants us to hold off for another year or longer any further improvements in the Home Care program. He is the first one to remind me that his o"n Price Waterhouse report is 10 years old and that we ought not to refer to it.

Well, 10 years ago we were told about inefficiencies, by Price Waterhouse. Ten years ago we were told about a lack of responsi veness, by Price Waterhouse. Ten years ago we were told about inconsistent application of services across this city and province. That was commissioned by the NDP. By the way, their response was user fees and cuts in SCf\1ces, which is something they today deny. But 10 years ago these problems were in existence. Not enough has been done to resolve them. We are attempting to resolve them. The honourable member says, oh, wait another year. The clients of home care cannot wait another year.

Regional Health Boards Budget Surpluses Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): When the government announced their plan to move to regional health boards, existing health boards were told that the initial operating budget of the regional health boards and the interim administration structure would have no impact on their funding, and this money would come from a separate line.

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1769 You can imagine the shock regional health boards felt when they got a letter from Mr. Duprey, which I will table, indicating that Manitoba Health will be redirecting up to 50 percent of the facilities' surpluses for the operation of the regional health board. I want to ask the minister why he has betrayed the existing health boards by first telling them that they should set up surpluses and now taking the money that they need to deal with crises. Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the department has been made aware of the displ easure of the various boards and administrations across the province, especially those that have surpluses when it comes to the financing of the operations of the new health boards. We have taken that expression of dis appointment quite seriously, made our health care consultants available for discussions with the various boards and administrations. We are attempting to resolve this ISSUe. * (1 4 10) Ms.

W owchuk: I wanted to ask the minister if he will not admit that it is absolutely hypocritical on their part to take this money away. I will quote members who say, who in their right mind would not put money away for hard times? Why are you taking this money away when you have told regional health boards that they should be setting up surpluses? Why are you taking it away and setting up surpluses for yourself? Mr.

McCrae: I already answered that we are attempting to resolve the concerns that board chairs, members and administrations have, but the honourable member's question really gives away the real philosophy of the New Democrats in two areas. First off, it is not a good idea to have a surplus, always spend what you can and more, No. 1; and No. 2, she forgets altogether whose money it is we are talking about, the money belongs to the taxpayers of Manitoba. Ms. W owchuk: I would ask the minister to remember that we left them a surplus. We certainly- Madam Speaker: Order, please.

The honourable member for Swan River, to pose her final supplementary question. Ms.Wowchuk: Will the Minister of Health communicate immediately through the regional health boards to let them know that they are not going to be recapturing the surpluses that they have built up and put some certainty back into these hospital boards? Mr. McCrae: The honourable member's questions about the so-called 1988 surplus made me think that our poor Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) over here is like the Maytag repairman.

Honourable members opposite do not have any questions for the Minister of Finance because he is handling our fiscal situation so well in our province. The allegation that honourable members left us with a surplus is- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Health, to complete his response. Mr. McCrae: The suggestion about a surplus left in 1988 is a bitter kind of irony and a bitter joke.

There is some $600 million going to the creditors of the Province of Manitoba that is not going to our hospitals, that is not going to home care, that is not going to all the other health and social services that we value so much, thanks to the balanced and surplus budget of the New Democratic Party in 1988. What a joke, Madam Speaker. Education System Physical Education Curriculum Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, this government seems determined to not have children and youth in Manitoba participate in physical education.

There is, first of all, the problem that they do not understand, that it is counterproductive to sacrifice physical education and health education, one for the other. Second, there is a problem that they are creating ultimate and utter confusion in the community with respect to how these courses are to be scheduled. I want to, first of all, table a directive from the minister's office from April 22 where she indicated that there should be a reduction of 40 percent of physical education in our schools. Secondly, I want to table a letter from the Deputy Minister of Education responding

1770 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 to the confusion that there has been caused, and saying that the department's intent is to go to 75- Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am sure the honourable member for Radisson has a question. The honourable member for Radisson, to pose a question. Ms. Cerilli: My question for the minister is, why has she sent different directives to the principals and superintendents in this province and then another directive in a letter to the dean of physical education? Will she send the same information into all the schools and all the physical educators in the province:• Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Tr aining): I am so embarrassed for the member that I hardly know where to begin. We have been through all this in Estimates. The member put forward the same misinformation she just put forward now. We have corrected that all for her, clarified for her her misreading of the situation. Perhaps, in order to correct the record that she has just created here by putting what she knows absolutely to be wrong on the record, I should maybe say what actually did happen here.

As the Speaker may know and the members of the House may know, physical education, there will be a new curriculum written. It has not yet been \Hitten. That curriculum will blend health and physical education to take a look at the whole business of a fit lifestyle. That is very important. There are a lot of things about that I could say, but I do not want to take all the time to explain that, although it is very interesting, very appropriate, very necessary. In setting down the guidelines, we have indicated that we will be moving to 75 percent phys ed, 25 percent health.

That has been talked about with all of the people involved, and it is eminently satisfactory In the meantime, we will be remaining at the 60/40 split that has always been there. The letter of clarification went out when we were extending the deadlines. The phys ed teachers misunderstood it, wrote-the physical education teachers have subsequently apologized for having mislmderstood that, and the letter that they have written reflects that. Ms.

Cer illi: Madam Speaker, if what the minister is saying is true and there is no confusion in the community, why were the physical educators at the recent Forum 3 asking the question: What percentage breakdown is your administrator using to make next year's decisions-50/50, 65/35, 60/40 for health and phys ed? There is a lot of confusion- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, as I was indicating, I have struck a minister's advisory committee on the implementation of educational change.

That committee has the Manitoba Teachers' Society, school superintendents. school trustees, parents and educators at-large on it. In talking about the new curriculum, new guidelines and time lines, that committee had recommended an extension of time for some of the new changes because the field, they felt. required more time to make the adjustment. That extra time was granted, and a letter was sent to the field saying. the new way will come into existence later than was originally planned at your request; in the meantime, you will carry on using the old system.

The physical education teachers at a quick cursory glance thought that we meant that the old system was staying in place. They immediately got upset. realized their mistake. sent a letter of apology, apologized to my deputy for misunderstanding. This member IS now implying that the misund erstanding is the thing that is correct, and she knows because we went through it in Estimates. I really object to what she is trying to do here with the game that she is playing It is not correct. Ms.

Cerilli: Madam Speaker, I am going to table a document from the Physical Education Teachers' Associ ation which will show that the information the minister has put on the record is inaccurate. I would like her to clarify, gi,·en that she had said: The agreement they have come to with the deputy minister meets their needs and they tell us it does; quite frankly, they have indicated their satisfaction. I would like her to explain that, in view of the information I just gave to her which states clearly that the field is not satisfied with this proposal.

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1771 Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, I would be happy to go through all of this again for her in detail in Estimates when I can go through step by step and have the time to properly address the questions that she has put. The history on this would take a long time to go through, but the fmal result is this: The physical education teachers are very satisfied with the 75/25 split that we will be going to. Everyone acknowledges that health has to be a component of physical education.

It is not enough, as the member said in Estimates, to have the students touching their toes. They must also understand why it is necessary to exercise, what the movement of blood through the circulatory system does for oxygen to the brain, et cetera. They need to understand the psychology of fitness as well as just learning how to touch their toes. We all know that. The physical education teachers know that. The member for Radisson is trying to just-1 do not know-play silly games. Madam Spea ker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. * (14 20) MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Mennonite Organizations Manitoba Works Mr.

Peter Dyck (Pembina): Madam Speaker, as the MLA for Pembina, we have a wide range of ethnic, cultural and religious diversities. Many people from many backgrounds form the building blocks that make up our constituency. Today, I want to recognize one group from among many worthy groups, and they are the Mennonite people. There are three Mennonite organizations that have joined forces to help Winnipeggers on social assistance and employers to get together so people can make the transition from welfare to work. In other words, as opposed to offering a handout, Winnipeggers are being offered a hand up.

The three Mennonite organizations spearheading this initiative are the Mennonite Central Committee, the Mennonite Economic Development Associates, and this is the Winnipeg chapter, and the Trainex Centre, a division of the Winkler-based Eden Health Care Services. Madam Speaker, I know many people personally who are part of these Mennonite organizations who since the times of the World Wars have reached out to help those in need through food, shelter, clothing and medical relief.

A good deal of that overseas service has also found representation in our own city of Winnipeg through the support of the aforementioned Mennonite organizations which have a broad base of support in rural Manitoba. These three Mennonite organizations are working together in a govermn ent-funded project called Manitoba Works: Opportunities for Employment. The program is designed to screen, select and train welfare recipients for placement into jobs with commercial organizations.

MCC Manitoba will co-ordinate the two-year pilot project which is designed to find jobs for about 100 people during the first year of operation, and up to 250 people in subsequent years. With the commitment of the Mennonite business community wealth behind them, this venture-! know that this innovative program will be a success. It is my pleasure to recognize the work of the Mennonite Central Committee, the Mennonite Economic Development Associates and the Trainex Centre. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Manitoba Telephone System Privatization Ms.

Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, the Conservative decision to privatize Manitoba Telephone System is an outright broken promise. Before and during the election the Conservatives said that they would not sell MTS. Premier Filmon himself said just last month, I can say unequivocally that we did not have privatization of the Manitoba Telephone System under active consideration at all during the election. The privatization scheme will only benefit the few. The winners will be big corporations, telecommunication companies and other major users of long-distance services.

The losers will be 75 percent of Manitobans who will see rates rise for guaranteed profits of new owners. The unilateral decision made by the Filmon government to privatize Manitoba Telephone is undemocratic. In March, over 70 people at a public meeting in Swan River expressed opposition to the selling of MTS. Over

1772 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 40 rural communities and organizations passed resolutions urging the government to maintain MTS as a publicly owned Crown corporation. These communities and others include Minitonas, Pelic an Rapids, Brandon, Selkirk, Dauphin, and the Manitoba Association of Urban Municipalities itself at its annual convention last month. Over 15, 000 ballots have been sent to the NDP from Manitobans stating they want MTS to remain under public ownership.

The government refuses to consult the public, who are the owners of MTS, because they know Manitobans want MTS to be kept as a Crown corporation. It has been proven in countries like Britain that privatization translates often to reduced services at the consumer level, combined with hefty raises fo r the company insiders and friends of government. In Manitoba there are alternatives to privatization. Over $2 billion has been raised through the sale of HydroBonds in the past six years .

Rather then selling Manitoba Telephone System, the government should look at bonds to generate the revenue fo r MTS like they did fo r Manitoba Hydro. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Morris Community Recognition Award Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris): Madam Speaker, recently had the pleasur e of participating in the recognition of two rural Manitobans who are making a diff erence to their local community of Morris, and to any and all who have ever driven through their fine town. Those two individuals are John and Sarah Remple, residents of Morris since 19 69.

John and Sarah Remple were recently awarded the Community Recognition Award by the people of Morris because of their tireless and selfless efforts to make Morris the kind of place you would like to visit, drive through and live in. John and Sarah Remple were recognized because they have almost single -handedly taken the people of Morris down a new path of expression. It was the Rem ples' house during our wonderful Manitoba winters that came to be somewhat fam ous for its elaborate and always-expanding Christmas light displays.

Soon others were fo llowing this lead and bef ore we knew it, Morris was caught up in a desire to send good cheer to those who passed through Morris. During the summ er, the Rcmples took full advantage of our sunbathed province to put their green thumbs to work. They saw to it that the main street of Morris had flower planters with a veritab le cornucopia of horticultural splendour. Their initiatives led to Morris's Communities in Bloom campaign which encouraged others to spruce up their yards and, by extension, the community as a whole.

Then, Madam Speaker, to add to this, John and Sarah Remple are fe verishly busy with other volunteer work in their community. They arc active in their church. They participate in a wide range of committee and volunteer work, and their home is knmm as having an open-door policy fo r both fa mily and friends . It is citizens such as John and Sarah Remple who have made it their goal to beautif)' the space in which they live. That kind of action and attitude is thankfully contagious, and the community of Morris has benefited from their work.

By extension. those who travel through Morris are wel comed with these eff orts, eff orts which make our province all the more attractive to those who live here and to those who visit. It is my pleasure to recognize John and Sarah Remple of Morris, recipients of the Morris Community Recognition Award. Manitoba Telephone System Privatization Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, this Conservative government broke an election promise once they announced the privatization of MTS.

Just last month, Premier Filmon stated, I can say unequivocally that we did not have privatization of Manitoba Telephone System under active consideration at all during the election. Aside from this broken election promise, the Filmon government neglected to consult the owners of MTS bef ore they decided to sell it off. These O\\ners are the citizens of Manitoba. As late as last fa ll, the government denied that they were considering selling MTS. It was not until the NDP was leaked inf ormation that the government hired brokerage firms to begin the process of selling MTS that the public was notified.

This is not the public accountability and open government that was

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1773 promised in the last throne speech. It is clear that this government does not have the guts to face Manitobans on this issue, in particular, rural Manitobans who will suffer the most as a result of privatization. As a direct result of MTS being publicly owned, up until now Manitobans have enjoyed the second lowest phone rates in North America. This will change with privatization. In Alberta, the privately owned AGT has increased local phone rates by $6 a month so far this year.

This government is more concerned with ensuring that their big business friends have the opportunity to profit off our publicly owned utility than they are about ensuring that rural Manitobans have efficient phone service . Mr. Findlay, the minister himself, even stated that he will be the first in line to buy MTS shares for his own personal gain. He stated, I personally, if I am allowed to, will definitely want to. I consider it a very good investment as a Manitoban and my family will too. Mr. Findlay will use his insider information to make a buck off Manitoba's telephone system.

What about those rural Manitobans who will no longer be able to afford phone service as a result of this personal greed? I am appalled at this government's arrogance, the very fact that this government feels justified to unilaterally privatize the publicly owned utility without public consultation is disturbing and dangerous. Thank you, Madam Speaker. *

(1430) Point of Order Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Madam Spe aker, on a point of order, I do realize that this is Members' Statements, but I would like to remind the honourable member that we do refer to our members in this House as the honourable minister, not by his name. Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On the same point of order, Madam Speaker, I think you might also want to remind the member that he is not curren tly sitting in the Chair, and he should not be handing out procedural advice.

If he is going to rise on a matter of order, he should address it to you and ask you to make the ruling on this particular matter. Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order, yes, I was somewhat disturbed by some of the language used by the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers), and I would remind the honourable member for Dauphin that he should exercise discretion in selection and choice of his words. Gimli Representative 1996 Olympic Games Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I would like to take this time to speak briefly about a young lady from my constituency.

Niki Jenkins is a 22-year-old Selkirk native who will be representing Canada at the upcoming Olympic Games to be held in Atlanta. Miss Jenkins earned her spot by winning her fourth straight national title at the Judo Senior Nationals held in Quebec City on April 20. Miss Jenkins proved beyond a doubt that she deserved to be the Canadian going to Atlanta in her weight class after earning her berth for her country at the world championship in Tokyo.

In the space of an average commercial break during your favourite sitcom, she dispatched three more opponents and claimed her prize, punctuating the performance with a tournament-ending move on Quebec's Karin Blanchet, a move that even some of her top-level judges had never seen before. Miss Jenkins has been seeking to compete in the Olympics since the 1992 Olympic Trials, which included both the 199 1 and '92 nationals. At the 199 1 nationals, Miss Jenkins lost a split decision to the reigning champion.

After much training, Miss Jenkins again lost in the 1992 nationals; however, perseverance and a tremendous positive attitude has resulted in her Olympic dream fmally being realized. Miss Jenkins has now left for a training camp in Japan as part of her final prepara tions for the Atlanta games. On behalf of all Manitobans, I would like to wish her, Miss Jenkins, the best of luck at the Olympics and further relate to her our pride at her accomplishments to date. Miss Jenkins represents the noble spirit of sports, and it is only fitting that we have chosen her to represent Canada. Good luck, Miss Jenkins. *

(1440) 17 74 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 19 96 ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, on a matter of House business, there is agreement amongst House leaders that for Thursday, May 9, and Friday, May 10 , the order of Estimate:s will be changed to allow for the Department of Environment to be dealt with on those dates, reverting thm to the Department of Education on Monday, May 13, I guess it is-anyway, whichever date the following Monday is.

So ju st for the 9th and lOth, Thursday and Friday, that would be Environment, and we will go back into Education then following that. Madam Speaker: Agreed? [agreed] Mr. Ernst: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider the :Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty, \\ith the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr.

McAlpine) in the Chair for the Department of Education and Training; and the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for the Department of Health. COM MITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) EDUCATION AND TRAINING Th e Acting Chairperson (Mr. Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this

section of the Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 255, will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Education and Training. When the committee last sat it had been considering item 2.(e)(

l) on page 36 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass? Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask the minister about an

article in the Sun today which suggested that Seine River School Division believes that the new curriculum proposals will diminish the possibil ities for having high school work experience credit courses. I wonder if the minister would like to give us some information on that. Is this indeed the case? Is this one school divisi on which is the only one that believes this? Did the minister see the article, and what response is she making to it? Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Just before I begin my answer, I had indicated on Friday that I would table information on the Access programs. on BUNTEP and the Winnipeg Education Centre I have that information here today. three copies for tabling. as requested. If the

article had said that we were cutting, then that is not correct. We are not diminishing the capability of school divisions to have work education. There are two ways. and the member may be familiar with this. either through school-initiated courses or student-initiated programs.

What we are doing is we are saying that both the SIC and the SIP, as they are called, must now have outcomes as well so that they cannot just have a school-initiated course wit h no outcomes that are being sought or measured The way it \\ill work is that the school-initiated courses and the SIPs \\ill iden�· what outcomes they are looking to achieve. They can still for graduation purposes have SICs and SIPs counted. They can have four SICs and two SIPs for a total of six that they can use for graduation.

The opportunity is there for students to have up to 25 percent of their graduation credits achieved under student-initiated or school-initiated courses. So any indication that such courses are going to be cut and that there be no opportunity to have them is not a correct indication because that is there for them.

As I say, however, we will be asking for outcomes along with the work that is being given Another opportunity that we have discussed with the field for a work experience is the introduction of two new policy guidelines which will be called locally developed, department-approved and the other one will be called externally developed, department-approved curriculum, and those two are underway . This thrust will provide schools the opportunity to use the expertise of the globe

May 6, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 75 through the Internet and access excellent externally developed content; for example, curriculum that might be developed by a corporation or by scientific authorities or by an academically rich organization, entities of that sort. Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, this

section of the department also deals with increased use of technology. I wondered if the minister could tell me about the progress, if any, that Manitoba schools have made in being hooked up to the Internet. How many schools are hooked up and does the minister have information on that, and does she have a plan for the coming year on the expansion oflnternet activities in Manitoba schools? * (14 50) Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, that particular detail would come under 16.5(

g) with MERLIN. In this one, with the programming, we can talk about the kinds of curricula, that type of thing, but the technical

part in terms of the hook-ups, et cetera, would come under the MERLIN designation. We could, if the member wishes, go through some of the programm ing work in terms of technology, but the numbers of schools hooked up in that come under that other section. We do not have the MERLIN people here. Ms. Friesen: Can the minister tell us how many schools are using, in distance education, courses in Manitoba, and bv that I do not mean correspondence courses, although I know that is part of the definition, how many are using distance education through other technologies other than correspondence courses? Mrs.

Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, on a daily basis, I could indicate that Midland, Elm Creek, Carman, the Evergreen-Interlake School Divisions, Gimli, Riverton, Ashern, Fisher Branch, the Swan Valley area, they have teleteaching. In terms of program implementation, the northern regional team is active in this area. They have seconded a consultant to provide a linkage between departmental initiatives and technology in northern school divisions and to enhance teachers' teaching strategies in the area of technology.

That consultant provides practical hands-on demonstrations in the implementation of various computer technologies, regularly visits schools to discuss initiatives and to assess and assist with the implementation of technology in the classroom, also providing in-service for teachers on the . effecti:e. use ?f technology in the classroom and assistmg divisiOns m developing plans for the integration of technology into the classroom. We have a total of23 Distance Education pilot projects underway .

Thirteen pro jects and their evaluations have been completed, 10 are ongoing, and the final evaluations will be completed in the fall of '97. Forty-eight school divisions and seven school districts have received grants for profess ional development in Distance Education and Technology totalling 1,7 42 educators to be impacted by these grants. We have about 650 schools on the Internet via the MINET. We have 15 wor kshops having been delivered related to technology integration to educators.

Twenty-five schools have been selected as sites for technology and resource centres for the '96-97 school year and we have had a series of workshop s organized by Manitoba Education and Training delivered by suppliers just held recently, January and February of this year. For bilingual education, we have technology in bilingual education. We held a workshop on that, a two day in-service on technology in Ukrainian language education held in Selkirk last year, and there will be a follow-up to that this year which will include teachers from Ukrainian, German and Hebrew bilingual education.

On the topic of languages, while I am talking about it, there was also an in-service for Ukrainian language teachers on the invitation of New Directions in the Ukrainian bilingual schools. We are working to develop a series of computer assisted language learning resources that have been made available to all teachers of German in Manitoba. That was developed through the department in collaboration with the University of Manitoba, the department of Germanic studies and the Republic of Germany. A series of workshops were held on that from October '95 to March '96 with over 10 0 participants in that.

I do not know if I am on the right track in terms of what you are looking for. I just conclude, and I will wait for the next question by indicating that 80 percent of the public schools have toll free access to Internet, and MERLIN mana ges about 12 ,400 educational users of the Internet. Ms. Friesen: My original question was how many schools are involved in the Internet, and the minister, I

1776 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 think, said in her response 650 schools, but then later on she said 80 percent of public schools are connected to the Internet. I am not sure how those two figures mesh. Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, 650 are actually on the Internet. Eighty percent have toll-free access to the Internet. Ms. Friesen: Are those 80 percent distributed throughout Manitoba, or is it predominantly the metropolitan schools? Mrs.

Mcintosh: Again, we really should have Dan Kerr here to provide some of the detail from MERLIN, but it is a safe statement I think to make that the majority of that 80 percent would be in the areas of the province that have a fairly decent sized population in terms of numbers, which would mean primarily the southern part of the province as opposed to the North, particularly some of the remote areas. Ms.

Friesen: This part of the department is also involved in the piloting of various programs, and during the course of Question Period, I think in the fall, I raised with the minister the problems encountered in Lord Selkirk School Division with the math curriculum. I wondered if the minister had done any follow-up on that, if there had been any evaluation of the problems that Lord Selkirk had encountered and the reasons for their withdrawal from the testing of the high school level new mathematics programs.

At the time they indicated there was not enough support in terms of professional development and that the resource materials and textbooks were not available. Did the minister evaluate that, and are there any reports available? Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, this is an area where we had 28 school divisions taking

part in a pilot. Twenty seven of them are h umm ing right along. One of them, Lord Selkirk, felt that their students were not going to do as well on these exams as they had on the other types of testing they had done. It was too rigorous, they felt, so they pulled out. As I say, the other 27 are h umm ing along. Lord Selkirk made this decision early in the process and that is their choice. Nobody is forced to be on a pilot if they think that they philosophically do not approve of the approach or feel they are not quite up to the task.

Nobody forces them to participate in a pilot, but looking at their concerns, it appeared that is what their concern boiled do'\\n to. The new examination has a focus on problem-solving. They did not feel that they had their students prepared to the level where they could do well on a problem-solving, focus-based exam, but in looking into their concerns they were not found to have the degree of concern that the superintendent there expressed. * (1 500) The Math 20-S. which focuses on a theoretical mathematics. complements Applied Math 20- S, which is also being piloted during the '95-96 year.

Both courses are based on the western framework for 1 0 to 12 mathematics. Math 20 -S has an increased emphasis on problem solving, as I said. and a corresponding decrease in the more traditional. rote, repetitive exercises that characterized its predecessor, Math 20-G. So students who had been just simply memorizing and going through, of course. would not have had a lot of, over time, experience in problem solving. This move towards problem soh·ing makes a big change in the mathematics curriculum.

But just to indicate what we found out when we looked into it, in looking at some of the allegations that were in that letter. we noted that in fact teachers involved in the Math 20-S pilot received a Mathematics 20-S pilot document and a two-day orientation and training session in the summ er. Subsequently, since that time, pilot teachers met three times to discuss their progress in field vali dation. They have also received additional support materials, both commercially and teacher developed.

The pilot teachers indicate that students who participate in the '94-95 Senior 1 math pilot, which has a similar focus, are much better equipped to handle the more challenging Math 20-S. The mathematics kindergarten to Grade 12 steering committee at its December 11 , 1995, meeting discussed the whole issue of Senior 2 math courses. That committee affirmed the department's approach to senior year courses. I think that probably is the most valid vindication of all. Lord Selkirk, of course, had already withdrawn from the Math 20-S pilot project and, to date, all pilots, with the exception of that one, are continuing

May 6, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 17 77 on with their Math 20-S for the second year. The senior years math pilot projects are being established for a two year period to the end of 1998, which will allow adequate time for commercial print resources to match those available in the western framework and Manitoba's mathematics programs.

The steering committee, which affirmed that the department's approach to senior year courses was the correct one, consisted of Linda Burnell from Brandon-these are all teachers, by the way-Cheryl Collins from Transcona-Springfield-the first was an early-years teacher, the second is a middle-years teacher-Brent Corrigan from St. James-Assiniboia, who is with the Manitoba Association of Mathematics Teachers; Jim Ferguson from St. Paul's High School, which is an independent school; Jack Fraser from St.

Vital School Division from the Manitoba Teachers' Society; Lenna Glade from Transcona-Springfield, Manitoba Association of Principals; Lars Jansson from the University of Manitoba, Faculty of Education, representing the universities; Gene Karlik, Red River Community College, representing the community colleges ; Joanne Peters, Winnipeg School Division No. 1, a teacher-librarian; Norbert Philippe, St. Vital School Division, representing the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents; Roy Schellenberg from St.

Boniface School Division, representing the Manitoba Association of School Trustees; Martin Simmons from the band-operated schools, representing the Manitoba Association of Parent Councils; Grant Woods from the University of Manitoba, faculty of discipline, representing the universities; Joseph Combiadakis, Education and Training, Bureau de !'education francaise division; and Wayne Watt, Education and Training, School Programs Division. Those people, in looking at the way the pilot was going, felt that we were on the right track, and while Ms.

Bagnall from Lord Selkirk did not-as I say, she has a smaller group of companions, shall I say, than those who hold the opposite perspective. (Mr. Ben Sveinson, Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair) Ms. Friesen: I think this was a decision of the Lord Selkirk trustees, and I think the concerns that were expressed dealt with professional development and with materials available.

Those were the two specific issues I was discussing, and I wondered if there had been a specific evaluation by the groups that the minister made reference to on those particular issues, and since it is continuing to be piloted this coming year, what provision has been made for the provision of a textbook, for example? Is that available yet? I believe that was not available at the time. The minister also made reference to certain kinds of materials; she said commercially developed and teacher developed.

I wonder if perhaps we could look at what the difference is between those, which teachers developed it, for what levels, and how were they distributed. * (15 10 ) Mrs. Mcintosh: As I indicated earlier, the teachers had received the pilot orientation, and during that orientation which took place in the summ er before the pilot began, they were taken through over a few days the pilot document which was provided to them. That pilot document outlined the goals and outcomes that were sought in the pilot. We can give you that hundred-page document.

As I said we went through it with them so that they could become familiar with it before they began teaching. They have met several times since then to go over the progress. They have the additional support materials as I indicated, and those materials, as they work with them, are being identified via Western Protocol. In the next three or four months, there will be a call for actual textbooks.

Right now they do not have a textbook per se, they are working from the pilot document and suggesting others, but the pilot document outlines all of the outcomes expected in the work that is being done in that particular mathematics course. We have not received complaints similar to those from Lord Selkirk from the other pilot projects. When the first concerns came forward from Lord Selkirk, our consultant offered to meet parents and teachers to discuss the views, explain the scope, the focus, to off er assi stance, et cetera, but the division decided not to avail itself of that opportunity for whatever reason.

They did not proceed to accept the department's offer to have the consultant meet with, as I say, parents, teachers, whomever, to go through all of the information that they had indicated they needed. I do not know why they chose not to follow up on that; that was their choice because they are not obliged to participate in a pilot. If they did not want the additional information or if they chose not to have others concerned receive that information, there is no desire on the part of

17 78 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 19 96 the Education department to force ourselves on people who do not wish to avail themselves of opportunities. That is what local autonomy is about. The same schools this fall will be piloting a second year to provide more feedback before the course is finalized. As I say, we have had no similar letter of concern come from any of the other 2 7 as came forward from Lord Selkirk. Ms. Friesen: The minister said that the call for actual textbooks was going out soon.

When would that textbook be produced and does the minister anticipate that this final year of piloting will in fact be done without a textbook? If so, what is the validity of a pilot if you do not have the textbook there ? Mrs. Mcintosh: I indicate to the member that the question indicates part of the dependence the system has had for years on textbooks, rote learning, repetition, et cetera. The schools have the curriculum; they have the outcomes, the pilot document, the in-servicing, the shared feedback and communications, the input and assistance from the department.

The textbook will reflect the curriculum and how it has worked in the schools, the outcomes and how they have been done. The textbook is not the curriculum. The curriculum dictates what should be learned; the textbook is a tool, one of many and oftentimes a very valuable tool. But it is not th{: textbook that determines what learning will be. It is the curriculum, the outcomes, and the pilot document that the teachers were provided with. Of course, we supplied that for them. The pilot teachers were also building together, fully unplementing the notion of resource-based learning.

The pilot teachers also do a unit of building together so that they can implement that notion of resource-based learning. I would hope that, while we appreciate the value of a good text to augment the curriculum, we would not get it backwards; we know which should come first. We expect that text to be completed and available probably sometime in the middle of the next school year. * (1 520 ) Ms. Friesen: My concern was dealing with evaluation of a pilot project. Evaluation to me includes all the resources that are being used.

The textbook is one standard, comparable element of a course which can be evaluated, and my concern is that a proper pilot project evaluation should include the evaluation of the usefulness of a textbook. You can get lousy textbooks; you can have very good textbooks. You have to evaluate those as part of the course that you are piloting. If it is not going to be available until the middle of next term or the middle of next academic year. I am concerned about the level of evaluation that may be possible as a result of that, and I wondered what the delay has been and why such a delay.

We were looking at a Western Consortium textbook. I understand that much of the math curriculum, in any case, has come from Manitoba with a Manitoba leadership. I am puzzled as to why the textbook should be in a sense coming in at the end of this proc ess. Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, perhap s it might be of some benefit if I indicated how these textbooks are being put together. Unlike the past, when we would sort of go to a publisher and buy a book off the she!( so to speak. these are custom-designed textbooks. We are having these textbooks produced for us based upon our experience with the curriculum.

Maybe understanding the why and the process here might help indicate the way things are being done now versus how they used to be done in the old days . In the old days, you would buy a textbook off the shelf and then you would try to sort of bend your curriculum around it. What we are doing now is, through the Western ProtocoL the teachers are called together to review textual material and electronic software. First, we identifY the outcomes and the curriculum and the pilot document.

Those are taught in the classroom The draft product then for a text that accompanies this is gleaned from the curriculum work in the classroom, and the draft product from the publisher is then custom designed to fit what the teachers of the pilot indicate they want, and distribution will then occur. The beauty of this system is that you end up with a textbook that is designed specifically for your curricula based upon feedback from teachers, and the cost becomes far less, as well, because when you have several jurisdictions purchasing together, of course, you have the volume which enables the cost to come down.

So I have to indicate again that there are a lot of materials in terms

May 6, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 79 of what is being taught in the classroom to assist with the curricula and the outcomes and the pilot which are all there in the classroom with the teachers working together with in-servicing, et cetera. The first interjurisdictional learning resource project occurred in March of this year with the K to 9 mathematics resources, and a bilingual Manitoba learning resource team comprised of 15 teachers and three departmental consultants participated in the review which was in Edmonton.

Over 2,000 print and multimedia learning resources were evaluated for listing as cur riculum-matched key resources for the K to 9 mathematics, and Manitoba, of course, has access to the resulting key learning resource database and evaluation reports which will be updated regularly. This information will assist in identifYing materials for inclusion in the Manitoba Textbook Bureau catalogue and the department's library. * (1530 ) So it is a different way that we are teaching. It is different material that we are teaching.

It is a different way of developing that material that is being taught, and the old habits and the old ways of developing these things are slightly modified. I am not saying that they have been thrown out. We do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water, because we do recognize the benefit of good textbooks and how helpful they can be.

There will be a chance to evaluate the text once it is out in the latter portion of next year, but that text, when it comes, will mirror the curricula that is being taught, and that curriculum already has material identifYing it within the classroom and with the teachers teaching the pilot. Ms.

Friesen: The process of teacher-led instructions for the drafting of textbooks and its tailoring to the curriculum sounds to me very similar to the process I understood was there for the Grade 11 senior history textbook many years ago, so I am not quite clear on what the difference is other than the connections with the Western Canadian Consortium. I wanted to ask the minister, for the math textbook, if she could tell me: Is there an author identified for that, is there a publisher identified, and does she know yet of the cost of that book? Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr.

Chairman, the difference between this way and the old way is that this way, when the call for a proposal goes out, it goes out with very specific outcomes identified. They are not general or vague or broadly based; they are very detailed, very specific outcomes. As regards the textual material, both print and nonprint, that is the other difference that we will see with this: it is not just print textual material; it will also be nonprint. That called-for proposal will go out and the responses will come in.

We do not know at this point who will be the successful, or group of successful, people to put together both the print and the nonprint material, but we do know that whoever does it, the outcomes detailed will be so specific that what will come back will be very tightly aligned to what the teachers who are working with the curr iculum in the classroom right now will be identifYing. So, in that sense, it is different from the old way where the parameters were much more generic and general. Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, is that an international call for proposals or is that western provinces based?

What specifications are there for publication in terms of printing, distribution and the national bases for that? Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, each bidding publisher will in effect submit a print and nonprint set of materials, and we will then pick the one that best matches the outcomes, best matches the philosophy of the curriculum, best matches the philosophy of the instructional approach and assessment. It must address issues such as resource based learning. It must address issues of gender-biased stereot yping, et cetera.

It must fall within a reasonable price range, and it will go out to both Canadian and United States of America based companies. Once the publishers submit their fmal materials, Mr. Chairman, the western provinces together will do the review and will identifY those resources that will be listed as western key resources, so that we will have the Western Protocol reflected in the materials that are being brought forward for the classroom.

That joint assessment, the joint development of outcomes, frameworks, et cetera, the joint request for proposals and the joint review of the material will, I think, ensure that we have something that really fits for western Manitoba. Since the published documents are matched to our

17 80 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 1996 curriculum outcomes, the schools will have access to documents that have a very close match to the outcomes. Ms. Friesen: I think the minister said western Manitoba and she meant western Canada. Mrs. Mcintosh: Yes, the member is correct, I meant western Canada. Much and all as I lov(: western Manitoba, I would hate to leave the eastern part of Manitoba out, and I thank her for that correcti on. Ms. Friesen: So the decision on the text is then made by a commit tee and it is based upon submissions from across North America.

What I am not clear at this stage, what is being used in the other western provinces, in Alberta in particular since their process for the teaching of mathematics has been quite different I think from other people's? Mrs. Mcintosh: There will be 50 teachers from the west ern provinces along with the consultants who will assess that material.

I should indicate that while in the past there may have been some fairly wide divergence in terms of philosophies, et cetera, in the last year or two there has been a remarkab le coming together, and we have seen more and more an emerging of truly common fr ameworks, outcomes and curr iculum, and I think you will start to notice that before long in the classroo ms. It is still maybe not as evident at these early stages as it will be as time goes on, but the short answer to th(: question is that there are 50 teachers. They do come from across the West. They work with the consultants.

I believe Manitoba sends 15 of the teachers, and we have two consultants I believe that go from Manitoba. * (1 540) The framework of outcomes articulates the agreement between the provinces with respect to the what I call big ideas, the philosophy of the stra nds, the general outcomes and the specific outcomes as well as the integrated elements that are involved. So you will see many people speaking with one voice although, undoubtedly, when they are doing the asses sment there will be many voices maybe speaking simultaneously as they weigh the pros and cons of the various materials put before them.

I should indicate for clarification that the 50 was for the kindergarten to Senior 1 review, and the 1 0 to 12 review, the Senior 3, Senior 4 review, will be done in the fall when the call for the 10 to 12 component is complete. Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): I would like to ask the minister some questions in regard to the Public Schools Finance Board. I understand that in this

section there is a ref erence to developing standards for facilities, equipment and technology. ln particular, can the minister elabo rate for us as to what typ es of standards you are talking about? We will start out there, because the whole area of capital inYestrnent through the Public Schools Finance Board is of particular concern to many school boards. Mrs. Mcintosh: I should just indicate-but it is also true. We work collabo ratiYely with the Public Schools Finance Board, and we giYe them information regarding progr amm ing.

We mi ght say, for example, if the music room is being renoYated, that it requires soundproof ing, so we giYe them the program requirement s, but the BSFB itself has the responsibility to make the decision and allocate the fimds. They will put them in order of priority every year. They may go so far as to say, well, here are about 25 pro jects that all need to be done. We can only afford to do 20 of them this year, and five will go on the list for the follo\\ing year as priorities. But the list keeps getting bigger and bigger, so they are always having to make decisions as to which items to proceed with, penod.

Then, once that decision is made as to in what order they intend to proceed with them and how far down the road will it be before the proj ect gets underway , the program consultants from the department will provide the program infor mation. TheY make the decision, but, aside for the building of a br �d-new school, they could make saf ety issues, ask us for information on safety issues on technology requirements, which is becoming more and more important .

In doing the renovations for the Manitoba School for the Deaf, for example, some of the technologies going in there are uniquely suited to-now that is a government building, so it does not follow in the same category as PSF B. However, it still does require information about the pro gramming and the needs of the people in the buil�ng for those making decisions on the renova tions. We mi ght give irif ormation about gymnasium programs, et cetera . The equipment and the facilities recommended for cur riculum implementation, special needs students,

May 6, 19 96 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 81 distance delivery and computer applications will be consistent with department standards and guidelines. Technology and science resource centres are a particular fo cus for up to 25 schools in the coming year. That is because of some pilot work we have got going. The PS FB is appointed by government but then, once app ointed, is an independent decis ion-making body. They will give a report, generally on an annual basis, once they have made their decisions. I do not know whether it is fo rmal or informal.

They will notify the minister as to which projects are slated fo r proceeding, which ones have been put on hold and which ones have been rejected or modified. Ms. Mihychuk: Can the minister elaborate on the relationship between the PSF B and the Department of Education?

The minister mentioned that after the appointments are done , basically they are an independent body that makes decisions, yet there needs to be a relationship between the department and, as the minister was discussing, certain standards or expectations that we consider a fa vourable environment fo r the operation of learning in whatever it may be, music room, the gymnasium, standard classroom sizes now diff erent than it was previously. I would be very interested to get more inf onnation as to that length.

The department makes the guidelines, and the PSF B implemen ts. * (155 0) Is there a time when the department would consider perhaps reviewing that ever-incre asing proje ct list, as it seems that public schools are fa lling behind the times, or many of them are. We have the research to indicate what a positive learning environment is, and that can happen anywhere. We all know that to have a wonderful learning environment can happen anywhere, but it does help if we have lighting and heat and some cooling systems when it becomes extremely hot.

We do know that there are certain environments that will enhance learning overall, and we are seeing many school divisions having to wait and postpone projects. The list is getting longer and longer; the minister is right. My concern is fo r those students who are in environments which are not optimal fo r learning. What is the role of the Department of Education to highlight the serious dichotomy between what we would like to see in our schools and what is really there? Mrs.

Mcintosh: The Public Schools Finance Board, we are not at that line yet, so when we get there we can probably give you more detail, but I am quite happy to provide what I can now. As I say, we can probably give you a better sense of the criteria and so on that they operate under. The executive director of the PUB-I think I am back in Consumer and Corporate Aff airs-of the Public Schools Finance Board does meet on a fa irly regular basis with the senior staff of the department when they have the departmental senior staff meet ings, he is part of those meetings by and large.

They meet about every two or three weeks as a team of people. Although technically he reports to the minister, he is there as part of the team, and that of course is headed by the deputy, that team of dire ctors. They are subject to rules at the PSFB. They are subject to decisions of government and the Treasury Board. For examp le, the Treasury Board will desi gnate the amount of money that will be permitted to flow to the Public Schools Finance Board. The Public Schools Finance Board will submit a request -f orgive me, my senior staff and I are all suff ering from various fo rms of ailments.

We just keep making each other sick. Sort of going around the office, so if I keep losing my voice it comes back event ually. A fe w words just do not seem to come out. The PSFB is subject to rules and decisions of government and the Treasury Board through those vehicles of approving a requested budget. Also, it may be from time to time that those in authority in government would say: we notice that you are still using this archaic roofing tec hnique, and there is a new more modem method that we suggest you take a look at. Those type of things might from time to time occur.

On some issues, the PSF B might work in conjunction with the Department of Government Services. It reports, as I indicated, directly to the minister. It operates under a set of criteria that guides it. Government sets those parameters, and I have an example of how the process kind of works in that there is the process of prioritizing funding and constructing roofing work, to use that fo r an examp le. Beginning in 19 92-93, in the roofing program that year, a new proce ss of assessing school division requests

17 82 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 19 96 for roof replacement work was begun by the Public Schools Finance Board. That process includes the following fundamental procedures. First of all, questionnaires are sent to school divisions to obtain information on their roof replacement requests. The roofs are then considered for inspection using the questionnaire information. Roofing consultants are selected to inspect the roofs using a proposal-call docu ment containing a list of school roofs in different regions.

Roof reports are then prepared by the consultants and submitted to the Public Schools Finance Board, and those reports then are analyzed and summarized by the PSFB. The three basic report recommendations include: roof replacement; deferred replacement; and repair. Priorities for replact:ment are established for the entire province. Discussio ns with school divisions about their priorities will lead to final recommendations. Approval s are given for the roof replacement projects in order of priority. School divisions are informed in writing.

Plans and specifications for the approved roof replacement projects are then sent by the PSFB to school divisions, except for the Winnipeg School Division, which prepares its 0\\11. The member may have some recollection of that but, Winnipeg School Diviswn aside, the rest all submit to this proc ess. Tendering is handled by the school division and the results are forwarded to the PSFB. The funding support is determined by the PSFB and construction of the roof replacement project is then authori zed.

The goal of the PSFB is to have school division questionnaires submitted in the summ er preceding the budget year duri ng which the work is required. To establish priorities for roof replacement work, the Public Schools Finance Board relies on communication with school divisions and on the roof reports that are prepared in response to school division requests. That communication, of course, is very important because the requests often exceed the funding available. In fact, the requests usually exceed the funding available.

Sometimes divisions will put in requests thinking, no harm in asking, if they have something they would like to have done and sometimes, if there is room on the priority lis t, they are able to get a pro ject that would be nice to have done but in a normal year might not make it to the priority list because it is oflesser importance than some of the other projects. *

(1600) You see the same kind of decision process for systems replacement program. With systems becoming so essential, they have a protocol for that, and I will not go through it necessarily. It is not identical, of course, to the roof replacement, but it does involve a similar type of protocol. In that one, the Public Schools Fmance Board authorized the support of the low bid. This new system was implemented after that So there are these protocols. there are these processes, and the Public Schools Finance Board spends a lot of time trying to find from the field what the state of the stock is.

That is of great assistance to it in trying to project what they feel might be hot ticket items coming dmm the road. Ifyou have a suburb where all of the schools were built in around the same year, you can kind of predict that within a few years of each other you are going to see a lot of major repairs in similar areas, furnaces, all sort of going on at the same time. So they can try to make those sort of projections in terms of their 0\\11 planning and budgeting into the future. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Is it the will of the committee to take a five-minute break?

Agreed? [agreed] The committee recessed at 4:0 2 p.m. After Recess The committee resumed at 4:10 p.m . Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Chairperson, I am going to continue on my questions on facilities and standards, and the reason is because I do believe that the Department of Education has a significant influence and impact in terms of developing policy.

It was a matter, of course, that every new school that was constructed also included a daycare, for example, and we have a number of schools that I know were constructed with daycares-I am not sure if it is every facility or in the city itself. A policy decision

May 6, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 83 was then apparently made to discontinue that program. Was the decision to not include a daycare facility, which provides those services to the children intricately linked between school and daycare, a decision of the Department of Education? Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, these kinds of issues are issues that do not pertain to the School Programs Division per se. They do pertain to PSFB, but the daycare policy issue is something that is government wide. It would be a governmental policy decision which would include, obviously, Family Services.

PSFB, when it is in, may be able to provide more specific answers to specific issues such as that, but that was not a decision of the Department of Education or the School Programs Division. Ms. Mihychuk: Can the minister clarity, she indicated that it was not a decision of the Department of Education, would the Public Schools Finance Board have the ability to make such a decision on its own? Mrs. Mcinto sh: No. Ms. Mihychuk: Issues such as that I raise here with the minister because it is really matters of policy that I am discu ssing rather than specific funding projects of the Public Schools Finance Board.

There are numerous projects that are awaiting approval and funding, and I know that the PSFB, if only they had more money, would be investing more into schools. There is a large number of building projects that are on the list needing attention; some urgent. Is it the will or interest of the Department of Education to review this list and lobby or urge for a larger share of funding for the Public Schools Finance Board? Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Chairman, we place about $25 mill ion annually into the PSFB for school construction and renovation, so it is a sizable sum; it is not a small amount of money.

Regarding the daycare space that might be available within schools, the whole policy on daycare in schools is one that is sort of under ongoing review with the government. I know many schools do have daycares and a lot of unused school space owned by the division has been utilized for the renting of space to daycares. Many of the existing schools have space within them that could be used for that purpose and, in fact, is being used for that purpose. The Public Schools Finance Board has not recently been putting money into the actual creation of daycare facilities in the schools.

It is something that government is reviewing as to where are the best possible monies for daycare spaces being made available. At the same time, of course, they are trying to meet the priority needs in education. The daycare issue is a good example of that which we talked about earlier when we said that government will determine policy and the PSFB then will manage the division requests keeping the government policies in mind, and it does so by involving the school divisions in priority setting.

The reason that we have the five-year priority planning process in place is so that local divisions can present their priorities to the PSFB. In the planning process, this is of great value to divisions and to the resource all ocations available to support capital projects. As I indica ted, in the last few years that has not included building in things that are not directly educational delivery things or required for the direct delivery of educatio n, but as I indicated that is something that is being looked at and many schools do have daycares.

I quite like seeing the daycares in the schools because I think there is a lot of merit in having the ability to keep siblings together, for example, and I have always liked it partic ularly for schools where there is empty space. I think it is a good utilization of that empty space, and the question then becomes can we afford again to use educational dollars for noneducational purposes. That whole arena is one that we have been in for a few years, trying to make those determinations of directed dollars. Ms.

Mihychuk: I appreciate the minister's remarks that she sees the value and encouraging a more community approach to schools and daycares is an integral part of that. It is unfortunate that when we look at funding programs such as the inclusion of a daycare into a new facility, that had to be halted because of Education dollars going into constructing a daycare, and we are, again, talking about jurisdictions. In the long run, is that community losing out because of that type of bureaucracy or those certain limits on portfolios or mandates of certain departments?

17 84 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 19 96 The issue here is also one that links back to another discussion we had with the Youth Secretariat. We are talking about schools serving children, and we see facilities that house many of the health care facilities that we had in the past in hospitals.

Now we have: personal care centres that bathe and feed and provide the medical fa cilities that are needed for a lot of our children in schools, and the daycare is another component. * (16 20) Has the department considered expanding its liaison or its work with, for example, Family Services, and when looking at projects like that, perhaps linking those needs and making schools a true community resource for our children? I agree with the minister, the funding for that daycare should come out of Family Services; that type of co-operation is something now people expect. I would ask the minister to respond. Mr s.

Mcintosh: I think the member has ra1sed some very valid points. I know that, when the policy was first announced that daycares would be included in new school construction, immediately there were 22 new centres created, and that was good. The dmmside of it was the cost of doing that was equival ent to the cost of building a new school, and that meant that in turn that a request for a new school would have to be turned down.

Just in terms ofthe use of the dollars for trying to do something for Education, we find we cannot build a new school because we have already spent the equivalent of the cost of a new school putting daycare s into other schools; then the Education dollars were not being used properly in terms of their mandate. But, as I indicate, this is something that is being looked at and reyiewed by the government for the Yery points that she identified in that we are trying to look at making maximum use of facilities and also having communities working well in all their components.

I think that she and I together could probably identify a fa irly good-sized list of things that are good about having daycares housed in schools. The question that I think needs to be determined is, the government money that goes to daycare fac ilities, from what original source should it come? Should governm ent money go to daycare fa cilities by the PS FB or through another department? Should daycares be attached to schools, regardless of the source of money, or should they be in another community setting?

Should another department responsible for day care redirect some of its dollars to the PSFB so that this purpose could be attained? So there are all those kinds of questions circulating around. They haYe not been resolved at this point, but the member's comments will be shared because I think they are rooted in some practical considerations that are worth examining. Ms.

Mihychuk: Could the minister provide to the committee the standards for fac ilities that are being developed and will there be minimum standards identified, where if a school does not meet those minimum facilities, that will be recognized and perhaps prioritized in terms of project approval under Public Schools Finance Board? Can the minister table those standards that we expect in our schools? Mrs. Mcintosh: We do have, Mr. Chairman, standards set.

Staff has just indicated to me that they do not have the level of detail here that the director for the PSFB might haYe, but I can mdicate in a generic sense that we have standards that we set, we have standards that are set by others, electrical standards, building code standards, et cetera. and the school division itself will indicate their priority needs to the PSFB. It in turn then will determine which ones are critical, must proceed right away, which need to be done but can be delayed, and which really they cannot do.

From their whole basket of requests, they will put in priority order the variety of items that are there, and they will take into account both their own standards and the standards set by regulation on construction. I can table those. I do not haYe them here, but I can table them for you tomorrow or the next day when I can get them from the PSFB, but they do have an asses sment and approval of major capital construction projects. They have a process, and I have indicated the submitting by the school divisions, et cetera.

Sometimes the PS FB will have to meet with division administration and trustees to get a clearer handle on exactly why a request is being made or some specific detail. The divisions are advised in writing of the projects accepted for in-depth asses sment. A project accepted for asses sment should not be interpreted as a project that will be given approval, because sometimes

May 6, 19 96 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 85 they come out and do the assessment and, at the end of the assessment, say, no, we really do not fe el that it is warranted here but they may have had enough cause to fe el that it did require an examination with a potential action to fo llow. So, to enable this assessment, the division must provide substantial evidence and documentation warranting the provision of additional fa cilities.

The data shall address but not be limited to the fo llowing aspects: student emollments and preschoolers in the area; nei ghbouring schools including capacities, emollments and five-year projected emollments; residential expansion; housing completed; construction industry projects of planned housing starts by year into the future ; student ratio per household based on housing completion; utilization of school fa cilities within the region and area; and review of alternatives to new construction.

That would be fo r new construction, obviously, and they have prioritization criteria fo r capital requests conducted in accordance with the fo llowing criteria. In submitting requests, divisions and districts will assess their proposals carefully and assign a category number to each major project submitted under the capital plan. Now, there are five categories here. Category 1 is the replacement of school buildi ngs, and that deals with requests fo r the replacement of active school buildings. There are two components there.

One is where the continued occupancy is certified by the provincial authority to constitute a serious hazard to the health and safe ty of its occupants and where no other acceptable fo rm of accommodation is fe asible.

The other is where the cost of up grading an older school building is deemed by the Public Schools Finance Board to exceed 50 percent of replacement costs. * (1 630) The second category is new classroom space, and this category deals with requests for the construction of new regular classroom space resulting usually from emollment increases that cannot be adequately accommodated within existing buildings or if there is no other fo rm of accommodation fe asible.

The other in this category is the conversion of existing space to provide fo r classroom type instructional fac ilities where they do not exist under established criteria-kindergarten, science rooms, closing up of open areas, special education, portable units, libraries, that type of thing. Category 3 is the modernization of school fac ilities. This category deals with requests fo r the complete modernization of older school buildings certified structurally sound and deemed to have a remaining useful life of at least 20 years fo llowing the modernization program.

The other under this category is the reorganization of existing space in a school where instructional areas are deficient and/or nonexistent . Subject to emollment data, such projects may also require the construction of new space to supplement areas lost through space reorganization. Category 4 is the instructional fa cilities other than classroom space. This category deals with requests fo r the construction of new space to provide instructional fa cilities other than regular classroom space ref erred to in category 2 where such carmot be adequately housed within existing space, et cetera.

The other here is the conversion of existing space to provide nonexistent ins tructional fa cilities other than those listed in category 2. The final category, category 5, is other fa cilities. This category deals with requests fo r the construction or the conversion of space considered ancillary to instructional areas and includes administrative areas, storage rooms, shower rooms, staff rooms, coat rooms, et cetera, that type of thing. Those are some pieces of inf ormation that I have here today, and I can table the rest of the inf ormation as soon as I get it.

The member may wish to ask further detail of the PSFB staff when they are here. Ms. Mihychuk: In conclusion, I would ask the minister to, if possible, have the minimum standards, if such exist, for certain areas, including the size of a classroom. Is there a number, a square fo otage, per pupil? Privacy, is it important to have a private place fo r guidance or counselling or resource? Programm ing, having the proper fa cilities fo r sinks, et cetera, fo r science; heating, ventilation, lighting and water quality, the physical ambiance of the school, do we have minimum standards?

I understand, I can hear from the staff , that there is that available. What is the situation in schools now? Do we have situations that are below what we would consider the minimum standard, and what are we going go do about those situations?

17 86 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 6, 19 96 Mrs. Mcintosh: Yes, staff has indicated there are minimum standards for all of those areas. Again, we do not have the specific detail here on the conditions of the buildings in Manitoba. We do place the onus on divisions to draw to our attention where they have concerns about required renovations or perceived required renovations. The prioritization that goes on when those requests or identifications are made to the board is a large part of their role, trying to accurately assess the validity of the request.

Once the request has been validated, trying to determine if they can afford all those requests in any given year and then, once that is determined, in what order do they need to be done. Clearly, anything that is in the category of hazardous will automatically go right to the top of the list. You have to have safe buildings; that is rule No. 1. I will look to obtain detail the day that we have the director in. He will probably know without having to look up some of the detail on the current status of the condition of buildings . Substandard? I would hope that we do not have any that are substandard.

I know we have many that require repairs, and those repairs are tended to, as I say, on a priority basis. What one division might consider a necessary repair another division might consider just part of the normal look of buildings . I think that school boards have to be really cognizant of the state of their buildings, because regular maintenance can prevent fairly costly major renovation do\\n the road. We do see some buildings that have require:d major renovations, foundations shifting, et cetera, that can be extremely costly to effect. The capital support program has a formula.

The formula has been revised and expanded to recognize and address the cost impact of complex design fe:atures of program areas, the size and location of the: project, modem construction standards, mechanical systems, et cetera. There is a control of the new school design at the Public Schools Finance Board level, and that is exercised primarily in terms of ensuring that the proposed structure and systems components are of sufficient quality and that the minister's approved award of specific program facilities in size and design are met so that capital funding support is limited to established criteria.

They cannot make exceptions from that on their own but require government change in policy or direction to do so. * (1 640) Again, as well, they do respect the local autonomy in school divisions with contracted architects, et cetera, with flexibility in building design. I know there are some new schools now being designed in such

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-2-29
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 2nd hansardpdf 29.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	11895dc43f48708940bcb6cb95d8153e0a4322cd

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