Manitoba Hansard — 12 April 1999 (Sitting 5, 36th Legislature, 5th Session)

36-5-5

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session- Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLIX No. 5 -1:30 p.m., Monday, April12, 1999 ISSN 0542·5492

Member ASHTON, Steve BARRETI, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUA Y, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James DRIEDGER, Albert DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FAURSCHOU, David FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen FRIESEN, Jean GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HEL WER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY,Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. McGIFFORD, Diane MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon.

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

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Interlake Brandon East Portage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St. Johns Elmwood Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Osborne Assiniboia St. James River East Riel Emerson Morris Lac du Bonnet River Heights Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Crescentwood Broadway Kirkfield Park Dauphin La Verendrye Rossmere Turtle Mountain Fort Garry Swan River St. Boniface Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C.

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

161 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, April 12, 1999 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table a variety of reports; first, the Communities Economic Development Fund Quarter Report for the quarter ended September 30, 1998, which has already been circulated; the Communities Economic Development Fund Annual Report for the fiscal year 1997-1998, which has been released; the Communities Economic Development Fund First Quarter Report for the period ending June 30, 1998; the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board Quarterly Report for the nine months ending December 31, 1998; the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board Quarterly Report for the three months ending June 30, 1998; the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board Forty Seventh Annual Report for the year ended March 31, 1998; the Energy and Mines 1997-98 Annual Report, and the Northern Affairs 1997- 98 Annual Report.

Hon. Shirley Render (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would like to table a letter dated April 8, 1999, pursuant to

Section 13 of The Trade Practices Inquiry Act. I have the honour to report that no inquiries were commenced subsequent to the last report. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 2- The Electoral Divisions Amendment Act Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable government House leader (Mr. Praznik), that leave be given to introduce Bill 2, The Electoral Divisions Amendment Act; Loi modifia nt la

Loi sur les circonscriptions electorales, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. * (1335 ) Bili 14-The Amusements Amendment Act Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minis ter of Agri culture (Mr. Enns), that leave be given to introduce Bill 14, The Amusements Amendment Act; Loi modi fiant la

Loi sur les divertissements, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. Bill 3- The Fatality Inquiries Amendment Act Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Min ister of Finance (Mr. Gilles hammer), that leave be given to introduce Bill 3, The Fatality Inquiries Amendment Act (Loi modifia nt la

Loi sur les enquetes medic o-legales), and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieu tenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House, and I have here the message of the Lieutenant Governor. Motion agreed to. Bill 5- The Highway Traffic Amendment, Off-Road Vehicles Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded by the honourable Minis ter of Education (Mr. McCrae), that leave be given to introduce Bill 5, The Hig hway Traffic

162 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 Amendment, O ff-Road Vehicles Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifia nt le Code de Ia route et Ia

Loi sur les vehicules a caractere non routier et modi fications correlatives, and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. At this time I would like to table a copy of His Honour's message. Motion agreed to. Bill 7-The Public Schools Amendment Act Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minis ter of Environment (Mrs. Mcintosh), that leave be given to introduce Bill 7, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. BillS-- The Ozone Depleting Substances Amendment Act Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Min ister of Education and Training (Mr. McCrae), that leave be given to introduce Bill 8, The Ozone Depleting Substances Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les substances appauvrissant Ia couche d' ozone, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. *

(1340) Bill 9- The Securities Amendment and Commodity Futures and Consequential Amendments Amendment Act Hon. Shirley Render (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minis ter of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Tweed), that leave be given to introduce Bill 9, The Securities Amendment and Commodity Futures and Consequential Amendments Amendment Act (Loi modifi ant Ia

Loi sur les valeurs mobilieres et Ia

Loi sur les contrats a terme de marchandises et apportant des modifications correlatives). His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. Madam Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Minis ter of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, seconded by the honourable Minis ter of Industry. Trade and Tourism (Mr. Tweed), that leave be given to introduce Bill 9, The Securities Amendment and Commodity Futures and Consequential Amendments Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les valeurs mobil ieres et Ia

Loi sur les contrats a terme de marchandises et apportant des modif ications correlatives, and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor. having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. Agreed? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Madam Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. An Honourable Member: Put on the record that she tabled the message because she forgot to say that. Madam Speaker: The honourable Mini ster of Consumer and Corporate Affairs did indeed table the message. Bill 15- The Cemeteries Amendment Act Hon.

Shirley Render (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minis ter of Education (Mr. McCrae), that leave be given to introduce Bill 15, The Cemeteries Amendment Act (Loi modi fiant Ia

Loi sur les cimetieres), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. -

April 12, 1999 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 163 Bill 200- The Legislative Assembly Amendment Act Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer), that leave be given to introduce Bill 200, The Legislative Assembly Amendment Act (Loi modifia nt Ia

Loi sur l'Assemblee legislative), and that the same now be received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Ashton: In accordance with our rules, would like to make a few brief remarks on the first reading of this par ticular bill. This bill would enact an elected Speaker for this House in this session. I want to indi cate that we are pleased that the government finally, probably some years too late for some very important matters of deliberation, has agreed to the principle of elected Speaker. We are somewhat disappoin ted there was no commitment in the throne speech to pass it this session.

That is what throne speeches are for, to indica te what the legis lative agenda is all about. It is not that we do not trust this government well, then again, maybe it is that we do not trust this government. We feel if there is now agreement from all parties-and I know the Li berals have been onside on this, as we have for quite some time-let us make it an opportunity this session to bring in an elected Speaker and bring our Legislature up to date with eight out of ten Legisla tures and the House of Commons by having an elected Speaker elected by all MLAs, not just appointed by the Premier. Motion agreed to.

Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where the six young persons who were appointed to the Manitoba Legisla tive Internship Program for the 1998-99 year are seated. In accordance with established practice, three interns were assigned to the government caucus and three to the official opposition caucus. Their term of employment is 12 months. They have been performing a variety of research and other tasks for private members.

These interns commenced their assignment last September and will complete them in August. *

(1345) They are, working with the government caucus, Ms. Melanie Mallet of the University of Manitoba, Ms. Shelly Wi seman of the University of Manitoba and Ms. Melanie Vanstone of McGill University; working with the caucus of the official opposition, Mr. Rory Henry of the Univers ity of Manitoba, Mr. David Markham of the University of Manitoba and Ms. Renata Neufeld of the University of Manitoba. Copies of their biographies have been distributed to the members.

I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of all members to congratulate you on your appointment to the program and to hope that you are having a very interesting and successful year. Also, seated in the public gallery we have fifty Grade 9 students from Li nden Christian School under the direction of Mr. Derek Kroeker. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable First Minis ter (Mr. Filmon). And, forty-three Grade 9 students from Chief Peguis Junior High School under the direction of Mr. Will Barmeir.

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minis ter of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson). And, forty-one Grade 11 students from Warren Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Jake Wiebe and Mr. John Smith. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minis ter of Agriculture (Mr. Enns). And, 20 senior high students from Daniel Mcintyre Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Steve Patrick. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.

164 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April l2 , 1999 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Aboriginal Children Special Needs Programs-Access Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, a national study dealing with the complia nce of U.S. standards on disabilities produced by Patrick Kellerman and Deborah Steinstra has produced some shocking results. One of the most appalling transgressions that they speak to is the fact that aboriginal parents living on reserves have to relinquish guardianship of their children if they have disabilities in order to access provincially funded special needs programs.

I would like to ask the Minister responsible for Federal-Provincial Relations and the First Minis ter: has his government taken any action on this issue, and what action is he proposing to the parents who must be in a horrible situation in Manitoba to be faced with those kinds of challenges? Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, my understanding is that we have had a working group that has been working on this and that the Child and Youth Secretariat along with the federal departments of Indian and Northern Affairs and Health Canada, Medical Services Branch, the A was is Agency of Northern Manitoba, Manitoba Health and Manitoba Family Services have been working on a project designed to repatriate First Nations children with technology dependence to their home reserves. The process is near completion.

The required funds have been approved, and a draft agreement has been developed with respect to the pilot project. Mr. Doer: I will have to examine the answer of the First Minis ter. Madam Speaker, I am quite concerned, and I think anyone in this Chamber would be absolutely concerned, about a situation where, in order for any of our children to access special needs programs, we have to lose custody.

It seems to me, whatever the jurisdictional issues here, that humanity and human rights would dictate that all of us take whatever action necessary to have programs accessible to children without families losing custody of those children. On page 97 of the Postl report, it also talked in 1995 of this critical situation for aboriginal children for special needs.

I would like to ask the Premi er: since the Postl report has been produced in Manitoba and released over four years ago, has this situation been dealt with in Manitoba so parents are not faced with special needs programs versus guardianship, which I think is an intolerable situation for any Manitoban? *

(1350) Mr. Filmon: As the member knows, among the many issues that are contained within this is the issue of jurisdiction on reserve, a matter over which, of course, the Constitution speaks. That is why this has been an issue in which technologically dependent chi ldren-we agree, I might say, with the member opposite that it should not be a situation that forces a choice of giving up the children by the parents.

That is why this matter has been under development for over two years in a multidiscipline, multidepartmental study that we believe is going to result in a pilot project to try and ensure that we can provide the technology on reserve. Again, the major partner and the ma jor authority under the Constitution is the federal government. That is why we have been a part of it, because we would want to have that matter resolved. We have certainly been urging, trying to find a way to resolve it. Mr.

Doer: On page 346 of the special needs report, it also talks about the perceived lack of co-operation dealing with special needs kids between the province, the school boards and the aboriginal community and a real lack of trust.

It seems to me, if the dollars are constant for special needs programs and children are coming from Fir st Nations communities to get those programs, that the issue of custody should not be in question and that the Premier today could say that no more kids will be taken into custody to access programs for special needs kids, that we could take a leadership stand today and say that programs for chi ldren in the jurisdictions that are being dealt with are one thing, but families and kids we do not believe should be split in order to access programs from one jurisdiction to another.

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 165 Can we get that commitment from the Premier today? Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I would agree that we need to resolve the situation and find a solution, but rather than take the narrow perspective that the member is of just simply dealing with it and saying that we are simply going to not allow the children to be taken away without providing for them the opportunity to have the technological access that they require, we think they would be condemning them to a life of poverty and ill achievement.

That is not a sufficient answer, which is why we are looking at the whole solution, not just a narrow part of the solution. That is what this pilot program is intended to do, is to find a whole solution. Aboriginal Children Government Action Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, according to the recent Steinstra-Kellerman report, aboriginal Manitobans identify themselves as facing disabilities at twice the rate of the general population. Much of this, of course, stems from issues of poverty.

I want to ask the Minis ter of Education why there were no aboriginal representatives on the special needs steering committee, why no hearings were held in aboriginal reserve communities and how he intends to ensure a continuum of support and services without such educational discussions with aboriginal schools and communities. Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, the question raised here does have quite a relationship with the questions raised by the honourable Leader of the Opposition and the answers given by the First Minis ter.

There is indeed a need for federal agencies to put the needs of the children ahead of any jurisdictional di sputes or squabbles that we might have. I know that many, many aboriginal children attend schools off reserve, and the special needs programs are available for children attending the public school system in Manitoba. On that matter, funding has doubled in the last 10 years or so to $109 million. That was added to just last week by another $2 million as our first responses to the special education report.

We are committed to responding further as well, and indeed in the course of doing so, we may take into account issues like the ones raised today by honourable members opposite, but without federal co operation we have a much harder row to hoe. * (135 5) Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, could the minis ter explain why, after five minis ters, 11 years of Tory education policy, the special needs review felt compelled to point out the perceived lack of co-operation between the province, the school system and aboriginal communities stemmed from a lack of trust and there is a need for someone to take responsibility?

Can he explain why, after five mini sters, 11 years of this government, no one in this government took responsibility for that? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I would take precisely the opposite view as that taken by the honourable member. It was this government that commissioned the proactive report and two years of work on special education. It was this government that saw the need to look ahead and do something about it. It was not those who simply want to criticize all the time.

We took that initiative, knowing full well there were significa nt challenges ahead in special education in Manitoba, but we also know that is the most significant area where investment can be made to enrich the lives of young people and make them contributing members of society for their whole life.

This government has shown a continuous will ingness to work with the various players, be they school divisions, be they aboriginal Manitobans, whomever they happen to be, but, again, without federal participation and co-operation we are not going to make the progress that honourable members opposite want and that we want. Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, could the minis ter who in fact initiated, in his own department's words, this review seven years ago-they have had seven years to think about this. He has been told by the special needs review that Manitoba parents, and I quote, are

166 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 not getting a full picture of what is out there. Many parents, and I quote, feel they have been lied to and mi sinformed. The review has advised the department to prepare a handbook for parents. I would like to ask the minis ter why, after five minis ters, 11 years of Tory education policy, the government has been unable to prepare a handbook, a fundamental obligation of this government. Mr.

McCrae: Madam Speaker, again, contrary to what the honourable member is alleging here today, the aboriginal education directorate of the Department of Education has been praised by aboriginal leaders and by educators throughout the province. That is not to say that all of the issues were resolved; otherwise the government would not have commissioned a special education review. We know very well, as does the honourable member, the significa nt opportunity that exists if we invest the dollars and the programs in young Manitobans who have special education requirements.

To go further, we can be thankful that we have forward-looking people in the Department of Family Services who have placed before Manitobans the BabyFirst program and the EarlyStart program which have such an impact and make such a difference on the early years of a student's life. Reading Recovery is another program that is very, very signifi cant. So the questions raised by the honourable member are indeed impor tant, and they are impor tant in every jurisdiction across this country as a generation of Canadians is coming forward requiring special education services. Political Advertising Electoral Process Ms.

Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, as I read the Monnin report, it is obvious that there was a plan to subvert the electoral process. When I read that Mr. Kozminski says he will do anything to take votes away from the NDP, I wonder where Tory ethics are when they try to pass this off as an error in judgment. Madam Speaker, 1995 was not the first time Tories tried to play with campaigns. In 1990 the Tories put out a bogus pamphlet in the Swan River constituency trying to divide the aboriginal and the white community.

I would like to ask the Premi er: given that this happened under his watch, can he indicate whether he accepts this attempt to stir up racism and to divide the people, and does he condone the actions of members of the Conservative Party to do this kind of thing? I will table the pamphlet, Madam Speaker. *

(1400) Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, not having seen the pamphlet that the member is talking about, I would just simply say that under no circ umstances do I or my party accept racism as a means of any democratic action in this province. I reject that. The member opposite can do whatever she wants to stir it up, but I will not accept it. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, the First Minis ter is clearly out of order. He is attributing motives.

Madam Speaker, I would like to indica te that this is a leaflet that was put out by the Conservative Party that was sent only to nonaborigi nal people, a phoney leaflet on aborigina l issues, and it was, by the way, acknowledged to be coming dir ectly from the Conservative campaign. In fact their officia l agent ended up paying for it. So I would like to ask you to have the First Minis ter withdraw his unparliamentary comments and perhaps for once accept responsibility again for this continuing pattern of attempts to subvert elections in this province by the Conservative Party.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I will take the matter under advisement to check the exact wording of the Premier and consult with the authorities . * * *

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 167 Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, given that this pamphlet was put out by the Conservative Party and it was an attempt to stir up racism, I would like to ask the Premier if he will commit this time that his party will follow The Elections Act and ensure that members of the Conservative Party do not put out bogus pamphlets and try to stir up racism anywhere in the province. Mr.

Filmon: Madam Speaker, not only is my party committed to ensure that the democratic process is followed, but we are strengthening the legislation in accordance with the recommendations of retired Chief Justice Monnin to ensure that we go beyond requirements that were there previously. Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier if he will refer this pamphlet which the Conservatives put out to the ethics committee of the Conservative Party that was created because of the vote-rigging scandal and ensure that Tories do not di stribute bogus pamphlets in the next election. Mr.

Filmon: Madam Speaker, I have already rejected the pamphlet and its content. I said so in my first answer. Monnin Report Government Action Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minis ter. We are very concerned on this side of the House about a climate as was indica ted in the Monnin report, a climate and a culture that has been adopted by members opposite that seems to go beyond the area of fair play and which, in the opinion of many Conservative members, is victory at all cost.

My question to the First Minis ter is: what kinds of assurances can the First Minis ter give that future Tory candidates, future Tory members and other close people around the Premier are not involved, will not be involved, in the debacle, the tragedy and the scandal of the last few years? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as was concluded by Mr.

Justice Monnin in his report, he said: "I find no evidence that any elected PC member, any member of the Party's executive, nor any other member of the Party's management committee on which Thorsteinson sat was aware of or aided and abetted in either the plot or the cover-up. "As far as the cover-up is concerned, it is the handiwork of three individuals.

There is no evidence to suggest that anyone else knew." I say to this member that this was after receiving testimony from 72 people, of whom 37 appeared under oath before the inquiry, and I have said unequivocally that their actions were unacceptable and that everything will be done to ensure that every step possible is taken to ensure that this never happens again. Political Advertising Confidentiality Mr.

Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, then perhaps the Premier can explain to me how it is that a chiropractic doctor can write a letter to all of his patients advocating support for a Conservative candidate running for the nomination, doing follow-up phone calls asking for memberships for those patients, and how that can happen and how we can lobby the effects of the Conservative Party on chiropractics in Manitoba and send out a letter to patients-and I will table this letter for review by the government-how the Premier acknowledges and accepts that. Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I will be happy to refer this to Elections Manitoba for their examination as to the propriety of this. I remind the member opposite that his friends and supporters and fellow party members routinely use union lists to write to members, as they did when the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Doer) became Leader of his party, and at the end of the day Bernie Christophe went on television and exulted: the machine works through the use of those kinds of things, as, Madam Speaker, the member himself , the member for Kild onan, used the lists of contractors to the Crown corporations of this province when the New Democrats were in

168 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 office to call on them to raise funds for the New Democratic Party. He did that. He used those lists of who received contracts from the New Democratic Party government in the '8 0s to call on them personally to urge them to contribute money to the party because they had received contracts from his party. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Ki ldonan, with a supplementary question. Mr.

Chomiak: Madam Speaker, my supplementary is to the Minis ter of Health, since the Premier apparently has not learned from the lessons of the Monnin inquiry when the First Minis ter attacked anyone that made any kind of accusation. That is why he got himself into trouble.

My question to the Minis ter of Health is: will the Minis ter of Health investigate the patient confidential ity provisions, as contained in their own privacy legislation, to see how it is that someone could take private patient lists and solicit for the Conservative Party for a Conservative candidate to work on behalf of a Conservative candidate in the next election to ensure that they can maintain themselves in office, something they have been trying to do illegally as we have found for many, many years? *

(1410) Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon. Eric Stefanson (Deputy Premier): Well, Madam Speaker, the Premier has already indi cated a preparedness to send this letter to Elections Manitoba. I am certainly prepared to look into the issue as to whether or not there has been any breach of any issues of confidentiality or any privacy legislation. I will certainly undertake to do that. Centra Gas Purchase Acquisition Price Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, just weeks prior to the throne speech the government went ahead and gave authorization for Manitoba Hydro to spend hundreds of mill ions of dollars in the acquisition of Centra Gas. The question for the Premier (Mr. Filmon) is: can the Premier indicate to this Chamber what is the actual cost for Manitobans in that acquisiti on? Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, the actual equity cost was $245 millio n.

Then there is an assumption of the debt which was also a debt, of course, that was paid for by the rates charged to consumers and approved by the Public Utilities Board. That was in the order of 300 and some-odd million dollars, and I will get the exact figure. That constitutes, in effect, the price of the acquisition. The price was a price that was evaluated by two independent bodies. The price was within the range which was considered appropriate for the market at the time. Public Input Process Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I would ask the government: given that there was absolutely no reference to this $100- million deal in the throne speech, does the government feel any obligation to provide a forum in which the public can have released some of these details and opposition would be able to provide more detailed questioni ng? Hon.

David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, the nature of the transaction, of course, was such that it was a publicly traded company that was privately owned and then there was a public corporation, Manitoba Hydro, involved. So the vendor was unable to disclose information, as was the purchaser, with the result that there was a confidentiality agreement which guided the negotiations.

The process for public input can potentially take place with respect to the Public Utilities Board, and that is under consi deration at this time by that body pursuant to applications that have been made. There is also an opportunity

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 169 for any member of the public to inquire of myself or Manitoba Hydro about facts in relation to the transaction which could be answered to the extent they are not precluded from being answered prior to the conclusion of the final deal. Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, many find it absolutely amazing government would okay something that would require hundreds of millions of dollars.

The question specific to the minis ter is: is the minis ter prepared to look at calling a Standing Committee on Public Utilities, much in the same fashion in which we handled Repap, so the public can be given a full accounting of exactly what this government has done by giving the authority to Manitoba Hydro to acquire Centra Gas, so we can find out what the hidden message or what it is that the government is hoping to be able to achieve by this purchase, and the public will be fully- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Mr.

Newman: Madam Speaker. in the due course of time, first of all pending the decision of the Public Utilities Board, which might provide the opportunity that has been alluded to there is, of course, a committee of this Legislature which does sit, and that might afford another opportunity in the due course of time. The full details of the transaction, when they are freed from any constraints of the negotiations pending closure, will be, of course, available to the public.

We made that assurance as a condition of the negotiations, that ultimately all of the details of the transaction would be made available to the public. Fishing Industry Fish Stocks-Decline Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): My questions are dir ected to the Minis ter responsible for Manitoba Hydro. Madam Speaker, the minis ter and his colleague the Minis ter of Natural Resources (Mr.

Cummings) are well aware that the fishing industry in the Grand Rapids area at the mouth of the Saskatchewan River into Lake Winnipeg has been deteriorating to the point where it is no longer feasible for the fishermen to go out and try to make a living out of fishing. Of course, these losses have long been linked to the hydro generating station that was installed there in the early '60s.

My question to the minis ter is: since Manitoba Hydro had admitted that there is a serious decline in the fish stock , which requires action, why has this minis ter and his colleague the Min ister of Natural Resources not made negotiations a much higher priority? Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, the history of this consequence of hydro development at Grand Rapids in the 1960s includes a period, of course, when the New Democratic Party was in office, and during that period no negotiations whatsoever took place.

It was not until September 1989 that Manitoba Hydro commissioned an evaluation of the Grand Rapids project impact by an independent team of consultants, consi stent with what was done with treaty land entitlement in the Northern Flood Agreements. The result of that was a settlement of $5 .1 million, I believe it was, for Grand Rapids. They were acting on behalf of the fishermen at that time and entered into releases and indemnities, with some exceptions, against the unforeseen. So the deal was settled. In spite of that, in addition, there were adverse effects compensation agreements in 1992 and '93 .

There were experimental habitat improvements, which continue from 1997 to 2003 costing over a million dollars, and there is a Grand Rapids walleye spawning enhancement program operation as well. Grand Rapids Visit Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): I have one more question for the minis ter. Would the minis ter agree to travel to Grand Rapids and meet with the fishers there to see what could be done to resolve the situation that is developing at Grand Rapids? Hon.

David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, we had a meeting with the deputies of the Department of Natural Resources, my deputy minis ter and representatives of Hydro, including the presid ent

170 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April l2 , 1999 of Hydro, in my office some time ago. I was distracted by other activities which required my immedia te attention at the time. The result of that meeting was a decision confirmed by a letter that they were attempting through threats to extort $25 milli on from the Province of Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro. The result of an analysis was that they had filed a statement of claim, and the statement of claim was sitting. Defences had been filed. They have chosen a legal route to get an adjudi cated result in a situation where legal opinions differ about liability.

Hydro and Manitoba believe there is no liability. So they are using a process of extortion at the moment to try and bring people back to a table which there was no basis to meet about. Life-Lease Condominiums Exemptions Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, when The Elderly and Infir m Persons Housing Act was amended in June of '9 7, there were 17 life-lease apartments identified in Manitoba where residents were going to receive a guaranteed tax exemption totalling more than three-quarters of a million dollars.

The minis ter has confirmed that this list of apartments receiving the exemption is growing, but he is unclear of how much they are going to be and how many are going to have two to three years before being reviewed. I want to ask the minis ter: if you knew there were more than 17 apartments at the time of the passage of the bill, how come they were not mentioned then, and how many more condominiums were you aware of at the time of the passage of Bill 60? Hon.

Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Under the present EIPH Act, Madam Speaker, I believe there are around 260 resid ents or apartments or housing complexes that are exempt. The life-lease portion of the exemption-there are 44 of these units that are exempt. The other day the member was mentioning one of the complexes being exempt, and the complex she was referring to, called Villa Beliveau, does not have an EIPH licence for exemption. The licences that have been issued were issued under the existing agreements or the parameters that were in effect before, as she mentioned, November 15. 1997.

Since that time no new licences have been issued to life lease units. The quali fications and the restrictions that apply to the size and the income have to be abided by before any licence is renewed. Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, the minis ter mentioned Villa Bel iveau. The complex is in his riding. He was at the sod turning. His name is in the ad for the complex. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Does the honourable member have a question, please? Question, please. *

(1420) Ms. Cerilli: I am asking my question, Madam Speaker. I want to ask the minis ter if these life lease condominiums are being marketed using the property tax exemption, and are the reside nts now being informed that they will lose that property tax exemption after two or three years. Mr. Reimer: Madam Speaker, firstly the member is right. I was at the ground-breaking ceremony for Villa Beliveau, but as was mentioned this unit does not have an EIPH licence so it is paying its share of taxes, whether it is property taxes or education taxes. So it does not qualify under the exemptions.

The exemptions have been renewed on three-year bases, and at that time all of them will be reviewed for their applications as to their qualifications, not only their income size but their income requirements to be qualified under the EIPH. So they will be reviewed. They were grandfathered, like I mentioned, for three years, and they will be reviewed. Mining Industry Claims Inspectors Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, given the importance of mining to Manitoba, the vast area of Manitoba's mineral resources, it is important that our resources are managed and developed in a fair and open process.

We are now in an intolerable situation where Manitoba has no claims inspectors.

April I2 , I9 99 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA I7I Can the minis ter explain why he has taken no effort to replace Manitoba's claims inspectors, and in fact we have none and have a situation that is going before the mines review board tomorrow? Hon. David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, at this particular point in time, there is a process considering the hiring of two claims inspectors, one for the northern area of the province and one for the southern area. There was a retirement of a civil servant long serving, and at the moment there is no claims inspector on departmental staff .

There are ways that that need can be fulfilled in the interim, but the intent is to as soon as possible engage two claims inspectors. The contingency plan, of course, is there to be operated when and if necessary. Interim Claims Inspectors Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, will the minis ter confirn1 that it is the intention to send out geological staff to be interim claims inspectors? Hon.

David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, it is always a decision that has to be made based on what other people are involved in, but other alternatives that are being investig ated as to service in the immedia te future, the suggestion that she has made is one of them. On the longer term, quarry insp ectors may be available for that purpose, but there would have to be some upgrading and adjustment.

Also·, the representative from The Pas office, Fred Hei dman, would be able to provide training, and he is also providing inspection services in the northern parts of the province at the present time. Winnipeg Inner City Government Policies Ms.

Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, the government admits in the throne speech that, and I quote, "many of our neighbourhoods, particularly in the centre, have seen an unacceptable level of decay and decline," which is well known to the residents of Manitoba, as a direct result of II years of this government's policies, which include but are, of course, not limited to unacceptable levels of sprawl in the Capital Region, a flight of residents from Winnipeg, and reduced financial resources to the city as a result of government examples like giving BFI a licence in the R.M. of Rosser, which has meant a loss of $7 million and the loss of several million dollars as a net result of the province overtaking social services.

In light of these and other devastating results of this government's deliberate policies and choices, how does the First Minis ter expect the people of Winnipeg to believe you when you state, and I quote again, "the success of our entire province is linked to the success of Winnipeg"? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as the throne speech says, there is no major city in Canada that gets a greater proportion of its financing and funding from the provincial government.

This government has increased dramatically its transfers to the City of Winnipeg, and I remind her-she would not know this because she was not here in I9 88-that one of our first official responsibil ities was to reverse a reduction in the Provincial Municipal Tax Sharing agreement which they- An Honourable Member: agreement. The Schreyer Mr. Filmon: Yes, it was the Schreyer agreement and then the Pawley-Doer government with Doer as the leader of the- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minis ter, to complete his response. Mr.

Filmon: Yes, Madam Speaker, I can understand the sensitivity of the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer), because he was the Minis ter of Urban Affairs that was cutting in half the transfer of the provincial-municipal tax sharing to the City of Winnipeg at that time. We reversed that cut as one of our first responsibilities in government. Now they have the audacity to try and say that they are friends of the city when they were trying to cut their transfers to the city in those days. We did not

172 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 agree with that. We have continued to enrich our transfers to the city, and that is one of the ways, one of the strong ways that we are showing our support to the City of Winnipeg. There will be many other opportunities that we will have to work co-operatively with the City of Winnipeg. That is what our commitment is, has been, and will continue to be, unlike the New Democrats. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Education Week Mr.

Jack Penner (Emerson): Madam Speaker, April 12 to 16 this week is Education Week in Manitoba, and I encourage everyone to join me in marking this impor tant week. I am pleased to be a part of a government that places such a strong emphasis on education. As the recent throne speech indi cated, our government remains committed to education renewal.

We will continue to focus on standards and testing to ensure that students, parents and teachers know how a student is progressing so they can take remedial action at the earliest possible time, reshaping our education system to ensure that every child develops the foundation skills to read, write, problem solve, and commute at a high level, encouraging greater parental involvement so that all voices are heard as we develop an education system that will take us successfully into the next century. Our government knows how important education is to indivi dual success.

We are shaping an education system known for excellence, results and accountability. We will continue to focus on literacy skills, early intervention and increasing technology in the classroom to help students meet the challenges of a changing global economy. Our students stand on the brink of a new mi llennium. Our education must prepare them for the future. It must provide them with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed in this new century. It must serve as a passport to hope, opportunity, jobs and growth. *

(1430) Madam Speaker, this government is committed to working in partnership with Manitobans to ensure that all students receive the highest quality education ever delivered in Manitoba. Please join me in cele brating Education Week, an event that allows everyone involved in and dedica ted to education to celebrate achievements and to look forward to even greater accomplishments. Greenway Schooi-Daycare Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Last May I brought an issue to the House regarding families in the Greenway School catchment area.

These families were told by the Tory government that they were not able to get a daycare in their new school that was recently built, even though there was a demonstrated need, even though it was cost-effective to include a daycare in this new school which was being built. Then last May we learned that the government had actually promised a new daycare in a school in River Heights, a constituency of a Tory cabinet minis ter.

As Manitobans know, it was the Pawley government that had made it a requirement to include daycares in all new school con struction projects if there was a demonstrated need, and it was this Filmon government that took this common- sense policy away from Manitoba families. What does this government have to say to the people in my area, and what does this Premier have to say to the families who were denied daycares in over a dozen schools across Manitoba? This type of favouritism, playing politics with the lives of Manitobans, is all too common with this government.

I say shame on this Conservative government for, once again, putting the well-being of their friends ahead of the well-being of families in our neighbourhoods. World Curling Championships Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to share with the members of this House the accomplishments of a great curling team from Charleswood. Five

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 173 men, Jeff Stoughton, Jonathan Mead, Gary Van den Berghe, Doug Armstrong and Steve Gould are the members of the highly successful Stoughton rink. Many Manitobans have been glued to their television sets in recent weeks following the efforts of the Stoughton rink. They began by winning the Safeway Select Provincial Curling Championships in Portage. This accomplishment allowed them to move on to the 1999 Labatt Brier in Edmonton. After winnin g the Brier, they proceeded to the World Curling Championships in New Brunswick where yesterday they won the Silver Medal .

The sport of curling has exploded on the global scene. Curling is now being played all over the world. At the World Championships, there were men's and women's teams representing Sweden, Japan, United States, Norway, Fin land, Denmark, Switzerland, Germany, Scotland and New Zealand. The Charleswood Curling Club is home to the Stoughton team, and we are very proud of their many great accomplishments. I know we are all looking forward to watching this very talented team try to do it all again next year. Manitobans are honoured to be represented by world-class athletes such as the members of the Stoughton rink.

I would like to thank Mr. Stoughton as he and his teammates are wonderful ambassadors for Winnipeg and the entire country. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Property Taxes Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, in 1999, 50 percent of the costs of public education for our schools is met through property taxes. The property tax burden in this province, and now for many taxpayers particularly in the urban areas, is comprised of more than 50 percent of taxes for school purposes. This government cut the property tax credit by some $75 in 1992-93.

They have failed to fund public education in an adequate manner, and thereby have forced school boards, in an attempt to keep class sizes at least reasonable although more than 600 teachers have been laid off-in an attempt to meet the needs of special needs chi ldren, which the recent report acknowledged are not being met-those school boards have been forced to raise property taxes to an exorbitant level, to the point where the special levy has risen by 80 percent since this government took office. This government has caused the increase of taxes of the special levy by 80 percent.

In 1992-93, they provided $732 million from the accounts of the Province of Manitoba for public education. That has fallen this year to $709 mill ion, a drop of some $24 million. So let it not be said that this government has increased its support to public schools. Let it not be said that this government has not raised taxes. They have not increased their support to schools since 1992-93. It has fallen. Taxes have risen by 80 percent as a direct consequence, and that does not make up for the loss. Classes are larger, teachers are fewer. There are fewer resources. There are out-of-date textbooks.

This government has increased taxes, and it has cut support to public schools in a drama tic fashion, and that is unacceptable to the people of Manitoba. Western Canada Bantam Hockey Championships Mr. Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): Madam Speaker, it gives me great honour to share with members on both sides of the House the accomplishments of local Manitoba hockey players. This last weekend, Winnipeg played host to the Western Canada Bantam Championships and our Winnipeg Hawks placed second, giving them the silver medal.

The host team, the Winnipeg Sharks, placed fourth. would like to highlight the accomplishments of some indiv idual players from Manitoba. Luke Mo lotowski was named the most valuable player for the tournament as well as best forward. Tim Boron was named best goalie for the tournament. David McDonald received the chairman's pick and received a $1,000 academic bursary from CIBC. He was selected for his ability, sportsmanship and academic potential. Lance Monych was named as one of the three stars in the gold medal game,

174 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 and Darcy Nazar was named in the three stars in the bronze medal game. It is impor tant that we continue to support these fine young athletes as their pursuit for sports plays an important role in personal development. All teams demonstrated good sportsmanship and played excellent hockey. It is also encouraging to see that our athletes are rece1vmg academic bursaries for the accomplis hments in hockey, and I am pleased to see that the hockey league is encouraging our young athletes to not only excel at their sport but also in their studies.

Finally, I would like to congratulate the organizers, the players, the coaches, the officials, parents and fans of the Western Canada Bantam Hockey Championships for presenting such a quality tournament. The organizers of the tournament with chairman AI Fast and his committee, along with the Greater Winnipeg minor hockey people, have to be congratulated for such a super effort. I heard many compli ments from the people in attendance throughout the weekend.

There is a lot of hockey talent in this province, evidenced by the world junior championships that we had here this past winter, and this weekend was also evidence of that. ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DEBATE (Fourth Day of Debate) Madam Speaker: To resume adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the official opposition (Mr. Doer) in amendment thereto, standing in the name of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) who has 25 mi nutes remaining. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, in commenting on it on Friday, I was talking last about fiscal policy, and I will just start in essence from there, where we feel that the lower tax commission is window dressing. If the government plans to reduce taxation prior to consultation, consultation should address questions of equity and transfers to school authorities, as well as level of taxation. The government has recognized that property taxes in Manitoba are too high, yet Tories reduced the min imum property tax credit from $325 to $250, a reduction of 23 percent.

That was not promised by the Tory throne speech in the years prior, Madam Speaker, and the election- Lacking, I should say, a clear vision, this particular government has incurred hundreds of mill ions of dollars in expenditure in the purchase of Centra Gas, yet as I indi cated earlier in Question Period, we saw nothing of that being mentioned inside the throne speech. We find that is very irresponsible of the government to have done it in the fashion in which they have. Madam Speaker. the throne speech does not inspire confidence. It is quite clear that this is not, indeed, a throne speech that is supportable.

Having said that. there were a few more words that I was wanting to put on the record before I move a subamendment. That being, of course, that I have always enjoyed giving input and my thoughts and party positions on throne speeches in the past. I hope, with my constituents' blessing, to be able to continue to do it in the future.

In looking at the type of a subamendment that we would bring forward, one has to take into consideration the actual amendment that the New Demo crats have brought before the Chamber because it then narrows the scope of what it is that we can bring forward as a party in terms of being able to amend the amendment, if you like. If there was no amendment prior, there are many different areas which we could have commented on in amending the throne speech itself. We know the impor tance of health care.

It is an issue which I hold very dear to my heart and believe that it is a part of what gives Canadians a sense of identity, that it is worth fighting for to ensure that we adhere to those five fundamental principles. What we should be doing is looking at ways in which we can enhance and make our system that much better. It should not be driven by the dollar per se. There is a way in which we can spend smarter and provide better quality service to all Manitobans at the same time. It is an area in which, obviously, we would have liked to have seen more mention of, more ideas and thoughts through the throne speech.

It

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 175 is an area in which the Li beral Party will be very aggressive in going into the next provincial election as we share with Manitobans a more detailed policy platform. There is the whole area, Madam Speaker, of education. I have said in the past and will maintain that a public education is there to challenge the minds and the capabili ties of all children whether it is the learning disabled or the gifted child. There is a great deal of concern in terms of direction, in particular with respect to financing a public education out there, that Manitobans have.

We have seen a lack of commitment from this government to adequately finance public education, and we would call upon the government to revisit the issue prior to presenting the next provincial budget and not to underestimate the importance of this government in bringing forward a budget that clearly demonstrates that it is the province that has to play a more leadership role in the financing of public education. Economic development, Madam Speaker, whether it is in rural Manitoba or the city of Winnipeg, is obviously another concern that we have within the Li beral Party.

There was a great deal of discussion from the current Minis ter of Ind ustry and Trade (Mr. Tweed), where he was actually being quoted in I believe it was the Steinbach newspaper. I quote, where it says: Mr. Tweed said that nobody in the Tory government would tell business that it cannot locate or expand in Winnipeg but that his department would vigorously promote alternative sites in rural communities. In the second

article Mr. Tweed is reported to have said he was impressed with the promotion thrust of his new department partly because it employs a team of consultants who make a special effort to attract small and medium business sized industries to rural Manitoba. Madam Speaker, we say that because we cannot underestimate the value and the contributions that the city of Winnipeg has to offer all of Manitobans. So, obviously, the Li beral Party believes in the diversi fication of our rural communities. I think that our past record has clearly demonstrated support where the government has done well in that diversification.

Also, it is critical that we not neglect the city of Winnipeg and the engines that drive the economy at that level. Those are the types of amendments that could have very easily been brought into the fold in addressing this particular Throne Speech, but because, somewhat, of the rules we were not necessarily able to address in the fashion that we would have liked to. As opposed, what we do have is a subamendment that is going to be dealing in essence with three issues: failu re to call the session back in order. That is in fact [interjection] And, you know, I look at the dean of the Chamber.

He has been here for many years, more than any other member inside this Chamber. That is why he is the dean of the Chamber. I know the dean enjoy tremendously the opportunity and the privi lege to be here, and we value how effective this Chamber can indeed be. Every year, we raise and spend billio ns of dollars. There is a need for public accountability through this session. It offends me more virtually than any other issue, with the possible exception of the manipulation of elections, because I look at this Chamber as one of our cornerstones of democracy.

Even if it means having to ad journ or recess an hour after Question Period, I believe it is absolutely essential, and Manitobans have a right to believe that their legislators are in fact sitting and opposition is being provided the opportunity to hold government accountable for the actions that it is taking on a day-in, day-out basis. I find it insulting to democracy when a government goes for nine months without sitting inside this Chamber. This particular government, Madam Speaker, is not alone.

The dean of the Chamber no doubt is very much aware that there is one inci dent not that long ago where the Chamber did not sit for a year, and that was under the NDP administration. Having said that, Madam Speaker, it does not justify this government's action in not calling the session at an earlier time. There was business. There was a need for us to meet, and it is really unfortunate that the government did not see that. I reviewed the provisional rules that we

176 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 are looking at adopting. One of them was a fixed session. It is absolutely critical that this Chamber at the very least acknowledge the need to have a guaranteed number of sitting days. *

(1450) Hon. Harry Enos (Minister of Agriculture): That is a contradiction of our parliamentary system. A basic contradiction of the parliamentary system. You cannot have it. Mr. Lamoureux: I disagree. You know, with all due respect to our dean, Madam Speaker, I do believe that we can put into our rules something that would force this Chamber to be sitting, at the very least, I 00 days in any given year. I believe that is, in fact, doable. I like to believe, having been here for 11 years, that I have a fairly decent understanding of what can, and cannot, be done inside this Chamber.

I believe, as the Li beral Party and Jon Gerrard have talked at length about, of the need to have a 1 00-day sitting as a minimum, as a benchmark. The other thing I want to comment on, on behalf of the party and my caucus colleague and me, obviously, is the Monnin inquiry. We find it tremendously difficult to believe that the Premier (Mr. Filmon), who sits in a chair, and the number of people that sit around him, all were aware except for the Premier.

Having said that, as I have indica ted earlier on behalf of the party, the Liberal Party is prepared to accept the apology of the Premier, and it is time that we move on. Ultimately, the individuals that matter the most are Manitobans, and Manitobans will get the final say on the Monnin inquiry. [i nterjection] There is, and my colleague from The Maples makes reference to the mudslinging. You know, we have got to be very careful. Someone said you do not throw a stone in a glass house.

Well, Madam Speaker, I can recall, and I am going back earlier today to Question Period, it was the '88 election in which I was in and all of a sudden-1 believe it was two days or three days before the election day and my apartment blocks had received a brochure and it did not have "sponsored by a political party" on it. It made it very clear that the Lib eral Party opposed rent control.

To the very best of my knowledge, we did not oppose rent control in 1988, but it was a deliberate attempt from someone or some group to try to say that the Li beral Party you should not vote for because they are going to take away your rent controls. At that time, the competition was very tough between me and my ma jor opponent. Having said that, I cannot conclude with 100 percent certainty that it was a political party because we did not find the person that circulated the material. But we have to be very careful.

I do not believe any political party, including the Liberal Party, is 100 percent clean when it comes to ethics. It is something which we have to be very careful of. What is imp ortant is that all members hold and value the office of being an MLA and respect democratic principles. Having said that, I want to go on with the final point which our subamendment is going to deal with. Madam Speaker, if I could just get a two-minute warning, because I do have a subamendment. The final point which I want to deal with is with respect to the boundary redistribution issue.

I really believe, soundly believe that the government was negligent in not calling us back into session. We should have been in session back in December or at the very least in January, February in order to pass the new boundaries. The government of the day has slapped democracy once again in the face by not seeing the impor tance and the urgency of having the boundary redistribution pass.

Having said that, the Liberal Party wanted very much so to see this legislation passed prior to the debate on the throne speech, the refore asked the government-and we respect the fact that the government House leader requested the leave to have this bill dealt with. The leave was denied by the New Democratic Party. The official opposition has a moral obligation to do what is necessary with respect to this legislation. Madam Speaker, I will suggest to you that in fact- Point of Order Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, it is not normal in this

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 177 House that house business is negotiated during Question Period, as it was that the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) is referring to, nor should it be discussed in his debate, and the bill has been introduced today. It is going to be passed in an orderly fashion, and no leave was necessary to pass the new boundaries bill. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Inkster, on the same point of order. Mr.

Lamoureux: Yes, Madam Speaker, on the same point of order, I do not believe I could count on both hands the number of times which I have seen the member's opposition House leader stand up and refer to issues that are indeed on the Order Paper. In the throne speech you do not get anything more, any other form of debate that gives you the latitude to comment on virtually anything that you want.

I would think, Madam Speaker, if you were to do some research, you would be able to find ample examples that would allow me to be able to comment on such an important issue that all Manitobans want to see the official opposition do the right thing on this issue, and that is to agree on the importance of passing it. Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Burrows, the honourable member for Burrows does not have a point of order.

Indeed, when debate is ongoing on the throne speech, there is a lot of latitude allowed. * * * Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, to continue his debate. Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Madam Speaker, keeping in mind the two-minute warning I asked for, what I have indica ted on behalf of the party is the impor tance of this particular legislation passing. If you cannot, and the government does not know when the election is going to be, the Liber al Party has done the responsible thing, has chalJenged, asked, prodded and told this government not to call the election prior to the boundaries being passed.

The government has not given us that assurance. Because they are behaving in an irresponsible fashion does not allow the New Democrats the same opportunity to behave in such a fashion which is totally unacceptable for Manitobans to be playing politics. And that is what you are doing. You are playing dangerous politics on an important democratic principle that all Manitobans have a right to see this opposition party behave in a more responsible fashion that would allow these boundaries. If the boundaries do not pass, it is not only because of the Tories. It is going to be because of the New Democratic Party.

You cannot guarantee that unless of course you are prepared to say that those boundaries will pass prior to the next election, and you cannot say that unless you are prepared to give leave with the government because you do not know when the government is going to call the election. It is highly irresponsible for the official opposition, even if you take some belief that, look, the Free Press editorial said that it was okay. That does not give you justific ation to believe that what you are doing is right. It is undemocratic.

Look at Point Douglas, Madam Speaker, and your ridin g, 17,000 versus 30,000, approximate numbers of course. The inequities are there. I look to the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin), who sighs in awe. Well, I suggest to you, you talk about fairness in the last provincial election. You are playing politics in the same fashion in which you are accusing the Tories of playing politics on a very imp ortant issue. My intention is to ensure that in fact-and it is important. One must be patient. Do not worry, the clock is ticking, and I will have to wind up, unfortunately.

But having said that, back in June of last year-it has been a long time since we have been sitting, as I earlier talked about. Back in June I spoke before the boundaries came out. I talked about the importance of passing whenever this legislation comes out. I talked about the importance of calling us back into session. Madam Speaker, I could not control the government calling us back into session. Mind you, when we were official opposition we ensured we had a date prior to letting the government-once you allow the session to come to an end, you better have a date for coming back in.

That is what this particular government has demonstrated, especially over the last 12

178 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 months. So I could not control that. We cannot control when the government is going to be calling the next provincial election, but having said that, we did what we could, we got a government that is prepared, albeit through leave, unfortunately, or fortunately, we have got a government that is prepared to do what it can to facilitate its passage prior to the next election. *( 1500) My recommendation to the New Democrats is: do not play games with this issue.

Do not try tying other legislation to this particular bill as has been implied by members of your caucus. Do not try to prevent the legis lation from passing because it is deemed not to be in your best interest because of one or two ridings that appear to cause discomf ort from within your caucus. Do the right thing. Allow for this legislation to be passed prior to the next election. I hope I am wrong. I hope that after the throne speech, between the throne speech and the budget, in fact we are able to deal with this particular bill. Some from the Chamber say: no problem.

I will not quote the indiv idual who said it. For once I will not quote the indiv idual who said it. Having said that, I look to the government and request the government again, as they have done in the past on other legislation, to request and continue to request for leave to expedite this bill through the Chamber. Then I look to the official opposition to do the right thing in being able to accommodate it, and we are not saying: pass a bill that you have not seen. That bill is in fact qualified .

We expect it to reflect what Elections Manitoba has brought forward and along with the traditions from the past, the most recent one being most obvious. Madam Speaker, I see that my time has very quickly run out, and I do have a very important amendment that we would like to see brought to the floor.

Again, I emphasize the scope of our subamendment does not involve the number of issues that we would have liked to have been able to bring forward in the amendment, whether it is on agriculture, health care, education, and it is only because of the limitations that we have been put on from the New Democratic Party in their amendment. Having said that, we do have an amendment that deals with those three very important issues, and I ask and appeal on behalf of the party and my caucus colleague from The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) for support on this particular amendment.

It reads : THAT the amendment be amended by adding thereto the following words: And that this House further regrets that this government has also failed to uphold basic democratic principles by its failure to call this House back into session for nine months, its failure to introduce fixed sittings of the legislative session, and in its delay of implementing the proposed electoral boundary changes. Madam Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for Inkster, seconded by the honourable member for The Maples (Mr.

Kowalski), that the amendment be amended by adding thereto the following words: And that this House further regrets that this government has also failed to uphold basic democratic principles by its failure to call this House back into session for nine months, its failure to introduce fixed sittings of the legis lative session, and in its delay in implem enting the proposed electoral boundary changes. The amendment is in order. Hon.

David Newman (Minister of Northern Affairs): Madam Speaker, speaking to this subamendment, which of course, is opposed, I just wanted to add to the record something that happened, of course, in the Winnipeg Free Press editorial page suggesting that there could have been an earlier resumption of activity in this House, the impl ication being from the editorial that somehow or other, given the tabling of the report of the Boundaries Commission sometime around December 21, I believe, of 1998, we could have resumed activity in this House either over the Christmas period or sometime earlier in the new year, at a time when the Monnin inquiry report had yet to be completed and the hearings had yet to be completed.

So what was done, I submit, was responsible and prudent in the best interests of the public.

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 179 April 6 was the resumption of activity in this House, and at the earliest possible opportunity seeking the approval of members opposite, we sought to move forward with the new legislation so that we could all be confident that we are proceeding under the new boundaries. So I would submit that everyth ing reasonable and responsible has been done by this government to move forward in the public interest under the new boundaries.

It is most unfortunate, as the member for Inkster has pointed out, that the official opposition is, it appears, playing games with this issue, rather than responsibly and in the public interest making very clear what the public can expect at the next election. To the extent that they do act irresponsibly in this matter, the public will be negatively affected and I hope would exercise their judgment in an informed way to once again reject the New Democratic Party candida tes in all of the constituencies within which they run. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr.

Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): It is a great privil ege to rise today to speak on, I believe, probably the 1Oth throne speech that l have had a chance to speak on over the years. I would like to begin by welcoming the new pages to our Chamber. We do not know whether our session is going to be a long one. We do not know if it is going to be a short one. We do not know exactly what role they are going to be playing over the next number of days. I guess we are all waiting. All of us who are seeking re-election are anxiously waiting for that date.

I know that you will enjoy your jobs here, and I hope your experience here does not taint your appreciation of our democratic system. Point of Order Hon. David Newman (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, really speaking as the deputy House leader, I had thought that there was a subamendment to a motion that had been tabled, and it was in order. I understand the member for Selkirk is speaking now to the throne speech. What has happened to the debate on the subamendment to the motion? Unless I have misi nterpreted what the member for Selkirk says, maybe he is debating the subamendment to the motion.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the acting government House leader, Manitoba practice has been that there is a lot of flexibil ity allowed when members are allowed to speak to the throne speech. As a direct result, I am certain the member for Selkirk will be speaking to the subamendment during the course of his comments as well. * * * Mr. Dewar: Madam Speaker, is it possible to get a copy of that subamendment so I can see what I am speaking to? * (1510 ) Madam Speaker: You may continue with your previous debate. Mr.

Dewar: I would like to, as well, wish all of those members who have indica ted that they will not be seeking re-election, I would like to wish them all the best. I want to thank them as well for their contribution to our political process here in the House. I would like to pay tribute to our colleague the late Neil Gaudry, whose untimely passing has affected all of us. I would like to pass on to his wif e and his family my condolences. This place does not seem the same without his warm personality and his great sense of humour.

Madam Speaker, I spent my time away from the Chamber the last eight, nine months contacting my constituents. I believe the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) said he was going to go out and knock on 2,000 doors. I will have to say that I upped him by a thousand, because I went to 3, 000 doors in my community over the last number of months. I want to tell you that my constituents are very disappointed with the members opposite. Having listened to some of the speeches that were given by members opposite I can see why. Just the other day I sat in here and I listened to the member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson) as

180 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 he gave sort of a travelogue of his constituency. All we need the next time he speaks, we need some slides in here. He is treading, and some members opposite would agree with that, on very thin ice, which is dangerous to do at this time of the year. It is not only him but other members of the government that believe, they are beginning to believe their own press releases. You get to that state, it is a dangerous place to be in when you start to believe your own press releases. We know the members opposite.

They have a very ambitious PR program here in the building, and they are able to pump out material. When you start to read and believe your own press releases I think you have some serious problems there. Madam Speaker, throne speeches are usually very vague, but this one I think is exceptional for its lack of content. It talks about a number of issues. Again, we do not know the length of the session. One would assume that we are in this pre-election situation, and it is very likely that this will only be a very short session. When you read the throne speech, you can pick out those things which indicate that.

They talk about health care. They said there is a promise of enhanced public representation on governing bodies, whatever that seems to mean. Hopefully, they are going to be addressing the problem that the regional health authorities are stuffed with Conservative appointees. Madam Speaker, another grave problem facing Manitoba is child poverty, and the concrete action that the government is going to take on this is they are going to set up a round table on healthy communities. That is to be led by the Premier (Mr. Filmon) himself .

So what we are going to have is a set of consultations across this province which is intended to excuse a government from taking any action, any steps to address a nation-leading child poverty problem. There are some things that they can do. They can institute a campaign of regularly increas ing the minimum wage. They can improve access to child care. They can end the clawback of the child benefit.

Most of the promises in the throne speech are clearly driven by a pre-election agenda or, as my coll eague from Transonca was able to indi cate in his speech, are poll driven, where he was polled prior to Christmas and he took down-he reported, jotted down the questions that he was asked and then he referred back to the throne speech, and, in fact, a number of the questions that he was asked and issues that were raised were reflected in what was presented here in the throne speech.

Madam Speaker, what the government has done, of course, over the last number of years is they have hoarded revenues raised by lotteries, by the sale ofMTS, in this pre-election fund, this pre-election slush fund that they are going to use in a couple of weeks as a gimmick to get re elected. We know that the government opposite, the members opposite, the party opposite will do anything, anything, to get re-elected. I think it was Bob Kozminski who said I will do anything to defeat the NDP. Then he was forced-after he realized he went a bit too far, he came back and said, well, you know, anything within the law.

Madam Speaker, it is the culture of the members opposite that they will do absolutely anything at all to get re-elected. Winning is everything to them and it is reflected in their actions in the past, and it is reflected in what was presented here in the throne speech. They have been able, over the last number of years, to build up this pre-election fund through reduced investments in health and education. We all remember that prior to the 1995 election or during the 1995 election, they promised $600 million for capital, but once the government was re-elected, unfortunately, they withdrew that promise.

Now they are doing that again. [interjection] Well, as my colleague points out, the same thing with the Jets, where they said: we are going to save the Jets at any cost. They were going to save the Jets at any cost. Now the Jets are in Phoenix. They are prepared to do or say anything to get re-elected. What they are going to do with the money is they are going to be using this $500 million, $600 million they have in the so-called rainy day fund, the Fiscal Stabil ization Fund, to once again try to induce Manitobans to vote for them.

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 181 Madam Speaker, in the throne speech there was mention of initia tives for Fir st Nations and aboriginal people, something that they promised in '88, something that they once again promised in '9 1. Again it was mentioned in 1996; again in the 1997 throne speech but with little follow-up.

We all remember that in the early '90s the government had a chance to do something regarding an urban aboriginal strategy and that was with the friendship centre movement here in this province, and what they did was they, in fact, cut the provincial government funding to the friendship centres, not only here in Winnipeg but in many urban centres across this province. But what they have done in this throne speech is they have mirrored some long-standing NDP policies, Madam Speaker. One is the election of a Speaker, something that my colleague the member for Thompson (Mr.

Ashton) raised today that we in fact could do that now. The Li beral Party is going on about the boundaries, but we have a chance to do that now if the government decided we should do this. Another promise was on the classi fication of home video games and the public participation in health care boards. But what also is quite interesting to see is that the Tories are taking credit for some NDP legacies, Madam Speaker. Two things that they raised in the throne speech, two things that you raise in the throne speech, were low hydro rates and MPIC rates.

I should remind the members opposite that they were opposed to Li mestone, as I recall. They were opposed to Li mestone, and when the Schreyer government formed MPIC in the early '70s, they led the opposition to the formation of Autopac in this province. Now they are suggesting that these are the bright spots in the Manitoba economy. Again, there was no mention of the Tory opposition to Autopac or to Li mestone. No mention at all about the MTS rates, and we all know what happened with MTS in this province. We have a situation.

Again, it is beginning to echo itself, and that is the situation regarding Manitoba Hydro, where we see the government during the last election, they promised not to sell off MTS, and once they were elected, they did. What was at stake in Manitoba as it relates to MTS? Jobs, rates, ownership of the shares. In Selkirk, we had over 400 MTS jobs, and now I understand there are just over 100 there. Our rates have gone up, and now the ownership of MTS-I am afraid it is owned by outside Manitoba.

All the profits that are generated because of rate increases, because of the jobs being cut, all those revenues that MTS are now generating are leaving the province. Madam Speaker, there is no mention regarding some of the problems faced by the rural economy here in Manitoba, no mention about the farm-aid package, or transportation issues, commodity prices. I understand that even the issue of mining, for example, was not raised. *

(1520) Madam Speaker, what we need here in this province is some concrete action to end the crisis in health care, dealing with the nurses, doctors, bed shortages. A capital health plan that moves along as quickly as casino expansions. We see that, when it comes to financing capital construction as it relates to casinos in this province, there is no shortage of money. As I drive home down McPhillips Street, I really note with concern the expansion of that casino. I do not know how much they spent. They are now $20-, $30-odd milli on, and it is getting larger. There is no money for dialysis services in Selkirk.

There is no money for palliative care services in the Selkirk hospital, but there certainly is lots of money for casino advertising. We also note that the government has spent over $500,000 on shameless self-promotion ads in terms of the health care in this province, $500,000. People are coming to my office with this leaflet, and they are upset that they are seeing their tax dollars being wasted and squandered in this way. I know the member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger) was dealing with this in her presentation to the House where she was saying that some of the waiting lists for services are being reduced.

Well, they are the government that has caused the line-ups in the first place. As we head to a provincial election, the government is finally taking some action to deal with some of these issues. As I said, there is no mention of the dialysis unit in the Selkirk hospital. I had

182 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 written to the Minis ter of Health in 1997, asking him to put a dialysis unit in the Selkirk Hospital. He had written back in July of that year saying that we would qualify for one then. Now I understand, after a great community effort-and I must applaud those in my community who worked so hard to pressure the government to do so, and I hope they are successful. We will find that out. There was no mention, of course, in the throne speech, but I hope that, when the budget is announced, there will be funding for such a unit in the Selkirk area.

Another thing, Madam Speaker, and that is the funding of a pallia tive care unit at the Selkirk General Hospital. The mayor of Selkirk had said, and I will quote: We have taken the stance that palliative care is a part of health care and should be funded by the provincial government. The reeve of St. Clements has stated: Health care is the responsibil ity of the province and the federal government. I do not think it is our responsibili ty. I do not think we should have to contribute. The situation now is that the R. M. of St. Andrews as well has pulled out, so it is not likely that it is going ahead.

It is regrettable, because I understand that in the city of Winnipeg this service is funded by the provincial government. It is my position that palliative care has become a core service, and I believe it should be funded out of the health care system. Those are just two issues that are important to my constituents. Another one is, as we head into the spring and into the summer, Coast Guard services and the dredging services that were once offered by the federal government, and I am interested to know what the provincial response is to this.

I know that I raised the issue in the House last year with the Min ister of Hi ghways, and the problem is that I have written to the federal Minis ter of Fisheries and Oceans, David Anderson, and received a response back from him. He states: To date, we have not had any major objections to the fact that the government is now cutting federally funded dredging on the Red River. What has the government opposite, members opposite, what have they done? Did they- An Honourable Member: Nothing. Mr. Dewar: Nothing is exactly right. Did they approach the federal department? We do not know.

When I asked the question of the Minis ter of Highways and Transportation last session, along with my coll eague for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson), his answers were very vague, and it is a problem that we are going to be faced with this spring. Every year the dredging services have dredged the northern part of the Red River and the mouth of the river to allow large vessels to enter into Lake Winnipeg. This year will be the last year, so what are we going to do next year? We know that there is the boat, the Poplar River, which supports communities on the east side of the lake which provides them with supplies.

The captain of that vessel has said publicly that he cannot continue this service to those communities -the communities of Bloodvein, Poplar River, Berens River, and so on-unless the river is dredged out. The owner of the cruise ship, Lord Selkirk II, mentioned that-again, publicly, he made the statement that he was considering recommissioning that ship. Again, he will have problems getting that ship up the river. I am bringing it to your attention; I am bringing it to the attention of the government. What are you going to do? What have you done? Have you lobbied the federal government?

Have you written to the federal mini ster? Have you raised it with federal authorities? Madam Speaker, I just want to bring it to the attention of the members, because it is something that we are going to have to deal with in the next number of weeks as the river and lake open up to service. I want to talk in the brief time that I have-! think that members opposite over the past have wrongly accused us of not presenting any positive ideas or alternatives-but I want to talk today about something that I have been putting a little bit of work in.

I think it is an initiative that we here in Manitoba can work at, and I think one that would be very productive, and that is the issue of using wind as a source of energy and a source of power. We as a community and as a country and as a society have not looked at wind power because of an abundance of energy that we do have, that we do possess here in Canada and Manitoba. We have an abundance of fossil fuels and, of

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 183 course, in this province we are very blessed with our ability to produce energy from using hydro. But we also, Madam Spea ker, as a country we are the highest per capita users of energy in the world. That is partially because of our cold climate, partially because of the vast distances that we have to travel here in Canada, but it is also part of the fact that we have low rates, that we have the abundance of energy. But this has a tremendous opportunity of an environmentally friendly industry. I had a chance recently to tour the Isobord plant in Elie.

When you go through that plant and you think about what they are doing, that they are taking straw and they are turning it into a building product, I think it is just a great idea. But here is another one that I think I want to bring forward to the Legi slature, and I offer it up as what I like to think is an alternative for the government to look at as a good idea. Just last week on "The Nature of Things" hosted by David Suzuki, he was talking about this issue, and it was his impression that 40,000 jobs could be created by using wind power. We are lagging far behind here in Canada in terms of this issue.

In the 1990s, wind power has become the world's fastest growing energy source. Global wind generating capacity stands currently at 9,600 megawatts, and this is enough power to power three and a half million suburban homes. It is also becoming one of the world's most rapidly expanding industries. We have an opportunity here in Manitoba, I would suggest, to take advantage of this industry. We are situated in an excellent location. You know, we like to say we live in a windy province. You know, the comer of Portage and Main, the windy comer. We live in obviously a flat land.

There is little to impede the exchange of air. It has been estimated that in the United States, the states of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Texas have sufficient wind capacity to provide all of the electricity needed for the United States. I mean, here we are in vir tually the same location. We are at the centre of the continent. We have little to impede the flow of air. * (153 0) Madam Speaker, I am suggesting that it has a great potential for remote communities, which currently, as members know, rely on diesel, on fossil fuels for the production of energy.

As well, what can be done is, if the government takes the initiative, well, we do not know if they will or not, but it has the potential to increase the exports of hydro generated electricity. There are new technologies being developed for the efficie nt storage of electricity. Currently now it is not that efficie nt to store electricity. Batteries are heavy and bulky and have a limited life. But we have the opportunity to develop that technology. We have an energy industry in this province. We have got Manitoba Hydro. They should be a leader, I would hope, in terms of energy and power.

So I offer this, Madam Speaker, as an idea to the Legis lature, to whatever political party is or will be in office, as I would assume that an election is coming and Manitobans will have a chance to judge us on our ideas. Again, we are situated in an excellent location to produce the power, to create some high-tech, high-paying employment in this province, something that the government should look at, and I offer that up. I want to speak in the final moments here about ethics.

I had a chance about a month and a half ago to meet with some young people in Selkirk, the youth parliamentarians, and had a chance to address them. We talked about ethics and politics, and, you know, they are young and they are a little bit concerned by what they have seen in Manitoba, but not only in Manitoba, all across Canada recently. Things have really hit bottom, but we do not want them to lose interest. We do not want it to be a situation like the United States where, you know, you get 30 percent or 40 percent out to vote, and that is considered to be a high turnout.

I believe this past year, in late 1998, which was an election year in the United States, they had about a 30 percent, 35 percent turnout. Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Speaker, in the Chair The only place they had a higher turnout was in Minnesota where Jesse Ventura was elected, Mr. Acting Speaker, but, again, that was young people coming out to vote. He was an appealing character; he appealed to them.

184 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 But, you know, the government in the last campaign, the last election, they campaigned to save the Jets. They campaigned to put $600 million into health care capital. They campaigned on saving and maintaining MTS as a public utility. But what did we get in the end? We got the Conservatives re-elected and we got the Monnin inquiry. I know some of the characters in this, have known them for awhile, and it was, I think, a low point, Mr. Acting Speaker, a low point in politics here in this country and in Manitoba. I know that whatever the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) says and however many apologies he made, Manitobans still do not believe him. I know the polls indi cate that, and it is true, they just do not believe him. When you begin to add everything together, I can understand why-you know, the denials and the accusations. The situation, however, that really stretches it was the situation surrounding Jules Benson writing all these cheques and particip ating in an advertisi ng-or reviewing the advertising contract. I believe Mr. Benson was also involved in reviewing the budget. But think of the chain of command there. If he was doing this, who was he reporting to?

Why would Mr. Benson go out there and review this if he was not reporting back to somebody? We at our local level have election planning committee meetings, and our chair says, okay, let us go over-we have a list of items to deal with. Number one might be the budget, so someone will report back about the status of our election budget. Then we have a line dealing with advertising, so the person who is looking into advertising and promotion during the campaign, well, he or she would then report back to the chair. Yet it seems that there was no line of communication there. What was Mr. Benson doing?

Who was he reporting to? Why was he doing this if he was not reporting to somebody higher up? To me, that really begins to stretch it. That stretches it for me when I look at those types of issues. So, Mr. Acting Speaker, as I said, the government opposite can do whatever they want, but I am afraid that this issue will not go away for them. We sense that and Manitobans know that. I listened to the CBC on Friday, and the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey) was on there; the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) was on there. It was quite interesting.

Every single caller, every single caller took issue with what you were saying, with what the government was saying. Every single caller to that show supported my colleague from Thompson. Whether the Premier's (Mr. Fi lmon) apology was good enough, I believe, was the question. Nobody supported the member for Arthur-Vir den as he scrambled around trying to get an answer to their questions. I think that is a reflection of Manitobans. That is a reflection of Manitobans. I remember, you know, in 1997, in the federal election, how Mr. Gerrard got his nomination. I remember my M.P., Mr. Fewchuk, said: I am going to run.

Come with me. I am going to run. I am going to run in Winnipeg North-St. Paul. I am going to run in Selkirk Interlake. He was determ ined he was going to run. I know Ron. He was determined he was going to go. The next thing you know. the Selkirk paper came out. Well, I have had a change of heart, he said. I have decided to retire, probably for my health. He retired for his health or he retired to spend more time with his family, whichever one. He left public office and a seat became available for Mr. Gerrard. Mr. Gerrard also got a seat in Selkirk-Interlake, which he lost. Mr.

Pagtakhan got his seat in Winnipeg North-St. Paul. Where did Mr. Fewchuk go? Well, Ronnie went into the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation at a hundred-and-something thousand a year. At a hundred-and-something thousand a year, Ron went into that. Well, Ron worked at that for a while. In fact, a couple of my colleagues from Crescentwood and Transcona and, I believe, Swan River, had a chance to tour Freshwater Fish. A number of people from Selkirk work there. Mr. Fewchuk took us around, but it was not long after that Mr. Fewchuk again decided that he could not continue, regrettably.

He had to quit, he says, because of his health. I hope he is feeling okay. I am sure that the severance package he received would go a long way to helping him recover from his iiiness.

April 12, I9 99 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 185 That is how Mr. Jon Gerrard got his opportunity to run federally. You know, the Liberals are higher than the high and mighty when it comes to the ethics here in this Chamber, but that is how they do it over there. The government has lost the authority to govern, Mr. Acting Speaker. It is time for an election, and we are prepared, as we have all said. I am prepared to campaign under those new boundaries. I know that we are prepared to pass them. It does not bother me either way. I am prepared to go, but I know that I will not be supporting the throne speech.

As it relates to my colleague with his amendment, I have not had a chance to look at it yet, but I am sure the Liberals' amendment is worthy of note. I will certainly take a look at it before I vote on it. I will say, though, I will not be supporting the throne speech. I will be voting against the throne speech, and by voting against the throne speech, Mr. Acting Speaker, I hope to be able to defeat this government. Thank you very much. Mr. Albert Driedger (Steinbach): Mr. Acting Speaker, I thank you and I appreciate the opportunity to participate in the throne speech debate.

Having served notice that I will not be seeking re-election, and with an election being eminent. I expect that this possibly will be the last time certainly that I will be speaking to a throne speech. I do not know how many more times I will be speaking in this House, period. I have not done it for the last number of years, but I thought that maybe today I would sort of do a bit of a recap of my last 2I -and-some-odd years in this Legisla ture. Mr. Acting Speaker, I might take certain liberties in terms of wandering a little bit off the throne speech subject, but when I heard the member for Broadway (Mr.

Santos) singing a song the other day, I thought that I would probably have a bit of latitude as well. An Honourable Member: Are you going to sing too, Albert? Mr. Driedger: No, I will not. Mr. Acting Speaker, I want to basically conclude my speech in the House here by dwellin g on the activities within this Legisla tive Buil ding. There will come a time, I think, when I will have the opportunity to maybe address the concerns of my two ridings that I represented, the Emerson riding for almost I3 years and the Steinbach riding of which of I am the MLA at the present time.

I want to take this opportunity before I get into the other part of my comments, to thank the voters of the Emerson constituency and the Steinbach constituency for the many years, six elections, that they have supported me. I have really enjoyed the opportunity. I feel very humbled by the fact that I had the opportunity to represent them all those years.

One thing that I have always enjoyed is the fact that when you look back, the many people and the many friends that you have gotten to know over the period of time, Mary and myself and I want to put on the record to recognize my wif e who has been a very faithful supporter all the time. Many people have said many times that she should have been the MLA, not myself. Possibly that is the case, because she probably got a lot more votes than I did, but she has been great in supporting me. We are looking forward when the time comes now, after the next election, to further our lives with other things.

It has been a great life out here. *

(1540) Anyway, I ju st thought maybe for the record and for the interest of many of the new members here, I want to recall a little bit of the time when I first was elected in '77. I won my nomination in March at that time, and the Sterling Lyon admini stration at that time won the election October II defeating the Schreyer government. I can recall coming into this House the first time. I think almost everyone of the members here, bar very few, would probably feel the first time you walked in here sort of intimida ted and awed by the building itself.

Over the many years that I have sat here listening to boring speeches I have looked up at the architecture here. What an architect basically that developed this build ing [i nterjection]-and the engineers. Yes. That is right. What a great building. In all the years I

186 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 remember my first speech, because the first one you are allowed to read, at least that is sort of the understanding. It was a terrible speech, but I read the thing. But you go through that process, and I think all of us do, where we feel sort of really challenged and we want to hit a home run the first time right away. It does not always happen. In fact, it does not happen very often, period. Over the years, almost every time that I have had the occasion to participate in debates in here, there is always a little bit of sensitivity.

You always feel a little nervous about it, and even to this day today, in making my fanfare speech, I thought about it and said, boy, you feel this is the last time but-[interjection] I do not think so. Anyway, Mr. Acting Speaker, there used to be this show on television. I think it was a detective show. It said, this city has one million stories, eight million people or eight million stories and the- An Honourable Member: The Naked City. Mr. Driedger: The Naked City. That is it. Okay. Thank you. This Legi slative Building has a million stories, and they are stories that can be told.

They are stories that maybe should be told, and there are stories that should never be told about what has happened over the years in this buildin g. I can only talk about this span, the short span of time that I have been here, not like my colleague for Lakeside, who has been here a lot longer than that. To start off, Mr. Acting Speaker, I just want the new members to think a little bit. When I got elected in 1977, the basic indemni ty for an MLA was, and I am going to put it into the record, $8,229 .27.

That was the indemnity, and then you got a portion of that pay before the session started and the balance when the session was over. Heck of an incentive to get out of here, you know. I was thinking, has anything changed in this building in terms of the politics and the way we debate things? Not really that much, but certain things have changed and I think it has gotten a lot better. We used to sit-during the session we sat three nights of the week and we sat Friday afternoons when we started.

That was very challenging at that time, and that goes back to some of the stories that maybe should or should not be told. An Honourable Member: That was 1986? Mr. Driedger: No, no. I am talking 1977 now, because that was actually when the Schreyer government had come on and had two terms of office, and that sort of upset the apple cart between the Li berals and the Conservatives. At that time there was the St. Regis Hotel and that is where the Li berals and the Conservatives all stayed when the session was on. It was during those years when the racing and chowder club developed.

I am going to give you a little bit of history because what happened and why it got that name was because Friday at noon when the session stopped we took the lunch break. Everybody rushed down to the St. Regis, and we would sort of have little cluster meetings there drinking tea, et cetera, and then when it got close to session time again we would all rush downstairs, have a bowl of chowder soup, because they had good chowder soup, and rush back in here for a very noisy Frid ay afternoon session as a rule. The tea did that.

Ultimately the decision by the wise people in charge at that time decided that there would be no more Friday afternoon sessions because they were not really that productive. So that was one of the changes that took place. But we did sit three nights a week, and at that time we did not have any limit on the Estimates process.

There was no limit, and you could sit as long as of course, the strategy was, at that time, I remember when I got to be chairma n of Committee of Supply during those days and we did the Estimates process and that was a matter of grinding down the opposition until they finally approved things. We would sit until two or three o' clock at night, and it got nearly to fistic uffs. The intelligence level was not that high at three o' clock in the morning either, but ultimately people like Sam Uskiw gave up and let the Agricu ltural Estimates go through.

That was sort of the process at that time Then in our wisdom at that time-and some of you maybe remember Warner Jorgensen who at one time was a member of Parliament and -

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 187 then ran provinc ially, and he was the House leader on our side. He felt that there had to be some rhyme and reason put into this whole process. So, together in consultation, as we do now all the tim e too-you know, it was an evolving thing; it is not always simp le ultimately a decision was arrived at as to a limit on the hours of Estimates. Once you establish that, that was the max. Of course, that is the minimum too. An Honourable Member: About 350? *

(1550) Mr. Driedger: I do not know what it was. It was just a wild thing, and that was basically one of the changes that took place. Ultimately for those of you that are thinking now that things are tough in here, I mean we do not sit evenings that much anymore. There is some committee stuff and stuff like that, but the grind at that time was much more challenging than it is now, and look at the kind of money you are getting paid now compared to the $8,000- something at that time. Those were two payments that we got, and then we were allowed a few trips then, because you know a mile age type of thing.

So basically we have done well in terms of evolving the benefits for members. I can recall in our caucus at that time we were government and I was a backbencher and backbenchers always sort of feel that as soon as they get elected they should be on the front bench somewhere. That was my feeling, getting elected. I defeated an NDP out of the Emerson riding, and that alone should have made me a minis ter, you know. Well, I will tell you something, the Premier of the day, Sterling Lyon, did not see it that way, not at all in his four years in tenure.

That is fair enough because lots of things have to be learned and we all have to learn. It is a long process. In our caucus at that time, the backbenchers and we were in the office where basically the NDP has the office now, and we had the big table where caucus meetings took place. The MLAs all had one little comer, and Jim, the member for Arthur at that time, will remember this. But he got to be a minis ter, see, so he had his own office, but us poor backbenchers, we each had a little comer with a telephone. We did not have offices.

We had our own telephone, and there were three secretaries basically that did all the correspondence for everybody. [interjection] I do not think we had one at that time. It was very limi ted. Anyway, during that '77 to '81 period as a backbencher, we basically shared three secretaries, all of us, and we were always upset with the minis ters when they came and impin ged on the time that was entitled for the backbenchers. Then there was a fellow, and I want to make reference to him-and I will be referencing some n ames here today, and with some that I do not, I hope nobody gets upset.

But Wally McKenzie was the member for Roblin-Russell at the time; Roblin, just Roblin. [interjection] Yes, I will come to that. Wally was the kind of guy, he did not have the patience to basically wait for the secretaries and stuff like that. All the mail that he got, basically he responded in handwriting and did his job. He was a fantastic campaigner and a fantastic politician, played the bass fiddle, and when he was out campaigning, he was in a band and he was playing the bass fiddle, and that is how he conquered his constituency, very unique politics.

I want to make some reference to-like, I will be rambling a little bit in terms of all the things that come to mind in terms of what happened. Some of you who probably think that our Clerk of the Assembly here started here when this buildin g was built, that is not quite true, you know, because with all due respect to Binx, the Clerk of the House, we used to have an indiv idual here by the name of Jack Reeves. [interjection] Yes, I think somebody served under him, but Jack was a very meticulous individual. He wanted things to be just right.

The prestige of a Legisla tive Assembly and all of the things that went with it, it was very important to him. If you did not address things right, he had a look on his face that almost-! do not want to use the wrong expression, but he could look very, very disgusted if you did not do it right, you know. Madam Speaker in the Chair

188 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 12, 1999 I can recall one time, sitting here, and my colleague, the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), was sitting in the far corner there and making a speech. We were government at the time, and he was sort of di sgusted with supply management and the fact that an individ ual farmer could only raise a hundred chickens, you know, outside of the quota, the supply management system, and if you had more, then ins pectors would come and they would count the chickens, and then you would have to get rid of them.

In trying to make his point-and the member for Lakeside was always a great orator, and I will make reference to some others-he came around that corner there, and he is showing how the inspectors are counting the chickens and killing them, and walks right up to the Clerk of the House's desk. Jack Reeves nearly fainted, you know. He had that look on his face. He was just abhorred with what Enns was doing. But Harry did other things too that we will not necessarily talk about at this point in time, and so did many others.

The member for Thompson, who I used to call-my favourite expression was, I called him landslide, because he defeated a good friend of mine, McMaster, at that time by 55 votes or something like that. [interjection] Well, he is exaggerating. It was 72; I thought it was 55 , you know. So we gave him the nickname calling him the landslide, and from time to time members gave each other nicknames here. But he has changed that; I cannot call him that anymore. But he made reference to the fact that in this House you cannot make displays, and we try and test that.

I mean the NDP have come in with bags of mail trying to illustrate a point and stuff like that, but none I think that was as cute as when we were in opposition, and Wally McKenzie came in one day-and he was a very good speaker. He had a way of really embellishing things a little bit. He was concerned because he thought the government of the day, which was the NDP under the Pawley admin istration, was poisoning the pigeons around this building. So as he is raising these questions, he all of a sudden reaches under his desk and pulls out a dead pigeon, displays it, and of course the uproar took place ultimately.

These things have happened from time to time, so, when you think you have come up with some innovative ideas about what you are showing off here, they have been done many times in this building. As I am dwellin g back and found things that I am thinking about or remembering, I want to dwell on some of the great orators in this building. There are many speeches that took place here, great speeches.

I mean, some of these people had just the gift, where you sat and you listened and you were almost petrified with the great speeches that they made. [interjection] Yes, my colleague Harry Enns did some of those, wildly enthusiastic, and ultimately made a point. I can recall people like Sid Green who, as a lawyer, had a unique way of making speeches. I always said he could take the head of a needle and speak for half an hour and you would be enthralled about the big speech that he had. Then, after it was over, you did not know what he was talking about, but you really got into this thing.

There were great speakers. Larry Desjardins. Larry could make great speeches, but he could not make great speeches if he was not heckled. He needed heckling to respond, and then he really got his engines charged up and going on. Russell Doern, who met an unfortunate end, but he was a great guy. He would be standing and he would ramble around, and he would look around and pick out guys and concoct stories. It was just wonderful to listen to, but there was nothing there. Interesting debates. If anybody would ever go through all the debates that have taken place in this buildin g, it has been great.

A lot of history here, and that is only in my short tenure. Some people here like the member for Brandon East (Mr. L. Evans) and the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), who have been here a lot longer, could really embellish on all the things that have happened. I remember the perception-! smile a lot now when I sit here, because my political career is coming to an end. However, when I see the posturing and the puffery that takes place in terms of the Monnin inquiry, you people really think you have a point, and that is the reality of politics in here.

I can recall the French language debate under Howard Pawley when he made a mistake, the government of the day made a

April 12, 1999 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 189 mistake, in terms of trying to bring in the constitutional changes related to the French language debate, and then that is when we started ringing the bells. See, there was no limit on the bell ringin g at that time. We rang them 24 hours a day for-help me out-two weeks. An Honourable Member: About two weeks. Mr. Driedger: About two weeks. Every day we came down, and we did not sit in the House. You could not shut the bells down. They rang 24 hours a day. It drove staff nearly nuts. So the bells kept ringing.

The staff were all crazy, and we came in and decided, are we going to go in or not? No, we will let it ring again. So at that time we had the public on our side to such an extent, because it was a very emotional issue, that we felt confide nt that if the election was called, we would win all 57 seats. The polling showed that everybody was with us, that we would win. But somehow the Premier of the day, Howard Pawley, at that time, chickened out and he would not call an election after four years. He decided to go almost to the max- An Honourable Member: As you are doing now. *

(1600) Mr. Driedger: Oh, no, no. I think the member should listen a little bit because we had an election in '81 and then we had an election in '86, and it was in '86 we thought it was a walk in. We ended up losing the election by one vote- An Honourable Member: One seat. Mr. Driedger: By one seat, yes. So what happened then? We just could not believe what had happened, the disaster. It should have been ours automatically, but with that thin majority it was in '86, and '88 during a budget debate, you know, the favoured vote that took place.

I remember sitting over on that side there where the member for Interlake (Mr. C. Evans) sits now, and I was a party Whip at that time. There had been speculation that maybe the member for St. Vital, Walding, would take and vote against his government during the throne speech, and that did not happen. So actually that day when the vote took place, and I think it was an evening vote-[interjection] No, no, evening vote [i nterjection] No, was it not an evening vote? [i nterjection] Evening vote. It was an evening vote at that time, if I am correct. Maybe I should check my records on that.

Anyway, the vote took place, and the media assumed, because W aiding had not voted against the government of the day on the throne speech-they never thought about the budget thing. There was actually no camera-there maybe was one camera that took part of it-when Walding got up and voted against his own government. I am talking about some of the highlig hts of my career. An Honourable Member: And history was made. The government fell. Mr. Driedger: That was phenomenal; that was phenomenal. An Honourable Member: A government fell to its knees. Mr.

Driedger: The devastation that we saw in the eyes of government when this happened- An Honourable Member: Sheer horror. Mr. Driedger: I remember the member for Churchill, Cowan, and Pawley. It was like somebody had slapped them down. It was awful, y

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-5-5
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 5th hansardpdf 5.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	2126113c3620b246cc2ddbf4ab7784cb3b982396

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