Manitoba Hansard — 13 July 1999 (Sitting 59, 36th Legislature, 5th Session)

36-5-59

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. 59- 1:30 p.m., Thesday, July 13, 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 LA THLIN, 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 Vacant 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.

4211 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, July 13, 1999 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Comm ittee of Supply Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Cha irperson): Madam Speaker, the Committee of Supply has considered certain resolutions, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the report of the commit tee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Shirley Render (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the 1997-19 98 annual reports for Vital Statistics Agency, Consumer and Corporate Affairs, the Companies Office, Property Registry Agency and the Manitoba Gaming Control Commission, copies of which have been previously distributed. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Virology Lab Wastewater Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, I think most Manitobans were shocked to read today that 2,000 litres of effluents were deposited in our river system from the federal virology lab.

This lab, of course, will be dealing with Ebola viruses and other very dangerous materials and genetic issues of disease. When we raised the questions of sewers and sewage system and disposal in 1994, the government stated that, clearly, the conditions of the licence will mean that there are no discharges that should be of any concern, and certainly this is meant to be a contained facility. I would like to ask the Premier: with the 2,000 litres of effluents discharged, are the conditions of the licence being breached with this, or has the licence been changed and weakened by the provincial government? Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, l appreciate the question. It is a very serious matter, and I thank the member for raising it. I believe, genuinely concerned as we are, that in this instance there was a breach of the protocol that is in place that we are insisting be rectified before any of the high-level lab work begins. It has not begun yet, and of course we want to ensure that in this case there was not a health hazard. We want to ensure that no such occurrence will happen again after higher level work does begin. Higher level work will not begin until this procedure is rectified. Mr.

Doer: Madam Speaker, in Hansard in 19 94 the government stated that this would be a contained facility, and there would not be the concerns that we had raised about materials being discharged to the river. I would like to ask the minister: is di scharging 2,000 litres of effluents from the virology lab consistent with the licence, or is it inconsistent with the licence issued by the province? We want to know whether the federal virology lab is breaking the licence or whether the licence conditions have been weakened by the provincial government. * (1 335) Mrs.

Mcintos h: Madam Speaker, as I indicated in my first response, before work begins on the higher level lab work, this kind of protocol has to be rectified. The member is quite correct in that this is not part of the original conditions. We do not want that effluent-in this case it was not health-hazard water; it was just water, but we

4212 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13 , 1999 absolutely insist that there be a change in that particular protocol. They are all under contain ment, but we want to ensure that no accidental turning of any tap will release any kind of water whether it, in this case, was not a health hazard. Certainly, we will not allow higher level lab work to begin until we are satisfied that that condition of the licence is respected. Licence Tabling Request Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, again, can the minister then table the licence in this Chamber and indicate to us that it is contrary not to the protocol but to the licence issued by the province for effluents to be discharged through the sewer system into the treatment plants into the rivers? Is that against the licence, or is that consistent with the licence? Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, as I indicated in both my previous answers, that is contrary to the licence.

What I have indicated is that the water that will be going through the waste treatment ultimately, for the higher level lab work is not yet containing any results of the higher level lab work. What I am saying to the member is that before that higher level lab work begins, we will be receiving assurance from the federal government that no such water will be going into the rivers, which is the concern he justifiably brings forward and with which we concur. Virology Lab Wastewater Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): With a new question, I just want to make sure that the public understands and we understand the issue. The minister mentioned before certain materials can be dealt with, and she also mentioned a higher level set of materials. Is the minister now saying to us that the condition that no liquids, fluids of any level, one, two, three or four, will be discharged through the sewer system to the river system here in Manitoba?

Is that what she is saying is the condition of the licence, or is there some kind of condition short of Ebola that the government is saying would be accepted by a licence for purposes of discharge? Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, the member had asked earlier, and I would be pleased to provide details of the licence to him as Leader of the Opposition, and those details will answer those questions. What I wish to assure the House and the Leader of the Opposition is that the water that did go into the wastewater treatment was ordina ry water. It did not have viral contaminants.

The lab is not yet working with those higher level viruses, and the protocols that are in place are now being looked at and investigated by both officials in my department and federal of ficials to ensure that before any contam inants come in there will be no danger of accidental release into the water system. That is a condition of the licence that we demand be honoured. So I will provide the details of the licensing for him, and if he has any further questions from that, I would be pleased to answer them as well. Mr. Doer: I thank the minister, and I look forward to looking at the licence.

The minister is saying that no alleged contaminants will go into the sewer and river supply, but water from the virology lab will be going through the regular treatment plant. Is that correct, in terms of the licence? * (1 340) Mrs. Mcinto sh: Madam Speaker, when I bring forward the conditions of the licence, I will be able to answer that more clearly. I will take that question as notice. because there are all kinds of ways in which water enters the system that are not contami nated water supply. I will check the detail of that for him.

I again wish to indicate that the break in procedure that occurred in this instance was a good alert to all of us who are looking at the way in which the protocols begin taking place in the lab. I can assure the House, Madam Speaker, that no viral contaminants will be entering the water system and that we are insisting that the federal government show us the protocols that are being put in place to rectify the situations so that no further incident of this sort can occur.

July 13, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 42 13 Mr. Doer: Well, I think a lot of people would be scared when they read this story today and very concerned about it. I have talked to a number of Manitobans that are, and I share their concern. I mean, it is just something that we thought that the facility was contained, and now we are learning that it may not be fully contained, notwithstanding the disagreement about what materials went in through the sewer into the treatment plant and into the river.

The federal government, in 19 95, promised that any accidental release or spill, the pri mary responsibil ity will be with the lab, but they also will be responsible to liaise with the provincial officials as necessary. When was this government notified? Was there proper liaison between the government, the federal government and this government, and is there proper notification of the public, because many of us read it in the newspaper this morning? Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, again, thank the Leader of the Opposition for his concern and for his very genuine, I believe, concern on this issue.

The federal government connected with the lab notified the provincial government that there had been some water going out of the lab the day after. Technically, they are supposed to let us know within 12 hours. We believe that it was in excess of 12 hours, and that is another point of contention that we are currently discussing with the federal government. Immedia tely, then, provincial officials contacted the health authorities. It was not a private or a secret communication at all. They notified Dr. Margaret Fast of the City of Winnipeg and Dr.

Popplow here in the provincial government to ascertain any degree of health hazard, and if there was a health hazard, what kind of notification should be provided to the public. Dr. Margaret Fast is the lead health official who determined that there was not a health hazard, and so therefore then department officials began turning their attention to corrective procedures in terms of protocol. Madam Speaker, I will provide more details because I know my time is up. Health Care System Waiting Lists Mr.

Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health on a different matter, and that is we were given assurances some years ago that the line ups in the hospitals would be dealt with. The Premier promised that there would be a massive decrease by the middle of this year, which has not happened. Two weeks ago in this Chamber I talked about my visit after midnight to the emergency rooms and over 40 people in the Health Sciences Centre. Madam Speaker, we are contacted by a Jenny Bell ino, who is known to some members opposite and who has had 13 surgeries.

The food was so bad at Victoria Hospital that her family brought in food for her. She is sitting at home presently, after being discharged, forced to leave the hospital, may have to go back to the St. Boniface emergency because of her condition. My question is: when will the minister stop making excuses and do something about the situation in the hospitals, and that is to open beds and to bring nurses into the hospital system to deal with the shortages, not the excuses that we have heard for six or seven years? Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. * (1 345) Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, it is not a matter of making excuses at all, it is a matter of providing the member for Kildonan with the situation as it exists this year. As has always been the case and he knows full well, and we certainly have evidence of it right across Canada, all provinces and Manitoba for many decades have had issues like summer slowdowns in terms of the procedures, elective surgery and so on. When it comes to emergency requirements and urgent requirements, these are dealt with in a very short period of time. But, again, it is nothing new to be in a summer

schedule situation affecting the timing of various procedures and services. So he knows that full well.

42 14 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 He knows we are taking a number of steps to address issues like recruiting and retaining our nurses, setting up a $7-million fund; putting $32 .5 mill ion into our budget that he supported, along with his Leader, I am sure for that very reason; that this budget has $32.5 million to recruit 650 more nurses; putting in place 850 new personal care home beds to take the pressure off our hospital facilities. If you go back a year ago, we had over 200 panelled patients in our hospitals. Today that is down to 50.

That is just a sample of a number of the steps that are being taken to address that very important issue. Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, if the government has done so much-two years ago it was the flu, then it was the nursing; it is now the middle of summer where we are supposed to have no line-ups, no people in the hallways-why do we have a chronic problem in our hospital system with people in the hallways and unable to access our health care system? Is it not a result of seven years of miserable planning by this government and an inabil ity to effect change, and their cuts? Mr.

Stefanson: No, Madam Speaker, and there is not a major chronic problem in terms of our hallways. We go day in and day out. I can give the member the last few days. You can go to a number of facilities, Concordia, you can go to HSC, St. Bon iface; you will not find any of that. There still are some cases, and we have said that is unacceptable. That is why we are doing a number of things. That is why we are recruiting more nurses in the province of Manitoba. That is why we have $32.5 million in this budget to recruit more nurses.

That is why we are building 850 net new personal care home beds right throughout Manitoba. That is why we have a bed co-ordination strategy making the best use of our beds right across our health care system . Those are just some of the steps that we are taking to address that issue. I am assuming that when that member stood up and voted for our budget, he did so because this budget includes $19 4 million to address those very important issues. I know some of his colleagues had long faces when they had to stand and support that budget.

I think that member was smil ing because he knows that we are supporting health care with $2.1 billion, $19 4 mill ion more than a year ago, to address all of these very important issues. Mr. Chomiak: My question to the minister, who well knows that we supported that budget because that is the first time in six or seven years they have done anything to try to improve the health care system- Madam Speaker: Order, please. An Honourable Member: For their electoral purposes. Mr. Chomiak: For their electoral purposes.

My question to the Minister of Health is: can the minister explain, as Jenny Bell ino was told when she was forced to leave Victoria Hospital, Madam Speaker, whether or not beds are being designated for the Pan Am Games? If that is the case. and of course you need to designate beds. why is it that we allow summer shutdowns in the face of all of these people coming to the city of Winnipeg when we need the additional beds that are going to be- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Mr.

Stefans on: Madam Speaker, an individual like the one that the member is referring to, and I am certainly prepared to look into her situation, will not be impacted in any way by the Pan Am Games. I have had questions about that in this House before. There is no reserving of beds at the expense of the citizens of Manitoba for the Pan Am Games. Some of the beds affected by the summer slowdown, if need be, can be put in place to deal with any urgent requirements under the Pan Am Games. That is how the process is designed to work.

There is no impact on Manitoba residents as a result of the Pan Am Games or any beds bemg held and putting a Manitoban in a situation where they cannot access a bed because of the Pan Am Games. Those are the facts.

July 13, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 42 15 Beverage Rooms Seating Limit Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Unfortunately, in this province issues related to liquor and politics seem to be intertwined, one Cubby Barrett getting a licence when the previous owners of the Cross Lake Inn could not get it; the fiasco under this minister, the private wine stores with that objective accountant Gordon McFa rlane, her official agent and the treasurer of the Conservative Party, giving assessment.

We learned in committee this morning that this minister made a decision to remove the 300- seat limit on beverage rooms without meeting with the hotel association bef ore that decision was made, a decision that just happens to benefit, in fact. two hotels owned by one company with close ties to the Conservative Party, in fact. whose owner sits on the Keystone Club which gives a direct contact with the First Minister.

I am wondering if the First Minister can explain to the people of Manitoba when we are going to stop seeing the mixture of politics and liquor in this province and how he can justify this situation where even the hotel association was not consult ed about this move. * (1 350 ) Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I note that the individual who is being referenced by the member for Thompson also made contributions to the New Democratic Party in 1998. Mr.

Ashton : Madam Speaker, since the Premier seems to know quite a bit about this, perhaps he has not read the owner gave $375 to the New Democratic Party as an individual. His company gave $5,387.50 to the Conservative Party. Can the minister also confirm that Mr. Ledohowski, the individual in question, has confirmed on the public record he is a member of this Keystone Club and obviously has direct connections to this government to be able to benefit two of the hotels he owns by a policy change? They would not even consult with the hotel association. Mr.

Filmon: Of course, Madam Speaker, Brian O'L eary gave $1 ,500 to the NDP party, which means that he has bought out of any need to obey the ethics of the NDP party, if they have any ethics. Brian O'L eary gets to buy his way out for $1 ,500, I assume. Man itoba Liquor Control Comm ission Privatization Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I would be more than glad to table a copy of the Conservative contribution list, which I think lists every principal in that vote-splitting scandal. Pretty well, you know, half the people that get benefits from this government are on this list.

I would like to ask a final question to the Premier, whether he can confirm whether either this government, since the minister did not know about this, or the Conservative Party is currently conducting polling into the privatization of liquor in this province and whether this is in fact the real agenda of the Conservative Party, the privatization of liquor in the same way that they privatized MTS after the election in 19 95. Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister cha rged with the admini stration of The Liquor Control Act): Madam Speaker, as I said today in my remarks introducing the Manitoba Liquor Commission, the Manitoba Liquor Commission currently has a very good balance between private and our own government-operated stores, and we see no need to change that balance. We have had difficulty in understanding where the NDP have been coming from in their series of questioning. The new NDP, they reinvent themselves every time we look at them. We have them objecting to expansion. Madam Speaker: Order, please. * (1 355) Point of Order Mr.

Ashton : Beauchesne's Citation 417 is very clear that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate.

4216 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 Madam Spea ker, I asked about polling that is currently being done in Manitoba. We have been receiving calls from Manitobans about it. I asked the Premier whether indeed, through his position in this government or he as the Leader of the Conservative Party, whatever, whether they are involved with polling. I would appreciate it if you would have the First Minis ter answer that question. Are they polling about privatization? Is that their real agenda? Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order. Hon.

Darren Praznik (Govern ment House Leader): I think if you examine the record you will find out that in quoting the same citation from Beauchesne, in stating questions members opposite are often very verbose, very argumentative, very provocative, and that, of course, results in a similar reply. So I would ask you to draw that to the attention of all honourable members. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister respo nsible for the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission, on the same point of order. Mrs.

Vodrey: Just in answering the question and clarifying, speaking to that point of order, it has often been very difficult to find out where the NDP are actually coming from in terms of their questions because they appear to stand for one thing on one day and stand for another thing on another day. So, Madam Speaker, in the answering of my question, it was simply to try and clarify who in fact are the new NDP. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Leader of the official opposition, on the same point of order. Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, it is an important public issue that we know what the true agenda of the Conservative Party is. We want to know whether they are going to say one thing before an election again and have the sequel plan to break their promise like they did on the telephone system. Somebody is polling. We want to know who is paying for it. Why is the government trying to cover up again their true intentions for the public assets here in Manitoba? Mada m Speaker: Order, please.

I would remind all honourable members when speaking to a point of order to not uti lize the time as debate on the issue but to relate specifically to the rule that has been violated. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), I would remind the honourable Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Vodrey) to respond to the question asked and not provoke debate. Education System Standards Testing Breach Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Ink ster): Madam Speaker, earlier today I trust that I was hand delivered a letter from the Seven Oaks School Division to myself, a letter that was submitted for the Winnipeg Free Press and the Winnipeg Sun editorial board. My question is for the Minister of Education and to ask for him to comment. In the letter it states, and I quote: The government's own officials twice reported that no harm was done and that the matter was concluded. Each of the three investigations which have been done reached the same conclusions. There was no breach in security; there was a violation of protocol.

Does the Minister of Education agree with that comment from the Seven Oaks School Division? * (1 400) Hon. James McCrae (Min ister of Education and Training): Categorically not, Madam Speaker. The Deputy Minister of Education has advised me that his officials take strong exception to that position taken by representatives of the Seven Oaks School Division. More troubling to me or equally troubling to me is the assertion in the letter which I assume is proposed to be printed

July 13 , 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 42 17 because I have not seen it yet. The letter is signed by the chair of the board, but it makes the point that the issue is more about partisan politics than it is about education, which we know there is plenty of partisan politics involved with this issue. But the fact that the school division would take the position that this is not about education is extremely troubling to me. It goes back to what I said about the initial report put out by Mr.

Wiens, the superintendent of the division, the one that I tabled here in the House which makes the same point that no harm was done, that there are plenty of analogies about that to be discussed at further length later. Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I ask for the Minister of Education to comment on the statement from the letter, and again I quote: The suggestion by Mr. McCrae, Mr. Lamoureux and Mr.

Filmon that this matter sti ll requires further investigation by an independent inquiry indicates that this issue has nothing to do with education and everything to do with party politics and the upcoming provincial election. Does the Minister of Education recognize now the need for the ind ependent investigation? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I do not hear much from the New Democrats on this matter except from their seats. They too have been asking for an independent investigation, and that would be about the first time they seem to have taken issue with Mr. Wiens or Mr. O'L eary on this matter.

As I said to the honourable member for Inkster earlier on in this discussion, this is a very serious matter. The honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans), speaking for the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer), says that this is no more than making a mountain out of a molehi ll, and honourable members in the New Democratic Party agree with that statement.

The honourable member for Brandon East has also said that this is much ado about nothing, speaking for the New Democratic caucus in this House, which speaks volumes about the commitment of honourable members of the New Democratic Party to integrity in our education system for our children. Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I ask for the Minister of Education to recognize that the Seven Oaks School Division does not have any credibility in bringing this issue to an end.

My question to the Minis ter of Education on this issue: is the Minis ter of Education going to do what is necessary in order to protect the integrity of our standards exams and call for an independent investigation on this matter today? Mr. McCrae: Yes, I share with the honourable member for Inkster concern about the credibilit y of the report that I tabled in this House. I share his concern about the position taken or the lack of a position taken, as usual, by the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) in this matter.

I am determined to protect the integrity of the standards testing procedures in our province. Communi ty Colleges Waiting Lists Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, Manitoba's young people and skilled immigrants have been betrayed by this government. According to StatsCan, Manitoba has the fewest college graduates per capita of this decade. This is after the Roblin commission called on the government to get serious about college enrollments and drama tically increase college spaces. I agree with the headline in one of our local papers that calls this a national disgrace.

I would like to ask the Minister of Education if it makes any sense at all for people like Harbir Dhaliwal, who is a foreign-trained computer programmer, age 25, to be on a waiting list for three years to get into computer programming at Red River Community College, while Manitoba employers continue to experience shortages of computer programmers and this individual is driving cab. What is your answer to that? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Well, Madam Speaker, it turns out the good people over at the Freedom of Information office are not the only ones that use those little white-out bottles. It turns out the caucus research people for the New Democratic Party, in being very selective with Statistics

4218 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13 , 1999 Canada documents, have omitted putting certain infonna tion in the hands of a certain reporter for a newspaper here which covered this matter. When it comes to the issue of apprentices, for example, they very conveniently left out the fact that Manitoba is about fourth or fifth in the country ranking-wise instead of last, as portrayed by the graph that they presented which was mtssmg the other provinces, Madam Speaker. The NDP applied 1998 population projections to 19 95-96 enrollment statistics for the purpose of making their case.

So, you know, I guess the honourable member for St. James seems to be spending too much time taking lessons from the honourable member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale). Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, ift he minister would like a briefing on how to calculate percentages, I am sure that the Free Press or our caucus would be willing to brief the minister. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. James was recognized for a supplementary question which requires no

preamble. Would the honourable member please pose her question now. Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, can this minister explain why his government, in response to the Mauro report and then the Roblin commission, not only cut spaces but did nothing for year after year after year, leaving little hope for Manitobans, for young Manitobans who eventually left Manitoba? Mr. McCrae: The honourable member has to square her comments today with the comments made by Nuala Beck, who tells us that 39 percent of Manitoba's population are employed in high-skilled jobs.

So there is obviously more homework to be done, not only by the honourable member but also by myself, because we recognize the challenges that a buoyant economic situation in Manitoba presents, more buoyant in Manitoba, by the way, than most other places in this country, thanks to the leadership of the present administration in partnership with those in our economy who create the wealth and create the jobs.

Madam Speaker, $4 milli on in the colleges growth fund this year will create 1 ,000 new seats in our college system, which will have quite an effect on the statistics that the honourable member has to doctor before she brings them to this House. Ms. Mihychuk: I would like the minister to respond to the question that I asked in my first question, and that is: what answer does the minister have to this individual who is a foreign trained computer programmer, highly skilled, who has been waiting for three years and all of those Manitoba companies that are looking for an individual with exactly those skills?

What is the government's answer to this individual? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I do not know all of the details respecting the individ ual referred to by the honourable member. I would be very happy if she would share with me more infonna tion about that particular individual because it is that very area where employers in Manitoba are crying out for skilled people. That is why. under the colleges growth fund, there will be 35 additional seats created at the Red River College for computer accounting technicians, 55 seats created for computer analyst programmer positions. That is the direction we are going.

If an individual is having difficulty, an indivi dual with the kind of training required by employ ers in our economy in Manitoba today, many of whom are needed in the workplace, I will do whatever I can to assist that particular individual. But certainly there are jobs available in this area, so many that we have to apply some of those $4 mill ion in the colleges growth fund for the very area referred to by the honourable member, for the person she has been speaking to who is having difficulty finding emplo yment.

So if the honourable member wants to share more infonna tion with me, I will use whatever efforts I can to assist. * (1410 ) Pan Am Games Aboriginal Runn ers-Recognition Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): have some questions for the Premier. In 1967 there were some aboriginal runners, Charles Bittern, Dave Courchene Jr., Patrick Bruyere, William

July 13 , 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 42 19 Chippaway, Fred Harper, William Merasty, Charles Nelson, Russell Abraham, John Nazzie and Milton Mallett, who took the Pan Am torch from St. Paul, Minnesota, to the Winnipeg Stadium, a run of some 800 kilometres in just six days, and the Premier knows that these runners were not recognized at that time, nor have they been to this day. I would like to ask the Premier to consider awarding these runners the Order of the Buffalo or some other award to recognize their achievement for the Pan Am Games. Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I thank the honourable member for his advice, and I will certainly take that matter under advisement. Man itoba Capital Fund Losses Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, I have asked a number of questions of the Min ister of In dustry, Trade and Tourism in regard to the Manitoba Capital Fund concerning the amount of losses suffered by Manitobans through Manitoba's investment as one of the five partners in the fund.

I wonder if the minister would be able to confirm today what the amount of the losses in regard to Rescom and Shamray, which total $4.5 mill ion for the fund, what proportion of that $4.5 mill ion does Manitoba as one of the five contributors bear. Hon. Mervin Tweed (Minister of Indus try, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, as I explained to the honourable member in Estimates and in other questions in this House, risk capital is exactly that.

It is what Manitobans have said in the survey or the review that was done in 19 94 that, in order to grow the jobs and the economy in a fast rate that we expected, that was the type of investment that was required. Companies that partook or were involved in the investment side of it, many of them have been successful. Many of them have created many high-paying jobs in the province of Manitoba. When you look at the fund, it is a balanced fund. The investment at the start of the day and at the end of the day fluctuates in great amounts.

Somebody told me that in 19 90 the Dell investment in the United States, a $2,500 investment today was worth $1 milli on, so it just shows that the risk capital that we need in Manitoba to make it grow is there for the people that need it. Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, I would like to table a memo from the Workers Compensation Board which points out that the people of Manitoba, through their one-fifth contribution, pay the entire losses, all $4.5 milli on of the loss, because of a secret share class, Class C, which the people of Manitoba bought for their $5 milli on- Madam Speaker: Order, please.

The honourable member for Crescentwood was recognized for a supplementary question to which no

preamble is required. Would the honourable member please pose his question. Mr. Sale: I want to ask the minister why he did not tell people, the people of Manitoba, and tell this party in Estimates and tell this House that Manitobans were responsible for the entire $4.5- million loss on Rescom and Shamray because of a class of shares called, apparently, Class C of shares, that Manitoba said they would take the first $5 mill ion of loss. What kind of a venture fund had no risk for the CIBC, no risk for the private sector? All the risk is on the people of Manitoba. What kind of a venture fund is that? Mr. Tweed: Madam Speaker, while not accepting any of the

preamble or the information that the honourable member often brings forward to this House which is incorrect, I am pleased to report that venture capital-backed companies increase jobs by 23 percent, increase sales by 31 percent, increase exports by 36 percent and taxes paid to the province by 39 percent. I am pleased to inform the member that Vision's $3-milli on investment in Monarch Industries is currently rated at $13 million, which he so conveniently neglects. When we look at the record of the previous administration on the loans that they put out- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Mr. Sale: Beauchesne 417 directs that questions should be answered briefly and to the

4220 LEGISLAT IVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13 , 1999 point and should answer the question that was asked. Madam Speaker, I asked whether the minister would confirm that Manitobans lost the entire $4.5 million because of a separate class of shares which Manit obans guaranteed when they set up this so-called venture fund, while the Bank of Commerce, which is a partner, has no losses at all. I simply asked him to confirm that, not to go on a ramble about some other funds. Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order. Hon.

Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I can appreciate the sensitivity of members opposite to have the minister put his answer into the context of this fund over the years because it is very clear that the record of the member for Crescentwood's party when in government was absolutely dismal in creating any jobs with the use of that venture fund. The minister has a right in his answer to place his answer in context of the fund and its success or failure over the years. Madam Speaker: Order, please.

On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Crescentwood, indeed I will take the matter under advisement to consult the Hansard record and report back to the Chamber. Teachers Pension Plan Matern ity Leave Matching Contribution Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, though this government poses as being supportive of women and famil ies, many of their policies are family bashing and women bashing. Consider for example teachers on maternity leave, and the majority are women, are losing pensionable service time because this government is the only one in Canada to ref use matching contributions.

I would like to ask the Minister of Education why his government refuses to match maternity leave pension contributions and so penalizes the pensions for teachers, again mostly women who are at home birthing children and caring for their children. Are you for families or are you against them? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, since my appointment as Minister of Education and Training, I have had the pleasure of visiting numerous Manitoba schools and seeing those teachers referred to by the honourable member at work with the children of Manitoba, doing an excellent job and making a wonderful impression on those young people so that they can grow up and become productive and happy citizens. The issue raised by the honourable member is one that has been discussed with me, and we continue to consider the matter. Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Winn ipeg International Airport Mr. Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): This morning I, along with the Premier (Mr. Filmon), Ind ustry, Trade and Tourism Minister Mervin Tweed, and Winnipeg Airports Authority President and CEO Murray Sigler, had the pleasure of attending an event regarding future developments at the Winnipeg Airport. The Winnipeg Airports Authority Inc. will develop detailed operational and facility plans to guide the future development of Winnipeg International Airport and its role in economic development for the city and province.

The plans will be developed in a series of studies to be conducted with financial assistance from the Manitoba government. The province will provide 50 percent of the cost of the studies, too, from the Manitoba Business Development Fund. The studies will focus on several areas of potential growth and development of the airport facility and surrounding areas. The project will look at setting out an updated airport master plan, defining elements of a plan to construct a new terminal building, creating an airport related business park and developing a strategy to market enhanced air cargo services.

July 13, 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 422 1 I would like to acknowledge the work of the Airports Authority which, since taking over operation of Winnipeg International, has worked hard to improve services and also look for new business development opportunities. With its 24-hour status, proximity to rail and road links, convenient location to the city, and room for expansion, Winnipeg International Airport can continue to be a major economic development engine for the city and the province and will keep us on course for continued success in the future.

I would like to wish this operation continued success. Thank you. * (1 420) Sayisi Dene Agreements Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsla nd): Madam Speaker, yesterday the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen) and I had the opportunity of witnessing the signing of the memorandum of understanding between the federal government and the Manitoba Dene people of Northlands First Nation at Lac Brochet and the Sayisi Dene of Tadoule Lake. The ceremony took place at Tadoule Lake and was signed by the federal Min ister of Indian Affairs, Jane Stewart. It was indeed a day to be remembered by all.

Firstly, the admission by the federal government is a breakthrough after past denials and refusals to negotiate on this issue, which is critical to the Sayisi Dene and the Northlands Dene who have traditionally hunted, fished and lived on both sides of the 60th parallel. I know that there is a lot of business that has to be done in the days ahead, the months and years ahead. Negotiations, however, can now begin on harvesting rights, land selection and reconciliation.

It is our hope that these negotiations can be fast-tracked and completed quickly to allow the two First Nations to obtain outstanding treaty land entitlement. The Northlands Sayisi Dene bands have been denied economic development due to a shortage of land, and of course, the Sayisi Dene it is well documented-still have a major dispute with the federal government over their forced relocation to Churchill in 19 56. Hopefully, we will bring to final closure the unfortunate circumstances that the Dene people faced while in Churchill, which we have come to know as an experiment on genocide.

Madam Speaker, we also look forward to the time when the federal government will formally apologize to the Sayisi Dene for the treatment that these people received in Churchill between 19 56 and the early '70s. Thank you. Oakbank -Springfield Personal Care Home Mr. Glen Findlay (Springfield): Madam Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure to rise today and inform everybody in the House that we had a very happy day in Springfield and Oakbank last Friday with the sod turning for the 40-bed personal care home.

This personal care home comes into being because of the community effort in Springfield and Oakbank over many years where the Kinsmen and Kinettes led a charge to have a personal care home. The local committee in the community worked very aggressively with Manitoba Health, with North Eastman association and have concluded with the announcement on Friday that with the sod turning, the construction is underway for this 40- bed personal care home.

The discussion over the years symbolized the kind of change in health care services being delivered, because from a 30-bed initially conceived, it ends up in a 40-bed personal care home plus a primary health centre, a primary health centre which has services such as community health services, home care, mental health, diabetes education, audiology services and substance abuse education awareness, all part of the facility in Oakbank to serve Springfield and area. I want to congratulate the mm1sters of Health in the past and this government, and particularly the current Minis ter of Health (Mr.

Stefanson) for being at the sod turning for the betterment of health care services in North Eastman association. All the citizens out there need to be congratulated, not only for the work to develop the final design of the project but in terms of responding to the request for the public funds to come forward for the matching grant of

4222 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 $84 1 ,000 from the community, which is citizens plus the R.M. of Spring field, to be part of the $7.2-million announcement that we made last Friday. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Pan Am Games Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, I want to recognize the 53 Manitoba born or Manitoba-trained athletes who have made the Pan Am Games team.

Twenty-three of the 41 sports will have Manitoba athletes, and I think that nothing is going to sell tickets for the Pan Am Games like promoting these athletes and having Manitobans get out and cheer for our home-grown athletes. In athletics, there are Daryl Fill ion and By ron Goodwin; badminton, Kara Solmundson; basketball, Todd MacCulloch; beach volleyball, Dan Lewis; cycling, Clara Hughes, Jim Fisher and Tanya Dubnicoff; equestrian, James Atkinson; field hockey, Christine Hunter; judo, Kevin Mciver and Niki Jenkins; racquetball.

Sherman Greenfeld; roller sports, Shaun Clark; roller hockey, Scott Burfoot, Jeff Leiter and Michael Martens; speed skating roller sports, Cindy Klassen and Christy Peters; rowing, Emma Robinson; rhythmic gymnastics, Julie Hayward, Katie Iafolla, Joanna Krecsy, Jennifer Pudavick and Andrea Sellen; sailing, Kelly Hand; shooting, Henry Gerow.

Soccer, Brian Devenney; softball, Rick Elias and Sandy Newsham; squash, Mamie Baizley and Carolyn Russell; swimming, Kelly Stefanyshyn; tae kwon do, Dominique Bosshart; handball, Ryan Biggs, Bill Coulter, Larry Hosegood, Kris Kendall, Trevor Nott and Jade Young; team handbal l, women, Rebecca Hoffer and Nancy Karpinsky; volleybal l, men, Jason Dufault, Scott Koskie, Jules Martens, Keith Sanheim and Andrew Zurawsky; women's team, Wanda Guenette, Janis Kelly, and Louise Wlock; water polo, men, Darryl Bourne; weightlifting, Theresa Brick and Susanne Dandenault.

I want to have all members of the House join me in wishing these athletes congratulations and all the best on their performances in the Games. Volunteerism Mr. Kevin Lamour eux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I just wanted to take this opportunity as we know there are many different events around the province in which we are getting a wide number of people participating and volunteering their time and efforts and ensuring that these many events are, in fact, as successful as they have been in years past. That is all being put in the time frame of the Pan Am Games.

I know, in the last couple of evenings, I have had opportunity to visit pavilions. It is a showcase for all Manitobans. I just wanted to applaud all of the eff orts, not only those who are participating and volunteering their time for the pavilions but for the many other festivities throughout the province. Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Hon.

Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I believe His Honour the Lieutenant Governor will be entering the Chamber momentarily with respect to Royal Assent for a bill which, discussions with House leaders, we require in order to convene a committee, a meeting of the Legislative Assembly Management Commission, to complete some regula tory work. So I believe His Honour should be here momentarily. Madam Speaker: The Lieutenant Governor is expected momentarily for Royal Assent on Bill 28. * (1 430) ROYAL ASSENT Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms (Mr. Garry Clark): His Honour the Lieutenant Governor.

His Honour Peter Liba, Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Manitoba, having entered the House and being seated on the throne, Madam Speaker addressed His Honour in the following words.

July 13, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4223 Madam Speaker: May it please Your Honour: The Legislative Assembly, at its present session, passed a bill which, in the name of the Assembly, I present to Your Honour and to which bill I respectfully request Your Honour's assent: Bill 28-The Legislative Assembly Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'Assemblt�e legislative. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): In Her Majesty's name, His Honour the Lieutenant Governor doth assent to this bill. His Honour was then pleased to retire. House Business Hon. Darren Praznik (Govern ment House Leader): Madam Speaker, I would like to announce that the Standing Commit tee on Law Amendments, to complete its work on Bill 40, will be called for this afternoon concurrently with the House for 2:45 p.m. Madam Speaker: The Sta nding Committee on Law Amendments will be called concurrently with the House at 2:45 this afternoon. Is there leave? [agreed] Mr.

Praznik: Madam Speaker, with respect to the passage of Bill 28, I would also like to announce that a Legislative Assembly Management Commission meeting will be called for this afternoon following the completion of the Law Amendments committee in the same committee room. So once that committee has concluded its work, a reasonable 10 -15 minutes following the completion of its work, if LAMC could then convene in that same committee room.

Madam Speaker: For the benefit of information for all members, the Legislative Assembly Management Commission meeting will take place following completion of the standing committee in Room 255. Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the difficulty that that may cause yourself, but I am sure, with a variety of Acting Deputy Speakers, et cetera, that we will be able to accommo date your attendance there.

As well, as I am sure members appreciate, as we are in the latter days of the session, the need, that there are some important regulations that require approval with respect to Revenue Canada, and in discussing this with the opposition House leader, and I do not think I have had the opportunity to speak to the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) on it yet, but there is a desire, I think, to at least complete that business while members are here in the capital, as opposed to calling a meeting following their disbursement across the province. So that is why we are attempting to accommodate that at this time.

Madam Speaker, there are a list of bills , and would ask if you could, with leave, call the reports from the standing committees that completed work on a number of bills. Madam Speaker: Is there leave to have the reports of the Standing Comm ittee on Industrial Relations and the Standing Comm ittee on Municipal Affairs? Leave? [agreed] PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Standing Comm ittee on Industrial Relations Third Report Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the Third Report on the Comm ittee on Industrial Relations. An Honourable Member: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Industrial Relations presents the following as its Third Report. Your committee met on Monday, July 12, 1999, at 7 p.m. in Room 254 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred. Your committee heard representation on bills as follows: Bill 29-The Victims' Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les droits des victimes

4224 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 Ken Mandzuik -Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties Your committee has considered: Bill 29-The Victims' Rights Amendment Act: Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur /es droits des victimes Bill 34-The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Cour du Bane de Ia Reine et modifications correlatives and has agreed to report the same without amendment. Mr. Helwer: I move, seconded by the honourable member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. Standing Comm ittee on Municipal Affairs Third Report Mr. Denis Rocan (Gladstone): I beg to report the Third Report of the Comm ittee on Municipal Affairs. An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs presents the following as its Third Report.

Your committee met on Monday, July 12, 1999, at 3 p.m. in Room 254 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred. At that meeting, your committee elected Mr. Rocan as its Chairperson and Mr. Helwer as its Vice-Chairperson. Your committee had met on Monday, July 5, 1999, to consider Bill 25, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur /'evaluation municipale, and at that meeting had heard public presentations on the bill. The list of presenters to the bill is contained in the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs. Your committee heard representation on bills as follows: Bill 47 -The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur /'evaluation municipale Mike McCandless - McCandless and Associates Your committee has considered: Bill 47 -The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur /'evaluation municipale and has agreed to report the same without amendment. Your committee has also considered: Bill 25-The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur /'evaluation municipale and has agreed to report the same with the following amendments: Your committee voted to delete Clause 4(1) of the bill. Your committee also voted to delete Clause 4(2) of the bill. Your committee also voted to delete Clause 5 of the bill. Your committee also voted to delete Clause 6 of the bill. Your committee also voted to delete Clause 7 of the bill. MOTION: THAT Legislative Counsel be authorized to change all

section numbers and internal references necessary to carry out the amendments adopted by this committee.

July 13, 19 99 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4225 Mr. Rocan : I move, seconded by the honourable member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. * * * Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I would ask if you could please, with leave where it is required, call for report stage all remaining bills that have been passed and been reported by committee, followed by, again with necessary leaves, any bills that have completed report stage, if you could then with leave call them for third reading, if leave is required.

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to proceed now with report stage on Bills 25, 29, 34 and 47? Agreed? [agreed] * (1 440) REPORT STAGE Bill 25-The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Praznik), that (Bill 25), The Municip al Assessment Amendment Act (Loi modi fiant Ia

Loi sur l'evaluation municipale), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bili 29-The Victims' Rights Amendment Act Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 29, The Victims' Rights Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ies droits des victimes), reported from the Standing Comm ittee on Indus trial Relations, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bili 34-The Cour t of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendment s Act Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pitura), that Bill 34, The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur la Cour du Bane de Ia Reine et modifications correlatives), reported from the Standing Comm ittee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Bill 47-The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Min ister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), that Bill 47, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act (2) (Loi No. 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur I' evaluation municipale ), reported from the Standing Commit tee on Municipal Affairs, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to now proceed to third reading on Bills 25, 29, 34 and 47? [agreed] THIRD READINGS Bill 25-The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), that Bill 25, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'evaluation municipale, be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Hon. Harry Enns (Min ister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, I want to indicate that I concur with the passage of this bill. Motion agreed to.

4226 LEGISLAT IVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Madam Speaker: The question before the House is third reading, Bill 25, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. Bill 29-The Victims' Rights Amendment Act Hon. Da rren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pitura), that Bill 29, The Victims' Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les droits des victimes, be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Kevin Lamour eux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, very briefly, unfortunately I did not have the opportunity in second reading to put just a few words on the record on Bill 29. It is a positive piece of legislation which we have no problem in terms of seeing through its passage. It deals in terms of compensation, and I think all of us would concur that the compensation for the victims should be the first priority.

So, from what I understand, if there is any sort of action taken against government by an inmate, that any sort of financial compensation that the government would be obligated to provide as a result of something that maybe would have occurred for a prisoner in incarceration, that first consideration for that money would go to the victims, I think something that is quite positive. With those few words, we are prepared to see the bill go through third reading. Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading Bill 29, The Victims' Rights Amendment Act.

Is it the will of the House to adopt to motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. Bi1134-The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded, I hope with his permission, by the honourable Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), that Bill 34, The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Cour du Bane de Ia Reine et modifications correlatives, be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Kevin Lamour eux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, this par ticular bill does set out the framework, if you like, for the appointment and functioning of masters for the Court of Queen's Bench. Masters perform a variety of judicial functions, and in order to maintain the importance of judicial independence, we feel that the legislation that we have before us is, in fact, quite necessary. Thank you. Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

The question before the House is third reading Bill 34, The Court of Queen's Bench Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act. Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. Bi1147-The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded by the most honourable Min ister of Rural Developm ent (Mr. Derkach), that Bi ll 47,

July 13 , 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4227 The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur !'evaluation municipale, be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I spoke on this bill at second reading, and I want to put on the record on third reading some of the concerns that we have in our caucus about the situation that the government finds itself in. * ( 14 50) First of all, we did predict this would happen. We raised this issue during 1996 during the debate on the privatization of MTS. In fact, if one recalls, we raised this in committee at that time. By the way, the commit tee never did deal with all the amendments we had.

Madam Speaker, we said at the time that this was an issue that had to be dealt with. Traditionally Crown corporations have received an exemption from assessment at the local municipal level. We said this was going to be a problem. At that time the government ignored it. Right now we have at least two municipalities which have passed by-laws assessing such property, which is I think something the minister is aware of. Not only that, I think there is every indication we were to have one court challenge. We were looking at the potential for several others.

I want to put on the record that we certainly predicted in '96 the fact this could lead to an impact on rates and of course on municipalities themselves. What we are saying now by passing this bill is that by no means is this over. I say to the minister, and I think he realizes this, what has happened now is, because of the decision made in 19 96, we are seeing a compounding effect. This bill does exempt not only MTS, which is a way of preventing rate shock in that area, but other utilities that previously had not been exempted.

So it appears that what we may see happening is some municipalities actually losing revenues. This is because they are now in a position of having to try to deal with certain classes of property as being the same. I want to say to the government that, even though we are prepared to pass this bill today to give some protection against rate shock, I think it is fairly clear from the presentations we have seen and our knowledge of this issue from day one that this issue is probably going to come back and haunt the provincial government down the line. There may very well be legal action taken on this.

There may be, I think, some presentations we will be hearing from the municipalities. I know of at least two, Grand Rapids and Lac du Bonnet, which have already put assessment in on the hydro poles. I do say to the minister, because I know that he is going to be hearing from ratepayers, from municipalities, this probably is nothing more than a temporary measure. We are not prepared, by the way, to allow Manitoba ratepayers to be subject to further rate shocks.

The bottom line here is that there have been enough rate shocks already from the fact that you have a private company now that is seeking to get $10 0 mill ion in profit from the ratepayers, which is far higher than was sought by the previous Crown corporation. It is higher because that private company is now subject to federal and provincial taxation. So they are now asking the ratepayers to pay for that taxation. The difficulty we were in in this situation was that if we did not take some action currently we would see a situation where there would be a further rate shock.

I know that is the only reason this government brought it in. There are various levels of concern on this bill in terms of the whole issue. Ob viously there is the question of what utilities should be subject to assessment or not. I put our concerns on the record. I just want to finish off by saying that there are various issues, whether or not municipalities can assess taxation, the level of assessment, the apportionment, and I say on the record, we are supporting this bill to protect ratepayers, but this issue is going to come back in the future. I know our Leader will expand on our concerns.

We want to put on the record, even though we are supporting this, that there are going to be further problems in the future. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

4228 LEGISLAT IVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): It is a regrettable responsibil ity to speak on this bill in this Chamber at this time, because many of us a few years ago raised the issue of taxation and taxation treatment dealing with the telephone system and its impact on consumers. In 1996, when the Tories broke their election promise of 1995 and proceeded to sell the phone system, we asked questions day after day about the tax ramifications of that decision and therefore its impact on consumers.

We asked those questions based on (1) the issue of the treatment of Tel us in Alberta, and its changed status from a public to a private company based on CRTC decisions. We had CRTC decisions that talked about both rate of return and taxation on a private company and its impact.

We further cited that Mike Harris, kind of the new spiritual leader of the Conservative Party opposite, had walked away from an Ontario privatization decision because of the consideration of income tax, that it could not sell Hydro because the income tax of a Crown corporation would mean a massive increase to the ratepayers of Ontario, on top of the debacles of the previous governments, Liberal and Conservative, in terms of nuclear power plants and their inefficiencies and their cost, which was ultimately put on hold by the NDP government of 1990.

Madam Speaker, we raised these questions and the government said, que sera sera, whatever will be will be. We know that taxes will be lower under a private company, and they went so far as to take false information and give it to the editorial board of the Free Press where there was editorial that said taxes will be lower. They also went on to say that taxes will be lower, because the grants in lieu of taxes are higher for the phone system than the assessed value of the company would be in various municipalities. Two broken promises on taxes to deal with a broken promise on the telephone system.

So what do we have now? What do we have before this Chamber today? We have before this Chamber today a bill to deal with a huge band aid that will be challenged in court based on the pipeline decision, will be challenged in court by people working for municipalities and lawyers working for municipalities. They will argue that now that MTS is a private company, it should be treated like the Supreme Court has treated the Inner-City Gas or the TransCanada Pipelines.

They will argue in the Superior Court that this legislation should be challenged because MTS now is private company, and poles and wires should be treated like pipelines, therefore should be treated as assessed assets, and therefore as assets that would be subject to the assessment roles of various municipalities. Ergo, a $6-a-month rate increase to deal with part of the broken promise on the massive broken promise of the Manitoba Telephone System by the Tories and by the Premier (Mr. Filmon), in particular.

We, first of all, pointed out that we did not think they could amend the previous Municip al Act, that it would be out of order, and how unwise of a government to put a band-aid that was on a bill that was already before the Legislature to deal with their utter incompetence, I would argue, to deal with their deceit by putting an amendment to The Municipal Act in the second reading committee stage that substantively changes the bill and substantively changes the regime of the property tax assessment, particularly, as it pertains to municipalities.

Madam Speaker, the government should have thought of this legislation when it dealt at committee and when it broke its promise to sell the phone system. It did not. On the taxation score, we have now a private corporation that is going to be subject to private corporate considerations by the federal government, which is going to raise the rates 40 percent. We also have on top of that an issue of taxation for property taxes that are also going to raise the rates considerably. Therefore, what is this Legislature supposed to do on this issue?

We are really faced with a Hobson's choice, because we could stand here and vote against it and say: we told you so. That would be inconsistent with us. We, in the NDP, are always on the side of the consumers and always voting with the consumers of telephone and telecommunic ation services by wanting and voting to keep the company owned by the public. * (1 500)

July 13, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4229 Madam Speaker, I think that therefore we have to vote and continue to vote with the consumers. The Tories have voted with the brokers. The Tories have voted with the brokers in the sale of the company. They have voted with the brokers in disallowing a vote by the people of Manitoba when we had proposed a referendum and plebiscite, then we were disallowed of even having that vote by the Speaker of the day, prohibited from having the vote in the Legislature to provide for a referendum for the people.

The Tories opposite were dancing to the tune of the downtown business community from Toronto and we were listening to the people here in Manitoba. We did not have the ideological position of the Liberal Party that said: we are not opposed to privatization, we are just opposed to the way they are doing it. An Honourable Member: We changed Leaders since then. Mr. Doer: Oh, you changed Leaders. I cannot keep track. There have been three Leaders since 19 95 . Who is the present Leader of the Liberal Party and what is their present position?

Because I know that the present Leader of the Liberal Party voted, well, first of all, they promised not to sell CN. John Chretien, in 1993, standing in front of the gates of CN, standing in the gates at Transcona saying: we will not sell CN. Jon Gerrard I am sure was saying the same thing. We will not sell the Canadian National Railways. You know, you can put that with their promise not to cut health care; you could put that with their promise not to abolish the GST.

I mean, if this person has moral problems, and we are dealing with politicians, he should not even be running for the Liberal Party after the broken promise on health care, on education, on CN, on GST. You know, what kind of integrity is that? What kind of party is this member a part of? He rails away against the Seven Oaks School Division. My God, all of them have a superior moral standard, I would argue, than the rascals in Ottawa and some of the def eated rascals in Ottawa that are presently trying to play some part here in Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, the Liberals at the Seven Oaks School Division I find having greater integrity than the Liberals in Ottawa and the defeated Liberals that have been thrown out of Ottawa because of broken election promises, but I digress. An Honourable Member: We just want him to come here and see the farms. That is all we want. Mr. Doer: Yes, we would like to see John Chretien in the fields. We would even loan him rubber boots. I know he does not have any of his own rubber boots. I will even loan him work boots. He probably does not have any of those too.

We will loan him anything to get him out in the fields of southwestern Manitoba and southeastern Manitoba so he can see for himself not only the flooding but the telephone poles that used to be owned by Manitobans and have been sold to private interests. Do you want to speak on this bill? An Honourable Member: I do. Mr. Doer: Okay. Because I would love to hear you speak on the bill, because I still recall with the greatest respect to Ne il, to you in your legacy, I still remember the vote from the Liberal Party, the most profound vote I ever saw when three members voted three different ways.

One voted for it, one voted against it, and one abstained. Today I know we have a unanimous position in the Liberal Party, this week at least, from the member for I nkster (Mr. Lamoureux). I need a cup of hot water. Excuse me for a second. Madam Speaker, I was trying to engage the member for Inkster, and I apologize. Having said that, I am sure he will agree with us that this is the biggest legislative band-aid I have ever seen on a broken political promise in all my years in this Legislature.

This is a huge politic al band-aid to deal with an incompetent government that did not deal with this in 19 96 and to deal, quite frankly, with a government that misled the people in the 1995 campaign. This will come back to haunt you. [interjection] I beg your pardon. Yes, and so did the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale). So did I and I got criticized.

4230 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13 , 1999 You know, I got criticized in an editorial about this. I was told that we were wrong on taxation in a Free Press editorial, and they waved it around. In fact, they blew it up so big, I do not know how much the taxpayers paid. How much did the taxpayers pay for Tories to blow up an editorial with "Doer is wrong" to be almost the size of some of the murals on these walls to try to embarrass me? You know, the editorial said we were wrong on taxation, both income tax, and they were wrong on municipal taxation.

Now the editorial page is writing editorials: Where is the NDP on this issue? I mean, give me a break. Give me a break. It is a good thing I have a sense of humour, because the members opposite wave this around, you know, taxation is going to be lower under a private company. Well, when am I going to get the retraction from members opposite for waving around those editorials that were paid for by the taxpayers? Just do not bother me at all, by the way. I mean, if you cannot take a bad editorial, you better not be leader of the NDP. You are bound to get 10 a month at least.

And if you vote one way, you will get it that way; if you get it the other way, you have it the other way. That is just part of the job and if it has some import and gravitus to it and some good facts. Yes, sometimes they may be right, because we cannot be right all the time. Sometimes the editorials can be right. But when they are wrong and the government is wrong, why are they not standing up apologizing? Why are they not grovelling before this Legi slature, as they should, for not telling the truth? Why are they not saying, oh, please, members of the opposition, do not hammer us for being wrong.

Please pass this bill to deal with our sins and our omissions and our weaknesses and our faults and our deceits and our dishonesty and our incompetence and our lack of any foresight and lack of any planning? Please, come forward and pass this bill. Well, the member heckles about the budget. I am proud of the fact that we voted against nine budgets. I am proud of the fact we voted against the budget that fired a thousand nurses, and when there is a budget that tries to rehire some of the nurses back, we are okay with that.

The members opposite may operate like Pavlov's dog and operate like everything they do is right; everything we do is wrong. They got nine budgets wrong, and this legislation is wrong. This legislation-[i nterjection] I want to speak to the bill here not the heckle from members opposite. It does speak to the issue of incompetence and why this bill is before the legislature. It does speak to the fact that this government is utterly and total ly incompetent. In fact, when you talk about incompetence, the members opposite could not run a first-aid kit. They could not run a first-aid kit for the people of Manitoba.

That is why the people that are in the hallways of our hospitals are still going to be subject to a higher taxation potentially with a court ruling, because of their incompetent, deceitful decision to sell the phone system. Madam Speaker, why is the government not admitting they made a mistake? Why are they not saying that we misled the people of this province when we said that the telephone system would be taxed in the same way privately as publicly? Why did the Premier stand up in this House day after day after day in October of 1996 and basically said that this will not have any impact on taxation?

Why did that happen? Perhaps if the House was not shut down, we could have gone on a little bit further. Maybe we would have found this out. Maybe the government would have listened to our points of privilege, if our microphones had not been silenced. Maybe we could have made some amendments to the bill that would have prevented us from dealing in a haphazard, I would argue, incompetent way some months later. What is going to happen some time after the election campaign when we are in office and we have to deal with this botched privatization?

What is going to happen if the courts rule and use the gas pipeline decision to jack up telephone rates, because the members opposite only cared about the brokers in Winnipeg and Toronto and did not care about the consumers? What are they going to do then? They will probably stand up in Question Period and ask us to fix the problem. They will probably do that. Shameless. Utterly, total ly, politica lly and principally shameless in terms of what they are going to do. * (1510 )

July 13 , 19 99 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 423 1 So I would argue strongly that this bill will be tested in the courts. This bill is not as good as our proposal to cancel the privatization. This bill is not as good as our proposal that we had put forward to have a plebiscite. This bill is not as good as the absolute security of Supreme Court decisions to protect many public assets from the assessment rolls of municipalities through the provision of grants in lieu of taxes. This Legislative Building is treated differently than Great-West Life across the street.

This Legislative Building pays grants in lieu of taxes to the City of Winnipeg. The Manitoba Telephone System was treated differently than TransCanada PipeLines. The wires on Manitoba Telephone System and the poles were treated differently than the pipeline in the ground through Manitoba. In fact, you can even see in rural Manitoba the pipeline areas adjacent to the telephone wires, adjacent to the hydro wires. The courts had made a decision that the pipelines were taxable, and because these are public enterprises, they were not taxable. It was grants in lieu of taxes.

So did anybody in that cabinet or that caucus raise that issue, or did you not care? Oh, do not worry about it; we will just pass a law, and, you know, if the courts overturn it, it will be after the next election. We do not care. We do not care about the people. We do not care about the public. We do not care about the consumer. We can dodge this and fudge this and amend this and cover it up and band-aid it up. We only care about the short term. We only work in a four year term. We just do everything possible to get elected, we try to get elected, and then dam the consequences after that.

That is what this bill says. Regrettably, we are the ones that are going to have to deal with this bill because we feel strongly that when the members opposite screw up their courage to call an election, we are going to have to deal with municipalities challenging this legislation and pointing out the pipeline decision. I do not know whether the government opposite has a legal opinion on this bill. If they do, they should table it in this House.

The government House leader should table the legal opinion in this House, because this is, at best, a band-aid to deal with their broken promise, a band-aid to deal with a broken comm itment to the people of this province. It is not the best guarantee that the consumer has to protect themselves from taxes. The best guarantee a consumer had was breached with the Tory sale of the phone system and regrettably breached with the passage of the privatization bill.

So we will vote for this massive band-aid because we have always been on the side of consumers, but we understand municipalities will be challenging this decision. Regrettably, the consumers will be the victims, as they have been all along, of the Tories' priorities to deal only with the privileged few, the financiers, the brokers, the banks that made the money on the phone system, the shareholders. The privileged few are the only ones the Tories care about, and we care about the hardworking, fair-minded Manitobans who are trying to make ends meet.

So we will be voting for this band-aid but with deep regret that we could not have prevented this by supporting the amendments of the NDP to keep the phone system publicly owned. We know that the Hydro will stand court challenges because it is a publicly owned corporation. We know that grants in lieu of taxes have been tested in courts for decades, and Hydro itself, the only peril to Hydro is the re election of a Conservative government or a Conservative-Liberal minority that would sell off Hydro. We will not let that happen. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

The question before the House is third reading Bill 47, The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act (2). Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Madam Speaker: Agreed? Agreed and so ordered. Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Spea ker, I would ask if we could then return to the concurrence process.

4232 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs and Housing (Mr. Reimer), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and that this House resolve itself into a commit tee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY Consi deration of Concurrence Motion The Acting Cha irperson (Gerry McAlpine): The Comm ittee of Supply has before it for consideration the motion concurring in all Supply resolutions relating to the Estimates of the expenditures for the fiscal year ending the 31s t of March. 2000. Mr. Kevin Lamour eux (Inkster): Mr. Chairperson, you know they say timing means a lot in terms of virtually any aspect in life, and prior to walking into Question Period, I was in the cafeteria and made a quick ja unt up to my office to grab my jacket.

Leaning against my door was an envelope from the Seven Oaks School Division, which I just kind of grabbed and took along with me and opened it up during Question Period. I started to read the letter that was inside and felt actually compelled to ask this question. I can honestly say I had no intentions on asking this particular question or a question related to the Seven Oaks School Division today, but, upon reading the letter, I thought it would in fact be appropriate. I say that because I think what it does is it again assists in the arguments of the need for an independent inquiry. Mr.

Chairperson, I do not know if I need to read the entire letter into the record, but there are two or three points in particular that I take great exception to. A couple of the points, I believe the Min ister of Education (Mr. McCrae) has addressed, and I would think should cause grave concern from the Min ister of Education in the sense that I cannot say with a hundred percent certainty who is right and who is wrong. But, suffice to say, someone is definitely right and someone is definitely wrong, and there is no doubt about that.

I say that because, and I quote right from the letter: The government's own officials twice reported that no harm was done and that the matter was concluded. Each of the three investigations, which have been done, reached the same conclusion. There was no breach m security; there was a violation of protocol. Mr. Chairperson, the author of the letter, or at least the signatory of the letter I know is Claudia Sarbit, and no doubt is acting at least in good faith by getting information from the school division.

The Minister of Education has been very clear in his response to me, and for that reason I have continuously tried to get to the bottom of this particular issue. But someone is wrong here. Is it the Minister of Education? Is it the signatory of this letter? I think that is a legitimate issue that does need further comment on. *( 15 20) Another point again reinforces the first point. Manitoba Education, and I quote: Manitoba Education officials investigated this incident immediately and declared that while protocol had not been followed, Mr.

O'Lea ry's actions represented no threat to the examination, security, and they deemed the matter closed. Well, again, I would argue someone is wrong here, and I would like to know who is wrong. I think that is quite legitimate, to pose that question. I cannot recall the last time I had talked to Ms. Sarbit. It has to be a good year at the very least, and this incident is about that age. I can assure you that I have never discussed this matter with Ms. Sarbit. Another part of the letter, which really offends me, and I question whether or not it was Ms.

Sarbit that actually wrote this letter, I would be interested in knowing if in fact she is the one who wrote this letter or did she have the letter written, and then she had signed it off. That is the suggestion, and I quote: The suggestion by Mr. McCrae and Mr. Lamoureux and Mr. Filmon that this matter still requires further investigation by an independent inquiry indicates that this issue has nothing to do with education

July 13 , 1999 LEGISLAT IVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4233 and everything to do with party politics and an upcoming provincia l election. Mr. Chairman, if Ms. Sarbit made that allegation inside this Chamber to me, I would take great exception to it and, in fact, would be up on my feet in some form and using one of our rules, whether it is our rules and procedures, Beauchesne's, privilege or points of order, in reference to imputing definitely unworthy motives. I have continuously maintained, virtually from the onset, that what we are talking about is the integrity of the standard exams in the province of Manitoba.

For someone to believe that that integrity is not worth protecting and being a school trustee, I think that there needs a re-evaluation in terms of why it is that one might even be in that position. As a school trustee, you are trusted with the responsibil ity of providing quality public education. There are expectations that, as a trustee or as a board, you are expected to follow. I find it incredibly difficult to understand how someone can or the board, to quote: imply that this issue has nothing to do with education and everything to do with party politics.

If we look at what the public, including the constituents that live in Seven Oaks School Division, would want to see, it is quality public education. Well, I think Manitobans have acknowledged and recognized the important role that standard exams play in ensuring that quality public education, and all three political parties inside this Chamber agree with that. I was on CJOB, the Adler on Line round talk show in which there was the Minister of Education, the critic from the New Democrats and myself, and all three of us, speaking on the behalf of our respective political parties, endorsed standard exams.

One has to realize that the standard exams have virtually no value if in fact you are not able to protect the integrity of those exams. I do not know if the entire board has actually read the report. If I were a school trustee, I would be quite concerned in terms of it appears there are allegations of more than one breach, of allegations of potential conflict of interest in terms of who is conducting the investigation. These are things in which I would be a little bit more careful or selective, as I am attempting to be.

Members might know that quite often I will say some things which I feel and maybe not have done as much research as I could have done, but I always like to believe that I am doing what I feel is right and must be addressed. The integrity of those standards exams has been called legitimately into question. To this date I do not know if there was any sort of reprimand. To the best of my knowledge, there was not any formal or informal reprimand of the individual. At the end of the letter, the school division then talks about Mr. Treller and says not to worry, not to fear, that this is something which always happens.

Well, how naive. That is so incredibly naive to believe that Mr. Treller's reputation has not been damaged by this. I was there when there was a number of teachers, his former peers, who sat around and said that this teacher was being demoted because he ratted on the principal. Now, if we want to try and say, well, those people that were sitting around, because I did not see their teaching certificates, that is a given, but if you want to say that I was set up to walk into this particular meeting, that they knew that I was meeting with other people there, well, that would be stretching the coincid ence.

But I will tell you something, the perception is very important. I believe politicians, of whatever politic al stripe, even apolitical politicians at our local level, realize the importance of perception. The perception that Mr. Treller was just transferred over because he was a wonderful teacher and this is just normal procedure, if they believe that that was the perception that is out there, I think that they really better start questioning the superintendent and anyone else that was involved in this whole issue.

I know, at least it has been indicated, because someone, and I hope to, and if I do not, I trust that the Seven Oaks School Division will ensure that the school trustees are provided a copy of the comments this afternoon. But, Mr. Chairperson, I find the whole issue of Mr. Treller absolutely amazing. I do not want to claim to know the reality of all of the details, but I do know in terms of a good deal

4234 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 of the harm that was caused to Mr. Treller, who has been-and I tried to get hold of Mr. Treller a while back, and I was told by someone else who had given me a call that Mr. Treller will not be able to return my call because he has been instructed not to talk to me. Well, who is the one who actually instructed Mr. Treller not to talk to me? * (1 530) would welcome correspondence or communication from Seven Oaks School Division.

If there is no election that comes up over the next little while, maybe we can even attend one of these school division meetings and try to get some of those questions answered. Why was Mr. Treller instructed that he cannot talk to me? If they believe that there is absolutely nothing wrong, nothing to fear, then what fear do they have in Mr. Treller talking to me? Was it the school trustees that instructed Mr. Treller? Was it the administration that instructed Mr. Treller? Was it the school division or the school trustees who instructed the administration to instruct Mr. Treller not to talk to me?

Well, you know, if we want to get to the bottom of this, Mr. Chairperson, in rea ding the letter, as I indicated, offends me, offends personally my intelligence and my motivation for pursuing this. I really believe that the letter gives credibil ity to the whole notion, which I have been arguing now for weeks, and that is for an independent investigation. I do not know what more the Minister of Education (Mr. McCrae) needs in order to see the merits for an independent investigation. In fact, I would argue that the Minister of Education only has two choices.

The first choice is to accept the report as written, and the second choice is to agree to an independent investigation. I do not understand why the Minister of Education continues to want to avoid making the commitment towards that independent investigation, especially when things continue to happen to justify the need for an independent investigation.

Yesterday, I brought to the attention of the Minister of Education other concerns that have been raised to me by individuals that I have respect for in terms of political affiliations of certain members of the school division admini stration and the potential for conflict. Today I bring forward a letter which he was cc'd a copy of. You know, I found it interesting. Someone had made reference to, well, in the letter, everything to do with party politics and upcoming provincial election. Well, read the cc list, Mr. Chairperson. The cc is to the Premier (Mr.

Filmon), to the education, to the deputy minister, the Mini ster of Envir onment (Mrs. Mci ntosh), the Leader of the Liberal Party, the Leader of the New Democratic Party, and myself. Well, I guess at least in part, you know, I would agree with the school division that there is a political background to this. That is the reason why I have consistently argued that any investigation of any value cannot be tied into the Department of Education. You cannot have Mr. Carlyle conducting an investigation. It would be no better than the investigation that we received from the Seven Oaks School Division.

You know, the politics of this issue are there. There is a lot of politics in it, and I acknowledge that. You know, one of the things that I have always been convinced of, and I somewhat heckled it to the Minister of Education (Mr. McCrae) yesterday, was that if this principal had been a Tory principal-you know, the Finance minister is the former principal I think out in Minnedosa. If this would have been Mr.

Gille shammer and he was still a principal, we, and I say we collectively, the opposition, it would not be just two of us in the Liberal Party fighting for justice on this issue, would have at the very least 25 MLAs fighting on this issue and to the extent of asking for the minister's resignation. There is absolutely no doubt about that. So is there politics? Sure, there is politics in it. I do not question that. That is the reason why I have stated that it has to be an independent investigation. In reading the report, I do not know if the school division actually has a copy of the report.

The school trustees will have more information than what I would have if they have

July 13 , 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4235 the report, because my edition is whited out. But, surely to goodness, they must give some credibility, I would hope, to some of the other allegations that are being made. Right of fhand, I can recall one individual quoted as saying that he would be able to attest to another breach in a court of law. Well, that raises a great deal of concern.

What is really interesting is in reading the letter one would get the impression that maybe you get the Liberals and the Conservatives kind of wringing their hands, saying, yes, justice has to be served here, so let us do what we can. I can honestly say, Mr. Chairperson, and I will not mention names, but I have had members from the New Democrats and the Conservatives who have expressed a great deal of concern in regard to what has taken place, that there are even New Democrats who do not support what has actually taken place, and I respect that.

I make reference to it because to try to heighten or to enlarge, to demonstrate the importance of this record [interjection] And I am sure that the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) will concur that there are all sorts of discussions that occur amongst MLAs, and if I have misspoken any confidence, I would apologize for it. But what I do know is the issue that is there, politics aside, is of a very serious nature. I would like to see the Min ister of Education (Mr. McCrae) address this issue. and there is only one way in which the Minister of Education can address this issue.

I posed the question yesterday to the minister, and I have posed the question previously to the minister to call for an independent investigation. The minister has a copy of the letter. I know he has a copy of it because it is cc'd to the minister, and I see it in his hands. Surely to goodness, the Minister of Education has to acknowledge that there is no chance or opportunity for an independent report coming out of the Seven Oaks School Division, and if you do not agree with the report that we have here today, well, Mr.

Chairperson, then the Minister of Education only has one choice, and that is to have another investigation. If the minister believes-[interjection] The Acting Cha irperson (Mr. McAlpine): Order, please. The honourable member for Inkster has been recognized. Honourable members who wish to carry on a conversation should do so outside the Chamber. Order, please. Mr. Lamoureux: As I was saying, if the minister wants to draw this issue to a conclusion and a conclusion that would include protecting the integrity of the standards exams, the minister needs to call for an independent investigation.

I appeal to the Minis ter of Education, and, no doubt, when I sit down the minister tends at times to be somewhat long-winded. I should not complain too much. At times I am too a little bit long-winded, but somewhere in that wind, that we see an answer, a very specific comm itment to the need for an independent investigation. * (1 540) The Minister of Education, I am not asking for the minister to say, yes, we will have an independent investigation and Mr. or Ms. X is going to be responsible for that investigation.

All I am talking about is a commitment to the independent investigation, and then we can have some dialogue over the next week, if it takes a week, to come up with a name of an individual. I do not believe it would be appropriate. I personally would not have any problem in terms of sitting down with the author of the letter that I have made reference to and the Minister of Education and seeing if there is a name which we can all concur to in terms of conducting this independent investigation. It does not have to be a costly adventure or venture. "Adventure" is probably a poor word to use in describing it.

In terms of cost, I think we are looking at a fraction of the cost of what the cost of the standard exams actually is. We spend millions every year in the standard exams. I think that spending a fraction of that cost in order to protect the integrity of those standard exams is money that is well spent because, and I will say it very clearly so that all members of the Chamber understand, there are a great number of people that are wat ching what the government is doing.

I was in fact at an event over the weekend where someone from the public who I did not know approached me and posed questions about this very issue. It is the

4236 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13 , 1999 first time that I know of that I actually met that person. So there are a great number of people that are watching the actions of this Chamber in addressing the issue of the standard exams. So, in conclusion, I would ask for the minister to indicate very clearly that he wiii in fact be conducting an independent investigation, thereby protecting the integrity of the standard exams and provincial directives as a whole. Hon.

James McCrae (Min ister of Education and Training): At the outset let me tell the honourable member, as I have done before, I believe that the vast majority of the people of Manitoba want quality in their education system; the vast majo rity want fairness in their education system. When I say they want that quality, they want good, solid curriculum. In the last few years under the New Directions to education begun by my predecessors and carried on by myself, one of the pillars of New Directions is good, solid curriculum.

In my travels, and they have been fairly significant in the few months I have been minister, I have learned from members of the teaching profession, whom I respect, that we have good, solid curriculum and we continually develop it. Our teaching profession would like to make sure that the government is mindful that they have got a big job to do in adjusting their methods and their approaches to these new curricula. I am mindful of that and sensitive to that. Another piilar is parental involvement.

Parents are very clearly in favour of a system of standards and a system of testing against those standards and the performance of the system and the indivi dual performance of the children in our system. So that at the earliest possible time in the development of children, we can find out where we are succeeding and where we are not succeeding and where we can improve and make adjustments to make the learning experience one that is fulfilling for our children and one that results in their being in a position to live happily and fruitfully in this province in the future.

So testing against those standards is one of those pillars, too.

If you are going to have a province-wide system of testing, in no matter what grade, whether it be Grade 12 , Grade 9, Grade 6 or Grade 3, which is the position that this government takes and for good reason, if you are going to do that, then you better have a system that is fair to the children in every comer of the province of Manitoba, so that children in every comer of the province of Manitoba can confidentially go about their school career knowing that there is integrity in the system in which they are engaged day in, day out, year in and year out.

That message is equally important to be received by parents of those children across this province and perhaps at least as important, if not more so, to every teacher engaged in the development of our children through the public school system. So if there is a suggestion that a teacher somewhere or a school principal who has a significant responsibil ity in the school environment, if there is a suggestion that a principal somewhere in Manitoba has breached the protocols associated with the standards testing system, then something needs to flow from that. What needs to flow from that?

Well, it is like anything else, and I do not equate what Mr. O'L eary did with what happened in other matters which were the subject of the Monnin review. I do not equate it with what goes on in our criminal courts. I do not equate it with what goes on anywhere else but in our education system. There are dimensions here that go well beyond that which I will get to. But I take this allegation-this fact, because Mr. O'L eary has acknowledged his misdeed here-and look at it from the standpoint that I must as the one who is charged with the responsibil ity for having some integrity in our education system.

I am taking what the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has said most seriously. I, in no way, wish to make light of anything the honourable member for Inkster has said. I especially put that on the record because of all of the people in this House, I think the honourable member for Inkster is probably the best acquainted with the circumstances, perhaps not all the details, but certainly the people, the neighbourhood, the region of the city of Winnipeg in which all of this has transpired. So it is out of that background that I approach the questions being raised by the honourable

July 13 , 1999 LEGISLAT IVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4237 member for Inkster. He has people no doubt inquiring of him, well, what is going on here, who did what, to whom and when, and all of those kinds of questions. What are we supposed to think about the way the government is running its education system if there are people who without any care or concern seemingly break the rules of security and cheat on the tests? I mean, what are we supposed to think?

If it is okay for a respected person in our community, the principal of our high school to break the rules and with impunity, does that mean it is okay for everybody else including, as the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) asks: what about John Carlyle? John Carlyle is the Deputy Minister of Education. The honourable member for Kildonan is not wrong to raise the question because as the letter points out today, it is the allegation of the Seven Oaks School Division in the position it takes. It wants to be totally politically aloof of course. In this letter copied to the CBC Radio and the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) of Manitoba, myself, the Deputy Minister of Education, the former Minister of Education, Dr. Jon Gerrard, Leader of the Liberal Party, the Leader of the New Democratic Party, and the member for Inkster, this nonpartisan approach that the school division is taking, we do have to remember here that there are political dimensions to this. [interjection] *( 15 50) Anybody who thinks there are not political implications and dimensions to this issue is living in some other world, and the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) knows that.

You cannot escape the fact that the school principal I referred to is presently the chairman of the election campaign for the New Democratic Party of Manitoba. This is not denied by anybody. But that is another dimension of this. Speaking as Education minister, it is a very important issue the honourable member raises respecting the integrity of the standards test.

Just because the NDP do not believe in standards, just because the NDP just want to let us just all be brothers and forget all about whether our kids can succeed or not, we will just give them welfare when they grow up, never mind having a quality education, and will even have classes to show them how they can get welfare. This whole issue points out a whole philosophical difference between the New Democrats and members of the other parties in this House. I say "parties" because I assume the Liberal Party does not agree with the NDP on some of these things.

So there is a very big political dimension, and anybody who wants to pretend there is not is on some other planet, or they are certainly extremely naive. [interjection] So the honourable member for Broadway (Mr. Santos) asks a very interesting question: how can there be an independent inquiry if this is the environment within which all this is taking place? Well, you know, I think, as a department, the Education department has to take for granted that school divisions are headed by elected people and will do the right things. That is what you have to do until something demonstrates otherwise.

The honourable member for Broadway would be the first to remind me of this: we are all expected to look upon each other in this House as honourable members. In fact, even the rules tell us, we have to accept the word of an honourable member in this Chamber. That is our duty to do that unless and until something intervenes to show that we should not do that anymore. Then there are certain sanctions in place for that. Mr. Edward Helwer, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair The same goes for the relationship of the Department of Education with the school divisions with which it partners in the education of our children.

Why a year ago, back in June July of 19 98, should the Department of Education have taken any other view but that the Seven Oaks School Division could be trusted to look appropriately into this alleged breach that had been made? Why should anybody suggest the Department of Education should have treated

4238 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13 , 1999 Seven Oaks School Division some way different from any other school division in this province? The answer is: it should not. The answer is: it did what it should have done and asked the division to conduct an inquiry or an investigation-actual ly, what was asked of the division, I think, gets forgotten in the debate. But we were asked: there was a breach that took place in your division; what are you doing about it? That was ba sically what was the genesis of all of the things that have flowed since. Mr.

O'Leary's wrongdoing is something he acknowledged, so that what flowed from that, all this business about Mr. Treller, the allegations coming forward, is very disturbing. You know, if you read the report and look at all the blanks, those blanks stand for names of people, real, living, breathing people in our Manitoba community. There are people in this House who, for their own reasons-none of them have told us what those reasons are-tend to gloss over the fact that real, breathing human beings are affected in some way or another by this matter. So, if somebody does wrong, other things happen.

That seems to be the suggestion here. So a whole lot of other things come out of this. We end up getting people like Mr. Brodbeck writing for the Winnipeg Sun saying all kinds of things, things like: "Doer changes rules to suit the NDP. After criticizing Tories, he bends his own ethics." We get people, Frances Russell, writing in the Winnipeg Free Press, saying: "Mr. Doer dropped the ethics ball on the very first pass ." That is what Frances Russell said.

So I guess when we get any lectures about ethics from New Democrats, we cannot assume that we are hearing it from those who have any particular expertise in the matter. So that is another dimension. There are two main dimensions here. Both of them are important. I think there are those who suggest the political one is not important. Well, those who suggest the political one is not important are those who have something to hide or something to protect. I suggest they all sit on the other side of the Chamber from myself. We have been through a difficult time with respect to wrongdoings by people.

We have been through that, and the Premier ( Mr. Filmon) of Manitoba very courageously did the right thing by asking former Mr. Chief Justice Alfred Monnin to look into all matters, and if the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) wants to suggest that that was not done with vigour by Mr. Monnin, let her do so. Point of Order Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellingt on): On a point of order, I would like to remind the Minister of Education (Mr. McCrae) that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) stated in this House day after day after day in June of 1998 that there had been nothing wrong that had happened.

He had "investigated." and nothing had happened. It was only after repeated questioning day after day in the House by the official opposition that the Premier finally, not with vigour and not courageously but with his tail between his legs, did the right thing. So let the Minis ter of Education not sit here in this House and impugn motive to members of this side of the House when he puts inaccurate information on the record about the behaviour, the despicable behaviour of his own Leader. The Acting Chair person (Mr. Helwer): The honourable member for Brandon West. on the same point of order. Mr.

McCrae: On the same point of order, Mr. Chairman, in response to the honourable member for Wellington, this is June of 1999, and today the tail of the Leader of the Opposition is not between his legs. The Leader of the Opposition is not part of this discussion. He has made sure that he would not be part [interjection] This is July of 19 99. Thank you to my colleagues in the NDP for bringing that clear. On the point of order, Mr. Chairman, I remind the honourable member of what I said on June 23 about this point of order.

The one thing the Leader of the Opposition needs to understand, if he wants to have credibility with the people, he should learn to face issues head on instead of running away from them and

July 13 , 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4239 hiding. That is not leadership. Leadership requires courage, something the honourable member does not have, and he is not willing to ensure that his own campaign manager is above reproach. The Acting Cha irperson (Mr. Helwer): The honourable member for Wellington does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. McCrae: One thing I can say about the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett), I think what we heard from her today is, other than the honourable member for Crescentwood (Mr.

Sale), I believe-probably more said by the New Democrats about this matter has been said by the honourable member for Wellington today than has been said in total by the whole party. The silence is absolutely deafening, but it was interesting to hear the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) from his seat say that what Mr. O'L eary did is much ado about nothing, what Mr. O'L eary did, and that the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) is just making mountains out of molehills. Well, let us talk about that molehill, because Mr. Brodbeck did in his comments or in his writing in the Winnipeg Sun.

He says that teachers might have been tipped off about what was on the exam. Well, we do not know that and I am not saying that, but that may have happened, too, and that would have given some teachers an unfair advantage over others when preparing their students. It is the very reason why there are strict rules governing the administration of standards exams. Were O'L eary's actions a deliberate attempt to give his school a leg up? Well, that is a good question, because we do know that this particular school in terms of the published results of these exams was behind the average. But we do not know that.

I know the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) would like to find that out. It is the very reason why there are strict rules. * (1 600) Did anybody else see the exam? Mr. Brodbeck asks. We will never know. The point is, Mr. O'Lea ry knew releasing the exam could compromise the fairness of the entire exam process. I guess that would be making a mountain out of a molehill, the fairness of the exam, total exam process in every comer of the province of Manitoba. Much ado about nothing, I guess, according to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) spoken through the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. L.

Evans). The students rely heavily, and this is very important, on Grade 12 exam results to get into university. Well, they also rely on it for other reasons. I will point this out to Mr. Brodbeck. I mean, they want to get into college. They also want to be able to do a good job if they go straight to the workplace or wherever else they are going. They rely heavily on Grade 12 exam results to get into university. I know people who have their Grade 12 diploma on their office wall. They are proud of it. It is an achievement.

But now the suggestion is that, because of this breach of the protocol, the security protocol, what is that diploma worth? Until we know the answers, I do not think we know the answer to that question either. You simply have to have not only examination security being done but also being seen to be done, and this is important. It was a clear breach of his ethical responsibili ty as the head of Maples Collegiate to ensure all students in Manitoba had a fair crack at writing the exam, but apparently it was not a serious enough breach of ethics to warrant a reprimand from his other boss, Gary Doer.

Now that is the other dimension here, the political side. The honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) rightly asks-and the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) may have some wisdom to share with us on this point as she did on the last one. The honourable member for Inkster was raising the question about the role of Mr. O'L eary, and I am raising it in relation to his role as campaign manager for the Manitoba New Democratic Party . Of course, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) has patted him on the back and said: You know, you said

4240 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 13, 1999 you did wrong and therefore it is all over; no harm done. Well, with regard to that, why is it that we see such a double standard on the part of the New Democratic Party ? Why do we have such a double standard, especially of the Leader of the New Democratic Party, who has waxed- Point of Order Ms. Barrett: Mr. Chair, on a point of order. would like to remind the honourable Minister of Education that the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Toews) finally last week, or within the last 10 days, after days and days of questioning in the House admitted-well, four different kinds of stories, but finally admitted that he had made an error and took responsibility for the gang hotline not being confidential as it should have been. So he admitted to his mistake, his error in judgment. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) did not do anything other than say in the House-and I think if you check Hansard, the Minister of Justice, I cannot remember the exact language, admitted that the situation had not unfolded as it should have, and that was the end of it.

Now I would like to ask the Minister of Education-and this is the Minister of Justice's job we are talking about, not a volunteer position. The principal of - The Acting Cha irperson (Mr. McAlpine): Order, please. The honourable member had risen on a point of order, and I would ask her to address the matter with regard to the point of order and make her point of order now, please. Ms. Barrett: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am in the process of doing that very thing. An Honourable Member: She was just about there. Ms. Barrett: I was just about there. My point of order, Mr.

Chair, is that the Premier accepted the Minister of Justice's acknowledgement that the process had not functioned as it should, did not remove him from his position. I would suggest that the parallels are striking here and that the Minister of Education, who talks about the role of the principal of the Maples Coll egiate in his role as a volunteer, is way out of line, that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The political games that are being played here are games that are being played between the Minister of Education (Mr. McCrae) and the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux).

The Acting Cha irperson (Mr. McAlpine): The honourable member for Inkster, on the same point of order. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Chairperson, I do not know if it is the same point. I will let you determine that after hearing my comment on it, because I am concerned about the potential of imputing motives. If I understand the member for Wellington (Ms.

Barrett) correctly, she is trying to say that of the hundreds of schools in the province of Manitoba that if a principal opens or breaches the security of standard exams. that if they get caught doing it, all we have to say is that I should not have opened it and nothing should ever come of it outside of that. If my

interpretation is wrong, please ask the member for Wellington to correct me on that point. The Acting Cha irperson (Mr. McAlpine): The honourable member for Well

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-5-59
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 5th hansardpdf 59.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	164333bed92e536bbe3da70049cf1e8dbe167b38

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