Manitoba Hansard — 3 May 1999 (Sitting 19, 36th Legislature, 5th Session)

36-5-19

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session- Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLIX No. 19- 1:30 p.m., Monday, May 3, 1999

Member ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUA Y, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James DRIEDGER, Albert DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FAURSCHOU, David FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen FRIESEN, Jean GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HEL WER, 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, Hon. PENNER, Jack PITURA, Frank, Hon. PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RADCLIFFE, Mike, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack, Hon. RENDER, Shirley, Hon. ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis SALE, Tim SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STRUTHERS, Stan SVEINSON, Ben TOEWS, Vic, Hon. TWEED, Mervin, Hon. VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosann l'acant MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Interlake Brandon East Portage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley 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 Emerson Morris Lac du Bonnet River Heights Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Crescentwood Broadway Kirkfield Park Dauphin La Verendrye Rossmere Turtle Mountain Fort Garry Swan River St. Boniface Political Affiliation 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. P.C. N.D.P. 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. 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.

807 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, May 3, 1999 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Forest Fire Conditions Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, I have a statement for the House. I have copies. We have had severe fire weather conditions recently with high winds, high temperatures, and low humidity. This past weekend created an extreme fire hazard in this province. It appears at this time the conditions will improve somewhat; however, unsettled weather is predicted.

We are expecting cooler temperatures, moderate winds and scattered showers and hopefully some reduced winds. At this time, there have been 16 5 fires that have been reported in total in the province, with 18 new starts in the past day. That means that we currently have about 60 active fires in the province. All fires, virtually without exception, have been human caused, and I cannot emphasize enough that all outdoor burning is prohibited; back-country travel is not recommended.

If conditions do not improve, we will be faced with travel restrictions, and persons responsible for causing fires will undoubtedly be charged. The Manigotagan area fire remains our No. concern. We are continuing to protect this community with about 200 firefighters on line today. Approximately close to 700 people out of a population of 900 have been evacuated from Seymourville, Hollow Water and Manigotagan. The St. Theresa Point fire is still not under control and seven houses as well as a number of outbuildings have been lost. A fire at Sundown has cut off travel on Highway No. 12 .

We currently have 32 helicopters, five CL- 215 water bombers and numerous other aircraft committed to supporting these firefighting operations. Currently, the province of Manitoba has on the ground about 500 firefighters. The State of Minnesota is assisting with a long-term fire retardant water bomber and help is being received from Alberta and Saskatchewan. More than 50 fighters have been mobilized out of the province of Saskatchewan. Natural Resources firefighters, I believe, are doing their very best under some very trying conditions.

We have just seen extreme wind conditions combined with low humidity yesterday that made firefighting virtually impossible. If we receive some precipitation and some cooler temperatures in the next few days, we will possibly en joy some improved conditions. I have to remind everyone and emphasize that outdoor burning is not permitted and that back country travel is certainly not recommended. * (1 335) Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his statement in bringing us up to date on the unfortunate fires that are burning in several parts of the province of Manitoba.

I know in speaking with Chief Larry Barker today of the Hollow Water First Nation, he pointed out that most of the community had been evacuated from the reserve that he represents. Primarily the people left in the reserve are the firefighters and some of the others that do not desire to move at this time. However, we have been advised as well that the people of Seymourville and Manigotagan have also been displaced as a result of this unfortunate circumstance at this time.

We have been told that many of the residents are being lodged in various locations, including the city of Winnipeg at various hotels, at the South East Tribal Council College in south Winnipeg, at the facilities within the Winnipeg Airport and also in

808 LEGISLATIV E ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 the town of Bissett. We want to thank the people in the town of Bissett for welcoming these people who are faced with this unfortunate situation. The chief advises me that the bombers did not arrive until this morning at eleven o'clock to begin the efforts in containing a fire within the community of Hollow Water and the nearby Northern Affairs community known as Seymourville. I am advised further that there are 36 skidders and 16 caterpillars that have been provided by the Pine Falls Paper Company, otherwise known as Tembec, for the community to contain the fire.

However, the community would like to express its need for pumps and hoses. As you know, Madam Speaker, and many members in this House, we have an elite team of firefighters that come from the community of Hollow Water and the surrounding areas, and they are certainly experienced in dealing with situations like this. The chief further asked me to ask the government about the policy of ensuring that people's lives are not put at risk by-when is a decision made, for example, for water bombers to be allowed to go and do the work that they have to do?

But, above all, the chief, I believe, is of the opinion that every effort is being made to contain the fire and certainly many people's lives are at risk, not only in the community of Hollow Water but indeed in St. Theresa Point where some houses have been lost. We are told that as many as 57 people have been evacuated from the community of St. Theresa Point in the northeast part of this province.

So, Madam Speaker, I do thank the minister for bringing us up to date on the situation of the fires that are burning out of control in parts of our province, and we will continue to listen for updates from the minister and his department so that we can assure the residents of these communities that are affected that there is indeed work being done to try and bring these fires under control. Thank you.

Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this afternoon fifteen Grade 9 students from Collegial Saint-Paul under the direction of Madame Yvonne Fleury. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns). Also, ten Grades 8 and 9 students from Waterhen School under the direction of Mr. Ed Hill. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon. * (1 340) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Health Care Facilities Food Services-Cost Savings Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, on February 11 , 1998, the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) indicated to his constituents that the frozen food experiment of the government would save an annual cost savings of $7.5 million. Further, in a letter to constituents, which I have, he stated that $3 million in deficits for cafeterias would be eliminated. I would like to ask the Premier (Mr.

Filmon): in light of the former Minister of Health's words on this matter and the present Minister of Health's words on this matter, will the Premier correct the government's truth on this position to the people of Rossmere and the people ofthis province? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): have answered many questions for the Leader of the Opposition on the whole issue of the Urban Shared Services Corporation which, as he knows, is a corporation, in effect, created by the nine hospitals here in the city of Winnipeg.

Their objective is to provide quality nutritional food and to do it as efficiently and effectively as possible. One area where they certainly can save money is in the whole area of capital

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 809 construction. The capital costs of the new facility are about $20 million. The estimated· cost of improving all the existing facilities would be about $35 million. When the initial project was started, there certainly were preliminary business plans done which showed significant savings in the range of $5 million to $6 million. That was based on a certain time frame, a certain

schedule of implementation. That

schedule has taken longer to implement for a number of reasons, in part because of some capital requirements at HSC and ·other facilities, in part to be absolutely certain that the food is appropriate when it is continually rolled out to other facilities. So again, the USSC released their year-end report just recently. They are updating their revised business plan. As the Leader of the Opposition knows, the Provincial Auditor has also indicated that he will be going in starting in June of this year. Betel Personal Care Home Construction Ms.

Becky Barrett (Wellington): In June 1994, the current Minister of Health who was then the Minister of Finance was more than willing to participate in a photo opportunity for the sod turning of the Betel personal care home. Then, in early 1995, the then Minister of Health who is now the Minister of Education (Mr. McCrae) wrote to me as the MLA for that area saying that the Betel personal care home was one of his government's top six priorities. Then, shortly thereafter, the provincial election was held and after that the Betel personal care home, along with many other capital projects, was cancelled.

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the then Minister of Health or the current Minister of Health or the Premier (Mr. Filmon), whoever would like to answer this, how the people of Manitoba can trust anything this government says when three Health ministers and five years they have promised a Betel personal care home and they did not come through with that promise, to the exacerbation of an already stressed health care system. *

(1345) Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): encourage the member to drive down Erin Street and look at the site where the Betel personal care home is going to be constructed, and she will see a 120-bed personal care home project under construction by the Calgary organization. That contract was awarded in November of last year, and that facility is under construction. She talks about the '95 capital project, uses words like "cancelled." I suggest to her that those projects were put on hold.

Today, if you were to look at that 1995-[in terjection] Do you want me to explain to you again why it was, which I have done on several occasions- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Health, to complete his response. Mr. Stefanson: I guess I should remind the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) that those projects were put on hold for at least two very good reasons. One, it was at the peak of the reduction in federal funding to the province of Manitoba, which amounted to some $260 million annually going forward from that point on.

It also was at the front end of the establishment of regional health organizations, which again would make sense for them to have an opportunity for input into the facilities that are being created across our province. Having said that, those projects were put on hold, but if the Leader of the Opposition did a little homework and went back and looked at that list of'95 projects, he would see that the vast majority of them are either completed, under construction or committed to today, and they are going forward. Brandon General Hospital Capital Project Mr.

Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, the Brandon General Hospital is the only major hospital in Manitoba that has not been modernized. When this government was first elected in 1988, it scrapped the plans of the previous NDP government which was on the verge of constructing a new facility. The

810 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 government has since promised a major renovation, modernization, several times, including a few years ago when the member, my colleague the member for Brandon West (Mr. McCrae) unveiled a huge model of a brand-new complex, front-page story in the Brandon Sun nice picture of the member-and he had it in the foyer of the Brandon General Hospital for many months. So everybody had a beautiful view of a model, but now that model has been scrapped. Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am sure the honourable member for Brandon East has a question. Mr. L.

Evans: I have a question for the minister because we are back to square one, and we are in the planning stages again, believe it or not, for redevelopment, but in the meantime we have still got leaky windows and a lot of other structural deficiencies in the building. So my question, Madam Speaker, is: why should the residents of Brandon and indeed the whole Westman area now believe that this government will actually build a badly needed new modem health care facility in Brandon? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, I will certainly take pleasure in sending the member for Brandon East an update on the Brandon Hospital situation, both in terms of what has been done and what is currently being done. I remind him that just recently a 25-bed adult acute psychiatric unit has been completed in May of last year. I remind him that a 1 0-bed child acute psychiatric unit was again completed in November last year. I tell him to drive by the facility and look at the construction relative to the energy centre.

I tell him to look at the announcements relative to all of the other improvements and the many millions of dollars for the Brandon General Hospital. Madam Speaker, I have certainly had an opportunity to meet with the Brandon RHA. I have had the opportunity to meet with representatives from the hospital, and they could not be more pleased with the capital commitment that this government has made to the needed improvements of the Brandon General Hospital facilities. *

(1350) Health Sciences Centre Capital Project Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): The Health Sciences redevelopment has been on the books for years, construction was to start in the fall of '93. It was highlighted in the '95 pre-election health capital plan. In '96 the Health Sciences Centre was in danger of losing its accreditation. In 1996 these health capital plans were suspended. In 1997 the government said the HSC redevelopment was going ahead. There is a scaled-back version of the plan in this year's capital announcement, but to date there has been no separate announcement of the start of construction.

If they had started according to their plan, it would have been opened by now. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Would the honourable member for Burrows please pose his question now. Mr. Martindale: Why should Manitobans trust this government is finally going to deal with the ongoing capital problems at the Health Sciences Centre, Manitoba's only trauma centre, when the project was supposed to go ahead in '93, in '95, in '97 and now is listed again in the 1999 Health capital funds? Why should anyone- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I am not sure that this member has driven by the Health Sciences Centre to see the number of improvements, the number of additions, the number of changes that have been put in place, in a large part because of significant capital dollars contributed by this provincial government. Certainly, when it comes to the whole HSC redevelopment, the site preparation has been approved for construction and Phase 1 is about to be awarded.

More importantly, the full $108-million project already has the capital set aside and the commitment of this government to go ahead with that full development. So I encourage these members to drive by and see the many changes that are taking place on that site, whether it is the

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 811 Manitoba Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation or a number of other improvements that have been put in place. I, again, have had the opportunity to meet with people from that facility, to meet with representatives of the Winnipeg Hospital Authority, and they are extremely pleased with the significant financial contribution and commitment made by this government to a major redevelopment at HSC.

Health Care Facilities Capital Projects Mr.· Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, for a number of days last week and previously we have consistently asked about the lack of integrity in dealing with the issue of the five-year capital health plan of this government. The core of the question has to be: what has changed today from yesterday in terms of credibility with this government? Given they made the commitments prior to the last provincial election, why should Manitobans believe this government this time, leading into a provincial election? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, I am amazed at that question because the one most significant thing that this member and his Leader should be aware that has changed-if you go back to '94-95, '95- 96, you will find that federal support from our federal government to health care and post secondary education had been reduced by $260 million annually- a year, each and every year. We as a provincial government were backfilling that entire amount and still putting more money into health care. Finally, today, we do have a small step forward from the federal govern ment.

They have made a commitment to start to restore approximately one-third of what they took out of health care and post-secondary education. We will ultimately, in two to three years, get up to a level where they are putting back about $90 million against the $260 million that they took out. But, finally, we have a long term commitment from the federal government not to be cutting money for health care but to finally be putting some of the money back into health care. That is what has changed, I tell him. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, with a supplementary question.

Fiscal Stabilization Fund Minimum Balance Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, as I indicated, it is a question of credibility. I ask the minister-and I will go to the Minister of Finance. To the Minister of Finance: in your budget document, in the government's budget document last year, in reference to the Fiscal Stabilization Fund, it indicated that there was a target minimum balance in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund of 5 percent. Madam Speaker, the question to the Minister of Finance: has that target changed today? Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Finance): No, the target has not changed.

The fund certainly was above that target for some period of time, and members opposite criticized the government because we were exceeding the target. Now we are slightly under the target and the criticism seems to be coming that there is too little in the fund. We are committed to the Stabilization Fund, and we will be building that up with future revenue that comes into government, and it still remains as our target. *

(1355) Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I seek clarification from the Minister of Finance. The so-called target is nothing more than, I take it from what the government is saying, a hit and miss. In good times there is nothing wrong with falling under target or above target. Why even have a 5 percent target, if you have complete disregard for it? Mr. Gilleshammer: Madam Speaker, it does not surprise me that my honourable friend from Inkster does not support a target because he does not support the Stabilization Fund, period.

This fund was put in place by our government when it had revenues that could be set aside in a savings account. Just like any prudent family has a savings account, we believe very strongly that

812 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 we need this fund for times when we may have disasters such as floods and fires. This fund has served us very well. Health Sciences Centre Consultations Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, we do not just drive by the Health Sciences Centre; we talk to people there, and we talk to the nurses and find out they are closing four beds of the I 0-bed ICU in surgical. The head nurse in surgical ICU has quit because there are not nurses that are well trained. They cannot do the neurosurgery program that they are shifting from St.

Boniface Hospital because the nurses are not available. I would like to ask the Minister of Health how it is that they do not talk to people there to find out what is happening in terms of the Health Sciences Centre. We are short anesthetists; we are short nurses; we have the worst operating rooms in the country; and if you had done what you promised in '95, you would have a proper facility built there. Why does he not talk to people, Madam Speaker, instead of just shooting back rhetoric to members here and not dealing with the reality out there? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I do not need any lessons from the member for Kildonan for either talking to or listening to people, and that has certainly been a big part of what I have done in the last three months in terms of going to meet with organizations, go to facilities and meet with people who are working in our facilities, whether it be nurses or doctors or other health care supporters. Certainly we have acknowledged that there are some issues that have to be addressed, and we are committed to addressing them.

We are committed to bringing more nurses into the system here in the province of Manitoba, and that is why we have done a number of things, like establishing a $7-million nurse recruitment pool, like working with employers to create more permanent positions in the health care system. At this point in time, we have gone through a collective bargaining process where both parties were able to reach agreement through that bargaining process at the table, and that issue is being recommended by both parties and is out for a vote by the nurses' union membership. So, again, we do not only talk; we listen and then we act.

That is what counts. Flin Flon Personal Care Home Construction Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Fiin Flon): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Before the 1995 election, this government made a promise to build a new personal care home for Flin Flon. After the election, that promise was broken. Could the minister tell this House and the people of Flin Flon whether or not there are plans to build a personal care home in Flin Flon, and if there are such plans or promises, why should we believe the government this time? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, again, a project has been approved for construction at the Northern Lights Manor, a 36-bed renovation project. That project will be going to tender in the next several weeks. So, again, the project is committed to, the resources are in place, and that project is moving forward. Foreign Trade U.S. Dependency Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, any business person and most governments would be concerned about dependency on one market.

Presumably that is why, in 1995, the Conservative Party promised that they would lessen the export dependenc_e on the United States market, which was then at 72 percent. Could the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism explain the utter failure of his government's policy and the broken promise so that now we are in a situation where trade dependency on the United States is up to 78 percent? Madam Speaker, we are more dependent on the American market than most states are. Can he explain his government's failure and broken promise?

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 813 *

(1400) Hon. Mervin Tweed (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Just contrary to what the member has put on the record, when I go to the trade missions and trade meetings with other ministers from other provinces across Canada, Manitoba is continually being recognized for its strong exports into world markets. Being relatively new to this position, I am constantly amazed and astounded at the accolades that they put forward to the province.

I would say that the opportunity for continued growth with the exports and the manufacturing that is going on in the province is positioning us very well to continue this growth. Urban Aboriginal Strategy Development Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Native Affairs. Why, after 11 years and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars wasted on consultants, is this government even now still developing an aboriginal educational strategy?

Has the minister given up pretending that an urban aboriginal strategy will be committed before the next call for the provincial election? Hon. David Newman (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Madam Speaker, I am very pleased that the honourable member has raised the issue of the urban aboriginal strategy because this is something that has been developed in content by the aboriginal community itself under the auspices of the-or the process which was set up by the Round Table for Sustainable Development and a task force which was operating pursuant to that body.

The report was in interdepartmental working groups that reviewed all of that, and an implementation strategy is in the process of being introduced to the community itself and to all the parts of this province of Manitoba that have a concern about the implementation within the aboriginal community in Winnipeg. It has to be community based, and it has to be supported by all levels of government and by nonprofit and profit bodies in the province. Prostate Cancer Screening Program Implementation Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): To the honourable Minister of Health.

On page 13 of Hansard issue of December 1994 the following was stated without any qualification: "A Prostate Centre will be established to provide leading-edge services to the more than 2,000 Manitoban men who have prostate disease."- 1994. In 1996, two years later, the capital plans were suspended and there was not even an item in this present budget in 1999. The question is: is it because this prostate cancer victim cannot go to the poll and vote? Why should Manitobans believe- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, all health issues are extremely important, and certainly anybody experiencing cancer, prostate or any other cancer, is an issue that is extremely important to our government and I think all Manitobans. We have continued to make strides and improvements in various programs in all of those areas in terms of dealing with prostate cancer. We are also seeing a number of improvements in terms of testing, mammograms and so on.

We have had discussion with one of the members in this House about the whole issue of a cervical screening program and so on, so in the whole issue of cancer we have continued to make significant improvements in terms of both early diagnosis so that it can be treated at the earliest possible opportunity but then also being sure that the care and treatments are in place if people have to be dealt with as a result of obtaining cancer. Crime Rate Reduction/Prevention Initiatives Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): To the Minister of Justice.

Leading up to and during the last provincial election, the Conservatives made a lot of promises of provincial action on crime, but I do not know whatever happened to about two-thirds or 23 of these promises. I do not know where to start, Madam Speaker, but

81 4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 whatever happened to the Youth Advisory Council on youth crime or a Winnipeg Youth Crime Intervention Team, johns of child prostitutes undergo child abuser treatment, publication of names of johns of child prostitutes, Crime Prevention Council? I knew there was one of those in Ottawa but not here. How about an auto theft work program for young offenders? That would have been interesting. Whatever happened to these promises, and why should anyone believe them again? Hon.

Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Well, Madam Speaker, the member puts a number of questions to me, and I will answer the first. He deals with the issue of the Provincial Council on Youth Crime. In fact, we have that council and that council- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Toews: I have had a number of meetings with the Provincial Council on Youth Crime that have provided me with opm10ns and recommendations in respect of a number of matters. Just recently, we had met, and they provided me with their input on a specific project.

Cervical Cancer Screening Program Implementation Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, successive ministers of Health have promised in '94, '95, '96, '97 and '98 to institute a central cervical cancer registry. We dealt with this the other day but got no answers. So I would like to ask the minister today if he would give us the specifics on the opening of this program, or is this registry one more broken Tory promise? Why should Manitoba women trust this government? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, I just referred to this in response to an earlier question, that this is an initiative that we have been working on with a number of organizations, the whole introduction of a cervical cancer screening program. I expect to be coming forward shortly with further details on that very important program.

I merely point to other examples where we have taken very positive steps to deal with screening programs relative to Manitobans, certainly in the case of Manitoba women, when it comes to the tripling of the whole issue of the numbers of mammograms being done now, I believe some 33,000 right across Manitoba, putting in place mobile breast cancer screening units right across Manitoba. So, again, these are very serious issues that we are addressing, and this is an issue that we are addressing. Physician Resources RecruitmenURetention Strategy Mr.

Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, there is a group called the Promise Keepers. We are seeing now that there is a new group that should be called the promise breakers, and it is the PC Party. I want to ask the Minister of Health: when are we going to see the comprehensive strategy on physician recruitment that was promised as recently as a year ago, when in fact we have seen I ,802 physicians leave the province? In fact, more than two-thirds of our medical graduates currently leave the province.

When are we going to see some action, rather than these rethermalized promises from this government on the physician shortage in this province? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Well, Madam Speaker, for the benefit of the member for Thompson, the issue of the number of physicians in Manitoba has basically remained stable over the course of the · last several years at roughly about 2,020, 2,030. So, again, there have been some physicians that have left the province; there have been some physicians that have come into the province.

As an example, last year there were 11 3 new registrants in the province of Manitoba. Again, that is an issue that is being addressed right across our province. Over the last 12 months, some 45 physicians have been recruited to rural areas throughout Manitoba to meet those very important needs.

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 815 So, again, we have been very aggressive in providing the needs, in terms of providing appropriate levels of physicians right across Manitoba. *

(1410) Regional Health Authorities Election of Board Members Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. When this government introduced legislation providing for regional health authorities, it promised to make health care more accountable. Instead, I hear from municipalities, hospitals, advisory committees and RHAs themselves that this government is simply using the regional health authorities to implement its health cuts. When will this government provide for the election of a majority of board members to our regional health authorities to make them accountable? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I am not sure whether the member for Dauphin supports regionalization or does not support regionalization. We certainly support regionalization for the very important reasons of making the best use of our facilities, the best use of our equipment and the best use of our people throughout the regions in the province of Manitoba. That is something that makes sense, and that is something that we believe in.

Again, when you come to the issue of whether or not boards should be appointed or elected, usually elected boards have a direct relationship to revenue and fundraising abilities. In this particular case, all of the revenues for regional health authorities, and in effect the other facilities that are funded, come from provincial taxpayers through the provincial government. So, if you are going to have an elected board, there is usually a relationship to their ability to be held accountable for raising money and so on. That is not the case right now with regional health authorities.

Swan River Hospital Capital Project Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, in 1992, this government promised major renovations to the Swan River hospital. However, after the last provincial election, the promise disappeared and the pictures disappeared off the walls. But now we are in need of a new facility, and all we have promised from this government is a feasibility study for this year but no commitment to maintain services or enhance services, no commitment to the residents that they will not have to pay the 20 percent fee to have the facility built.

How can the people of the Swan River constituency trust this government to protect and enhance our services when so many of their other promises have been broken? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): This is a repeat question from the member for Swan River. I indicated to her that this budget includes approximately $500,000 to do the appropriate review and design of the kind of facility that is required for Swan River and for the Swan River surrounding area.

I should also point out to the member-and I will certainly provide her with the details of work that has been done on the Swan River hospital over the years, various maintenance projects and so on, and there was not a case where any project was brought to the attention of health authorities or our provincial government that was not acted upon. Repairs have been done over the course of time. Mould is something that went undetected, unfortunately. We are now faced with this situation where we either have to replace that facility or do a major renovation.

As I said the other day, it is looking more and more like it will be a replacement of that facility. We have money in place to start that process, to start the design, and whatever it takes, whichever it ends up being, renovation or replacement, we are committed to do that.

816 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 Recycling Programs Government Initiatives Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Environment. Madam Speaker, in 1994 when the government announced its Products Stewardship Program, it promised that the money raised by the 2-cent levy would be put directly into recycling initiatives and that the program would offer all Manitobans the opportunity to participate in recycling.

Now, Madam Speaker, my question to the minister: can the minister then explain, five years into the program, how can she justify sitting on a $7-million slush fund collected by this corporation when 90,000 apartment dwellers in Manitoba have yet to see a recycling program? Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Environment): I thank my honourable friend for his question. I indicate that we have had a very, very good response to that particular program and project, as I believe he knows and understands. In terms of multifamily dwelling units in the city of Winnipeg, for example, there is still work to do there.

They are still working to bring those dwellers on side. That involves co-operation with a lot of entities. But I thank him for the question and appreciate his interest in the topic. Post-Secondary Education Tuition Fee Policy Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, since 1995 you could confidently predict that there would be an annual promise from this government to have a fee policy for post secondary education students. Unfortunately, you could equally predict that they would not do anything about it. Year after year the fees have risen, in some cases by more than a hundred percent.

I would like to ask the Minister of Education whether he intends to repeat that promise this year and whether he could give us any grounds for believing that there is any intent to honour it. Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): The best hope for a bright future for the students of Manitoba today is- An Honourable Member: Vote NDP. Mr. McCrae: It is not that simple, as the honourable member well knows.

The best hope is quality education, and funding for education has been the consistent No. 2 priority for the Manitoba government, which is a reflection, I think, of the priorities of Manitobans generally. I am a little puzzled by the question put by the honourable member. Last time I was addressing this question, I made a reference to the honourable member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) and her musings respecting the whole matter of tuition, and I did not get to finish the answer that day. After a lot of Jack of clarity from the honourable member for Radisson, the

article that I read from says as follows: a spokesman for NDP Leader Gary Doer said later that freezing tuition is a goal but the New Democrats have not yet established it as a policy. So, I guess, while we are talking about goals and policies, it would be very nice to know the position of the honourable members opposite. Meanwhile, we are putting students first and providing programs so that education for them is accessible. SmartHealth Cost Savings Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): My question is to the Minister of Health. This government continues to spend money without getting promised savings.

In fact, the government has contracted to spend $100 million on SmartHealth to save $200 million. I would like to ask the minister: would the minister outline how much of the $200-million savings have been realized as a result of the SmartHealth program?

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 817 Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): I certainly look forward to getting into the detailed Estimates process with the members opposite in the next few weeks. But I think if the member looks at that entire issue, he will realize that the whole concept of introducing technology into the health care system is you make the investment, and then you extract the savings over a period of time as you have less duplication in the system.

Again, I know members opposite have difficulty comprehending or accepting that unfortunately there still is overlapping duplication, where we might have a patient outside of Winnipeg get a certain test done, whether it be an X-ray, that test is then duplicated here in Winnipeg. The whole objective of the SmartHealth initiative is to eliminate that overlap in duplication, to introduce technology into the health care system and to pay for that technology through future savings as a result of the introduction of the SmartHealth initiative.

Madam Speaker, it is a five-year initiative that is still underway, and I am certainly prepared to get more details for the member opposite. *

(1420) Community Colleges Space Availability Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): In 1995, this government promised to implement the recommendation of the Roblin report to double the number of spaces in our community colleges in Manitoba. They broke that promise, like many others, which resulted in a skill shortage in Manitoba and our young people leaving Manitoba to find opportunities elsewhere. Why did you break your promise? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): The fact that Manitoba has the lowest unemployment rate in the country is not an accident.

It is not something that was planned for, but what was planned for was to provide opportunities for those thousands of unemployed people who were getting six-week jobs out of the NDP at a time when they had an opportunity to do something. They provided short-term, make-work projects, and we are still paying for those jobs that ended a long, long time ago. The honourable member also is aware that the colleges are poised and they have been working very hard. This particular budget year they have a $4-million growth fund.

They are very enthusiastically moving towards developing the programs that are needed to put the people to work at their studies so that they can go to work in the jobs that this economy, under the Filmon administration, has generated. Forest Fires Firefighting Resources/Equipment Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): I would like to go back to the ministerial statement made earlier today by the Minister of Natural Resources. A situation facing several thousand Manitobans in the Island Lake region and near Lake Winnipeg right now is of concern to everyone today.

There are more than 600 people from the Manigotagan, Hollow Water, Seymourville area that have been evacuated, along with 57, as I pointed out earlier, from St. Theresa Point. Simply, my question to the Minister of Natural Resources is: do we have enough equipment and also workers to contain these very serious fires? Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, given the magnitude and the enormity of the weather conditions and the fire outbreaks that we had yesterday, I think one has to be realistic in the observation that we are doing and will continue to do everything possible and provide necessary resources to man up as quickly and in as well equipped manner as possible, but we do need co operation from the weather. Seventy-kilometre winds when you have a fire that can run 40 kilometres in a day really leads to near impossible conditions.

I am sure that the member is referring to issues that have been raised about whether or not equipment is getting to the communities quickly enough, and it is certainly our intention to make sure that

818 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 available, necessary equipment gets to them. I have just been informed since Question Period began that, in fact, we have doubled up the crews on the water bombers to extend their hours of operation safely. Evacuations Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): It is appreciated that the minister is keeping us up to date on the current fire situation, Madam Speaker, and I wonder if he has any advance information on whether or not other communities may face evacuation. Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, nothing of intelligence that I could add to that question except to be very aware, as I know the member is, that this is an hour-by-hour situation. When high winds are involved, with absolutely high combustible materials in the field, we need a break in the weather, and frankly we need to have every community in the area to be most mindful of their situation and be prepared to evacuate if in fact a fire begins to threaten them.

As I said in my statement, one of the biggest concerns that we have had is that the vast majority of these fires are as a result of human activity. Secondly, if we get thunderstorms and we do not get a significant rainfall, it can in fact exacerbate the situation and start more fires. So I think we all have to be mindful of the situation, and our prayers are with the people in the community given the threat that they are under. Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Renaissance Capital Manitoba Ventures Fund Mr.

Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise today and speak for a few moments about how this government continues to support businesses in Manitoba. Recently the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism announced our government will contribute $3 million to a new venture capital fund. This money will be available to Manitoba businesses for start-up and expansion costs. The Renaissance Capital Manitoba Ventures Fund will give assistance to small and medium businesses and will focus on helping them succeed in the knowledge-based economy.

Support will be given to companies operating in information technology, communications, value added agriculture and health care. All of these areas offer opportunities for growth, investment and job creation. This is a further indication of how this government is creating an optimum climate for economic growth and expansion. We are committed to helping businesses develop and seize new opportunities. Manitoba is a world leader in knowledge-based jobs, and we are committed to staying on this path to success.

This province is a national leader in job creation and economic growth, and we will continue to show leadership in this area. This government is truly making Manitoba the best place to live, work and raise a family. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Brave New Words Awards Ms. Diane McGitTord (Osborne): Madam Speaker, on April 24, 1999, writers, publishers and friends of the literary arts community celebrated the 11th annual Manitoba writing and publishing awards, Brave New Words. I was in attendance and noted that a number of awards are supported by private enterprise and memorial trusts.

As well, at this year's ceremony, Councillor Jenny Gerbasi announced that the City of Winnipeg would next year institute the annual Carol Shields literary award, yet the Province of Manitoba has not, to date, followed the examples of the mayor or of McNally Robinson Booksellers who offer two of the Brave New Words literary awards. At this year's ceremony, the recipients told us that the awards were vital to their literary lives. Tomson Highway described Manitoba's growing international literary reputation. The NDP believes in nurturing our artists and fostering our provincial reputation.

Today, then, it is with great pleasure that I announce that an NDP government would plan to institute three annual literary awards: one for book of the year in French and in English, one for publisher of

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 819 the year, and one for the year's most outstanding periodical. Although details are not yet delineated, we would like to present our awards at the annual Brave New Words ceremony. New Democrats honour the principles of participation and community, and to reflect our principles we would invite the Manitoba publishing and awards committee to assist us in finalizing the specifics of the awards.

Apprenticeship Legislation Mr. ·Peter Dyck (Pembina): Madam Speaker, new legislation designed to revitalize Manitoba's apprenticeship system, support job opportunities for Manitobans and build a skilled workforce for economic growth was proclaimed on Saturday. By strengthening and approving Manitoba's apprenticeship system with this legislation, we are helping Manitobans connect with rewarding careers and preparing the province to meet the future demands of the businesses. Our system will be more responsive to the needs of our key stakeholders, industry sectors, apprentices, employers and tradespersons.

The new Apprenticeship and Trades Qualifications Act strengthens the system by increasing the involvement of industry, stakeholders, employers and employees, and making the regulatory process more efficient. The act recognizes apprenticeship status as an equally important post-secondary educational system and sets out the legal framework for the apprenticeship partnership between industry and government. Apprenticeships provide Manitobans with nationally recognized certification in an expanding array of increasingly technical trades.

Currently there are more than 3,500 apprentices enrolled in 51 designated trades in Manitoba. Well-trained tradespeople are the backbone of our economy and are crucial to Manitoba's success. Last Friday I had the pleasure of attending a ceremony recognizing the achievements of the top 30 apprentices in Manitoba. They are in diverse fields ranging from aircraft maintenance to cabinet making to welding to commercial cooking. The level of ability and dedication exhibited by these award winners is a testament to the excellence of Manitoba's Apprenticeship Program.

In fact, construction electrician Ryan Bell of Border View Electric Limited in Winkler was one of the apprentices recognized. I am pleased our Apprenticeship Program is evolving. This broader revitalization initiative supports youth and aboriginal participation, flexible training delivery, and the development of new trades for apprenticeship and doubling the size of Manitoba's apprenticeship system. The entire Manitoba economy will benefit from the success of the Apprenticeship Program. Thank you. Kosovar Refugees Mr.

Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, this past weekend was a very significant day for the Hoti family in Thompson as they welcomed relatives fleeing the war in Yugoslavia. They are a Kosovar-Albanian family who has been welcomed to our community with support from every cross

section of our community. As I travelled on the plane with Mrs. Hoti, seeing the relief in her eyes to see her family reunited, I was reminded of my own experience in what was then Yugoslavia a number of years ago when I in fact met my wife, who is also from a country in the Balkans.

I was reminded of the fact that in our own small community of Thompson we have so many people who continue to not be able to sleep at night because of the situation that exists currently in Yugoslavia and in the former Yugoslavia: the Bosnian-Serb refugee who is in my daughter's class in high school who still cannot sleep at night; the caretaker at her school who is Kosovar Albanian who cannot sleep at night because of the conflict; the Bosnian-Muslim family from Sarajevo who for many years suffered wondering if their family would survive the dreadful war in Bosnia; the Serb who cannot sleep at night because of worrying about the bombing that is taking place in Belgrade where he has family, including two sons.

Madam Speaker, as I saw the joy in the face of the Hoti family, and as I know I have seen the anguish in the eyes of everyone of the former

820 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 Yugoslavia and the continuing anguish at the conflict that exists there, I want to speak today to urge people of good will to come together and find a peaceful, diplomatic solution. I look forward to the day when they will again be able to live side by side in peace. Madam Speaker, I want to urge everyone to give peace a chance. Emergency Preparedness Week Mr. Ben Sveinson (La Verendrye): Madam Speaker, I would like to take a moment to remind Manitobans about the importance of being prepared for an emergency.

Be prepared, not scared is this year's theme for National Emergency Preparedness Week, which is being observed May 3 to 9. Emergency Preparedness Week is held annually across the country to raise public awareness of the importance of planning for emergencies. The theme is a reminder to everyone that emergency preparedness starts at the individual level. All levels of government have a role to play in the area of emergency preparedness and response.

For example, Madam Speaker, the Manitoba Emergency Management Organization works closely with municipalities to ensure emergency plans are in place and kept current and that the municipal responders are trained to deal with any emergency situation. But ultimately emergency preparedness starts with the individual, and by planning ahead people will know what to do before, during and after a disaster strikes. * (14 30) Manitobans know all too well the devastating effects of flooding and forest fires.

This past spring parts of the province were affected by flooding, and in recent days forest fires have forced the evacuation of hundreds of Manitobans from their homes. The summer months also bring with them the risks associated with hailstorms, tornadoes and even leisure activities such as swimming and boating. People need to be aware of what to do during these natural emergencies and during human-caused situations to ensure their own safety. Emergency preparedness starts with individuals. Knowing the risks in their community is a first step to being prepared.

Manitobans should endeavour to Jearn about and prepare for natural disasters, service disruptions and technological or environmental accidents that could impact the community. By identifying potential risks, planning ahead and being prepared, we can all reduce the fear and ensure that we can recover more quickly from a disaster or emergency situation. Thank you, Madam Speaker. ORDERS OF THE DAY BUDGET DEBATE (Third Day of Debate) Madam Speaker: To resume adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr.

Gilleshammer), standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the official opposition. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, on Friday I began my comments very consistently with the questions we were raising in the Chamber today. That is basically, as the lady at the soccer field said to me last week, that we are not going to believe this same Tory movie a second time. We are not going to be fooled by the people who fooled us once before on their promises on restoring health care services and not cutting them.

Madam Speaker, the government, like all governments, has strengths and weaknesses, and budgets that are presented, like all budgets, have strengths and weaknesses, but the ability to keep your word, the ability to deliver on what you promised in a budget is crucial for the credi�ility of any government. You spend your credibility or you gain your credibility not by what you say, not by what you promise, but by what you deliver on. This group opposite has failed over and over and over again to deliver on the promises that they made in 1995. Mr.

Ben Sveinson, Acting Speaker, in the Chair Now, it is interesting that members opposite now are claiming that this is a-they are out there, the government House leader (Mr.

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 821 Praznik), who provided such excellent leader ship on the boundaries, asking for leave on the boundaries, the chief strategist, the man who did such a wonderful job for the Conservatives, is running around saying: this is such a difficult decision for the members opposite, licking his lips and rubbing his hands and all these other silly little immature moves that he is known for. We know on this side that the budget is not [ interjection] Well, the Premier (Mr. Filmon), maybe he will answer one of the questions about his broken promises.

Maybe the Premier would like to stand up because the members opposite may not remember this, but during the 1995 election campaign there was an ad, the Premier and Mrs. Filmon walking along the pathway, and a lot of people remember that ad. [interjection] Yes, he wants to heckle now from his seat, but there was an ad walking along the riverbank after they campaigned on saving the Jets. There was an ad with the Premier saying: if we are elected, we will protect health care. We will not cut back health care. That is why members opposite have such a huge credibility problem.

On the most important issue in 1995, the Premier misled the people through Tory ads, because what happened after? We do not even know what is in the hidden agenda of the Conservative Party after this next election campaign. Let us remind people of what they did not campaign on. They did not campaign on cutting $40 million out of the operating budgets of hospitals. They did not campaign on cancelling the $600 million in capital commit ments they had made. They did not campaign on privatizing home care all across Manitoba.

They did not campaign on bringing in this rotten, frozen food and having extra costs for war veterans to eat that food. Why does not any mem her of this caucus- An Honourable Member: I eat frozen food every day. Mr. Doer: I hope the member for Emerson (Mr. Penner) does not double blanche his vegetables before he eats them, because that is what they are requiring the people of the Deer Lodge hospital to do. Did he campaign on cutting back dramatically Pharmacare and introducing a tax on the sick and the elderly in Manitoba? Did he campaign on cutting back the numbers of people working on diagnostic tests?

This Premier is going to be man of the year in Grafton, North Dakota, because of the people who unfortunately have to go to that community. So when we talk about this budget and we talk about the '95 budget, the '95 budget that the Tories voted for did not mean a darn thing for people. It did not mean anything because the '95 Tory budget contained the '95 health care promises.

It did not contain the broken promises that came week after week, month after month after the budget was presented, so that when they go around telling people: oh, all these things are contained within our budget, they were contained within their budget in 19 95. It did not mean a thing. The budget did not mean a thing because the government went and broke every promise in health care in that budget. That is why the only way this government can deal with its credibility is call an election and let the people decide rather than the self-serving comments of members opposite. The Premier (Mr.

Filmon) mentioned the Fiscal Stabilization Fund in answer to one of our questions on Friday. We have always said, and we have said consistently, that the Fiscal Stabilization Fund should be used when it is raining in health care. It should be used when it is dealing with the massive cuts from the federal Liberal government. The government said that it did not have to make cuts after the '95 federal budget, but we thought that the stabilization fund should be used. The issue of the stabilization fund, again, is not whether it is a good or bad idea. We voted for it in '89, another mistruth of the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) on Friday morning. I do not know whether this Premier could ever tell the truth anymore. He knows we voted for the Fiscal Stabilization in '89. Why would he just stand up here and deliberately mislead the House again? Why would he just blatantly try to fool the people through mistruths again? I guess he is so desperate that he feels that the only thing he could run on is false statements. The voting record is on the record. Of course, the Premier has apologized so many times now, he has doubled Jimmy Swaggart in his apologies, and I guess he does not have anything more left.

822 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 The real issue of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund is the honesty of the government. This is what the Minister of Finance said in '95, '96, '97. He said that this is a fund which is a minimum. We are committed-this is the exact quote-committed to maintaining at least 5 percent of its total budget in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. Mr. Acting Speaker, this does not say: this is a target. It does not say it is a target.

He has said over and over and over again when questioned by us-why do you not use the money in the rainy day fund instead of firing nurses?-1 cannot do it; we are committed to 5 percent. So, the issue is the honesty of the government. They do not have any credibility, even on matters that they should have credibility on because the Stabilization Fund could be used in a positive way. The statements from this government over and over and over again are: We are committed to maintaining at least 5 percent. They also use the words minimum 5 percent, and those are in budgets; those are in interviews.

We can bring them out. So again they misled Manitobans. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair The only difference between now and two years ago is an election campaign, so this Fiscal Stabilization Fund has gone from a good idea to be used for the priorities of Manitobans to a pre election slush fund, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to be used only for the priorities of the Conservative Party. People in Manitoba do not want an election slush fund.

They want a rainy day fund to deal with the leaks in the roof, plug them up and it has been leaking and raining in health care for the last three years, and again that is why they will not believe members opposite on this issue. * (1 440) The government has made statements about the balanced budget legislation. Well, you know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we did vote against the balanced budget legislation, and we pointed out that and we moved one amendment to the balanced budget legislation, and you know it was quite regrettably fortuitous that we made that amendment.

We moved one amendment to prohibit the government from selling a Crown corporation away and taking the assets from the Crown corporation and moving it into the Stabilization Fund as an operating revenue and then using it for the operating priorities of the government. We said that this would be an incentive for a government to sell a Crown corporation to save their own salaries under the balanced budget legislation, that they would sell a company low for it to meet the provisions of this legislation, and I would think, both on the left and the right, that our amendment made sense.

The right believes that you should not use a capital asset as an operating revenue. Any accountant will tell you that. And the left would believe that there should be no incentives in a law, which we believe, to allow for a person or government to sell off a public asset at a wholesale, fire-sale price in order to meet the short-term requirements under this legislation. So we moved that amendment and, lo and behold, a year later, members opposite did exactly what we predicted they would do. They sold the Telephones at a fire sale.

As one farmer said to me, they stole that company from me without my permission, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and they in fact took the asset-they sold it on the basis of debt and then, because of course the company was not in debt because the asset was worth more than the debt, they took the remaining assets in the form of a fund and moved it over to the Fiscal Stabilization Fund and showed that as an operating revenue. Mr. Deputy Speaker, they then flushed that money through the Fiscal Stabilization Fund, through the debt repayment plan.

So the only debt repayment that has been made under the fiscal stabilization law has been a broken promise on the telephone system, a fire sale on that telephone system that, as the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) has said, has been flushed through the operating revenues in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund and shown as part of the debt repayment plan. It is very, very manipulative and deceitful, but the fundamental principle that we stood for is very, very fundamental today, Mr. Deputy

May 3, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 823 Speaker, because there is no question that the same incentives remain in the balanced budget legislation to sell off Hydro and put it in an operating revenue line under the balanced budget legislation and then have that there to manipulate, to deal with future considerations in the provincial budget area. That is why we are committed to our amendment. We are committed to our amend ment to prohibit the sale of Hydro and the assets of Hydro going into the Fiscal Stabilization Fund under the balanced budget legislation.

Some of the good provisions of the balanced budget legislation and some of the restrictive provisions of the balanced budget legislation cannot be overridden by a provision that allows the government to sell off, not the silverware, but sell off the house to pay off the credit cards. You do not sell your house to pay for your credit cards. You sell your house and deal with the mortgage. You do not sell a house if you are only going to get 60 percent of what it is worth. You continue to live in it and enjoy the house.

That is, again, why people do not trust this Premier opposite, because he misled the people again on Telephones, and now we have the same line on Hydro. Here he is buying a gas company at a much higher cost than he criticized in 19 87, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We had that asset for $18 0 million, and after we got a 30 percent rate reduction we made a difficult decision.

These people are spending over $500 million with no public scrutiny in this Legislature, with no accountability in this Legislature, and we know that the only reason they are buying this gas company is to fatten up the golden calf, so they will sell Hydro after the next election campaign. The only thing between the people of Manitoba keeping their hydro corporation, owned for their own benefit, and selling it off is the NDP. My greatest respect to the Liberals, some of these tough decisions, you know-I think their strongest statement in the telephone debate was they did not like the way it was being done.

One member voted for it, one member voted against it and one member abstained. Well, you know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we know that the members opposite, the Liberals, of course, they promised to enhance CN in the 1993 election campaign. [interjection] Yes, well, it speaks to the principle, the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. [interjection] Well, we do not know what the provincial caucus's position was. I would point out to the member for The Maples (Mr.

Kowalski) who has pointed this out to me in the past, there is a lot of Wellington Crescent Liberals in that party, and, you know, they may have a different view obviously than the member for The Maples when it comes to public assets and the ownership of public assets. That is why the Liberals have such a complicated position. They are not opposed to the sale; they are just opposed to the way it was done. Well, you know what? We are opposed to the way it was done, and we were opposed to the sale of MTS. We were opposed to the sale of CN. [interjection] Well, that is right.

Well, I have often thought, you know, be free at last. Join a party that stands up for the north end; do not join a party that walks away from the north end. That is what we have always-[interjection] You still have a week. Of course, when we look at Hydro, this government refused to bring in a referendum amendment that we made, the similar position they took on Telephones, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

So we can have a referendum on selective taxes, but we cannot have a referendum on property taxes, or we cannot have a referendum on a sale of something that is almost irreversible, in our view, once it is done, especially the way the Premier gave it away according to the CRTC at "discount rate." So here we have a situation where Tories now-and it is a good thing many of them inherited their companies, because they have sold low and bought high. That is what they have done.

You might be able to do that if you have money that you inherit or you marry into or everything else, but you cannot do that in the real world, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It just does not work. The other matter in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund and the balanced budget legislation that the

824 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 government must deal with is the issue of: are they really running a debt? Norm Cameron said on air-and we are still doing some of the number crunching on this budget, because, like any Tory budget, it has invisible ink all over it- An Honourable Member: Disappearing ink. Mr. Doer: With disappearing ink with disappearing promises. Norm Cameron says there is really an $80-million debt in this budget. He is an independent economist. He is not a person whose politics I would know.

It is kind of interesting that independent economists-even Conrad Black's newspaper were making some comments about this budget. Madam Speaker in the Chair It is hard to tell, though, whether this budget is sustainable, because this government has had a record of understating the revenues for years because of bracket creep and gambling revenues, of all kinds of other things, and there is maybe a play within the play in this budget. As I say, only an independent audit will really produce the real numbers.

There is an argument about sustainability, there is an argument about more revenue than is being stated, and we are still working on some of those numbers ourselves. Madam Speaker, we do not believe that any government is required, under present circumstances, to have to run a debt.

With bracket creep and income tax, even with a very modest income tax reduction, we know, since the changes of the Mulroney government, the bequeath to many provinces, that taxes go up for average families and families every year, and they go up because of bracket creep. * (1 450) Madam Speaker, We also know that this government has received a considerable amount of revenue from gambling. It has gone from $40 million to well over $240 million. There is more money coming in from gambling now than all the corporate income tax in the province.

We know that, of course, even Nevada has no debt and no taxes with the gambling revenue that comes in in that state. I think what people are concerned about is that all this gambling money and tax revenue was hoarded in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund for three years while it was raining in health care, and it does not make any sense at all for the people of Manitoba in terms of their priorities to have a situation where funds go to a slush fund and then are not used for the priorities until the election year. That is, again, why this govern ment does not have any credibility.

When we go to education and training, we see a similar pattern, as the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) mentioned today in Question Period. Her analysis of this budget is very simple, Madam Speaker, that this govern ment will put in a considerable amount of resources before an election and take considerable resources out of education after the election campaign. We can see a similar pattern here. Do not forget, again, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) promised to put 80 percent of property taxes-80 percent of education funding would be financed by the provincial government. He made that promise in the 1990 election.

He broke it in 1990. He broke it again in '91. He broke it again in '92. He clawed back property tax credits in Riel and St. Vital and other communities in '93. He cut back the education finances: -2 in '93; -2 in '94; zero in an election year; -2 in 1996. There is a pattern here, and members opposite do not think the public realizes there is a pattern.

The pattern is: promise one thing in the election, break your promise after the election, and seriously break your promise in the first couple of years after an election, and then put a little bit of money in a pre-election budget and get members opposite just to respond to the pre-election budget and say that we are spending more on education in the pre-election budget. Well, you have four years of cuts and one year of freeze. Then you have four years of cuts and one year of a slightly enhanced level of funding. The bottom line is that there is less money going into the classroom in 19 99 than there was in 1992.

Whose source of information is this? This is our source of information, yes, but it is in the

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 825 government's own FRAME documents. The government's own annual reports in education have a line, provincial money into the classroom, and it has gone down. It has gone down from 732 to 709. It will go up slightly this year, but the FRAME document that will be released after the election campaign will show that there is still less money in '99. But the other side of that equation is that taxes have gone up in property tax. The property taxes have gone from $200 million to $400 million since this government has been in office.

That is the equivalent of 7.7 points in income tax. When you combine that with the property tax credit clawback of members opposite, it is equivalent of 10 points in income tax. Now, they do not want to go out and campaign on a 1 0-point income tax cut; they want to go back and campaign on the modest reductions contained within this budget. We, in one sense, are pleased that the tax reductions are modest because we did not want to see a bidding war on a Mike Harris kind of budget, but clearly this government has increased taxes dramatically at the property tax level. What are they going to do about it?

They are going to exclude it from the discussion in the so-called tax commission. We would like to take the tax commission idea and change the terms of reference. We would like to change the terms of reference to a fair tax commission and put property taxes and property tax credits before that commission so that people can speak out about the provincial government's role on property taxes directly in education and indirectly through property tax credits.

Our alternative to this government is to have this matter of income taxes and income tax questions, as well as property taxes, before a public consultation process, unlike members opposite. There is some money now for community colleges. This is a government that cut 10 percent community college budgets. This is a government that has the lowest enrolment in Canada on a per-capita basis between the ages of 18 and 25. So why had this government committed themselves to Roblin before the last election and not fulfilled Roblin since the last election?

I would remind members opposite that Roblin promised to double the community college spaces in the next five years. That was made in 19 93. It is 19 99. You have broken another promise. Do these promises not mean anything? Do members of your caucus not sit down and say: this is what we said in the '95 election, and I do not want to go back to the streets of Riel or St. Vital or Rossmere or Gimli or Sturgeon Creek or Turtle Mountain or Seine River without fulfilling these promises?

Madam Speaker, I remember that Ed Schreyer in 19 73 took the '69 platform and said: Autopac, check; medicare premiums, check; hospitalization, check; property tax credits, check; human rights code, check. Did it. [interjection] Well, the member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer), you know, we are still waiting for a housing policy from him. He would not know an urban vision if he tripped over it, but I do not blame him because the Premier is responsible for the lack of urban vision in their party. I do not blame the member for Niakwa.

The Premier would rather fight Susan Thompson, and fight Glen Murray, and give BFI a great big break and shaft the people of Winnipeg. That is why we have an ineffective urban strategy here in Winnipeg. Community colleges and apprenticeship programs have been cut. Just because you put a little bit back in this budget does not mean to say you have not cut 10 percent a few years ago. The people know that. The people do not judge governments only on the last budget they see. They judge governments, thank goodness, on their last four years. They give you a commitment.

An Honourable Member: That is precisely how they are going to judge us. Mr. Doer: Well, I hope so. That is exactly how we want them to judge you. Broken promises in health care, broken promises in education, broken promises on decent hope for our kids, and broken promises about how you handled the election scandal, but this member would not care because he goes out on holidays with these people that subverted the democratic process in the last election campaign.

826 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 The other issue here is universities. I was in a school in Brandon about six months ago, and Grade II students were saying to me: you know, everybody tells us we should study, we should pass, we should do well, and we agree with that. but we cannot afford to go to university anymore. In fact, one of them was saying they were going to go to B.C. because they had frozen tuition fees.

We have to find a way in this Legislature of making community colleges, making Access programs and New Career programs that these members cut, making universities affordable again for average families. We are absolutely committed, if we are given the responsibility of forming government after this election is called, to rebuilding that bridge for kids in high school to post-secondary education. We want to feel that kids can go there, they can study hard. They can work hard in high school, and they have a chance to go to university. They are not going to be denied because they do not come from wealthy families.

That is what we have to work on in the next four years. Kids in all families should feel they have a chance in universities. That is what we are committed to, if we get the responsibility of government, which I am sure we will after this next election campaign. Madam Speaker, I have the briefing notes from this government on tax increases in 19 92 and '93 . When members opposite say we do not raise taxes, read our lips, we have to remind them that we have Gary Filmon's federal provincial briefing notes in 1993 that says that baby food-these are the things they were going to tax.

They were going to tax baby bottles, nipples, soothers, teethers, baby cups and cutlery. The exemptions are being removed. Now I was down Broadway on Thursday afternoon and some of the people were saying: these people tax my hotdog on Broadway. They did, with the expansion of the sales tax. Of course, they are taxing chocolate bars for kids in schools now, too, with volunteer activity. The amount of money that this government increased in taxation: the property tax credit, $75; the sales tax, $16 0; the fuel tax, the equivalent was well over $300 now in today's terms.

Now, listen to this-this is a government that does not tax-the cost was $53 million for tax credits, $48 million for sales tax, gasoline $13 million: $1 14 million. You are not even giving back what you took in I9 93. To achieve this in other ways would require an income tax rate going from 52 to 57.7 or increasing the Manitoba sales tax rate from 7.7 to 8.4 percent. So we have this briefing note when they are going to talk about their so-called record. People do not believe it anyway, but we have the facts to discount that. *( 15 00) Madam Speaker, we said we would not try to outbid the members opposite.

We believe that health, education, training should come before a scorched-earth policy on tax reductions. I note that property tax was not even contained in the poll that the Tories released over the weekend that was commissioned in December of 19 98. We think that property tax relief is fairer. Why not have an income tax reduction in July and have property tax credits reinstated in January of the year 2000 as kind of a balance between the proposals from the government? It would not cost any money. We also said two years ago that we would support a small business tax reduction from 9 percent to 5 percent.

I am glad it is in this budget, but we also adopted the recommendation from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. Now, we do not adopt a lot of their recommendations, but they said get rid of those corporate grants and put that money into a reduction in the small business tax. Well, now that the government has done the small business tax and costed it in their budget, we still think there is room to take about $10 million out of the Shamrays of this world and put that into dealing with child poverty.

If we were to reinstate the clawback in social assistance families with some of the money that we were going to use for the small

May 3, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 827 business tax, we would not have to change the small business tax proposals of the government, but we could take the corporate grants, the Shramray grants, and put that back to child poverty. We should be doing something about child poverty. Our party will, and we will reallocate resources out of this budget for the child poverty commitments we make-again, a fairer way to go in our communities. The Winnipeg Stock Exchange was in the Speech from the Throne three years ago.

It was a good idea then, it was a good idea last year, it was a good idea a year ago, and, of course, members opposite wait till an election year. The film industry proposals, we started the film industry office in Manitoba. It has obviously been enhanced through activity in the last year. I was talking to film people over the weekend. Manitoba's costs are inherently lower, so we have real advantages to continue on. The sales tax reduction for agricultural buildings, I think, has been brought in to Saskatchewan three years ago or two years ago, at least, and it is obviously something we would support.

It is just part-[interjection] Well, you do not know what we are going to do. I would not get my wishful thinking up if I were you. Madam Speaker, the agricultural proposals, the $12 million is a lot less than what the government promised. As I understand it, the research and development has been reduced, as we can see it. There is no strong stand for orderly marketing. There is no strong stand for leadership, for stewardship on the hog expansion, in the hog industry development. Many of the programs, we see a discrepancy in the agricultural budget to the actual commitments made by this government.

Where are they going to get the money that they have committed in the agricultural budget, or is this just another shell game from members opposite? When we have been faced with this government before, we have always found that the shell game is the first priority for this government. There have been a couple of positive announcements for urban people, urban aboriginal people, and other aboriginal citizens, the Partners for Careers and $1. 6 million for Northern Affairs communities, the South Indian Lake and adult literacy programs up a hundred thousand, but more is missing than is there. There is no strategy.

There is no urban aboriginal strategy in terms of New Careers and access programs. There is no funding reinstatement to friendship centres. There is no strategy to deal with the high unemployment of aboriginal people in Winnipeg and in other communities that led to some of the public displays here in this Legislature a few weeks ago. There is no dealing with freight subsidies for fishers. There is nothing on the AJI. There is nothing on the Northern Economic Development Commission-oh, that was another broken promise-and there is nothing to deal with the food in remote communities.

There is nothing to deal with northern airports and, Madam Speaker, nothing to deal with the Cross Lake situation, the fact that they have won a couple of times at arbitration. Obviously, it is going to require an NDP govern ment to rebuild partnerships for First Nations people and northern Manitobans to get things moving in this area. This budget is noticeable by its lack of leadership. Last year, Madam Speaker, we proposed an alternative budget. We said that more money should be spent on health care. A year ago, we said that money should come from the rainy day fund and it should come from the surplus.

We said that the surplus was closer to $17 5 million dollars. We were right because the Auditor said so. The members opposite hid that money. So our alternative budget was very close to being right on, with more money for health, the growth of the economy and education, community colleges, Access, New Careers, the Gang Action Plan and a child poverty strategy that would make a difference for people. We also said, reduce the small business tax. We said that the first priorities of tax reductions should be property taxes. Obviously, that is the difference between ourselves and members opposite.

We would choose to make taxes and property taxes-we would reinstate the property tax credit clawback of members opposite starting with seniors, starting with homeowners. That would obviously be a matter that we would be willing to have before a public consultation

828 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 process in the fall of 1999, after the election campaign. Madam Speaker, I have talked about the breach of promises from the members opposite. I have talked about the broken promises in education. I have talked about the lack of hope for our young people. I have talked about the lack of trust for Hydro. I have talked about a better balanced approach in terms of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund by prohibiting the sale of public assets to that fund, which obviously makes our position on the balanced budget the more honest position, if you will.

Madam Speaker, there is a pattern of history. The pattern of history is being repeated. This government will give us a moderate government for four months before an election campaign. It will give us a budget that we have been calling on for years just prior to the campaign. It is not the budget that we would have brought in, but a budget that dealt with health care to some degree.

Madam Speaker, what we believe the people of Manitoba need and want and will get after this next campaign is not a government that will meet their priorities for the four months before an election, but the government that is committed to meeting health care, educational, community safety, child poverty and Crown corporation priorities for four years between elections. We are committed to giving people the promises we make the years after an election campaign, not just four months before a campaign. That is why we are asking this government to have the courage of your convictions.

Call an election and people will vote for a government that will provide balanced, fair government after the election campaign, not a government that comes forward with cynical pre-election promises that cannot be trusted four weeks before a budget for a campaign. Hon. Harry Eons (Minister of Agriculture): It is always a privilege to address a budget, a budget being the most defining document that governments can bring to this Chamber from time to time. I take great pleasure in addressing this budget, and, of course, supporting it with a great deal of enthusiasm.

Madam Speaker, this budget follows on the heels of four successive balanced budgets. This budget has a specific goal in mind. That goal, in case it escapes honourable members opposite, is a cool $500-plus million that we still currently pay out in debt servicing charges. That promise that we can hold out to the people of Manitoba, the taxpaying people of Manitoba, that we can get those additional revenues to the service of government and to the people of Manitoba without having to impose greater increase of taxation, is a worthwhile goal.

That is a goal that keeps this government, this group of legislators feeling comfortable where we are heading. We feel more comfortable with every budget. This one, of course, is one that reinforces that all the more. * (1510 ) Madam Speaker, I want to begin by referring to an editorial in today's national newspaper, Canada's largest national newspaper, that really is quite remarkable. I read editorials from time to time, and I cannot recall reading an editorial that endorses a particular Premier and party and government for re-election in the manner and the way The Globe and Mail has re endorsed Mr.

Harris and his Conservative government in Ontario. It says simply this: The election is for Mr. Harris to lose. More than 60 percent of Ontario voters believe his government is on the right track, and the latest opinion polls show the Conservatives with an 8-point lead over the prime opponents, the Liberals. The economy is buoyant, real personal incomes are rising, and much of the sturm und drang surrounding Mr. Harris's reforms to education, health care, taxes, and municipal government is fading away, despite efforts of various unions and interest groups to keep the discontent alive. Mr.

Harris has been a man of his word in keeping most of the promises he made in the common-sense revolution platform four years ago. More importantly, most of those promises were wise. By 1995, Ontario had grown grotesquely unbalanced in its economic and social policies under Liberal and New Democratic Party regimes. There was an

May 3, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 829 enonnous amount of undoing and remaking and refonn ing to do. In fact, Mr. Harris's Tories have been better than their word. Most surprising, they tackled the rotten borough of local school board taxation and union control of education-does that ringing a bell, Madam Speaker?-most bravely they faced up to the logic of closing many costly and underutilized hospitals-we did not have to do that in Manitoba, but we are refonning them while increasing total spending on health care.

Most creatively, they united much of metropolitan Toronto under one government with a more rational set of responsibilities, supported by a more sensible system of property taxation. They created substantial new protected wilderness areas and parks. They chose to govern rather than to administer and, in substance, they governed well. Madam Speaker, that is an endorsement that one seldom hears from editorial writers of any political group in this country. Do we not all have visions of the difficulties that Mr. Harris's government faced when first elected and throughout his four years?

Do we not all recall the militant stonn ing of the Ontario Legislature by the public service sector unions that even prevented MLAs from attending to their business? Do we not recall the ongoing vicious campaign of their teachers union as they attempted to block the refonns brought in by that government? It is that kind of endorsation and the recognition that likely this week Mr. Harris will call an election that will probably come to fall into place sometime before ours, that strikes fear in the hearts of members opposite.

Madam Speaker, in the last little while, the last few weeks, there has been a shrillness, a desperation in their attacks, a repetitiveness, not of new policies, but of dredging up old, in their mind, sins of this government, no serious alternatives to government, as they know in their hearts that what Mike Harris and his Conservatives are going to do for the people of Ontario, Mr. Filmon and this government is going to do for the people of Manitoba whenever that election is called. Most of those honourable members know it. Most of them deep down in their hearts know it.

Madam Speaker, I am so convinced of that that I wanted to be sure that I was part of that team, and I myself got myself renominated just last Wednesday because I want to see, you know, a coming together of the extremely challenging number of years that I have seen this government, the government that I have been very privileged to be part of, undertake. Madam Speaker, have we not faced many of the same issues? This incessant noise about health and health food and something like that, we are not hearing that from the broad general public of Manitobans who utilize our health care system. We know who is driving it.

I can make allowances. I know that unions are structured to protect jobs even though the rationale for those jobs sometimes no longer exists. The fact that we can do things better in some instances in a centralized fonn, in some instances in a decentralized fonn, as versus our regional health care systems throughout the system, but the simple fact of the matter that experience has shown us that just throwing more money into the system does not provide the outputs. Deep down I know that the people of Manitoba, when they judge this government, that is what they will be making their decisions on.

Not on so much of the peripheral nonsense that takes place for legitimate, alternative options for governments to consider, that should be the prerogative of Her Majesty's official opposition. That is the way this House is supposed to operate. They are supposed to provide us, constantly keep us on our toes with better ways of doing things, not merely opposing ways of doing things in ways that have eminently proven themselves successful.

Madam Speaker, before leaving that particular subject, because I do want to take this occasion to talk briefly about the matters that impact most directly on the portfolio in the Ministry of Agriculture, I do want to say one thing because it has burned in my mind over the many, many years. A lot of us, particularly some of the old-timers, I refer to the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) and a few others, we have seen many staged demonstrations of protest by various interest groups coming to this legislative Chamber.

830 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 I can recall right at the early onset of the New Democratic Party regime of Ed Schreyer, when upwards to 9,000-10 ,000 displaced auto mobile insurance workers surrounded this building, because many of them were losing their livelihoods when the government of that day brought in the public automobile insurance corporation. Madam Speaker, as I recall that, it was probably the largest demonstration on record but reasonably orderly. They made their point, the government stuck to their point.

The government prevailed, and 15 , 20 years later, on that particular occasion, I and most of my-1 think all of my members of my part of the government still suggest it could have been done a different way. We could have chosen, and many of us at that time opted for that resolution, quite frankly, the Quebec resolution to that issue, insuring lives and injury, not steel and metal. That was an option that the government of the day chose. It was bitterly opposed, but it is a program that did indeed bring forth the desired results that the government thought it would when it introduced it.

We have had demonstrations of particular industries that were threatened. I can remember when that favourite company, or favourite government-owned company that the New Democrats took such pride in, McKenzie Seeds was talked about, possible privatization under Bob Banman, the then Minister of Industry and Trade for the Sterling Lyon government. No doubt, at the encouragement of the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) and others, busloads descended onto the Legislature here to protect any intended action that that government may have taken with respect to McKenzie Seeds. *

(1520) I have seen other demonstrations and indeed, regrettably, I have been the pivot point for some of those demonstrations. I can recall, when I was building a modest hacienda for ducks and geese at a place called Oak Hammock, Madam Speaker, you recall, one would have thought the sky was falling down. They even disrupted the committee rooms in protest to that action at the time when that bill was in committee, but I have to acknowledge they at least did it in an innovative way. Some of them were dressed in rubber duck suits and things like that.

They kind of livened up the committee and made it for an interesting hearing, but all within reason. It is only three short years ago or four short years ago, I took no great pleasure in it, but I incensed, I "outraged," might have been a better word, many of the hog producers in the province of Manitoba. There were many of them that came to this Chamber, sat in the public gallery. There were many others at other private meetings throughout the province of Manitoba.

I had to bear the brunt of their criticisms, but I am satisfied that reason prevailed and certainly in my will to carry on, the program that we embarked on was the correct one and is the correct one. Today, the pork producers, while not liking the kind of price collapse that they have had in the last four or five months, are looking with optimism to their future and the issue of the day has long since been set aside. There is one particular demonstration that I will take with me until the day I leave politics, until the day I am not able to recall all those things that happened here.

That, Madam Speaker, is when the Manitoba teachers' .union invaded this building. It will be constantly burned in my memory as being the most boorish, the rudest demonstration that I have ever witnessed by any protesting group in this building. They accosted our Minister of Education. They swore at us in the hallway. It was simply an unforgettable performance by the educators of our children, one that leaves me shaken to this day, one that I was just totally taken aback that that could take place. I say that with a great deal of regret.

I am a product of the public school system, as are all my siblings and want to be and want to continue to be a supporter of the public school systems. An Honourable Member: Indeed, you were a teacher. Mr. Enos: Indeed, I was a teacher at one time, but I mention this only: this was created and caused by the militant leadership of that union, totally in my opinion misrepresenting the

May 3, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 83 1 thousands of teachers that are doing their work every day in their classrooms, but that is how they presented themselves in this Chamber. Madam Speaker, my reasons for recalling this is let us remember this is what the Mike Harris government was getting virtually every day. This is what the Mike Harris government was getting not only from the teachers, but from the public service sector groups. This is what the Mike Harris government was getting from a whole host of vested-interest groups that were played out acr oss the television screens across this country.

Who would have said two years ago, who would have said three years ago, who would have said a couple of months ago that the Mike Harris government would get re-elected in a relatively substantial way and will go on to provide those wise policies that Ontario needs? I am simply experienced enough to note, and I say this as much as for encouragement to some of the new members that are coming on stream that the danger of reading into what sometimes gets presented to us here in the form of militant demonstrations does not necessarily, in fact, in most instances, reflect thinking Manitobans.

I am satisfied that when the day comes that we will be knocking on Manitoban's doors for reconfirmation of the policies that this government has set in place that they will want three, four or more, many more of these kinds of budgets. They know the course that we are on. They know that there is a reason why we are taking these courses. They also like many other things about this government. I could be diverted. I think they like the positions that we are taking on matters of justice.

I think they like the position that we are taking with probably the most challenging department of our government, Family Services, my colleague the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson). They like the course-the teachers do not like the course, but the parents like the course of our insisting on measuring outcomes out of the education system. I am not getting-is anybody getting besieged by letters from parents who are distraught because we are asking our Grade 3s or our Grade 9s or our Grade 12 s to write some exams, to do some testing? None of us are getting those letters.

None of us are getting those letters. [interjection] Well, maybe on one or two issues but the fact that we are challenging our education system at some point in their process of delivering education to our children to be held accountable by some means. Surely that cannot be an issue. That is an issue that resonates. We walk, we fan out, we talk to people on our cabinet tours, and that issue just brings an immediate nodding of heads in agreement in terms of support for this government. Madam Speaker, we will carry on.

We will carry on on the course that we have set for ourselves with the firm and comforting knowledge that our course is the wise one as, this editorial acknowledges, is the course that Mr. Harris and the Conservative government in Ontario set for themselves was the wise one, the right one for Ontario to undo some seven years of mismanagement by a Liberal and a New Democratic Party regime. They only had one crack at it, and the Liberal one was cut short, as I understand it. It was only about three years.

But in those seven years they wreaked unconscionable harm to Canada's premier province, and if you think Manitobans are not listening today to what is happening in British Columbia-here are our two wealthiest provinces, Ontario and British Columbia, the two have provinces that contribute massively to the transfer payments of the have-not provinces of which we still are one to some extent, but certainly the Maritimes, and we are getting out of it.

Two NDP governments have brought the two economies of those two provinces virtually to their knees, and that is noted across this land, and that will be acknowledged here in Manitoba when we put ourselves before the people of Manitoba for reconfirmation. Madam Speaker, just a bit about agriculture, and I want to talk about agriculture, just two very short items. I want to first of all just simply talk about the support programs that we have and just the difference between what a caring and sensitive government does and a government that is somewhat removed, Ottawa and their support program for our farmers.

832 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 Then, Madam Speaker, it would not be Harry Enns speaking to this Chamber if I did not add a little bit of additional colour. I want to speak about watermelons and how they are, in fact, threatening agriculture today. They are indeed threatening agriculture today.

First of all, on the farm aid reports, I am pleased to report to this Chamber that I am going to be asking my Treasury Board and my cabinet to raise the upper limits of the $25-million recovery loan program that we very quickly made available to Manitoba farmers when it became apparent that the need was there and that the complicated provincial-federal program was, first of all, questionable in terms of its criteria as to how many of our producers could actually access that program, although I do not want to be overly critical at this point. They jury is still out on that.

The income tax forms are just being filed, and it will be another month or two before I can give a more definitive report as to how much assistance that program really is. What I do know, Madam Speaker, and what this budget contains is that we have committed a massive amount of dollars, $62 million, to that program-$62 million to that program. But on the recovery program-and I take some pride with it.

I am going to be in the next week asking for an extension of that program because the $25 million is rapidly becoming oversubscribed, and I am told that upwards of $17 million has actually flowed to farmers who are cash strapped, who desperately need some support, particularly right at this time of the year as the heavy expenses roll in, when you see the crops being put in all over the province of Manitoba. I want to just conclude by a few comments, as I promised, about water melons.

Madam Speaker, there was a downside to the end of the Cold War because during the Cold War a lot of our leftist friends and people that particularly did not like the Americans, under the banner of peace and ban-the-bomb and anti-nuclear-this demonstration-remember when a peace march used to attract thousands and thousands of people down Portage A venue, up Memorial Boulevard, to this building?

I always took some comfort in the fact that under that umbrella of hate-the-Americans and left-of-centre politics, that was an all-encompassing umbrella over that group where they kept themselves occupied. * (1 530) What has happened, of course, with the end of the Cold War, these same groups are still out there, but they have to find something to engage their political militancy with and activity with, and their subject was the environment. Let us glom onto the environment.

You saw a distinct correlation between the dropping of the military concerns that we had during the Cold War and the growth of the environmental movements right across this land. I call them watermelons because, although they were green on the outside, they were red on the inside. Deep down, there was this incipient fear and hostility towards the Americans. Now, the Americans, whether we like them or not-I happen to like them-are also, more importantly, our biggest single trading partner. The catch word right now that they have glommed onto is being featured all day today on CBC and Dr.

David Suzuki has an eight-part series going on you can hear it on Ideas tonight-is "biotechnology." You see, there is the big conspiracy af oot now that the American multinational firms like Monsanto-who I am very pleased to welcome onto our campus with a $1 2-million research facility-through their genetic engineering of plants, are going to cause the ruination of mankind. That is the fearmongering that is now going on.

Regrettably, it does impact seriously on our farmers because we have, and have had for the last number of years, a very significant amount of our canola, of our soya that we grow from the States, all our com, is genetically engineered, if you like. Madam Speaker, it is nothing frightening. It is nothing new. It took plant scientists at the university many, many years to do the same thing in the old-fashioned way.

If we wanted to take out of a wheat sample-as we did from time to time-that would be more resistant to rust or more resistant to another particular problem, it would take our plant scientists 15 -18 years, working diligently, splicing plants and doing it the manual way, to get rid of a particular gene or to add a gene that gave that plant strength to withstand certain

May 3, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 833 diseases and be more resistant to them and so forth. It does not surprise us, with technology moving as it is in this computerized world, that we have been able to do it better. We have been able to look much more quickly into the gene structure of various plants and organisms and come up with combinations that are tremendously beneficial to agriculture. Fully 50 percent, 60 percent, of all the soybeans, which is a massive crop in the United States and competes directly with our canola oil, is genetically engineered.

Forty percent of all those yellow fields that you will see this summer in our farms are genetically engineered canola fields. Canola oil is the premium edible oil, and do not let anybody else tell you anything else, least of all a watermelon on CBC. So, Madam Speaker, I take this opportunity to, first of all, ease the confidence of Manitobans who are eating this food. This is good food, and there is absolutely no science in any of the fearmongering that is being spread about biotechnology in agriculture. There is a different issue.

I think this country, the world, faces a tremendous challenge as to how we look at our own reproductive challenges in the future, as to what extent man should tinker with some of these issues. I am a modest rancher from Woodlands, a Minister of Agriculture. I am not trying to tackle them, but I speak with confidence when I speak about our canola, when I speak about our com, when I speak about our future alf alfas, when I speak about our potatoes that can now be grown with a much more selective use of herbicides. Surely that is a good thing for the environment.

These plants will require maybe at most one pass of a herbicide or of a pesticide, where the other plants often required four, five, six passes of the same thing. Now, surely, if anything, that should be embraced by my watermelon friends. That should be encouraged. An Honourable Member: But are they? Mr. Eons: No, they are not. They are attacking it. But it has severe repercussions for agriculture, not only in Manitoba but in Canada, because agriculture is set on that course.

We ought not to be fighting these kinds of rear-guard actions from within when we are challenged constantly to make sure these products have the highest reputation as we seek out the markets of the world. Madam Speaker, I am delighted and I am proud to serve this government. I am proud of this budget. This government will be passed. It will be of particular delight for me to see members opposite help ensure the prediction that I made at the start of this speech when they vote against this budget.

I want to be able to knock on every one of my doors in Lakeside and have a budget in one hand and the voting record of this House on the other hand and say: Would you believe it, ladies and gentlemen, that this opposition-this government voted against tax increases-voted against increased health care spending, voted against increased opportunities in education? That is what you people are going to do, and that is why you are going to be returned with fewer seats than we. This government will come back with an increased majority. Thank you. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I, too, wanted to put a number of words on the record on this budget. Madam Speaker, I have alluded to it earlier in speeches in this very young session about the importance of actual sitting days. I think that always one has to take things in proper perspective when voting on a document that we have, like the document that we have before us. I was listening to the member for Lakeside's (Mr. Enns) comments, and I was paying especially a lot of close attention when he was talking about the Grade 3 standard exams.

His mind seemed to be somewhat open toward� that, which always gives me some hope that that is one of the areas which this government would address. But I bring it up because I would articulate that there are a number of things within this budget that even the staunchest team player, the staunchest member of that caucus, will have a great difficulty with and, in fact, I would argue, would probably even express disagreement with, their constituents.

834 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 3, 1999 Madam Speaker, the government is going to, no doubt, vote en masse in favour of this budget in order to carry the party line, as it should, but it means you are going to be taking the good and the bad. There are aspects of that budget, no doubt, that you might, as an individual MLA, have some difficulty in terms of agreeing with. Having said that, I have alluded to earlier in speeches to the length of session. One of the things that Jon Gerrard, the Leader of our Liberal Party, has come out very strongly on is the need for more accountability.

If we take a look at the length of time that has lapsed between the session and the calling of this session, we find that it is totally irresponsible for government to take a break of that magnitude. It has ultimately led to the Liberal Party taking a position that we believe that there needs to be an accorded number of days, and the threshold that was estab lished through our Leader was 10 0 sitting days. This is something that is absolutely critical when you take into account that there has been or will be and has been billions of dollars raised and spent.

We make and contribute to legislation that has an impact on the daily life of every Manitoban. This sort of session or abuse of session sittings is not something that is just with this particular government. It was also there when the NDP were in government. * (1 540) In talking to the Leader of the party in regard to not only that particular issue and the budget that we have before us, we have to be cognizant of the fact that today during Question Period we talked about the broken promises. Well, when the Leader and I were talking about it, we talked about the broken record of the NDP.

We look at the government, and it talks about the tax decreases. Well, you know, back in '88, and it is important that we put things in perspective, I was elected because Manitobans as a whole were revolting against the tax increases that the NDP government of the day were levelling. At one count, I believe it was something like 36 tax increases or different forms of taxes that were in fact being increased. Now, this government, Madam Speaker, likes to say that it has not increased taxes. Well, that is not true. There have been tax increases also.

Like we will tell Manitobans or remind Manitobans of the abusive tax measures that the NDP had when they were in government, we are also going to be letting Manitobans know in terms of that this is not a government that has not increased taxes. It has increased taxes, and it has increased taxes in a very regressive fashion. Now, we look at this in terms of accountability.

The document that we have before us is not a comprehensive, detailed budget-that will maybe come after May 11 , as we see more detailed Estimates coming through but I think that there is a fair assumption that many members of this Chamber, in particular I look to the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski), myself, and no doubt others, whether they want to say so or not, where it is a question of ordinary accounting procedures that should have been taken into account when giving some sort of an assessment of this particular budget. There is a well-respected professor of economics, Dr.

Cameron, we have our Provincial Auditor, Jon Singleton, where they have expressed real concerns in terms of what the actual status of Manitoba's financial picture really is. What they are referring to, in particular the professor, I believe, is the manipulation of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. If we carry it through to the Provincial Auditor, I believe what we are also talking about- An Honourable Member: Grade 3 accounting. Mr.

Lamoureux: I will talk about the Grade 3 accounting, but the Provincial Auditor, in reference to the pension liability fund-thos� are two issues which really confuse or put a lot of clouds over this particular budget. I can recall back in '88 when the government at that time and the dean is very much aware of that particular budget, and I hope my memory serves me correct-the budget that was introduced was actually a fairly significant deficit, and that was the NDP budget at the time that was being proposed.

Well, the government-elect manipulated and worked that budget [interjection ]-no, no, manipulated it in a positive way. In many ways, they did some positive

May 3, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 835 things there, but at the end of the day they actually had a surplus. It was somewhere in the tune of $50 million. Yes, it was a $50-million surplus, but being the first year in government, they did not want to say they had a surplus, so what they did was they went and they created the concept of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund and borrowed $15 0 million. So they created a debt in order to create the Fiscal Stabilization Fund.

We pointed out at that time that this was nothing more than an election fund, that it was going to be used in the future to manipulate the books. Lo and behold, and before I say my lo and behold, that particular legislation, Madam Speaker, and the budget were actually supported soundly by the New Democ rats at the time. They supported it, and the dean remembers that. They supported it, to our frustration, because we knew that that fund was going to be used in a very manipulative way.

I would have to go back into Hansard, but I can assure all members that, if they read speeches from the Liberal MLAs at that time, they will see those sorts of comments that were being made. We did not have a crystal ball back then. We were just getting our research together. But now what has happened is we have seen full circle take place. Now we have a deficit, an actual deficit, and this is where, as I say, we bring up Professor Cameron's observations.

We look at our Provincial Auditor's observations, where we have a deficit, and that deficit is actually being erased by using the Fiscal Stabilization Fund and turning it into a surplus. Do we not see some irony in that? Another thing that I find somewhat ironic is the last time I believe the NDP did not introduce an amendment to the budget was back then when they created the Fiscal Stabilization, and again today we did not see an amendment being moved to the budget.

It is something which, I believe, as all members, we have to agree that there needs to be a better accounting of the way in which we present our budgets because it has become very apparent, especially if you believe that there is a need for a Fiscal Stabilization Fund. Under the right circumstances there is a valid argument to have a Fiscal Stabilization Fund. You have to put into place aspects to the legislation that would prevent its abuse, as we have seen in this last budget. A good example that was raised by our Leader this morning in my discussion with him was Centra Gas.

You know, when MTS was sold, the proceeds from MTS ultimately wiggled their way into the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. When they acquired Centra Gas, you did not see any of those funds wiggle away from the Fiscal Stabilzation Fund in order to acquire Centra Gas. Madam Speaker, the party believes very firmly in the need to have multiyear budgets. It is something which we have heard-Clayton Manness when he was Minister of Finance talked about it, and the member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) recalls it too. Clayton Manness argued for multiyear budgeting.

Well, we believe that a Liberal administration would ensure that we would have multiyear budgeting, and where that helps is your differ

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-5-19
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 5th hansardpdf 19.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	11ede66879ee15db7cfcbbe67908de414564d10a

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