Manitoba Hansard — 9 December 1997 (Sitting 9, 36th Legislature, 4th Session)

36-4-9

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth 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. XLVIII No. 9 - 1:30 p.m., Thesday, December 9, 1997

Member ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise, Hon. DERKACH. Leonard. Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FAURSCHOU. David FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold. Hon. HEL WER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI. Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LA THLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOW A 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 ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis SALE, Tim SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STRUTHERS, Stan SVEINSON, Ben TOEWS, Vic, Hon. TWEED, Mervin VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Pembina Lakeside Interlake Brandon East Portage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minncdosa 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 Charleswood 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. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. Lib. Lib. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. 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.

31 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, December 9, 1997 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Women's Resource Centres Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, I would like to present the petition of Alice Riley, Nancy McPherson, John Masson and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Filmon government to consider providing long-term, adequate and stable funding for the Evergreen Women's Resource Centre and other women's resource centres in the province to ensure that the vital services provided by these organizations are continued. Mr.

Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Cece Hutchinson, Agusta Gudmunds, Shelly Bjarnson and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Filmon government to consider long-term, adequate and stable funding for the Evergreen Women's Resource Centre and other women's resource centres in the province to ensure that the vital services provided by these organizations are continued. Ms.

Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, I would like to present the petition of Marlene Stratton, Valdine Bjornsson, Harold Thorkelson and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Filmon government to consider providing long-term, adequate and stable funding for the Evergreen Women's Resource Centre and other women's resource centres in the province to ensure that vital services provided by these organizations are continued. Ms.

Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Maurice Sigurdson, Eric Sigurdson, Audrey Disbrowe and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Filmon government to consider providing long-term, adequate and stable funding for the Evergreen Women's Resource Centre and other women's resource centres in the province to ensure that the vital services provided by these organizations are continued. Mr. ClifEvans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Monica Sigurdson, Grace Fridfinnson, Susan L.

Van Dreses and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Filmon government to consider providing long-term, adequate and stable funding the Evergreen Women's Resource Centre and other women's resource centres in the province to ensure that the vital services provided by these organizations are continued. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Domestic Violence Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans). It complies with the rules (by leave) and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

An Honourable Member: Yes. Madam Speaker: Yes. The Clerk will read. Mr.

Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT domestic violence continues to be a serious problem in Manitoba that results in the injury and death of women across this province; and THAT certain initiatives such as the Family Violence Court, the Women's Advocacy Program and mandatory charging have been taken by the government; and THAT survivors of abuse, their families, service providers and the community at large recognize serious shortcomings in the response to domestic violence which continues to threaten the lives of Manitoba women and children; and

312 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 THAT a blueprint for an effective response to domestic violence is being offered by several reports including the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, the Pedlar report and the Lavoie inquiry recommendations. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONER S HUMBLY PRAY that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the provincial government to consider preparing an action plan in consultation with the community for the timely implementation of meaningful change as outlined in the Lavoie inquiry, the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry and the Pedlar report. * (13 35) TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I would like to table reports that have been forwarded to members' offices prior to the House resuming, and I would like to officially table at this point the following reports, which have three copies of each. The Report ofthe Manitoba Textbook Bureau, 19 96-97; the Education and Training Annual Report, 19 96-97.

University of Manitoba Annual Financial Report, 19 97; University of Winnipeg Financial Statements ending March 31, 19 97; Brandon University Annual Financial Report ending March 31, 19 97; Universities Grants Commission Annual Report for 19 96-97; Assiniboine Community College Financial Statements ending June 30, 19 97; Keewatin Commun ity College Financial Statements ending June 30, 19 97; and Red River Commun ity College Annual Financial Report, 19 96-97. As indicated, these have been previously forwarded to members' offices.

Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the loge to my left where we have with us today five members of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan: the Honourable Eric Upshall, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and MLA for Watrous; Mr. Dale Flavel, MLA for Last Mountain-Touchwood; Mr. Jack Langford, MLA for Saskatchewan Rivers; the Honourable Andy Renaud, MLA for Carrot River Valley; Mr. John Wall, MLA for Swift Current. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Education System Funding Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, over the last five years this government, this Premier, has cut public education by minus 2 percent, minus 2 percent, zero prior to the election, minus 2 percent after the election, and again another zero percent last year. Parents have talked to us about the difficulties their children are having with these cutbacks in their public schools.

Taxpayers are concerned about the massive property tax increases based on these funding cutbacks, and of course kids feel that this government is robbing their future with a reduction in their curriculum and opportunities in their schools. I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): will he now agree to take some of the $600 -million lottery funds and other funds that are in the fund that the government has and reinvest some of that money in public education and go beyond the zero percent funding commitment they have made so kids can have a future again here in the province of Manitoba? Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, the member refers to percentage cuts in a few select years of depression and transfer cuts from Ottaw a. The member does not refer to the fact that this year we have put $1 15 million more into public schools alone than they put in when they were in office in their last year of office. The member also talks about increases in school taxes, not remembering that increases put in place by school boards during their tenure as government were higher percentage increases than increases put in under this government by school boards.

Madam Speaker, we indicated, when we provided a slight increase to the schools last year, that we would guarantee them a minimum amount this year. We were not able at that

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA 313 time, nor am I able at this time, to say what the amount this year will be, but we indicated last year-and it was a great benefit to school divisions in terms of multiyear planning-that at least they could count on a minimum. * (13 40) Children's Services Government Strategy Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the government's own report written by Greg Mason from Prairie Research Associates states that the, quote, Department of Health, Department of Education and the Department of Family Services are fragmented in this government, and secondly, they go on to state that the cutbacks have reduced services in all three departments and reduced services for our children. They actually recommend that we go to the Saskatchewan strategy for kids, an action plan for children, and a broader strategy in government.

Will this Premier finally do the right thing and take the broader Saskatchewan strategy and reinvest in our children and reinvest in our future? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I do not know whether or not Saskatchewan is also going for a 32-hour workweek as these New Democrats are [interjection] Well, I think that philosophically they are closer to this government than they are to the members opposite. I am tempted to say I know Roy Romanow and this Leader of the Opposition knows Roy Romanow.

In any case, I would say to the member opposite that we have recognized, as governments right across Canada have, that there is a need to co-ordinate social services. There is a need to have interdepartmental co operation and co-ordination. That is why we have set up the Child and Youth Secretariat that involves making solutions child-centred so that we bring together Family Services, we bring together Education, we bring together Justice, and we bring together Health and the relevant departments so that we can address the needs of the child in a holistic fashion.

We know that that is a better way to go in the future, and indeed that is what will improve the services to those children of Manitoba. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the Premier certainly has his talking points, but he has no action points for kids and their future. Today the Canadian Council on Social Development talked about the need to integrate health and education and social services for our kids. They condemned provinces like Manitoba that have cut back the Children's Dental Program.

They condemned Premiers like the one opposite for cutting back children's dental programs in the province, and they praised provinces like Saskatchewan that have taken a long-term, integrated view with resources, with funds, with investments. Why is this Premier content to be condemned by an independent body, and why will he not have the long term strategy with real action like Saskatchewan that is getting praised on the national stage? Mr.

Filmon: Our government acted very early on in our mandate-for instance, in 19 89 we brought into place one of the richest systems of child tax credits anywhere in Canada, raising I believe it was from $50 to $250 the child tax credit that involved an expenditure of something in the range of $30 million annually to reinvest in the children of this province, in families with children. We will continue to reinvest in our children, and we will continue to build-[i nterjection] Well, Madam Speaker, the members opposite are always critical.

I know that they take a look at every silver lining to try and find the dark cloud behind it. You know, the Prince of Darkness over there comes up with his comments time after time after time. But the fact of the matter is that our children in our public schools continue to do well in various different analyses. We have the recent one that said that, in terms ofliteracy, they are among the tops in the country because of decisions that have been made, priorities that have been set by this government. * (1 345) Independent Schools Funding Ms.

Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, this government has continued to make regular cuts, not selective cuts but regular cuts-m inus two, minus two,

314 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 minus two, a cynical zero as an election approaches, and what they have done is created deficits greater than dollars for Manitoba's young people. Meanwhile, away from the public eye, the minister has increased the grants to private schools from $16 .4 million to $30.2 million. I would like to ask the minister to confirm that on a per-student basis, this has meant an increase over the last five years for private schools of more than 45 percent per student. Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): As I indicated, we have increased funding to public schools by $115 million as we took office. Just as we are seeing a lot of comparisons with Saskatche wan-and I work through the Council of Ministers of Education with mtmsters from Saskatchewan, for whom I have admiration-we face many of the same problems, but I should indicate that Saskatchewan spends less on a per-student basis than any province west of New Brunswick, so I think they should maybe be careful. If they are going to get into those comparisons, we can have a lot of fun with them.

Madam Speaker, in very public announcements, we indicated that funding to independent schools would rise to 50 percent of the cost of public schools. Independent schools currently receive half, approximately half the cost of public school students, and we made that a very public announcement. It has been no secret. I do not know why the member seems to feel it was. Perhaps she was not listening when we were telling people all of this information about education in Manitoba.

We are responsible for all education in Manitoba, including home schooling, nonfunded schools, funded schools and public schools. and we believe in treating all students, giving them the best opportunity possible. Ms. Friesen: I would like to ask the minister why she refuses in this House, time after time, and she has done it again today, to be accountable to Manitobans for the more than $30 million of public money that goes annually to the private sector. Wi ll she at least table an annual report in the Legislature on private schools indicating to the taxpayer how that money has been spent? Mrs.

Mcintosh: Indeed, the member is correct. We provide some $30 million to independent schools and some $746 million to public schools. Madam Speaker, the independent schools, should those students all decide to come to public schools tomorrow and become then fully funded as opposed to partly funded students, would have us having to raise overnight millions upon millions of dollars from the taxpayers of this province. Point of Order Mr.

Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, Beauchesne Citation 417 is clear that "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate." The question was about a report to provide accountability for private schools. I suggest the Minister of Education, of all people, expects students to answer questions every day in some of these tests that she provides for. Perhaps she could answer some of the questions she is asked in this House and follow our rules under Beauchesne 417 .

Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Education and Training, on the same point of order. Mrs. Mcintosh: I am responding to points raised in the member's question. Part of the problem when the

preamble makes allegations is that the answer then attempts to address all points put on the floor by the member. My answers can be much shorter if the question is much shorter, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I would remind the honourable Minister of Education and Training that indeed answers should be specific to the question asked and should be as brief as possible. * (1 350) Education System Funding Mr.

Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, since this government got its majority in 19 90, its mean-spirited agenda has fully surfaced. Children in Manitoba's public schools have suffered from deep funding cuts. Parents have had to pay higher and

December 9, 19 97 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 315 higher fees for courses and other things, while children in private schools have received huge increases. Will the Minister of Education finally come clean and admit that since 19 90 the real value of her government's funding to public schools, the money our school divisions actually get at the classroom level to teach with, has fallen by an astounding $10 2 million in purchasing power? That is $532 for every child in every classroom. No wonder parents are being fleeced for higher fees. Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): I would invite the member to attend my office and meet with the financial people in my office who can explain to him the real purchasing power in constant dollars, which is not at all the information he has put on the record. I do not know where he learned his math, but I would suggest that with our new math curriculum he might be able to do better. Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, I would be most pleased to accept the minister's kind offer, and I think we will have a very good time sorting out whose numbers are which.

Madam Speaker, will the minister simply admit that her claims about growing support are wrong, that when you take inflation out of the numbers, it is very, very plain the numbers have dropped from $644 million to $542 million, constant dollars, purchasing power, $10 2 million? Will she not simply admit that she is wrong? Mrs. Mcintosh: There were several points in that speech, and I will attempt to address each one of them so as not to be accused of avoiding answering any portion of it.

Madam Speaker, first of all, I should indicate that in terms of inflation, the last decade for which we have the accurate count, which was the '85-95, soon we will have the '85-96, that we have analyzed in our office shows that we kept pace with inflation, except for 0.5 percent funding to public schools by the Province of Manitoba in that decade just passed, kept pace with inflation. The problem occurred when school division spending outpaced inflation by 15 percent. Not all of that was their fault, and some of that was legitimate spending.

Much of it was spending that school divisions have since begun to adjust. We are attempting to help with some of the new costs that are coming in, special needs education, for example. We have a review on right now to ascertain what we could and should be doing with this new cost that school divisions are facing. Madam Speaker, it comes down in the end to not being fixated on the dollars that are spent but on the learning that occurs, and we know that the learning that occurs can be excellent in any kind of circumstance where there are good teachers and willing students.

Education System Funding-Special Needs Students Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, six year-old Breanne Cure in Grade 1 has been diagnosed with severe receptive and expressive language disorder. Dr. Bowman of the Child Guidance Clinic states that Breanne has significant cognitive delays as well as significant gross and fine motor disabilities. Language development was below a three-year age level. On May 27 of this year, the school division applied for Level II funding but was rejected. Teachers, doctors and the school division support this application.

The minister states that applications will be given a thorough assessment, and I want to ask the Minister of Education to explain why you received this application for Level II funding for Breanne Cure on May 27 and rejected the application on the same day without seeing the child in the classroom, without a written explanation, without an appeal mechanism. Is this your idea of a thorough review for this- Madam Speaker: Order, please. *

(1355) Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): The member is calling for an opinion which is-but then again Beauchesne does not seem to mean a lot to them, but I would say to the member opposite- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton {Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, I just referenced Beauchesne Citation

316 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 417 , and not only is the minister once again out of order, she seems to wish to continue with these editorial comments. I was wondering if you would ask her to come to order and remind her she is not an editorial writer, and she is not even the Speaker of the House either. She should for once answer the questions we are raising, in this case about the serious problems in education. A very serious question was asked on behalfofthe constituents of Transcona by the member for Transcona. When are we going to get some straight answers from this minister? Hon.

James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I tend to agree with the opposition House leader when he objects to unnecessary editorializing in this House, and if what he says applies to the Minister of Education, then it applies to all 23 or so New Democrats who occupy that side of the Chamber who editorialize every time they ask a question in this House. So when you are considering this matter, I would hope that we might think that that rule should apply to all members of this House. Madam Speaker: Order, please.

On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I would request the support and co-operation of all members in this House to firstly, when posing questions, pose the

preamble with a single statement and then pose a question. Second and supplementary questions need no

preamble, and I would ask that on the other side of the House all ministers respond specifically to the question asked within the time limit allowed. * * * Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Education, to quickly complete her response. Mrs. Mcintosh: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I indeed have met with the student and the family that the member refers to. I am aware of their situation, but I think it would not be proper in any way, shape or form for me as Minister of Education to divulge the discussions that took place between a little child in this province, her mother and this minister.

I think there are privacy issues that would put this office in great jeopardy were I to be discussing them publicly, and I think the members also know that very well. It is not a fair tactic to use. Mr.

Reid: Madam Speaker, I have permission from the family to raise this case, and I want to ask this Minister of Education: how many years does this child have to wait, how far does this child have to fall behind her peers because this government has set the special needs Level II- funding bar at a level that will forever relegate this child to a life of poverty and misery even before she has had a real chance to develop into a contributing member of our society? Your numbers mean nothing to this child, only- Madam Speaker: Order, please.

I would remind the honourable member for Transcona that postamble is not required either. * (1 400) Mrs. Mcintosh: I appreciate that the member states that a third party has given him permission to raise the issue. That same third party has not given me permission to raise the issue, but I can, in generic terms, respond to the whole question of assessment, which I do not think divulges any confidence or breaks any obligations of privacy that I feel as a minister I am honour-bound to keep. Madam Speaker, I can indicate that assessments are done by school divisions when children enter schools.

School divisions will assess whether a child is Level I, Level II, Level Ill. They will apply to the department with their diagnosis, their expert testimony and other information that they have used to come to their decision, and the department will then take that request and assign funding, if it is deemed to be properly done, to that child. If that child is deemed to be indeed a Level II or a Level III, the money flows without question to an unlimited number of people who apply if they qualify. That assessment is done by division personnel initially and confirmed by departmental personnel. Mr.

Reid: Madam Speaker, I want the minister to take a look at this picture of Breanne Cure and tell me you do not believe that this child does not deserve every opportunity to grow and learn, to become a child proud of her accomplishments, instead of depressed and

December 9, 19 97 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 317 discouraged because your education system has failed her even before she starts. Will you provide Level II funding for this child? Madam Speaker: I would remind the honourable member for Transcona that the display of exhibits is strictly prohibited in this Chamber and other Chambers, and I would ask for his co-operation. Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, I think the question reveals more about the questioner than it does about anybody attempting to answer the kinds of comments that have just been put on the record.

I have met the child that he has just shown a photograph of. I have talked to her mother; I have talked to departmental staff. I do not do the assess ments. I have confidence that very, very few appeals on assessments done by school divisions and depart ment personnel on Level II funding are questioned by those receiving the information, very few appeals, Madam Speaker, and a tremendous number of grants for Level II and Level III. The member asks if I care, and of course I care. All my life I have been involved with education-as a teacher, as a parent, as a school trustee, and now as Minister of Education.

That member over there knows nothing about how ill the system was treated in terms of special needs when his government was in power, how as a school trustee I would come down here pleading with then Minister Hemphill for help with our special needs students. We have more than doubled funding for special needs. We have a special needs review underway, long overdue, that they never did, that we are doing because we care. We care. Had they cared earlier, we would maybe have a lot more solutions here for people like Breanne. Video Lottery Terminals Increase Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the First Minister with respect to the gaming policy. One of the quickest- or fastest-growing industries is in fact gaming, and after saturating Manitoba with slot machines and VL Ts, they commissioned a report. In that Gaming Commission report, one of the recommendations was to reduce the number of VL Ts, to which the government actually responded and reduced some VL Ts. My question is to the Premier. Has, in fact, this government increased the number of electronic slot machines at the same time? Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I find it passing strange that the member opposite, who as a candidate for the leadership of the Liberal Party advocated having three more casinos in this province to increase the gambling revenues, is now out there attempting to say that he has some concerns about the volume of gaming in the province. I will take the substance of his question as notice on behalf of the Minister responsible for the Lotteries Corporation (Mr. Stefanson). Mr.

Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, will the Premier confirm that hundreds of electronic slot machines have in fact been added into the system, while the government on the one hand has been trying to say that VL Ts have been reduced? Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I believe that, according to the rules of the House, members are required to confirm their facts before they bring them to the House and present them as fact, so I would invite him to do so. Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I will await the Premier's or his government's response to the first question. Video Lottery Terminals Definition Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My final supplementary question is: will he agree that the chairman's report-Mr. Desjardins-on the Gaming Commission which acknowledged that, and I quote, when reference is made to VL Ts, it should be understood to mean both VL Ts and slot machines. That includes electronic slot machines. Does the Premier agree with the report which he commissio ned and paid thousands of dollars for?

3I8 LEGI SLATIV E ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, I9 97 Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, my recollection of that report is that it did not recommend that we reduce the number of VL Ts in the province, but we as a government policy decided to do that and did bring in a substantial reduction of something, I believe, in excess of I 0 percent. Student Transportation Funding Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Early in November of this year the CBC 1-Team report called Precious Cargo revealed that in the I9 97 fleet inspections, I4 percent of the school bus fleet had to be pulled off of Manitoba's roads.

The head of Manitoba's vehicle inspection branch or department says that any more than I percent is unacceptable. Some school divisions, in fact, Madam Speaker, had an 80 percent failure rate. Will this minister admit that she has sacrificed the safety of our children for a financial gain and their election surplus fund, and will she immediately reverse her shortsighted and dangerous decisions regarding our children's school buses? * (14I

O) Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I had been asked by the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) to put my comments on the record, and the comment I made before I sat down was: you come late to the caring table, sir. So I have complied- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Education and Training was recognized to respond to the question posed by the honourable member for St. James. The honourable Minister of Education and Training, to respond to the question posed. Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, the member for St.

James refers to school division policy, ref ers to busing policy in the province. The school divisions for some time have been asking for some easier way of dealing with school bus transportation. We then responded by- instead of purchasing a new bus for them-pr oviding for them the amount of money that it would cost them to buy a new bus and allowing them to make the decision as to which bus they would wish to purchase, or if they wished to use some other transportation policies for their students. We did say that school buses must be inspected twice a year.

They must pass a safety inspection twice a year by division staff. As well, the government of Manitoba does an audit on I 0 percent of those buses with the provincial safety inspection on top of that inspection. The school bus inspections, of course, must comply with all safety regulations put down by the Province of Manitoba. If in the audit this province finds that there are any further things that need be followed up, we then do a mass inspection of school division, and I will answer the rest in the next question, Madam Speaker. Ms.

Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, will the minister not admit that school divisions would have preferred full funding, with the province responsible for replacing buses when they got used, at about 12 years of age? Will this minister and her government take responsibility and fund school divisions so they can provide safe buses for our children? Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for St. James that her question is to be a single question, not a multiple question. The honourable Minister of Education and Training has one minute to respond to either question or both questions. Mrs.

Mcintosh: Well, Madam Speaker, since the question took-we ll, I guess I will have to just answer one of them, which is really not quite cricket because she did ask two. and I will only get to answer one in the time allowed. Madam Speaker, school divisions had long requested flexibility. They had said why should they have to get rid of a perfectly good bus if it is still roadworthy and, conversely, why should they have to replace a bus after eight years, et cetera. So we said the decision then would be theirs, provided that all safety inspections pass the test of safety.

In terms of funding, we have now made it possible, in an urban setting for school

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 31 9 students, to get funding for busing if their division decides to bus them, if they live more than a mile from their closest transit bus stop. That is an enhancement to the system that has been very much appreciated by school divisions, and we have received many kudos from school divisions for our changes in bus policy. TeleSend Gateway Inc. Funding Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): My question is to the Deputy Premier.

Madam Speaker, the question concerns the competence of this minister and the lack of due diligence and proper credit checks on applicants for grants from his department. Madam Speaker, when he gave the $200,000 grant to TeleSend Gateway Inc., at what point did he discover that the developer of the technology and the controlling mind was serving an 18 -month sentence in Milner Ridge for fraud? Was it (

a) after he gave TeleSend Gateway the first cheque for $20,000, or (

b) after he gave Telesend Gateway the second cheque for $90,000? Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, just to make the record clear, the individual the department dealt with is not the individual that they are referring to. It was a different person, a young woman who was carrying out the activities of the business, so I cannot accept what the member is putting on the record as having dealt with this individual. Mr. Maloway: Madam Speaker, if Mr. Ishmael is not the controlling mind of this company, then why does he claim to have developed the technology?

Why did he apply for an American Express supplementary card on October 28, 19 94, in the name of TeleSend Gateway Inc., and why was he using that company credit card for personal expenses? Mr. Downey: I am as equally concerned making sure that any activities of the department and the government to develop and create new businesses, particularly in the new generation of activities in the electronic field, that we in fact do carry it out in a responsible manner, and it is my understanding that was done.

Far more responsible, Madam Speaker, than the NDP when they dumped $29 million in the sands of Saudi Arabia, hard-earned money of the taxpayers of Manitoba. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, earlier I made reference to Beauchesne Citation 417 in regard to the Minister of Education, and you did admonish the minister. I would like to do the same with the current minister and point out that the question was about this government giving grants to a company of which the controlling mind is now in Milner Ridge, a correctional facility.

This minister is making a mockery out of a very serious question, and I think this incompetent minister should answer why that grant was given in the first place. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism, on the same point of order. Mr. Downey: Madam Speaker, I think an apology is in order. I said $29 million that they frittered away. It was $27 million that they frittered away.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I would remind the honourable minister that answers are supposed to be as brief as possible, pertain to the question asked and not provoke debate. * * * Mr. Maloway: My final supplementary is to the same minister. On May 27 of this year, the minister claimed that the money was used for its intended purposes. I would like to ask the minister: if that is the case, then why was the company credit card used for such TeleSend Gateway Inc. business essentials such as cosmetics, beauty shop gifts, suits, shoes and other personal expenses?

Mr. Downey: Madam Speaker, I would not have any ability to know what the credit card use was of the individual as it relates to the operations of the business.

320 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 As far as I know, and I have been informed by the department, the monies were used for the purposes for which they were intended, for business-related activities. High School Education Bursaries/Financial Assistance Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, in 19 91 this government cut the high school bursary program which funded 4,600 students. In 19 93 they eliminated the Student Social Allowances Program which ensured that young adults on their own with no family could complete their Grade I 2 education.

This program helped thousands of students a year graduate from high school. When we objected and asked what these students were supposed to do, this heartless and shortsighted government said the students should go home. I want to ask the Minister of Education to confirm how many students missed the opportunity of finishing their high school education in the last five years with no student social assistance or bursary programs.

Can the minister explain how more than 6,000 students have been left behind by this government, who would rather fund a few private schools than help disadvantaged young people finish high school? * (1 420) Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, we have done a tremendous amount of work in terms of encouraging students to remain in school, not the least of which is bringing a new program of studies into the school that will enable higher standards, measurable standards, differentiated teaching and opportunities for students at all levels of learning.

We are working very hard on early intervention, early assessment. We have increased the amount of money there for special needs, double what was there before we came to office. We have programs in place in many divisions, entrepreneurial programs. Ms. Cerilli: Is the minister aware that the Family Services' Employment First workfare program is now forcing the few students still in high school collecting assistance, who are deemed, quote, job-ready, to leave high school and enter a workfare job-training program with no guarantee of a job?

More importantly, does she support this or will she reverse this move to have kids leave school for nothing? Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, perhaps the member would like to come with me on my routine visits to schools, to visit infant labs in schools, to help young adolescent mothers remain in school, to even be able to attend classes while their babies are safely cared for in the school. They can still nurse their children while they are attending classes.

We have all kinds of programs in place to enable young single moms, who may be on social assistance, to remain in school and complete their education, knowing, Madam Speaker, as we all do in this Chamber, including members opposite, that training is the way out of a life of despair, a life of lack of opportunity. Therefore. we have programs of training that encourage adolescents and young people to complete their education. whether or not they are on social assistance. whether or not they are parents.

I think our record is very good in that regard, and again, would she like to come with the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) and we could give her a thorough briefing as well? Education System Public Health Nurses Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, to the Minister of Health. New Democrats believe that teachers and principals should not have to do medical work and that nurses should be put in our schools to deliver community-based children's health programs, including immunizations, special needs help, deal with injuries and outbreaks and prevention. My question is to the min ister.

Would he now at least assure the families of Winnipeg School Division that when the Winnipeg Health Authority takes over health services this spring, it will maintain, if not enhance, public health nurses in our schools, as now provided by the City of Winnipeg? Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, to my understanding and knowledge,

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 32 1 Manitoba Health, the public health nurses have for many years provided various functions in our school system. I believe the member's question references the discussions now that are ongoing to consolidate public health functions between two different jurisdictions in the same city of Winnipeg. Ifthat is the case, if we are able to succeed in having that amalgamation, services will continue on the same basis, and we would hope over time that, obviously, service levels can improve. Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.

Speaker's Rulings Madam Speaker: I have rulings for the House. I am ruling on a matter I took under advisement on March 25, 19 97, during Question Period. The opposition House leader (Mr. Ashton) raised a point of order about an answer provided by the honourable Minister of Environment (Mr. McCrae). Having taken the opportunity to research Hansard, I am ruling that there was a point of order. The minister was not clear on March 25 that he was answering questions asked on March 20, nor had he clearly indicated on March 20 that he was taking a question as notice.

What he had said on the 20th was that he would provide the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) with information. What the Minister of Environment did say on March 25 was clearly debating the issue and was provocative. That was in contravention of Citation 417 , and I would have to caution the minister when answering questions to conform to the provisions of that citation, that is, the answer should be brief, should deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate. I took under advisement a point of order raised on March 25, 19 97, by the opposition House leader (Mr.

Ashton) about the orderliness of an answer provided by the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to a question. Having reviewed the Hansard record, I find that there was indeed a point of order. The question asked was quite straightforward, asking whether a matter would be sent to the Provincial Auditor for a review. A large portion of the answer from the minister consisted of quotations from a newspaper

article which did not directly relate to the question asked. I encourage all ministers when answering questions to be brief, to deal with the matter raised and to not provoke debate. During Question Period on March 27 two points were raised relating to an exchange of questions and answers between the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) and the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer). The first point of order was raised by the opposition House leader (Mr. Ashton) about the relevancy of the answer by the minister to the second question posed by the honourable member for Brandon East.

After reviewing the Hansard record, I am ruling that the opposition House leader did have a point of order, and I ask the minister when replying to questions to deal with the matter raised and to not provoke debate. The second point of order as raised by the government House leader (Mr. McCrae) was that the questions posed by the member for Brandon East were outside the administrative responsibility of the minister as they had to do with the A.E. McKenzie Company.

The government House leader may indeed have had a point; however, he should have raised it before the minister began to answer the first question of the honourable member for Brandon East. Therefore, I am ruling that the government House leader did not have a point of order. On April 11 during Question Period I took under advisement a point of order raised by the opposition House leader (Mr. Ashton) regarding an answer to a question by the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

Having reviewed the Hansard record, I am ruling that the opposition House leader did have a point of order, and I ask the First Minister when replying to questions to deal with the matter raised and to not provoke debate. * (14 30) MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Roseau River Training Centre Youth Futures Program Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Madam Speaker, it gives me great pride to rise today to recognize the

322 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 efforts of the Youth Futures program in the Roseau River Training Centre at Roseau, Manitoba. They are initiating a three-month pilot project which is being funded through the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs and the Regional Aboriginal Management Board. There are 15 youths enrolled in the program between the ages of 16 and 25, and the training will include the following modules: Youth Phoenix Semi nar, which is a one-week, intense motivational training seminar.

They will also be enrolled in a computer multimedia training course, which includes computer training, and they will also utilize a course in jujitsu, which is a martial arts training program. Mr. Ben Sveinson, Ac ting Speaker, in the Chair This program was started by a group of young people on the reserve, and the trainers that are going to be involved are Ken Henry, trainer and co-ordinator, Curtis Jonny and Kirt Prince. Most of these people are local people that are going to be doing the training, and I certainly look forward to the results of this program.

I congratulate the staff and students of the Roseau River Training Employability Centre for taking on this initiative, and I ask all members here to encourage and further the studies in this area. Hog Industry Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Acting Speaker, I rise today to make a few comments about the announcement about the Maple Leaf Hog Processing Plant in Brandon and the hog industry in Manitoba.

One of the good things about the announcement is that we are finally seeing a rise in the number of food processing jobs in this province, for even though the government has talked about creating value-added jobs in this province, we are at a much lower level than we were in 19 87 and '88. At that time we were up to 5,000 jobs in food-processing in this pro vince. More recently, in 19 96, we were down to about 2,500 jobs, half of wha t we had eight years earlier. So the additional 1, 500 jobs in the food-processing sector are certainly welcome.

But, along with the processing jobs, we are going to see an increase in hog production in Manitoba, and this is where the government has to get their act together to ensure that this production is done in a sustainable manner. This government has to bring in regulations that have strength rather than the guidelines that are currently in place and have resulted in many conflicts between rural residents. This government has simply not done a good job up to this point in addressing people's concerns.

We have hog barns being built in areas that are very sensitive, and we hear concerns from rural residents who are worried about their water quality. This is a real opportunity for the government at this time as we can have an industry grow in a proper manner in this province. We do after all need the growth in the livestock sector because shipping grain has become too expensive with the loss of the Crow, but this growth has to be done in a sustainable way. We need to look at the mistakes made in other countries and ensure that that does not happen here.

We need to look at North Carolina, and we need to look at Holland and learn from their mistakes. I say to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns): take what you saw in Taiwan as far as managing odour and ensure that some of this new technology is applied in Manitoba. We must also consider the size of operations that are going to be sustainable in this province. We have to listen to people such as those at Netley, in Gimli, in Kemnay and in the Interlake region who have expressed concern about livestock operations and do this in a sustainable way so that all people in this province can benefit.

Open House-Manitoba Legislature Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I want to take this opportunity to express my immense satisfaction with the success of this past Saturday's open house held at the Legislature. During the course of the day I saw hundreds of Manitobans enjoying some of the wonderful dainties, listening to the strolling carollers and musicians and visiting with elected officials. The warmth of the Christmas season was evident throughout the day. The sound of boys and girls laughing in the children's room permeated the hallways and added to the Christmas feeling. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I want to thank all the volunteers who generously gave of their time. Every year they

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 323 continue to outdo themselves, and as a result, they enhance our "Friendly Manitoba" reputation. They are the unsung heroes of the day and without their assistance we would never have achieved the success we do. A special thank you to two groups from the Pembina constituency, Wing and a Prayer from Manitou and VOX, the Morden Collegiate Women's Choir. I hope that all members have had a chance to listen to these two groups as they are a wonderful example ofthe quality of entertainment available in my area.

I thank all the members of the Legislature who participated in the day, including the traditional Christmas carols on the grand staircase. Despite our lack of practice together, I believe that our efforts were appreciated. As Christmas fast approaches, let us all take time to reflect and celebrate the meaning behind this holiday. Thank you. Home Invasions Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Mr.

Acting Speaker, once again Manitobans have witnessed a very tragic crime in this province, one that has certainly instilled greater fear on the part of seniors and made us question some of our basic values and how we can best protect those who are vulnerable among us. We are again calling on this government to better protect seniors from home invasions as we saw on Bannerman in the last number of days. Mr. Acting Speaker, I remind the House that this province is the most violent province in the nation.

As well, I remind this House that while nationally robberies have dropped by 10 percent, the rate of robberies has increased by 10 percent over the last five years. While I hear the police advising seniors to install alarm systems or otherwise better secure their homes, I hear nothing from the members opposite offering help to those who cannot afford this kind of protection. Why is the government excluding safety improve ments from its home renovation fund, why, when this is the most violent province in Canada?

The cost of home security alarms is in the range of $500 to a thousand dollars, not to mention the ongoing fees for monitoring, well beyond the means of many seniors. Unfortunately, those who can least afford better home security tend to be those who live in the more vulnerable areas. Since the conditions that breed crime are worsening under the Filmon government, the least it can do is commit to rearguard action to protect those who need it most. The cost of crime must not be borne by those least able to pay and those most vulnerable.

Madam Speaker in the Chair ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DEBATE (Eighth Day of Debate) Madam Speaker: To resume adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism who has 30 minutes remaining. Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to get the floor, particularly when our neighbours and friends from Saskatchewan are in the House, because I think it is time to acknowledge and compliment the government of Saskatchewan-in Manitoba.

By the way, their farm community will to a great extent benefit from the recent decision made by Maple Leaf Foods here in Manitoba as it relates to a new hog processing plant. I also want to compliment the government of Saskatchewan in their foresight and vision to give dual marketing to their hog producers in Saskatchewan, which will lead to additional industrial development as it relates to that industry in Saskatchewan.

I am sure that the member who just spoke from Swan River could take a page from their book as it relates to some of the more progressive marketing attitudes as it relates to agriculture. * (1 440) Yesterday, when the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer}-in my opening comments, I made a comment to him about his lack of vision and about his lack of dedication to the people of Manitoba in creation of jobs. I want to ta ble a letter which was sent to the

324 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 Leader of the Opposition, which I was copied on, from an individual who has quite a successful business in Manitoba, major exporters, in fact, has a comment to the Leader of the Opposition who, by the way, should have stood and objected to his membership wanting to go to a 32-hour workweek in the province of Manitoba. This is what the business community thinks. I want to table a letter from Canadian Tool & Die Ltd., Mr. Johnnie Gatschuff, and I will tell you, Madam Speaker, that there is a lot in there that the Leader opposite should take note of.

I will, in the interests of giving as many members an opportunity to speak today a chance, just further elaborate on a couple of points which I think are extremely important: that, when we talk about two things, one is when it comes to the exports of the products from Manitoba, how we have seen such a tremendous increase in exports, whether it is in the manufactured goods, whether it is in the goods and services that are provided in Manitoba. particularly the increases that have gone into the United States.

That is why when this opposition say that this government have no view or no vision, why did this government support NAFT A? Why did this government support the Free Trade Agreement? [interjection] That is right. Why did they oppose it? That is why when we talk about vision and where we want to be for job creation, to produce the wealth, to produce the health and educational services for this province, we need exports and we need jobs that come from those exports.

When we look at some ofthe numbers of jobs that we are looking at in the province of Manitoba-and I want to put this on the record before I conclude-when you look at the recent job statistics, over 14 ,000 new jobs from October of a year ago to this current time-! will just give you the numbers for the 10 months to October, 19 97. Totally, season-adjusted employment in Manitoba has averaged 537,800 persons, a gain of 14 ,10 0 over the same period last year.

Madam Speaker, the point that I am making is that all of the initiatives that this government has put in place, whether it is Free Trade Agreement, whether it is the mining sector, whether it is the mineral sector, whether it is the oil sector, whether it is the agriculture sector, the manufacturing sector, the garment industry manufacturers, the service sector, the challenge for us today in this province is to train the people to fill the jobs. I will conclude on this remark.

I was the happiest person the other day when I heard that the employees of Edmonton may have to come back to Brandon or to Manitoba to get a job. Far too long we have seen the young people of this country exit this province for jobs in western Canada. I say it is ''welcome home." We have a friendly government, we have jobs and we have a tremendous economy. That is the vision we have for this country, that is the vision we have for this province, and I believe under the leadership of Premier Filmon and the Progressive Conservative Party, this will continue well into the 21s t Century. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Ms.

Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, I too am very concerned about other people having the right to speak so my remarks. like the Minister of Industry. Trade and Tourism's (Mr. Downey), will be brief. I do want to take the opportunity to welcome the pages to the Legislative Building and tell them how much we appreciate their work. Their work makes our work possible. and we are very grateful for their being here. Also. I would like to welcome the member for Portage (Mr. Faurschou) to the Legislative Assembly. We have had the opportunity to exchange a few words, and I am sure we will have other opportunities.

I also wanted to join my colleague from Concordia in paying tribute to Mr. Ernst, formerly from Charleswood. I certainly found him to be a very respectful person, and he seemed to behave in a very decent, gracious and gentlemanly manner, and I appreciated his presence in the House. We certainly wish him well. Also, while I am on my feet, I would like to thank the Minister for Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey) for his tub-thumping speech. He began yesterday and actually did not give his usual I-love Manitoba speech to start with. He started with I love Canada, and then he went into I love Manitoba, I love

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 325 this government and I really love this Premier (Mr. Filmon). That was yesterday. As well, I think the subtext of this minister's speech was that the mind can make a heaven of hell, reminding me of the great Puritan, the divine John Milton, his epic poem Paradise Lost and the malicious antagonist in that poem, the fallen angel, sometimes known as Satan.

Milton, I suppose it is-Satan says to us that the mind can make a heaven ofhell and a hell of heaven, in other words, that it is a matter of perception, and perhaps that is what the minister wants us to think of Manitoba. However, John Milton did not believe that. John Milton cautions the reader, tells us to read this poem carefully, tells us that we cannot trust devils and fallen angels. While I certainly would not want to put the minister in that context, I think we should take some of what he said yesterday with a little bit of caution.

This government has not created heaven right here in the province of Manitoba. I want to turn now to the substance of the throne speech, although I do think to refer to it as a substantial speech is a little bit of a contradiction in terms, as many of my colleagues in their speeches inside this House and as many people outside the House in the press, et cetera, have pointed out. It was not a substantial throne speech, Madam Speaker. Indeed, one must acknowledge that more than toast is being rethermalized in the province of Manitoba, and I think another example of rethermalized material is the throne speech.

The throne speech is a weary speech. We have heard it all before. I know the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) in his speech said that the throne speech was rethermalized vintage 19 94, and I am sure that he is right. But I was not here in 19 94, so I cannot personally be absolutely sure. To my ear, the throne speech ofDecember 19 97 rings ofthe speech ofMarch I9 95. We have the same old weary announcements in training and education, for example.

The emphasis on training and education is, once again, on core subjects with little room, Madam Speaker, for any emphasis on the arts, on music, on culture and that, according to the Tories, most irrelevant of all subjects, Grade 1I Canadian history. * (1 450) Many people in the community, as I am sure members opposite know, are extremely discouraged and disturbed about the elimination of Grade 11 Canadian history from the program. I want to quote from a letter sent to the Free Press by two very prestigious citizens, Celine M.

Kear who is the president of the Manitoba Historical Society and Bernie Wolfe, president of Heritage Winnipeg. They both believe that Grade 11 Canadian history should be present in the curriculum, and I read their letter: The Manitoba Historical Society and Heritage Winnipeg are concerned about reports that Canadian history at the Grade II level is to be abolished in Manitoba schools. Our concern is reinforced by recent studies about the ignorance of Canadian students of their own country's history and heritage.

The Dominion Institute recently hired the Angus Reid polling company to study the depth or otherwise of the knowledge of their own country by young people between the ages of I8 and 24. Only 19 percent got more than half the questions correct. This is the age when the current young generation begins to engage in Canadian politics as citizens. How can they make informed, intelligent, political and economic decisions about Canada's future ifthey have such abysmal knowledge of Canada's past?

For the purposes of expediting my speech today, I am not going to read the entire letter, but I think that they make a very good point here, Madam Speaker. I wonder exactly why this government wants to eliminate Canadian history for Grade 11 , and I can only conclude, Madam Speaker, that what lies behind it is a desire to produce a generation of students who really lack the analytical and creative capacity to challenge and understand government.

I gather that what this government really wants are highly efficient, obedient workers, individuals who will not challenge the order of the day, more sameness, more weariness. What we have or what this government would like to produce is a culture where efficiency is the only moral principle and where morality gives way to smugness, arrogance and self satisfaction. That is certainly what I heard in the throne speech and what we hear day after day in Question Period. We heard some more of it today, especially

326 LEGISL ATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 from the Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh) who should be a model to all of us as the Minister of Education .

I want to just return briefly to the question of education and training to point out that the refusal to recognize the importance of arts and culture in our public school system is something that will ultimately backfire on us, and here I quote the great American poet, William Carlos Williams: Not only is art a rival government always in opposition to its cruder replicas, but as well-and Tories should understand this-1 know the Minister of Labour (Mr.

Gilleshammer) does, because he was formerly the Minister of Culture-! know he understands the economic impact of the arts and knows that the economic impact of the arts is considerable and, as well, the economic impact of the arts. Arts themselves are one of the strongest tourist attractions to our capital city. The arts community, our ballet, our symphony, our theatre, our art gallery are very, very strong tourist attractions, and I think, Madam Speaker, we have a duty and responsibility to support the arts, duty and responsibility in which we are failing at present.

Given my short time here today, I think that I will move on. I really do not have to pursue this matter of education since I am sure others in my caucus will. As well, I am sure that we all heard Diane Beresford, president of the Manitoba Teachers' Society, who spoke so succinctly, intelligently, who analyzed the situation so wel l. She understands the educational crisis in Manitoba, and I think that she speaks very well for teachers and for the educational crisis in the province, so I am not going to speak about that. I do briefly want to touch upon the status of AI DS as an issue in this province.

I found it so hypocritical that these members, on International AIDS Day, wore red ribbons into the Legislature, wore red ribbons into this Legislature, but had no answers to questions. Such hypocrisy and such humbug, Madam Speaker, but these members should know that they do not fool anybody. Everybody in the AIDS community knows exactly what they are about. I asked three questions that day. I believe the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) asked three questions, and perhaps the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale), I cannot quite remember.

I got one answer from the Premier, the Premier insisting that the province was doing its duty because it was providing health care through the Village Clinic. This was the only answer that we got. The rest of the questions were all taken as notice and we would be got back to later. Well, I for one have not been got back to later, and I wonder if I will be at all.

Conveniently, the day the Premier spoke, answered my question, he was confusing basic health care, which I remind him we are still obliged to provide in this province, though his government might like to change that as well, but the Premier was confusing basic health care with an AIDS strategy. and they are of course quite different. I want to indicate to this Premier that health care and an AIDS strategy are quite different, but no wonder the treatment and care for people living with AIDS is languishing when the Premier does not understand this simple distinction.

I think I have spoken before about the whole history of the AI DS strategy in the province of Manitoba. I will just sum it up very quickly. The whole fiasco began in the summer of 19 94 when Justice Hor ace Krever was in Manitoba and, to the embarrassment of this government, John Guilfoyle spilt the beans and pointed out that we had .5 persons working on AIDS in this province. It was such an embarrassment that there was all of a sudden the desire to create an AIDS strategy, and people gathered together in November of 19 94.

There were people living with AIDS, the families of those people, community workers, medical people gathered for two days, I believe, had a very, very good discussion, I think. From there a paper was drafted; the paper went back and forth from the community to government, from government to the community, and finally, Madam Speaker, in July of 19 96, this AIDS paper, this AIDS strategy was released to the public. It was a somewhat disappointing document, and I think that we have indicated this earlier during debate in this House.

Still, one thinks that half a loaf is better than nothing at all, so in the summer of 19 96 the Minister of Health dissolved his AIDS Advisory Committee and, though it is now December 19 97, still nothing has happened, which brings me back to the point that I was making, a year and a half and nothing has happened. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) gives nonsensical answers or no answers at all to questions

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 327 on AIDS and then these people have the hypocrisy to wear red ribbons into this House. It is really a travesty, and I am quite ashamed of the government. Madam Speaker, there are several issues I would like to have addressed today. I would like to have addressed the shameful inaction on child prostitution in this province. I would like to have addressed the prolonged underfunding of agencies supporting people who are-1 am a bit confused. I would like to have talked about the underfunding of agencies that support the mentally disabled.

Workers here make only minimum wage, and it is impossible for these agencies to keep workers. It is quite untenable. I also would like to have talked about violence against women but I have done that before. There are certainly cultural issues that require addressing, health care issues, the shame of Grafton, North Dakota. Certainly this is a blot on our once-proud health care system. I regret to say that I would like to have spoken a little bit more about the conduct of the Speaker in this House. Time does not permit.

Suffice it to say that this rethermalized throne speech reflects the weariness, the staleness, the arrogance of a very elitist government. This government is out of touch with its people and, contrary to what the Minister of I, T and T (Mr. Downey) says, has no vision for the future at all. Thank you. * (1 500) Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, I want to welcome the new pages and the new member for Portage Ia Prairie (Mr.

Faurschou), but I want most of all to speak about the air of unreality in this throne speech which stems, I believe, from the isolation of a government which for nearly a decade has moved around in private planes and ministerial cars and more recently whose ministers seem curiously intent on long distance journeys on slim pretexts. Such separation from reality is partly what lies behind the meanspirited nature of the government response to the flood victims of Ste. Agathe.

The government misses no opportunity to speak of Manitobans' generosity to one another, hands across the border, hands across to the Saguenay, city and country all in this together, and so they were, until we came to add up the bill on the government side of the House. Then the true nature of this new conservativism shone through. This was not to be a Duff Roblin response. Roblin recognized the importance of public service, and the Tories recognized the public relations value of the former Premier and capitalized on it shamelessly with their fundraising dinner.

Yet the very principles which Roblin stood for, public investment, a sense of responsibility for each other and acknowledgement that the future of the city and country are linked are the ones that they have forsaken. For 200 years, Madam Speaker, Europeans have known the Red River Valley and they have known the extremes of climate and fortune that have required extraordinary community effort and a recognition of comm itment to each other's welfare, and Roblin understood that. Yet the present Tories do not. It is quite curious. Manitobans' long-term flood relief has left a bitter taste for many.

It has been slow in coming. It has followed tortuous and inconsistent paths and, whi·le sandbags and dikes went up quickly and evacuees received courtesy and consideration, government announcements left Manitobans bewildered. For a while the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and his Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pitura) were like two old figures on a weather vane; one popped out with what seemed like a generous announcement about compensation, then he was swung around vigorously and out slammed the Premier with a sharp contradiction. It was bewildering and very distressing for the flood victims.

But most astonishing of all has been the Premier's insistence that people must take responsibility for choosing to live in a flood plain. This is an argument he made during the flood and has subsequently repeated over and over again. I must admit, Madam Speaker, that my first reaction to this was to suggest that the Premier had possibly been quoted out of context. Indeed, I suggested as much to a colleague in Montreal. It seemed so cold, so callous, so unresponsive and so unManitoban, if there be such a word. But the Premier persisted in offering the same

328 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 rejection to the people of Ste. Agathe in the Chamber that he had on radio, and so I took another look at it. An acquaintance, a lifelong Tory-let us call him "Deep Blue"-te lls me the true answer to this lies very close to the surf ace. I should not really puzzle about it very long, he said, it is vanity. The Premier simply could not abide being trumped by the largess of the federal government, particularly Lloyd Axworthy in an election year.

So one argument we would have to consider is that vanity, political rivalry and a stubborn refusal to rethink the merits of the case of the people of Ste. Agathe are really the key to the policy of the government of Manitoba, a government which tries to portray itself as the inheritor of Duff Roblin. Politics and history is, in part, about character, and it is possible that "Deep Blue" is right, but history is also about circumstance and about ideas and ideology, and we must consider other alternatives. This is a government whose ministers openly pride themselves on following the dictum of Machiavelli.

Well-thumbed copies of Machiavelli's discourses are occasionally passed around at comm ittee meetings, albeit in plain brown wrappers. During the MTS hearings, the Premier could be seen, a lonely and disconsolate figure at the back of the comm ittee room. He carried in his hand a piece of paper written large with a quote from Machiavelli's "The Prince." Does the answer then to the Ste. Agathe question lie in the posture of a government which has taken to heart Machiavelli's advice that if as a government you cannot be both feared and loved then it is better to be feared?

If that were the case, surely the firing of cabinet ministers-the last but two, member for Portage; the member for Rhineland; the member for Charleswood; the former Speaker, the member for Gladstone-the instilling of fear into civil servants who make mistakes, the cuts to health, welfare and education, the calculated attacks on teachers, would surely have carried this message of fear for the Premier and his government. Was it also necessary to rub salt in the wounds of Ste. Agathe?

As one writer wrote recently, it is not difficult to see why "The Prince" by Machiavelli is so appealing to those who fancy they are made of sterner stuff than others, and this is a government, Madam Speaker, which certainly fancies itself. Machiavelli's astringent prostyle, however, is the polar opposite of the usual Tory platitudes. There is no waffling around there, no euphemisms such as referring to tax increases and user fees as sensitive economic adjustments, as the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) prefers to do. Machiavelli says men must be either one over or destroyed.

Now if you spent your time reading Stephen Covey, you would welcome the clarity which Machiavelli brings to a situation. This government likes to pretend that it is following the California philosophies of Stephen Covey. I think all the cabinet ministers received a copy from the Premier. Quotations from Stephen Covey are received enthusiastically by different ministers. So for the public face of this government, there are Covey's pie charts, seven routes to totally mastery, seven routes to synergy, the full monte of a '90s guru.

But behind the brown paper covers and under the desks it is "The Prince" whose advice they follow. Machiavelli would indeed have approved. As many have pointed out over the years, Machiavelli is no apologist for despotism, but his advice to princes and governments underlines that the people must always believe that by serving the prince they will be serving their own best interests. Has the government reflected on this in the case of Ste. Agathe and have they decided again with Machiavelli that, and I quote, there is nothing so self-defeating as generosity?

In the art of practising it, you lose the ability to do so and you become poor and despised. Benefits must be conferred gradually and, in that, they will taste better. Is that, Madam Speaker, what lies behind the government's approach to flood relief, a little tum of the tap now and again, the same approach they are taking to health care and perhaps education? We may see the benefits conferred gradually so that they will taste better to us as they begin in the run-up to the next election. So perhaps it is this, the government's election

schedule and the doctrine of Machiavelli, to confer benefits gradually, which lie at the strategic heart of this incomprehensible response to the people of Ste. Agathe. They faced extraordinary circumstances, the flood of the century. They had taken the precautions that were

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 329 normal and prudent for their circumstances. Their wealth had helped to build the floodway that protected Winnipeg. They, in tum, have been helped by the wealth and prosperity of the city since the 19 50s, and that their government now should tum their backs and transform them from citizens to beggars and petitioners is a cruel blow, and I believe most Manitobans see it that way. Perhaps even the government sees it that way too, for the meanspirited government response is now being portrayed as a matter of principle.

The government's argument is that people must take some responsibility for living in a flood plain. The lack of generosity is portrayed as a way of protecting Manitobans from their worst impulses. If it were not for this government, goes the argument, urging us to shed our dependence on the state, we would all be on some form of welfare, and let us start with Ste. Agathe. Again, Madam Speaker, let us tum to the real guru of the modern Conservatives, Machiavelli. Machiavelli is firm that the prince should develop a flair for spin doctoring for new management.

He says: to those seeing or hearing him, the prince should appear a man of compassion, a man of good faith, a man of integrity, and a kind and religious man. Well, this government seems to have missed the boat on this one, or is it, I wonder, that they have proffered the gospel of self-help, of rugged individualism, of antistatism as a way to disguise for the time their un Manitoban response to those people in Ste. Agathe? All of this is possible, but we should be aware that the individualism thread runs deep in the new market Toryism.

It probably speaks to the new dangers that the government rightly perceives from the growth of the Reform Party in their own ridings. It certainly has been present in other government policies. * (1510 ) The Youth Secretariat, for example, frames most of its strategies in that ideological framework. It may be no coincidence that we have heard so little from the Youth Secretariat other than government ministers passing the buck, a heavy thud as they throw it from one to the other.

Because the task of the Youth Secretariat is one that requires co-operation, community participation and shared values, yet, the government response has been framed in the language of Victorian individualism. I do not suppose the government has ever heard of Samuel Smiles, but that is the true source of their perspective. A true and indeed eminent Victorian, an author and lecturer known throughout the English speaking world at the end of the 19 th Century, he was a mis sionary to what he saw as the howling chaos of the new urban centres.

He argued that causes of social disorder and dysfunction, although he would never have used such terms, could be laid at the feet of the individual ·a nd that it was the responsibility of the individual to raise himself in the social order by his strength of character, duty, learning, et cetera. By so doing, he would also raise his entire class, and society would benefit. I see honourable members are listening attentively. They might indeed learn something.

There was a seductive simplicity to Smiles's views which I am sure the government would share, and the grain of truth that we all seek to be masters of our own destiny, but we are born unequal and the wealth of our society is dis tributed unequally. Samuel Smiles accepted that. He was part of a society which honoured rank, accepted and even revelled in inequality, and which practised deference to authority in all things.

Much of Smiles's message to the working class was intended to turn them away from dangerous revolutionary ideas such as the 10 -hour day and channel their energies into self -improvement and volunteerism, and we find echoes of all of this in the government's policy and their response to Ste. Agathe. It is matched perhaps by the Department of Education's ideas about citizenship. At the last Parents' Forum, the deputy minister was again given the political role of outlining Manitoba's position on curriculum.

He talked of the importance of teaching citizenship, and I sat up and took note because, of course, this government has steadfastly refused to make Canadian history mandatory beyond Grade 6. But honourable members will forgive me if I sound incredulous, but he truly did, Madam Speaker, define citizenship at the end of the 20th Century as respect for authority and respect for property. Not respect for the

330 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 law. Not responsibility to each other. Not the golden rule, but authority. Perhaps it is quite consistent with the desire of members opposite to throw out Beauchesne. Why do we need a set of rules that we have developed collectively and over time if our only job as a citizen is deference to authority? There is very little modem about these new Tories, Madam Speaker.

Their market ideology, their simplistic belief in individualism, their ju stification of inequality and their deference to authority are all hallmarks of the Victorian Age or at least of the dominating ideology of that time. Well, Madam Speaker, what are the broader consequences for Manitobans of this new Victorianism? How will it affect special needs education or respite care? We can see already how much of education costs is being shifted to families as students come home with longer and longer lists of money they must provide.

Families are indeed taking the individual responsibility, as the government would have it, for paying for substitute teachers, for example, in Assiniboine South, or in River Heights where individual responsibility requires that paper be brought in for xerox, and these in our wealthier neighbour hoods. In health care the government has no strategy to deal with diabetes or AIDS, but it is quite prepared to mouth its platitudes about individual responsibility as it offloads more and more care onto families.

How much more can be expected of family caregivers in long-term diseases such as Alzheimer's or AID S or in workplace health and safety? The deaths of so many this last year remind us of the importance of inspection, of collective enforcement of standards, and not just the individual responsibility the government wants to talk about. Madam Speaker, I remember vividly the voice of one mother who spoke at the Association for Commun ity Living last year. She told of the extraordinary burdens which she and her family had shouldered and shouldered gladly.

But she said, we are just an ordinary family and we cannot do it alone. That voice stands for many Manitobans who are hardworking, struggling and yet just surviving. The individualism of the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) message to Ste. Agathe would ring hollow with that woman who would understand that they too cannot do it alone. The message of Ste. Agathe should be a warning for all Manitobans. What lies behind it is a philosophy which leads down a road that I believe most Canadians and most Manitobans do not want to go.

It began with a massive transfer of wealth from the people of this province to brokers and speculators in New York as MTS was sold off, all done without consent of the people. [interjection] Well, Madam Speaker, I hear the many groans of the members opposite. They cannot face the truth because that is exactly what it is. Madam Speaker. the government policy will continue with the offloading of health and education onto families without regard for their ability to meet the needs of their children or their elders.

It will see the rise of private pensions as the Reform Party is proposing and as Thatcher did in Britain with disastrous consequences. There is an ideologic to this train of policy, and the Filmon Conservatives are exactly on that path. But will we see this in the runup to the election? The government knows this is not the Manitoba way. and just as they knew that they must hide their true intentions with the Jets, and that they must hide their true intentions with the public telephone system, so they will hide this philosophy from the public. If this is the case, then why is Ste.

Agathe being singled out for such treatment? Was it merely an additional misfortune for their situation to present itself just too close to the last election and just a month or so too far from the planning for the next one in a government which eats polls for breakfast? On the throne speech, Madam Speaker, there is much more to say. It offers little hope for those concerned with health or education. In the case of education, the government policy remains set in stone, a rigid and expensive approach to assessment, a reduction of curriculum.

There is no indication of a response to come to the special needs review, and we see a continued shift of resources from public to private schoo ls. It is not a level playing field, it is not a fair system and most Manitobans are recognizing that.

December 9, 19 97 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 33 1 In my meetings with parents and teachers across the province, I hear of increasing class size, and that is no wonder in a Tory reign which has seen the loss of nearly 600 teachers. I hear of children who are falling behind in their reading, of parents who are working at two jobs to try to make ends meet to look after their children, to shop and do the laundry, and who are now worried by a government which is telling them they must do more with their children to make up for the lesser amount of time that a teacher can spend with them.

One father told me he spends an hour and a half with his son on math, then he tries to read with his daughter each night. He is a single parent with two jobs and worries he is not able to do more with and for his children. I am finding that this is not an isolated case, and yet it is these families who are being told that they must welcome the withdrawal of the state, welcome the chance to rid themselves of the yoke of government. What utter and absolute rubbish. Again, it shows just how isolated this government has become.

The calls I receive from anxious parents are coming not just from the inner city or my own riding but from rural Manitoba and from ridings represented by the members opposite. Madam Speaker, I would have liked longer time to examine the hypocrisy of a throne speech which talks about the government's intentions to develop research and training, to deal with victims' services, to revitalize apprenticeships and to provide hope for aboriginal people in the city, because in every single one of those cases it is this government which has either refused assistance or delayed policies so long that people have lost hope.

I wanted to mention, too, the Premier's address to the Chamber of Commerce, which has become grandiosely and gratuitously entitled the state of the province message. It is not of course a state of the province's message. It is more like a booster speech for the Tory party. Some of my constituents have told me how offended they are that the government's vision of the province is so limited that it sees only the business comm unity as the leader and only the business community to whom it should report in this way, and I take both of their points.

This is not to say that my constituents do not recognize the importance of business in the community. Many of them are entrepreneurs working from home or employing 20 or 30 people on wages above the minimum wage, as does the bakery and the new restaurants in Wolseley, but they also have a vision of a wider community of Manitoba. They are rooted in the politics of the '90s, and here the heroes are the neighbourhood and the commun ity and the social entrepreneurs who work at the very basic building blocks of neighbourhood associations and which are doing so much in west Broadway at St.

Matthews-Maryland, at Harvest, at Crossways, at Robert A. Steen and at the Magnus Eliason Centre. * (1 520) They are orgamzmg powwows and daycares, organizing small residents' associations such as that in east Wolseley. They bring together public institutions such as the University of Manitoba's City Planning department to meet with the Lions Club, with the Misericordia, with residents of west Broadway to build a safer neighbourhood with decent housing. Those are our leaders. They are our local heroes, but they are not the ones whom this government designates as leaders and to whom they make a special report.

It may be a small point, but it is a fundamental one. Nor when the Premier (Mr. Filmon) spoke did he give a true picture of the province. His statistics on unemployment do not include aboriginal people. He gives us no indicators of social gains or losses in housing or in safety or in child or family poverty. There is no true picture there presented of the inner city. I can only quote from an

article by a constituent, a teacher at R.B. Russell, who said, and I quote: Who gives a damn about the inner city? Certainly not the Conservative government of Premier Gary Filmon. It does not have a clue about how to cure societal ills among the jobless in an undereducated, racially diverse and poverty-impeded youth. Does it really see no correlation, he said, between poverty and crime? There seems to be a shortage of elementary deductive logic within the Filmon caucus. He continued to argue that Rossbrook House, FREIGHT House and Turtle Island, for example, cannot do it alone.

A very interesting use of the same words and the same sentiments of the woman who spoke for the families in the Association for Community Living.

332 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 In the Premier's speech, as in the throne speech, there is no sense of the growing gap between Manitobans. There is no acknowledgment that nine years of Tory rule have created a society that is more unequal than when the Tories were first elected.

There is no sense that for the small prairie provinces, like Saskatchewan and Manitoba, that our success has been built upon collective economic effort, government investment in infrastructure, particularly in the 20th Century which has opened the doors for generations of young Manitobans as well as for the enterprise and initiative of entrepreneurs.

Blakeney, Schreyer, Douglas, Pawley and, yes, Duff Roblin, understood this but not the new Filmon ideological market Tories, and so they are well on their way on the task they set themselves when they came to power to dismantle what generations of Manitobans have built. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Madam Speaker, time is running short today, and I have so much that I want to say to my constituents within my speech, and I was wondering before I say a few words for the record, might I have leave to table my speech for the record? Some Honourable Members: Leave.

Madam Speaker: Does the honourable member for St. Norbert have leave to table his message? [agreed] Mr. Laurendeau: I would just say a few words on the record. Madam Speaker, I would like to welcome my colleagues back. I am sure they all had a fruitful summer and fall. I am wishing them the best of the season for the winter. Madam Speaker, one thing I learned last spring was that by working with my colleagues and my constituency, my M.P. Mr. Reg Alcock and my City Councillor Mr. John Angus, that even though we had differences of opinions, if we worked together we could resolve the problems.

We also had members of the opposition that came out to help us during the flood. I know Mr. Sale was there and Gord-[interjection] Oh, that is right. The member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) and the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) were there. Mr. Doer was out, a number of my colleagues, the Premier (Mr. Fi lmon) was out, the member for Concordia and the member for Crescentwood. I will not list them all, because it was unreal the response that happened during that period of time. It proved to me that that is what made Manitoba strong. When I was first elected in 19 90, I was proud to be a Tory.

When I was re-elected in 19 95, I was prouder of being a Tory. After this throne speech, I am that much more proud and looking forward to the next election. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, because time is getting short, we will not be able to raise all of the issues with respect to this throne speech, but I would also like to take the opportunity to welcome the pages to the House and the new member for Portage Ia Prairie (Mr. Faurschou) to the House and to take this opportunity to wish all members the very best in the holiday season.

I would also like to recognize the people who are victims of the flood and hope that they have a holiday season, but certainly the actions of this government and the way they have been treated by this government will not make their holiday season very en joyable, particularly those who are still out of their homes, those who have not got their farm operations back in order and those who are carrying tremendous debt loads because of the flood and the lack of heart from this government and lack of support.

We could outline many of those families, but there will not be the opportunity to do this under this throne speech. As we look at what the government said in this throne speech-and they talked about the prosperity in Manitoba-! want to say that the prosperity that they talked about does not reflect on the conditions of many of the people that I represent.

Many of the people that I represent are having difficulty with housing and having improvements to their homes, but this government has been heartless enough to cancel all the home repair programs and has no consideration for these people, and, again, these people will be living in some desperate living conditions this winter. Some of the people that I represent also are looking to have their education opportunities improved, but this government, although they say they want people to go

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLAT IVE ASS EMB LY OF MANITOBA 333 back to school, are not prepared to provide daycare for people who are trying to upgrade their education. One ofthose groups of people is a group of people in Duck Bay who are trying to take upgrading, and I have written to the minister for her support to provide home care, but, again, this government is heartless and does not recognize. They like to tell people that they should go back into the workforce, but they are not prepared to put the supports there for them.

The other people in my constituency who are facing difficulty are people in the Duck Mountain School Division because of cutbacks to education funding. This is a school division with a decreased population and a low assessment. Now the school superintendent and school trustees are going out and meeting with people and asking them what they should do because they are either going to have to raise taxes or close schools. I think this is just absolutely disgraceful.

In a country like Canada, in a province like Manitoba, rural children have the right to get an education in a public school system, and because of actions taken by this government we now have children who are going to have to travel greater distances, courses are cut in the schools, and there is not an equal opportunity for rural children. But this government is quite prepared to support the private schools and increase their funding,

whereas the public schools are having to carry a very heavy load, and many of them are facing real difficulties. This is something that the government has to consider, and it is not considered in this throne speech as to how we are going to address the issue of areas of low population. Madam Speaker, there are other issues, but I want to focus a bit on the agricultural issues in this budget, and I want to say that I am again pleased that the government has rehashed the announcement on research funding. The announcement was made in the last term.

It has not been put in place yet, but, certainly, it is time we start to do some agriculture research. We are way behind other provinces and in particular Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan is becoming the research capital of western Canada. There is no reason for Manitoba to fall behind in that, so I urge the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), and particularly in the time that we are getting into now, of more diversification of livestock, we have to look at other diversification as well, and I urge the Minister of Agriculture to ensure that that actually happens.

Madam Speaker, I started earlier today to talk about the jobs that we are going to get in this province in the food-processing industry, and, as I said earlier, I am very pleased that we are going to have the additional jobs coming back into food processing because we lost a tremendous amount of jobs in the last few years under the Conservative government. * (15 30) Mr. Ben Sveinson, Ac ting Speaker, in the Chair Between 19 87 and '88, we had close to or over 5,000 jobs in the food-processing industry, and those jobs have disappeared out of this province. We have gone down.

In 19 96, we were as low as 2,500, this at a time when this government continues to talk about value added, value-added jobs. Well, those jobs are not there, so this announcement for a processing plant in Brandon is an excellent announcement. It gives us jobs that we need. We should not be exporting everything out without adding value to it, and I think that there is much more that we can do to add value in the beef industry, and, in fact, much of the pork is shipped out by carcasses, as I understand, and I think there is much more work, that we can get more jobs into this province.

With respect to the hog industry, I was talking to one of the farm leaders in this province, who said to me: We have to be sure, and the government has to be sure that they do not put all their eggs into one basket. It cannot only be hogs that are expanded, and it cannot only be the potato industry that is expanded. You have to look at all parts of the province, what other kinds of diversification can take place, and, of course, that diversification would result if we did more research into what can happen in this province, and, hopefully, that will happen.

I want to also take this opportunity to talk about the growth in the livestock industry. This afternoon we had people here visiting at the Chamber who are from Netley. This is a group of farmers who indicated very clearly they are not opposed to hog production, and

334 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 you, Mr. Acting Speaker, have similar situations in the area that you represent, where there is conflict between those people who want to produce livestock and those people who are living in a residential area. It is the same thing that is happening in Netley, in Gimli and in Interlake. There is an

article from Kemnay near Brandon, and these people say they are not opposed to the increase in hog production, but they want it done in an orderly fashion. So, again, the challenge is here for this government to ensure that they bring in regulations, regulations that have teeth in them. The guidelines that are in place right now have no strength, carry no weight, and we have situations where there is conflict between municipality and municipality, people in various areas. People are concerned about water quality; people are concerned about the environment.

This is the challenge to the government of the day to ensure that this is done properly so that we do not make the same mistakes that people in other countries have made. If we look at what happened in North Carolina where it was very large operations that took over and there were not proper regulations in place, there is a real problem there. People of North Carolina and other states have said that, because there was not proper regulation, they have real problems right now. Holland has similar problems. Holland is shutting down some of their hog operations because there just is not enough space for them.

There is not enough land and they have created problems. I know of other people who were with the minister in Taiwan where they looked at ways in which hog waste is processed. They take off the methane, as I understand it, and use it as an energy source, and then they have a product they can spread on land. Here in Manitoba we have a lot of land. We can increase our hog production, but there has to be some organization to it. We should not be putting hog barns in areas that are water sensitive. We have to ensure that when a hog barn is built there is enough land to spread the waste on, that that is in place.

We have to ensure there is communication and people understand what is going on. We have to think about what size operations we want in this province. Is it necessary to have very large operations that do not really create a lot of jobs, or should we be encouraging more family farm operations that are on a smaller scale but involve more people, more jobs? Those are the kinds of things we have to think about. So there is room for growth of the industry in this province; but, as I say to the government, we have to ensure that these things are-that it is done in an orderly fashion.

I want to ju st look for a minute-we quite often hear from the government when we raise these kinds of issues that, oh, this is just the NDP talking about production and they are against hog production. We heard the same thing in other areas, but that is not the case at all. There are other people out there who are concerned about this. I would like to read a little bit from an editorial, from the Portage Ia Prairie Daily Graphic. The editorial part of it says: Some of the rules in Manitoba's fastest growing industry need some retooling.

Even pork contractors have been heard calling for tougher regulations and stiffer fines for those operating without disregard for environmental rules and their neighbours. These outspoken contractors know that it only takes a few poor operators to do severe damage to the industry. It goes on to say: But tougher regulations and stiffer fines work only as well as the enforcement accompanying them. If the province pays lip service to its own regulations and uses a hands-off enforcement approach, it could mean killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

Further on, it goes on to say: It will not take much for public opinion to swing against the hog industry if hog operations are found to be carrying out poor management practices and spreading excess amounts of manure and contaminating regional ground water. So this is what the public is saying. This is what the government has to be aware of. Let us ensure that the industry we have has the opportunity to expand in this province and is done in a sustainable way. We look forward to hearing regulations that the minister has talked about.

We look forward to the government doing much more research and ensuring that not only the hog industry grows but also that other aspects of livestock, and that we look at other opportu nities to diversify the rural economy. At the present time we are not having growth in the rural communities. Population is dropping; and, as the population drops, we face difficulties with our education systems, we face difficulties in sustaining services in the rural community. This government often talks about its

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 335 comm itment to the rural community. This is an opportunity to do things that will help sustain and enhance the quality of life in rural communities. Mr. Acting Speaker, I just want to raise a couple of more issues that relate to my constituency, and one of them has to do with the people in Pine River and surrounding area who worked so diligently when they found out that this government was on another one of their privatization schemes.

They were proposing to privatize a spring water wayside park, a source of water that many people in the area use because they do not have good water. This government was making arrangements with one individual who wanted to bottle water and sell it, and I am not opposed to bottling water. I think that if somebody wants to start that kind of business, go to it, but there is no reason to take a public source of water. There are lots of springs around the mountain.

This individual was planning to charge for water at this public site, but because the people rallied they were able to convince the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Cummings) that his decision was wrong. We are not completely happy with his answer, but we will continue to work with the Minister of Natural Resources and ensure that the issues that have been raised by the people in the Pine River area-and people as far away as Dauphin come to use this water. Mr.

Acting Speaker, along with that, I think that one of the disappointments that face the people in my constituency is the fact that the government has put no effort and no consideration to road construction. This is an offload of roads. Our roads are deteriorating because oflack of railway service and offloading by the government, and it is one that they have to address.

Certainly, the very last point I want to raise is farmers across the province are disappointed that this government has not in this throne speech addressed the Canadian Wheat Board, and I think that tells us very clearly that, instead of standing up with the many farmers, the majority of whom support the Wheat Board, the advisory board who is elected by the people who support the Wheat Board and want it maintained, we see this government saying nothing on it.

It is clearly an indication that this government is not supporting some of the institutions, and the Canadian Wheat Board that is very important to the farming community. Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker. * (1 540) Point of Order Mr. Laurendeau: On a point of order, Mr. Acting Speaker. I wonder if I might have leave to ask for my speech to be printed in Hansard. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Sveinson): Is there leave? Agreed? Agreed. Mr. Laurendeau: Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker.

Madam Speaker, it is again my distinguished pleasure to rise and address the honourable members of this House, the people of Manitoba, and the people of St. Norbert on the subject of our governm ent's most recen t throne speech. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this occasion to welcome back all honourable members to the House. I am certain that, like myself, my friend s and colleagues in this Chamber had a summer and fa ll filled with events and meetings and worked hard to address the various needs of their constituents.

While I enjoy the time I have working in my constituency, I also welcome the opportunity to re present the views and interests of my constituents in the context of daily House activities. Madam Speaker, I would like to welcome the Chamber' s six new pages who will be playing an active role in the democratic process of our province in the coming months. It is a tremendous opportunity to witness government in action from a vantage point that fe w experience. As Deputy Speaker and a member fo r this House, I look fo rward to working with each of you.

Regre ttably, this Chamber lost the services of one of its members since the past session. The fo rmer member fo r Charleswood, Mr. Jim Ernst, has left to pursue private sector interests, and I am certain that all members join with me in wishing Mr. Ernst a prosperous and successfu l private sector career. I hold a great deal of esteem fo r my fo rmer colleague, both as a legislator and as an individual, and his service to the people of Manitoba are worthy of the commendation he has received already in this Chamber. I will miss the

336 LEGISL ATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 oft en fierce dedication he had to constituents and to all Manitobans. His qualities as a statesman made an immediate impression upon me, and his qualities as a friend have left a lasting one. And while one chair in this House has gone vacant since our last sitting, another has been filled andfilled very capably. I would like to offi cially, Madam Speaker, welcome the newest member of the Filmon team, the honourable members fo r Portage Ia Prairie, Mr. David Faur schou, to the govern ment benches.

It is a testament to the people of Portage Ia Prairie that they have elected an individual of charac ter and deter mination to carry fo rward their views to this Chamber. I know that he will be a strong and able voice fo r the people of Portage Ia Prairie. I would also take the opportunity, />.!adam Speaker, to offe r praise to the fin e people of St. Norbert fo r whom I have had the pleasure and honour of representing fo r the past eight years . As the members of this House know, the past year has been one which was oft en filled with anxiety and trials fo r the people of St.

Norbert, but the strength of our community remains unbroken, and, in fa ct, we have grown even stronger. When I was firs t elected to this Chamber, it was with the promise that I would work to the limits of my ability to represent the people of St. Norbert and to strengthen the community and the province which we call home. It is a commitment which I still hold to, Madam Speaker, and I thank each and every one of my constituents who have provided me with direction, advice and support during my tenure as their representative.

As well, and perha ps more than ever, I would like to pay tribute to my fa mily, Madam Speaker. When I firs t was elected to this Assembly, it was with the knowledge that there would be times when the responsibilities of public lif e would lay a burden on the responsibilities of fa mily lif e. Never was that more true than during this spring 's enormou s flood. There were many nights when my fa mily dealt with their own personal fe ars about their home and possessions while taking on the extra fe ars of a community which I brought home every night.

They never gre w angry at me fo r putting aside fa mily matters, although they certainl y would have been justified in doing so, and their support never wavered. Madam Speaker, to my wif e Winni and my children Amanda and Laney a thousand thanks would be too fe w. lvf adam Speaker. as was given considerable notice in the Speech from the Throne, much of the news and much of our fo cus and energy last year went to battling what has now become known as the flood of the century. The constituents of St.

Norbert were among the many thousands of }vfanitobans who helped their neighbours pre pare fo r this devastating act of nature, and they were also among the many who suff ered losses at its hands. Yet, Af adam Speaker, we do not measure loss or victory by the calculation of dollars and cents but rather by the preservation of human lif e, and to that I say that we were the clear \'ictor and that none of those endangered, be they militmy or ci\'i!ian, perished due to the flood of the centwy. Let me say that it was no small fe at that none were critical ly injured in the area of St. Norbert.

The men and women of our Canadian Armed Forces, a grou p fo r which my respect has increased tenfo ld, placed themselves many times in harm 's way in the eff ort to protect the personal possessions of the residents of St. Norbert. Many have claimed that this was a tremendous "peacetime " eff ort on behalf of our armed fo rce �. Jvfadam Speaker, I want to assure all members that the effo rt that ·was waged on behalf of my constituents had all the makings of a battle.

From the fr ont lines of sandbags where military per sonnel patrolled to ensure the rising water, a fo rmidable enemy, did not advance its position ... to the "war rooms" where strategy was developed on a daily basis to ensure that maximum protection and safe ty were aff orded to area residents, a battle was fo ught. Each year, it seems, we are reminded in one fo rm or another that we are a strong and compassionate country.

Each year, be it thro ugh natural disasters like the one experienced or be it through triumph such as a gold medal by a Canadian athlete, we are reminded that we are a country of pride and of passion. It is my hope that the pride and passion we demonstrate during

December 9, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 337 extrao rdinary situations can be equally maintained in all circumstances and in all provinces. Madam Speaker, the words "thank you " seem so little in comparison to the mighty effo rt that was put fo rward by our armed fo rces personnel. Yet speaking on behalf of all of St. Norbert, the thanks I offe r represent the heart and the emotion of a community that was deeply touched by the eff orts of those Canadians that came to their aid in a great time of need. We will not soon fo rg et their compassion.

In my own constituency the acts of individual heroism are too many to mention, Madam Speaker. From the neighbours who risked their own safe ty to check another water pump to the young and old who gave ever ything they had in the aid of another, acts of kindness were the order of the day. We are no longer a community populated by individual heros, we have taken on the collective status of a heroic community. I will remember always the sight of young and old, able-bodied and disabled, and men and women working long into the night to fill sandbags at the Fort Richmond Shopping Centre.

They worked at a pace which continually surp rised and amazed our city engineers. I will always remember the boxes and boxes of fo od pre pared by volunteers fo r volunteers that flo wed into our local flood centre. Most of all, I will always remember the look of determ ination that residents held as the battle waged to save home and property. The spirit that the community of St. Norbert showed during the flood of the century was not new, Madam Speaker. We just had never needed it as much as we did then. It is a tribute to a community, a community which I am fo rever proud to call home.

Madam Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not make mention of our neighbours to the south who battled equally hard, but in some circumstances were not as fo rtunate. While we are separated by a border, we were united in heart and spirit as we fo ught a common enemy. The pictures of devastation we witnessed from Grand Forks left many of us with a fe eling of both anger and of emptiness, an anger at the fo rce that had caused such hardship and an emptiness fo r the people who had lost so much.

I know, however, from my trips and phone calls that the people of Grand Forks and the aff ected area have taken up the challenge of rebu ilding and will do so with strength and determ ination. Madam Speaker, perha ps one of the most heartening things of a crisis is the response it oft en emits from those who are aff ected. Never have we seen such a demonstration of this than during the flood as strangers came to the aid of strangers and friend s to the aid of friend s. So of ten we get lost in the arguments of rural versus urban, core versus suburbs and region versus reg ion.

What a heartening experience it was to see a province, literally a province, fo rget about their diff erences and unite in a common cause. Madam Speaker, perha ps one of the most surprising things is that we learned a great deal about each other. The friend ships and the learning that I saw take place on the sandbag lines was something that cannot be taught in a classroom. For the many hundreds of your Manitobans who fo ught off aching muscles and tired arms, it was a lesson in humanity and a lesson in compassion that will never be fo rgo tten and that will serve them well in their fu ture.

Yet, Madam Speaker, the flood of the century has passed, and while a great deal of rebui lding and restoration remains, we must move on, move on as a community, move on as a city and move on as a provin ce. But we must take with us the lessons that we learned and apply them to our fu ture needs. We must remember the energy that we had when we worked together fo r a common goal. We must remember the strength that we demonstrated when we came together fo r the greater benefit of our neighbours. Madam Speaker, as a province our success lies in our collective will, not in our individual knowledge and self-assurance.

Today, in a world that demands global thinking and a unified approach, we can use the knowledge and lessons that we have learned and prosper from them. Today, more than ever, we are a province which has a tremendous reason to be optimistic, a tremendous reason to bond together. We are in the midst of an economy that seemingly has no bounds and which has strength on so many levels. We have a degree of fi nancial stability that is the envy of many of our provincial neighbours, and we have a workf orce which is knowledgeable and vibrant.

338 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA December 9, 19 97 Madam Speaker, while it is true that we live in uncertain times, Manitobans have never bef ore had as much reason to foe/ secure about their fUture as they do today. Our young people are poised to inherit a province which is fiscally sound, economically diversified and socially responsible. This past summer, Madam Speaker, I had the fo rtune of spending a great deal of time with a group of young people who worked through the province 's Green Team to help in the post-flood cleanu p in the St. Norbert area.

It was a group of young people who were filled with confide nce and filled with enthusiasm. They were a group who were willing to learn, were willing to work hard, and, most of all, were excited to get involved in a project that made a tremendous diff erence in the lives of their fe llow Manitobans. It was an experience that gave me an overwhelming confidence in the fu ture of our pro vince and gave me a renewed vigour fo r the direction that our government is going. Madam Speaker, it is fo r these young people that we have worked to ensure that the burden of debt and interest payments will be remove d.

It is fo r these young people that our government has worked to again make Manitoba an attractive place fo r investors, and it is fo r these young people that our government has worked to ensure that there will be opportunity and challenge in the workf orce. Madam Speaker, we live in a province which can now offe r our young people more than just hope fo r a brigh ter fu ture. We live in a province in which they can achieve their goals today. Much has been made in this very House about the robust pred ictions fo r Manitoba.

We have heard about the Conf erence Board of Canada heralding Manitoba as one of the top perf ormers in terms of economic gro wth an

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-4-9
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 4th hansardpdf 9.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	19a50aadca8748e3ebab5a57965e7f3fa72347cb

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