Manitoba Hansard — 10 June 2002 (Sitting 45, 37th Legislature, 3rd Session)

37-3-45

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session- Thirty-Seventh Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LII No. 45- 1:30 p.m., Monday, June 10,2002 JSSN {)542-5492

Member AGLUGUB, Cris ALLAN, Nancy ASHTON, Steve, Hon. ASPER, Linda BARRETT, Becky, Hon. CALDWELL, Drew, Hon. CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. CUMMINGS, Glen DACQUA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary, Hon. DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry FAURSCHOU, David FRIESEN, Jean, Hon. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. GILLESHAMMER, Harold HA WRANIK, Gerald HEL WER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. LAURENDEAU, Marcel LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. LOEWEN, John MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. MAGUIRE, Larry MALOWAY, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn, Hon.

MITCHELSON, Bonnie MURRAY, Stuart NEV AKSHONOFF, Tom PENNER, Jack PENNER, Jim PITURA, Frank REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. ROCAN, Denis RONDEAU, Jim SALE, Tim, Hon. SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Harry SCHULER, Ron SELINGER, Greg, Hon. SMITH, Joy SMITH, Scott, Hon. STEFANSON, Heather STRUTHERS, Stan TWEED, Mervin WOWCHUK, Rosano, Hon. MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Seventh Legislature Constituency The Maples St. Vital Thompson Riel Inkster Brandon East Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Russell Selkirk Concordia Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Portage Ia Prairie Wolseley River Heights Minnedosa Lac du Bonnet Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon St. James The Pas St. Norbert La Verendrye Fort Whyte St. Johns Arthur-Virden Elmwood Burrows Lord Roberts Minto River East Kirkfield Park Interlake Emerson Steinbach Morris Transcona Southdale Rupertsland Carman Assiniboia Fort Rouge Wellington Rossmere Springfield St. Boniface Fort Garry Brandon West Tuxedo Dauphin-Roblin Turtle Mountain Swan River Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

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

2347 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, June 10, 2002 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Transcona-Springfield School Division Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Don Brook, D. Colbert, N. Capner and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Education, Training and Youth (Mr.

Caldwell) consider halting plans to place portions of the Rural Municipality of Springfield into separate school divisions and to request that the Minister of Education, Training and Youth recognize that dividing the R.M. of Springfield will result in a lower quality of education for all of the students involved. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a communique as a report from the Western Premiers' Conference and a communique from the Western Premiers and Western Governors, a Progress Report, please. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Philippine Heritage Week Hon.

Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour and Immigration): I have a ministerial statement. This week marks the 1 04th anniversary of Philippine independence. I will now read the proclamation declaring June 9 to 16 as Philip pine Heritage Week in Manitoba.

WHEREAS the number of people of Fili pino decent who have settled in Manitoba is more than 40 000 and this community continues to contribute greatly to the pr ovince's social, economic, political and cultural life, and * (13:35)

WHEREAS Philippine independence is a significant celebration for all Filipino people that reflect principles of universal significance, trans cending cultural and linguistic barriers; and

WHEREAS Manitoba's Filipino community annually organizes activities to celebrate and share with all Manitobans the freedom and inde pendence of Filipino people everywhere; and

WHEREAS the promotion of intercultural understanding, mutual respect and universal acceptance of our province's cultural diversity is supported and encouraged by the Government of Manitoba; and

WHEREAS the Government of Manitoba encourages all citizens to respect individual, cul tural and historic celebrations; and

WHEREAS this day shall remind us to rededicate ourselves to promoting and protecting the independence and human rights of all people, everywhere in the world;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT KNOWN that we do hereby proclaim June 9-16, 2002, as Philippine Heritage Week in Manitoba and do hereby extend all greetings to all Filipinos in our province on this important occasion. Mr. Jack Reimer (Southdale): Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for the ministerial statement regarding the Philippine Heritage Week. I join with her in celebration of this independence, of the 1 04th anniversary, and also the fact that it is Filipino Heritage Week from June 9-16 . Manitoba, in fact Winnipeg, is blessed with a very, very large community of Filipinos that live here in our province and in this great city of Winnipeg and contribute significantly to the

2348 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 welfare, the sense of community, the contri butions to the economic, the political and the cultural life that we so much enjoy here in Winnipeg. We associate a lot of times the cultural events with the great Folklorama celebrations that we have during the summertime, but the Filipino community, along with a lot of other communities, working tirelessly throughout the year, not only promoting their own culture and their own heritage. In being involved with the various communities, we get a chance to recognize their great contributions to this mosaic in Manitoba.

I congratulate the minister on bringing forth the statement of proclamation, and I encourage all members of the Legislature to take

part in some of the events that will be happening in the Filipino community during June 9-16. It is a great time to get involved with the community. Thank you very, very much, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I ask for leave to speak to the minister's statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been denied. Seniors Residence Fire (Fiin Flon) Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): I have a statement for the House, Mr. Speaker.

Early in the afternoon of June 6, a fire broke out in the Hemlock Drive apartments in Flin Flon, a seniors residence which was home to 21 people. Thanks to the efforts of rescue crews, including firefighters from Flin Flon Fire Department, the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelt ing Company and the RCMP from both Flin Flon and Creighton, Saskatchewan, all of the tenants were safely evacuated. Four of the tenants were taken to hospital for observation, but due to the efforts of the Flin Flon General Hospital staff, no tenants require any further medical attention.

Staff from the Norman Regional Health Authority assisted in the evacu ation and have worked with departmental staff in providing supports for the tenants during this difficult time. In addition, there were a large number of volunteers from the community who offered their support, and the Salvation Army opened their facilities to the tenants. An example of community support included a pharmacist from the clinic pharmacy who stayed at work to ensure that all medications required by the tenants were provided.

She left her home num ber at the hospital switchboard to be called in case anyone's medication was overlooked. The building has sustained major damage, and it appears that it will not be habitable soon and will require major reconstruction. Manitoba Housing has identified some vacancies in housing managed by the Manitoba Housing Authority, as well as vacancies in the local private market. Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting has indicated that some of their housing can be accessed if required.

My staff, in partnership with staff from the regional health authority, will work with each of the tenants on an individual basis to meet their long-term hous ing needs. On a short-term basis many of the tenants have been placed with family or friends. Local and provincial representatives will con tinue to work together to meet the needs of tenants as they evolve. * (13:40) Mr. Jack Reimer (Southdale): I thank the minister for the update as to the fire that was up in Flin Flon, on June 6.

I commend the volunteer firefighters in Flin Flon and Creighton, the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company and the RCMP for their efforts in attending to the tragedy. Our concerns naturally are for the four victims that were hospitalized, and we hope that there is no undue stress for them and their families and that they are back to normal in a sense of trying to accommodate themselves back into the housing for the area in Flin Flon. The minister has mentioned the lack of housing in the area, but it would appear that the volunteers and the people of the community are rallying behind the people of the area.

It is another example of how, when tragedy does

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATNE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2349 strike in certain areas of Winnipeg or Manitoba or in any town in Manitoba, it is always the volunteers that seem to come up to perform the task and we see that with volunteer firefighters. Manitoba Housing naturally has stepped in, and I commend the minister for giving the authority for Manitoba Housing to try to do their utmost to accommodate these people. I know that, with my tenure as Minister of Housing, Manitoba Housing and the people in the depart ment are very, very dedicated to trying to help people of all areas in trying to support their needs.

I commend the minister for giving them the ability to work to try and accommodate these people. So I thank the minister and the Govern ment for this statement. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I ask for leave to speak to the minister's statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? An Honourable Member: No leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been denied. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 35-The Child and Family Services Authorities Act Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): I move, seconded by the honour able Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr.

Robinson), that leave be given to introduce Bill 35, The Child and Family Services Authori ties Act;

Loi sur les regies de services a l'enfant et a la famille, and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Administrator, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. Mr. Speaker, I am tabling a copy of the mes sage from the Lieutenant-Governor. Motion presented. Mr. Sale: I am pleased to introduce for first reading Bill 35, The Child and Family Services Authorities Act.

This historic bill builds on the work that began in 19 76, with the creation of Sagkeeng Child and Family Services as the first Aboriginal Child and Family Services agency in Manitoba, followed by the creation of the Dakota-Ojibway Child and Family Services in 198 1-82. By now, Aboriginal Child and Family Services care for over 2000 children in all areas of our province. This historic bill creates the ability for First Nations and Metis people to provide child and family services to all of their people in Manitoba. I would like to add, Mr.

Speaker, that the jacket I am wearing was a gift from the Metis people to the people of Manitoba on the signing of the agreement to undertake this important work. It is a significant step in fulfilling the Government's commitment to implementing the recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry of 19 91. Thank you. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us from Original Woman's Network, eight visitors under the direction of Ms. Florence Raven.

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes). Also seated in the public gallery from Nellie McClung Collegiate 25 Grade 11 students under the direction of Mr. Grant Caldwell. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck). Also seated in the public gallery from Springs Christian Academy 32 Grades 9 and 11 students under the direction of Mr. Brad Dowler and Mr. David V anDerSteen. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. * (13: 45)

2350 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Manitoba Hydro Financing Requirements Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, over the last two weeks we have been hearing a number of stories from Hydro officials and the Doer government, regarding the impact Manitoba Hydro will face because the Doer government failed to balance their books from last year. Manitoba Hydro offi cials testified under oath that they do not have the millions of dollars the Government is demanding, and in fact, they are going to have to go out and borrow the money. The president, Mr.

Bob Brennan, and the Premier are both quoted as saying that they are going to be forced to borrow money this year. Manitoba Hydro is going to be forced, Mr. Speaker. But asked outside in the hallway by a member of the media, the Minister of Hydro (Mr. Selinger) stated that Manitoba Hydro would not have to borrow any money. Does the Premier agree with the statements made by the Minister of Hydro who has stated that Manitoba Hydro will not have to borrow, despite the fact that this Government raided them for $288 million? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, members opposite will know that the telephone system was raided for $440 million to balance the books in '95, '96, '97 and '98, and then had their rates increased by 66 percent to deal with the shareholder return that almost tripled. We need no lectures from Tories on this matter. Furthermore, under the same logic as the member opposite, the largest borrowing require ment for Manitoba Hydro, which was not in the books when we came into office, was for Centra Gas, Mr. Speaker, which lost $10 million last year. Mr. Murray: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is a very simple question.

The question is, and I will quote the Premier who stated: There is no ques tion taking a dividend out of profits affects the borrowing requirements. That is a quote from the First Minister. That does not appear to be in line with what the Minister of Hydro (Mr. Selinger), the Minister of Finance, is saying. So Manitobans have a right to know. Who do they believe? Do they believe the First Minis ter who said they will be required to borrow, or do they believe the Minister of Hydro who said they will not? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I mentioned Centra Gas.

The contribution to this debate which was not in the books for borrowing costs was the highest borrowing requirement we have had since we have been in office, at Manitoba Hydro. There are other assets- An Honourable Member: You acquired an asset though. Mr. Doer: An asset that lost money last year, Mr. Speaker, a good point from the member from Russell. Thank you very much. Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, this comes down to who can Manitobans believe. Now, if I could, I would like to introduce a quote that we talked about. The chief financial officer of Manitoba Hydro, his name is Mr. Vince Warden. I say this: Mr.

Vince Warden said Manitoba Hydro will be financing the special payment and that the financing cost for the life of the current integrated financial forecast is some $260 mil lion to $276 million. Is that correct? That was the question put to Mr. Vince Warden. Under oath, he answered: Yes, that is correct. Mr. Speaker, does the Premier agree with the comments made by Mr. Warden, or does he have another story? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the export revenues have generated over $700 million in the last number of years.

A couple of days ago members opposite were calling: The sky is falling, the sky is falling, not enough rain. I thought the Leader of the Opposition would be standing up today and cheering on behalf of farmers and on behalf of Hydro. You know, I remember the doom and gloom on a drought a couple of days ago. However, we take no responsibility for the generosity of the skies in terms of getting this

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2351 water level which I am sure many producers in Manitoba are happy to see, particularly in south western Manitoba. Manitoba Hydro, as opposed to Centra Gas, is projected to make approximately $220 million in the last fiscal year. The money is generated from having export sales well over $400 million, primarily to the United States. Mr. Speaker, $220 million minus $150 million in a dividend equals a surplus still after the dividend of close to $70 million. There are capital assets.

Unlike members opposite that totally mothballed the development of dams in the past, we are a party that is building up Hydro, and we are investing in capital investments that will get more money for return. Stay tuned when we announce those returns. * (1 3:50) Manitoba Hydro Financing Requirements Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, at the very heart of democracy is the obligation of a minister of the Crown to tell the truth. I would ask the Minister of Finance if he would confirm and if he is in agreement with the statement made by Mr.

Vince Warden, who is the chief financial officer for Manitoba Hydro, who, on June 3, swore under oath in response to a question. The question was: I understand as well, Mr. Warden, that Manitoba Hydro will be financing the special payment and that the financing costs for the life of the current IFF is some $276 million. Is that correct? The answer Mr. Warden gave, unequivocal, and I quote: Yes. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister if he concurs with this statement made by the chief financial officer of Manitoba Hydro. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Mr.

Speaker, we are revisiting testimony that was given on June 3, and I have a quote for the record as well, a quote that was officially sworn testimony by a member of Manitoba Hydro. It says: What is the interest expense associated with the payments to government funded by export revenues? The answer then would be there is no interest expense. So it is a question of how the question is put. We have made it very clear that profits off export sales would be the source and the basis for this dividend payment, and Hydro will borrow for other capital projects, which, as the Member for Russell (Mr.

Derkach) has indi cated, acquire assets, build the strength of Mani toba Hydro to provide profits in the future. That is the approach we are taking. Mr. Loewen: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister if he concurs with the statement made by Ms. Carolyn Wray, who under oath on May 27, under oath at the Public Utilities Board stated, and I quote: It was a policy decision by the Government and announced as such that there would be no changes to rates as a result of the special payments. Does the minister concur with that statement that was made under oath? Mr. Selinger: Mr.

Speaker, the officially sworn testimony by the same person mentioned by the Member for Fort Whyte that I would like to put on the record is: With the special payments to the Province, Manitoba Hydro can still achieve positive net income without any electricity rate increases. * (13 :5 5) Mr. Loewen: Mr. Speaker, I would implore the minister to answer these simple questions.

Will the minister simply advise the people of Mani toba who is telling the truth, the officials of Manitoba Hydro who have sworn under oath that Hydro will not only have to finance all of the $288-million dividend, but also under sworn testimony they have indicated that it is Govern ment policy not to raise rates as a result of the payment to the Crown? Who are they to believe, the minister or the officials under oath? Mr. Selinger: Mr.

Speaker, at the risk of being repetitive, I will read again into the record that Manitoba Hydro can still achieve positive net income without any electricity rate increases, additional to those already in the previous fore cast, i.e., 2 percent a year from 2003-04 to 2008- 09. I indicated in the record last week that when you look at the forecasts for '01-02 and '02-03, that the very prudent assumptions of Manitoba Hydro remain exactly the same before and after there was a decision to have a dividend.

2352 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 Health Care System Per Capita Funding Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Doer government has made grandiose promises about how they would have all the solutions for Manitobans for health care. They promised to slash waiting lists, yet these lists have grown. The Government has failed miserably for one reason; they have no plan for health care. Mr.

Speaker, a Maclean's magazine annual ranking of Canadian health care services has ranked Winnipeg 16th for the second con secutive year, yet at the same time a recent report from the Canadian Institute for Health Information revealed that Manitoba spends more on health care per person than any province. Mr. Speaker, can the Premier explain: How is it that on one hand we spend the most per person in Canada and on the other hand the best that we can do, our capital city ranks 16th? How is that? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): The member should note that the first report was '98-99 and the second report was '99-2000.

I just noted this week, or just last weekend, for the first time in seven years there were not numbers, hundreds of people showing up as nurses at a job fair looking to go elsewhere because of the decent, respectful relationship that we are slowly but surely build ing up in our health care system. The member will note, Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of areas that Maclean's has identi fied that we think are valid. The whole issue of cervical cancer detection, tests and systems, that was a matter that was promised in 1994 in the Speech from the Throne.

In October of 2001, this minister delivered on the promise for that program. You will see the positive results as we proceed. Another criticism of Maclean's is the issue of low-weight babies. I am proud of the fact that we have a new program for potentially under nourished and low-weight babies, the first pro gram in North America, under the leadership of this Government. We will not see the positive results overnight in a Maclean's survey, but year after year we believe in investing in healthy mothers.

With new nutritional programs we will have less underweight babies in Manitoba, pro vide more babies to be born with dignity. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, we are on track for more specialists, and on the issue of the old statistic of the highest number or the highest amount per capita, we have gone from 10 to 9 to 8 on the various stats on a per capita basis. So we are making improvements and lowering our highest in Canada per capita cost which we inherited when we came into office in the '99 year. Hallway Medicine Mr.

Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): It is clear that the analysis that has been put forward shows that the Doer govern ment status quo to health care is not working. It is just simply not working. The Doer govern ment promised during the election camaign to end hallway medicine, and we know and Mani tobans know that they have failed to do that. In fact, it was interesting that the associate editor of Maclean's magazine had said despite these poor showings for Manitoba, they did not include hallway medicine. If they had, Mr. Speaker, the results would have been even lower.

Does the Premier not- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. * (14:00) Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Murray: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question to the Premier (Mr. Doer) is very simple: Does this Premier not think that Mani tobans and particularly Winnipeggers deserve a health care system that is better than 16th in the country? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): That is why the people of Manitoba elected an NDP government in the fall of 1999. Members opposite, in their great research effort, would have noted in Maclean's magazine that the stats were from the years '98-99 and '99- 2000.

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATNE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2353 Secondly, the two areas that we were the best in, knee replacements and number of spe cialists, were two issues members opposite last week, two weeks ago, criticized us for not doing enough of, Mr. Speaker, the areas were the best in Canada. In addition, the two areas where we had more difficulty, low birth weight and pap smears, are two programs that we introduced because we recognized what they had failed to do for a decade. Ultrasound Waiting List Mr.

Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): We always understand the sensi tivity on the other side when it comes to health, because Manitobans know that during the last election, in this campaign, they said they would reduce waiting lists; they have gone higher. They said they would end hallway medicine; it has grown. They promised to hire more full-time nurses; they have doubled, Mr. Speaker, in terms of shortages. That is the record of this Government. It is clear the numbers tell the story. While the NDP loves to spend money, there are no results whatsoever. Can the Premier (Mr.

Doer) explain to Manitobans, who pay the most taxes per capita for their health care, can he simply explain to Manitobans, despite his promise to reduce ultrasound tests to one or two weeks, why they are forced to wait up to 20 weeks for an ultrasound? Why is that? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): First, let me correct the inaccuracies by the Member for Kirkfield Park. Firstly, radiation therapy, life-saving therapy: September 1999, 10 weeks; now, 3 weeks. Nurses: job fair after job fair, United States, B.C., all across the country, there was a job fair a couple of weeks ago, and do you know what happened?

Nobody showed up. Hallways: CIHI, which this data comes from, said the best in the country and the program was copied by the Tory government, the Tory gov ernment of Ontario has recognized as the best in the country. Medical Equipment Fund Status Report Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, in October of 2000, the Doer govern- ment received $37 million from the federal government for the purchase of medical equip ment such as MRis and CT scanners. From our own Freedom of Information document and from their own budget documents, it shows that they have only spent $2.8 million of that money.

Can the minister please explain why on May 15 he insisted that $18 million was spent of this money, as reported in the Winnipeg Free Press of May 16, when official documents show that only $2.8 million has been spent? Why is this Minister of Health misleading Manitobans? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, this is another example of a little bit of information in the hands of members opposite being a very, very dangerous thing. I will list- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MRI, Health Sciences Centre $3.7 million, request for pro posals completed, evaluation, and the renovation underway; ultrasound and other diagnostic $2.9 Winnipeg; neuroangiography $2.5, evaluation and RFPs underway; linear accelerator [interjection} The problem is, Mr. Speaker, members opposite did so little in terms of equipment. They do not know it takes renovation, it takes tender, the money is committed, the money is up-front. It has been the most in the last decade. Mrs. Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, can the minister explain why he is insisting that $18 million was spent, when we read in the Globe and Mail today that his department staff, Pat Hosang, executive director of Urban Regional Support Services, confirmed that most of that money has not been spent yet? Why is he continuing to mislead Manitobans? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I do not know if members opposite understand, but we are reno vating at Health Sciences Centre to put in an MRI. We cannot park it in the trailer beside Health Sciences Centre and wait for it to be

2354 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 reconstructed, as members opposite tried to do with Brandon Hospital. We have a $55-million capital project at Brandon. We cannot commit that this year. It is spent. We cannot commit that in our books, because the money is not totally expended. That is what happens with these dollars. Unfortunately, members opposite do not understand that. The money is in a fund. The money has been committed.

The money is com mitted to the MRI at Health Sciences Centre, neuroangiography Winnipeg, 2.5; critical care Winnipeg, 123; information technology $500 million; CT scan Selkirk $1. 7 million; CT scan ner The Pas $1. 7 million; one linear accelerator CancerCare $4 million. Most of these are either ordered or in the process of being ordered or being constructed, Mr. Speaker. Some of them are already up and running. Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask this Minister of Health if he can guarantee that this money is safely put aside for medical equipment and that he has not spent it on some thing else.

It is very hard to trust this Minister of Health when he is putting this information forward all the time. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, let me table a letter that came from the federal Minister of Health that says, and I quote: I note that your Govern ment has dedicated $73 million to the purchase of new equipment in April 2001, in its first round. I am pleased with your ongoing con sultation with regional health authorities and medical experts to identify the best way to spend money on more equipment and your multi faceted approach to long-term planning. Also noted, Mr.

Speaker, is the Canadian Association of Radiologists' acknowledgement of your response to its requests and its satis faction with the minister's use of the fund. Your continued commitment to addressing medical needs-[interjection] Now the member is calling the federal Minister of Health a liar, Mr. Speaker. It is unbe lievable what depth the members opposite will go to. I cannot believe that they would go to such depths. School Divisions Amalgamations Mr.

Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): In November, the Minister of Education announced the forced changes to school division boundaries throughout Manitoba, an issue that has been of great concern to many Manitobans. Can the minister indicate what subsequent changes have been made since the November announcement? How have boundaries been amended since that time? * (14 :10 ) Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education, Training and Youth): I thank the member for his question. He is an eminence grise of this House, and I respect his stature in the Chamber, Mr. Speaker.

Of course, the reasons for amalgamation are to free up resources for the classrooms of the province. We have been engaged in an ongoing consultation with school divisions, with muni cipal officials, with parent groups, indeed with students and teachers around the issue of amalgamation. We believe that it is in the best interest of all parties to be engaged in a consultation so that all parties are part of this process.

There has been, as a result of consultations, most famously the boundary of the Transcona-Springfield merger whereby all of the Rural Municipality of Spring field was contained in the Agassiz Division. Amalgamations-Appeal Process Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Could the minister indicate if there was a formal appeal process that was in place that allowed for these changes? Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education, Training and Youth): Mr.

Speaker, I should say the new Sunrise School Division in eastern Manitoba, the trustees have been exercising tremendous leadership in eastern Manitoba in the creation of the Sunrise School Division, which will be the largest rural school division with an extraordinarily broadly based tax assess-

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATNE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2355 ment level and opportumties for tremendous program growth to benefit the children of eastern Manitoba. Mr. Gilleshammer: I assume there was no for mal appeal process. Can the minister indicate which appeals or requests were denied by him? Mr. Caldwell: Well, Mr. Speaker, as the member knows and as the people of the province of Manitoba know, this process began in 1993- 94 with the Norrie report. [interjection] The Norrie report cost $700,000 and sat on the shelf until the change in government in 1999. Mr.

Speaker, this Government believes in- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Caldwell: This is a process, as Manitobans know, that has been underway for the better part of a decade, since 1993-94, with the Norrie report. Our Government prides itself on consulting with the field broadly and in being partners with the field. That will continue. True North Entertainment Complex Ernst & Young Report Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): My question to the Premier.

Last year, the provincial government commissioned a report to be done by Ernst & Young to provide an assessment of the downtown arena project and the business plan for the project. The report cost taxpayers $95,000 plus expenses. I ask the Premier to provide to this Legislature a list of the concerns that were raised by the Ernst & Young report in relation to the arena project. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I believe the ques tions were asked last week. I will double-check the due diligence, the various reports on due diligence that took place as we prepared our investments for this new arena.

As you know, we conducted reviews of the capital investments under the infrastructure program and the tax receipts that we received back, the sales tax, the payroll tax and other tax considerations. The economic analysis that we received was for the $1 3-million investment that is in the sheet that is tabled in the House. We would make approxi mately $1 1 million. Of course, along with other activity in downtown Winnipeg, and as we continue to build and rebuild downtown Win nipeg, there is obviously ongoing activity in the area. I note, Mr.

Speaker, that the member opposite wrote a letter congratulating Mark Chipman, and then a couple of months later he jumped on the bandwagon to oppose the True North project. We are optimistic about our future, and we do not have two different posi tions on the arena. Mr. Gerrard: Manitobans deserve legitimate answers to questions. Why does the Premier hesitate to make the Ernst & Young report public? Why is the Premier hesitant to discuss the shortcomings in the Ernst & Young report? Were sufficient changes made to the True North business plan to address the risks assessed in the Ernst & Young report?

These are questions to which Manitobans deserve answers. Mr. Doer: The member opposite would know that the federal Liberal Treasury Board had the same information before it in the fall of 2001 and approved the project. This member has two different positions on the arena. We can only afford to have one position on the arena. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Member for River Heights has the floor. Disability Access Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mani tobans deserve some legitimate answers. My supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Minister of Family Services what arrangements have been made to ensure the new arena conforms com pletely to universal design standards for full disability access, and what efforts have been made to ensure that a significant representation of people from the disabled community will be hired to operate and run the new arena?

2356 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): That is a very important ques tion. I think it is interesting that those who oppose the new arena were quite prepared to sacrifice public housing in the inner city in the interests of what they were pursuing. But I will consult with our officials and determine what steps are being taken. I can tell the member that the requirements of the new arena come under the current building code in regard to access and acces sibility.

I would expect that they will make use of the universal design guidelines as well in the preparation of this project. But I will ascertain the facts and the specifics for the member. Morris-Macdonald School Division Representation Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): In response to a question put by residents of Morris-Macdonald School Division, the Minister of Education said: I am interested in facilitating some of their concerns around representation. Can the minister indicate what he has done to give those ratepayers representation? Hon.

Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education, Training and Youth): There is a bill before this House, Bill 14, The Public Schools Moderni zation Act. I look forward to that bill moving to the public hearing process, the committee process. I look forward to that bill getting to committee. There has not been a lot of debate in this House since it was introduced in early May, Mr. Speaker. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Minister of Education, to conclude your comments. Mr. Caldwell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mani tobans, of course, are seeking great accounta bility and responsibility in our public school system. Bill 14 goes a long way to achieving that. Mr. Gilleshammer: On a new question, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Minnedosa, on a new question. Mr. Gilleshammer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister clearly indicated to ratepayers in Morris-Macdonald that he was interested in facilitating their request for representation. My question to the minister is: What has he done about that? * (14:20) Mr. Caldwell: Well, Mr.

Speaker, again, there have been numerous meetings in my office with the Morris-Macdonald coalition that we have been reading so much about recently in the media. There have been meetings with municipal officials, with reeves, councillors, mayors of the region to share perspectives on representation in the Morris-Macdonald School Division. The elections for the public school system in our province are October 23, about three and a half months hence.

There will be a new board in the Morris-Macdonald School Division, the new school division, the amalgamated school divi sion of Red River and Morris-Macdonald, an amalgamation that has been worked at for a number of years by citizens in that part of the province. Mr. Gilleshammer: On a new question, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Minnedosa, on a new question. Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, this minister fired the board and then promised ratepayers in Morris-Macdonald that he would facilitate their request for representation.

He has done nothing about that and he has done nothing about trying to retrieve money that was sent to third parties, friends of the NDP. What is he going to do about allowing the people in Morris-Macdonald to recover those funds that were flowed for phan tom students to groups like Hope and Anokiiwin? Mr. Caldwell: Mr. Speaker, if only the Member for Minnedosa was as concerned about his taxpayers in his constituency as he was concerned about the ratepayers of Morris Macdonald, because taxpayers in the province of Manitoba are out $4.5 million, as identified by the provincial auditor. Those are taxpayers in

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2357 Minnedosa, in Boissevain, in Killarney, in Russell. Those are taxpayers throughout the province of Manitoba. There was a system of adult learning centres set up without any legislative authority, and over $40 million went out the door of this building without any accountability. We are restoring accountability on behalf of the taxpayers of the province of Manitoba. Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Wrongful Dismissals Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr.

Speaker, when the NDP took government, they began a program of mass firings within the various departments and with intergovernment agencies. One of those was Manitoba Lotteries. The minister who is responsible for Lotteries, as a matter of fact, saw a number of individuals who had been fired launch civil suits against her department for wrongful dismissal. One of the victims was the executive general manager of Club Regent, Mr. Charles Devenney. I would like to ask the minister whether she could tell this House the date of dismissal of the former executive director of Club Regent. Hon.

Diane McGifford (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act): I certainly take issue with the inaccuracies housed in the member's question. Certainly there were not mass firings under this Government in Lotteries or any other department. So I really want to point out the inaccuracies that are part and parcel of his question. As to Mr. Devenney, I do not think it is a very seemly place to discuss the career of anybody, but since the member has brought his question to the floor of the Legislature, Mr. Speaker, I cannot remember the specific date that Mr.

Devenney left MLC, but I would think it was probably around June 2000. If the member would like the date more specifically than that, I will get the date. I can rise in the Legislature perhaps tomorrow and give him the specific date that he is seeking. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, on a new question. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Russell, on a new question. Mr. Derkach: To the Premier (Mr. Doer), Mr. Speaker: Could the Premier please identify the date of hiring Mr.

Charles Devenney as the former executive general manager of Club Regent, then into the position as an investigator with the Gaming Control Commission? Given that Mr. Devenney was first fired, then he was paid a generous package for wrongful dismissal, and then he was rehired, could the Premier tell me the date that Mr. Devenney was rehired? Ms. McGifford: Fr-om what I can hear, it was really the members opposite who launched massive firings when they came to government in 1988. Now they would like to tell a different tale. Mr. Speaker, Mr.

Charles Devenney did not, and I think the member said, sue for wrongful dismissal. That was not the case at all. Mr. Devenney was given a package and left Lotter ies. As to the date of his hiring by the Manitoba Gaming Commission, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the minister for the Manitoba Gaming Control Commission. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. May I remind all honour able members, when the Speaker stands all members should be seated in their seats. Speaker's Rulings Mr. Speaker: I have a few rulings for the House.

Order. During debate of Bill 5, The WQrkers Compensation Amendment Act, on May 23, 2002, a point of order was raised by the honourable Member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cum mings) regarding comments spoken in the debate by the honourable Member for Transcona (Mr. Reid). The honourable Member for Ste. Rose contended that the honourable Member for

2358 LEGISLATNE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 Transcona referred to members of the Oppo sition as racists and requested an apology. The honourable Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr. Sale) also spoke to the point of order and noted that the member had not used the word and had not attributed it to any specific members in the House. I took the matter under advisement in order to peruse Hansard carefully. * (14:30) As Speaker, I take this issue very seriously, as the word "racist" can have a terrible and hurtful connotation.

The word has a history in the House and has been the subject of inter ventions by a number of Speakers. Looking at the comments of the honourable Member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), on page 1814 of Hansard, the honourable member is recorded as saying, "I would ask you perhaps you want to explain to members of the House why you are either excluding on the basis of science or you are excluding it on the basis that they are First Nations people. I suppose if it is the latter reason there is a word that is used to describe that, which, Mr.

Speaker, would be unparliamentary for me to mention, but it begins with the letter 'r.' I am sure members of the Opposition know what that reference is to, why they would have excluded that particular coverage." The issue is a difficult one because the honourable Member for Transcona did not come right out and say the word "racist" or "racism." However, it was strongly implied in his remarks. As Beauchesne Citation 487(2) advises, words may not be used hypothetically or conditionally, if they are plainly intended to convey a direct imputation.

I am troubled that members would allude to or attempt to make an indirect reference to other members in the House as being racists. Therefore, I am advising the House that the

interpretation I have for use of the word "racist" in this House is that the word should not be used, either directly or indirectly, against individuals or groups of members in the House to convey the impression that the members are racist or have racist attitudes. Let there be no misunder standing of this. I do not want members to be making indirect references to the "r" word or attempting to use the word against a group of persons in the House and expect that by using a generic reference it would be okay to use the word. As I mentioned previously, the word can have a very hurtful and harmful connotation.

I am not prepared to allow the use of the word directly or indirectly against members. Given that the honourable Member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) did not actually say the word, I cannot call upon him to withdraw it, but I would call upon the honourable Member for Transcona to offer an apology for implying something that caused other members to be offended. Mr. Daryl Reid (franscona): Mr. Speaker, if there was any disruption of the House that was caused by any comments that were attributed to me, I apologize for that disruption. Mr. Speaker: I thank the honourable member for that. I have another ruling.

During Oral Questions on Wednesday, May 29, 2002, the honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Mackintosh) raised a point of order concerning the use of the words "lie" and "lying" which he indicated that he had heard the honourable Member for Emerson (Mr. Jack Penner) say from his seat. The honourable Offi cial Opposition House Leader (Mr. Laurendeau) also spoke to the same point of order. I took the matter under advisement in order to peruse Hansard. Page 1939 of Hansard indicates that the words "why is he lying" and "why do you often lie" do appear. However, the words are not attributed to a specific member.

Although the honourable Government House Leader made reference to the words as being spoken by the honourable Member for Emerson, the honourable Member for Emerson did not state on the record whether he did or did not say the words in question. As I ruled on November 14, 2001, and on May 2, 2002, without a clear indication either through identification in Hansard or by admis sion from a particular member that the words in question were indeed spoken by that member, it places the Speaker in a difficult position to rule on the language used.

I therefore cannot rule on whether there was or was not a point of order in this instance. I would, however, like to take this

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2359 opportunity to remind all members that we should be referring to each other in terms and language that are temperate and are worthy of this Chamber and the positions that we all hold. I have one more ruling. During Oral Questions on Tuesday June 4, 2002, the honourable Official Opposition House Leader (Mr. Laurendeau) raised two points of order concerning the content of replies given by the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) to questions asked by the honourable Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen).

The honourable Opposition House Leader cited Beauchesne Citation 417 which states: Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and not provoke debate. The honourable Minister of Finance also spoke to the points of order, and I took the matter under advisement. After reading the an swers of the honourable Minister of Finance that appear on pages 217 2 and 217 3 of Hansard, I would rule that there is a point of order.

I would like to remind all ministers that, according to Beauchesne Citation 417 , answers to questions should be as brief as possible and should deal with the matter raised. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Friends of Bruce Park Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): On May 25, I had the pleasure of joining some very community-minded groups and individuals in cleaning up a valuable park area. The Friends of Bruce Park are dedicated and very competent stewards of the park and Truro Creek. They have diligently cleaned up and maintained Bruce Park each spring for many years.

The members care fully monitor the water for toxic materials or other threats to the natural environment in and along the banks of the creek. I am happy to see that representatives from the Winnipeg Airports Authority have joined this group in their endeavours. As well, the clean-up crew was joined this year by the St. James Rods football team. Several boys in their late teens helped with the new facelift by painting over three graffiti-plastered buildings in the playground. Pat Martin, M.P. for Winnipeg Centre, lent his support by sanding graffiti off the wood covering of the play structure.

Tom Brodbeck, whose backyard borders the play ground, also generously chipped in by lending a hand and his electricity for sanding. He has offered to keep watch for necessary touch-ups. Finally, Rods' coach Jim McMillan, Pat Martin and I hosted a barbecue at the event. The food and socializing capped off a great day. I would like to thank all the people from so many walks of life who have pitched in to help make St. James the beautiful constituency it is. This kind of co-operation and sense of civic duty is to be commended. It plays a huge role in building a healthy community. lie des Bois Cemetery Mr.

Denis Rocan (Carman): Mr. Speaker, yesterday, June 9, I had the pleasure of joining the former lieutenant-governor, the Honourable Yvon Dumont, and Reeve Bill Roth in bringing greetings at the plaque dedication ceremony of the Ile des Bois Cemetery of the St. Daniel Roman Catholic Church. * (1 4:40) Metis hunters populated this area originally in the early 18 00s and began permanent settle ment in the 18 30s. Records show the first bap tism, in 18 3 7, of a child named Elzear by Father Charles Poire. This location became their first burial grounds with over 100 sites.

A log school was constructed across the road on

section 21- 7- 5 in 18 70. A log church was built on this location and the parish became known as St. Daniel. In 18 99, the church was relocated to

section 24-7-6 and a new cemetery was established. The school had been moved to

section 30-7-5 in 18 94. Surnames from this time included on the plaque are: Aymont, Bellevue, Barnes, Boucher, Delorme, Ducharme, Desjardins, Dumas, Dupuis, Fontaine, Gagnon, Gauthier, Godon, Gosselin, Guiboche, Gutherie, Grant, Jolicoeur, Lapointe, Lili, Lesperance, Loisselle, Major, McDermott, Mcivor, McNabb, Moreau, Nadeau,

2360 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 Ouelette, Paul, Payette, Proulx, Pruden and Ritchot. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize other individuals who have made contributions to Sunday's ceremony. Doug Sisson and Michael Funke, chairpersons; plaque unveilers Lorraine Middleton and Raymond Grant; Father Jim Gray; piper Bruce Wood; entertainers Ryan Richard, Emile Lavalee and Madeline Provo, and the many individuals who have helped to keep the history of St. Daniel and the Ile des bois cemetery alive. On behalf of a proud Metis nation, thank you very much. Encounters with Canada Ms.

Linda Asper (Riel): As an MLA, I have the pleasure of interacting with and supporting stu dents on a variety of issues, including young people who participate in exchange programs, sports and other special events. Let me share the experience of two students who participated in the program Encounters with Canada in Ottawa. Pawel Buczkowicz, who participated in the program last month, reported that his experience was amazing. In his letter to me, quote: I have learned so much about government operation.

The visit to Parliament was exciting and edu cational, but I would also like to express thanks to you for giving me the opportunity to meet all the amazing people in Ottawa. I have found new friendships that will hopefully last a lifetime. The best part of the trip was meeting all the people from all the provinces and territories across Canada and learning about the differences and similarities we share. I also learned some thing I never expected to. There were some stu dents who were hearing impaired.

While spend ing time with them, I found I had learned a lot of sign language that they used and could actually tell them what I did during the day and they understood me. Susan Durnin, Grade 11 student at Glenlawn Collegiate who also participated in Encounters with Canada last winter said, quote: I had a fabu lous trip, experiences and memories. She described exciting activities such as sitting in the Senate, skating on Rideau Canal, visiting the National Gallery and the Terry Fox centre. Encounters with Canada is a fantastic program. I had the time of my life, explained Susan.

Erica Young, a Senior 4 student at College Jeanne-Sauve, was selected to be part of a student exhibition to Antarctica this past year. Students on Ice, a Canadian company, brought students and scientists from around the world together for two weeks. Daily landings and Zodiac cruises allowed Erica to do some hands on learning, experiences she will not forget. It is very rewarding to learn about these young people's opportunities to widen their horizons. Bravo to their parents who provide support and encouragement. Winnipeg River Brokenhead Community Futures Development Corporation Mr.

Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure last week to attend the annual general meeting and awards banquet of the Winnipeg River Brokenhead Community Futures Development Corporation. Four awards were given to various entrepreneurs from Lac du Bonnet constituency. Mrs. Lucci's Second Hand Store in Lac du Bonnet received the Community Initiatives Award to recognize the outstanding efforts of a community organization to advance a proje ct intended to contribute to the economic develop ment of the community.

The recipients of this award work within a regional perspective, portray an attitude of co-operation with neigh bouring communities, demonstrate community commitments and have undertaken community driven initiatives focussed on improving the local economy. Jodene Toews, chairperson of the board, and Karen Kost, program co-ordinator, accepted the Community Initiative Award on behalf of Mrs. Lucci's Second Hand Store. Book Break, a business in Pinawa, received the Business of the Year A ward to recognize the outstanding efforts of Dorothy Wilkin and Allan

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATNE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2361 Cassidy. The recipients embody all of the positive attitudes of entrepreneurs, including determination and enthusiasm for the develop ment of their business. With a focus on future growth, the business has prospered over the past year and maintained a commitment to the com munity through local investment, community involvement and community support. John Gibson, who owns and operates Provincial Helicopters Ltd. in Lac du Bonnet, was the recipient of the Warren D.

Besel Mem orial Award which recognizes the outstanding contributions made by a local person to their community. Recipients are local entrepreneurs who over time have contributed significantly and selflessly to their community, who have demon strated leadership and pride in their community and who have a proven track record of working with the community to make it a better place. Corley Sweeting from Falcon Lake was named the Youth Entrepreneur of the Year for operating and owning Rewind Productions which is an innovative videography business.

To obtain this award, Corley displayed a true entrepreneurial spirit, strong business manage ment skills and an attitude of co-operation with and support of the community and other businesses. I congratulate Winnipeg River Brokenhead Community Futures Development Corporation for recognizing entrepreneurs in the Lac du Bonnet constituency to encourage entrepre neurial growth. I note that Winnipeg River Brokenhead Community Futures Development Corporation has created 441 jobs. Philippine Heritage Week Mr. Conrad Santos (Wellington): Mr.

Speaker, despite the rain and threatened thunderstorm, on the Sunday of June 9, at 9:30 a.m., the Philippine community held a flag-raising ceremony pro gram at the City of Winnipeg building, attended by the honourable Minister of Labour and Immigration (Ms. Barrett) and other guests and representatives, to officially start the Philippine Heritage Week 2002. On the 13th of June, 2002, the Manitoba Association of Filipino Teachers will sponsor a cultural event at Machray School at 320 Moun tain A venue with free refreshments of ethnic food.

On Friday, June 14, 2002, the Philippine Association of Manitoba, an umbrella organiza tion for many Filipino associations and groups, will hold the Philippine-Canadian Ball following dinner and program under the leadership of its president and members of the board of directors at 1800 Wellington A venue, Radisson Suite Hotel. On Saturday, the 15th of June, 2002, the Philippine Association of Manitoba will feature a cultural variety show led by the renowned locally raised singer, Ma Ann Dionisio, at the Manitoba Centennial Concert Hall.

On Sunday, the 16th of June, 2002, the Philippine Canadian Centre of Manitoba, led by its president and members of the board of direc tors, will hold a picnic accompanied by an official ground-breaking ceremony to start the construction of the new Philippine Centre at the Burrows-Keewatin vacant lot near 765 Keewatin Street.

Therefore, this MLA for Wellington, as messenger, officially conveys the gratitude and thanks of the entire Philippine community to the City of Winnipeg, to the Province of Manitoba, to the Government of Canada, and to all other selfless donors and contributors. * (14:50) ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, there have been discus sions about whether there would be leave to extend the sitting today after private members' hour till 10 p.m. to deal with 14. That is not available today.

Would you please call then Bill 14, debate on second reading, Bill 14.

2362 LEGISLATNE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 Mr. Speaker: Before going to Bill 14, the honourable Official Opposition House Leader, to clarify some matters? Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Official Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: On a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Laurendeau: I understand what the Gov ernment House Leader was attempting to do. That was to put information and gibberish on the record, Mr. Speaker, but the Government House Leader was correct when he was going to seek leave for the House to sit till 10 o'clock this evening.

I did say that that would not be necessary. Mr. Speaker: Okay, that should clarify it. There will be no evening sitting tonight. So we will proceed to the ordinary, regular time. There is no point of order. Discussion between House leaders is between the House leaders. There is no point of order. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Biii 14-The Public Schools Modernization Act (Public Schools Act Amended) Mr. Speaker: Debate on second reading, Bill 14, The Public Schools Modernization Act (Public Schools Act Amended). The Member for Lac du Bonnet must speak now or lose his right to speak. Mr.

Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to debate Bill 14 on behalf of all residents of Lac du Bonnet constituency. Bill 14 is a bill that limits the number of school trustees to nine across school divisions throughout the province. It also empowers the minister to control budgets within school divi sions. It reduces, as mentioned earlier, 54 school divisions in the province of Manitoba down to 38. I believe that it should not be called The Public Schools Modernization Act.

Instead, because of all the controversy that it has instilled in Manitobans, it probably should be called the public schools disruption act.

Section 22 of that act indicates and gives unprecedented power, I believe, to a minister to revise budgets. It takes control from local school boards. I think that is not what we want in the province of Manitoba. It takes control away from local school boards, local trustees who were elected for that purpose. Also, I feel that the minister can undermine the financing of education and the quality of education. I do not think that that is what Bill 14 should be doing in the province. This forced amalgamation process has been, I believe, flawed from the outset.

There was no public consultation, as required by The Public Schools Act, and there was a six-month time lag between the amalgamation announcement and any enabling legislation. Regulation preceded this legislation. These comments are not my comments. These comments come directly from the Manitoba Association of School Trustees. I believe they should be heeded. The Pu blic Schools Act, I believe, has provision already to allow the minister to amalgamate school divisions without passing Bill 14. Without passing Bill 14, the minister can in fact amalgamate school divisions by utilizing either the provisions under

section 5 ofThe Public Schools Act, or in fact,

section 7 of The Public Schools Act. Under

section 5, the minister can merge or amalgamate school divisions if he receives written requests from municipal councils or school boards within that division or written requests from 10 or more electors within that division. Then the minister can in fact form a board of revision, which will then decide the matter. The board of reference has hearings which are in fact public hearings. In the event that the minister does not receive a request from 10 or more electors or in fact does not receive a request from a school board or a school division, the minister himself can request that board of reference to decide the matter. However, under

section 5 of the act, when we are talking about the amalgamation of Agassiz School Division with the Springfield portion of Transcona-Springfield and the Pine Falls School District and the Pinawa school district, under that provision it would require in

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2363 fact four boards of reference. I feel, for that reason, considering the number of amalga mations and the number of divisions, 54 going down to 38, that in fact going under

section 5 would be too cumbersome and probably too time-consuming. However, the minister can proceed under

section 7 of The Public Schools Act, and under

section 7, the minister can add territory or withdraw territory from any school division and also can amalgamate any two or more school divisions or school districts. Under this section, if he chose to do so, he could form the Boundaries Review Commission, and the Boundaries Review Commission could review the matter. Under this section, the minister establishes the commission and appoints its members and instructs the commission to conduct a review of all the boundaries of school divisions within the province. There is no appeal from the findings of the Boundaries Review Commission. The Boundaries Review Com mission's hearings are in fact in public. I feel that proceeding under

section 7, under the Bound aries Review Commission, would be the most efficient way to proceed under The Public Schools Act, given the numbers of amalga mations that are out there. I hope that the minister would reconsider Bill 14 and, in fact, proceed under The Public Schools Act, because there is existing legislation which permits him to proceed. Why not proceed under

section 7 of the Public Schools Act? There are only two reasons I feel that the minister is proceeding under that act: firstly, maybe the minister does not want to consult with the public, maybe he does not want public hearings; secondly, the minister under Bill 14 has the authority under

section 22 to control school division budgets. Maybe that is another reason why he wants to proceed under Bill 14 rather than proceeding by way of a public consultation process under The Public Schools Act,

section 7. I think it is important, before you find my views of Bill 14, that you realize what it is that we have in Lac du Bonnet constituency, and that will give you some idea as to why I feel the way I do about Bill 14. In our constituency, we have seven secondary schools, at this point. We have one in Pinawa, Lac du Bonnet; we have Wanipagow School in Manigotagan, White mouth, Powerview; we have a secondary school in Edward Schreyer School in Beausejour; and on Sagkeeng First Nation, we have Anicinabe School, a total of seven secondary schools.

In our constituency, we have three adult education facilities: one in Beausejour; one in Lac du Bonnet; one in Pine Falls and Powerview areas. I have four school division and districts in Lac du Bonnet constituency. We have Agassiz School Division, whose head office is in Beausejour; the Whiteshell School District, head office in Pinawa; the Pine Falls School District, of course, in Pine Falls; and the Frontier School Division, which is located north of Agassiz; and included in there are schools in Bisset and Manigotagan.

Under Bill 14, in fact, as it currently exists, there still will be four school divisions and school districts in Lac du Bonnet constituency, so there will not be any amalgamation at this point. Eventually, it will be reduced to three, with Pine Falls School District eventually becoming part of Agassiz School Division and becoming new Sunrise School Division, and then eventually to two, once the Whiteshell School District becomes part of the new school division. I, of course, graduated from Whitemouth School. So I am a product, of course, of the Agassiz School Division.

Whitemouth School, in fact, is now a K-to-12 school. It used to be, at one point, 600 students attending that school about 30 years ago, and now it is less than 300 students in the last 30 years. I can tell you that there have been many accomplishments from people who have graduated from that school, in spite of the fact that it is a very small school. We have had people who have graduated who became lawyers and professors, accountants, doctors, teachers, people in the police force. We have had many outstanding citizens in Manitoba and many outstanding volunteers.

During those 30 years that I have been outside of that school, many of those years that I was inside that school, and, in fact, many years in which the school has been open, Alex Shewchuck was the principal of that school. He was a very caring person. The current principal is Craig Mackenzie.

2364 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 The amalgamation of school districts occurred many years ago, probably about 40 years ago, as I recall. Many one-room school houses were amalgamated into divisions at the time and that made sense. It made sense from the point of view that one-room and two-room schoolhouses became larger schools. There were synergies that were in place that made sense for the amalgamation of those schools. As well, there were economies of scale that were impor tant, and for that reason I believe it was very much supported at the time. It made a lot of economic sense.

Better facilities and better resources came out of those amalgamations of those one-room and two-room schoolhouses. * (15:00) Just one school in Whitemouth was the result of the amalgamation of many, of seven one- or two-room schools in the Whitemouth area, the Stony Hill, Darwin, River Hills, Oldenberg, Seven Sisters and Elma, a total of seven schools to make one school with cen tralized services at the time.

I believe at that time the Government of Manitoba gave Manitobans a vote after extensive public consultations and had referendums and that was the Manitoba way, to ensure that Manitobans were consulted and Manitobans had a voice in the process, and they were given a voice in that process. This process is not the same. We have heard many speakers on the other side of the House over the last couple of weeks mention that the Norrie report is an important reason why they are proceeding with Bill 14. In fact, the Norrie report was commissioned more than eight years ago, and that report came down about eight years ago.

That report is eight years old. Feasibility studies are not relied on after one year. What makes the difference with the Norrie report? Why should we rely on a report that is eight years old? Who acts on studies that are more than a year old? We do not. I do not believe we should. Banks, credit unions and other financial institutions do not rely on reports, on feasibility studies that are more than a year old. Why should we? I think it is outdated, and it has to be revised before we act on that report and before we follow any recommendations that we perceive to be in that report, Mr. Speaker.

The Norrie report, though, if you read it, says, first of all, that if we move on amalga mation of school divisions, it will do absolutely nothing to reduce costs. That is what the Norrie report says. Secondly, the Norrie report says that the amalgamation process will do nothing to improve education. It is exactly what it said. It may close smaller schools. Schools in our school division that may be vulnerable would include, I believe, Hazelridge, the Whitemouth School, the Reynolds School, the Pointe du Bois School and so on.

I think it is important, before we make a decision as to whether to amalgamate, we have to decide whether in fact it will do something for education. Is that not the big issue? Will it do something for students? I do not think it will. In fact, I think it will increase bus travel for many of the students. In fact, I can relate a story to you that happened to me seven or eight years ago. After I had finished working in Beausejour, I took the opportunity to go by the Beausejour Elementary School seven or eight years ago, and on the sidewalk I found a seven-year-old student who was crying on the sidewalk.

So I stopped and I offered my help and my assistance. I asked the student why he was crying, and he said, well, I am crying because I missed the school bus at the time. So I volunteered. I asked him his name. I did not recognize the name, so I did not know where they lived. So I volunteered to offer him a ride back home, and he was very happy at that because he did not want to bother his parents who were home at the time. He thought that, perhaps, he would be in trouble withJhem. So I volunteered to drive him home, and I told him to give me the directions.

I must have gone down every gravel road in the rural municipality of Brokenhead in taking him home until I finally found his place. It took 30 minutes before I got to his house and gave him a ride home. What I found, though, was that his home was only five minutes from the school and, had I known that, I would have taken a more direct route, but I did not know that. But the reason he took me on such a roundabout route was because

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2365 the only way he knew how to get home was the way the school bus took him home, and it took him 30 minutes to get home. I do not believe a thirty-minute bus ride or an hour bus ride does anything for the quality of education that students get. Mr. Harry Schellenberg, Acting Speaker, in the Chair I believe that amalgamation in fact may increase the time that students travel on the way to school, and that certainly does not do anything to improve education.

I am not entirely against the amalgamation of school divisions, but what I am against, I can tell you, is the forced amalgamation of school divisions. I feel that forced amalgamation of school divisions is in many ways like a shotgun wedding. In fact, the Premier (Mr. Doer) and the Education Minister (Mr. Caldwell) and others on the opposite side of the House agree with me. They agreed that forced amalgamation was not a good idea, as I did. First of all, the Minister of Intergovern mental Affairs (Ms.

Friesen) stated that there was no evidence that the government's proposed boundary revisions would save money, and she cited reports, including one prepared in 1994 by the World Development Institute which stated there is no economic or educational rationale for proceeding on forced boundary revisions. The minister said this in an NDP news release on March 27, 1996, after the Norrie report. What has changed her mind since? The Premier told the Manitoba Association of School Trustees that there will be no forced amalgamations. It is not the Manitoba way.

This was reported by the Manitoba Association of School Trustees fall 2001 newsletter. What has changed his mind since? The Minister of Education, in December of 1999, advised he was against forcing school divisions to amalgamate and stated: I am not inclined to impose anything; I am really not. That was reported in the Winnipeg Free Press on December 22, 1999. What has changed his mind since? Well, I can tell you forced amalgamations produce bad results. Forced amalgamations are like hostile takeovers in business. An example is Nortel takeovers.

Nortel took over many businesses which formed part of their compe tition. They went from $12 8 a share down to less than $4 a share today. That is the result of forced takeovers. That is the result of forced amalga mations. Forced amalgamations create animosity with government. There is absolutely no doubt, that forced amalgamations create animosity with government as a whole. Several of the quotes include Reeve Holland of the Rural Municipality of Springfield. On December 20 of last year, he says he is disap pointed with everything he heard coming from the minister.

Carol Lalonde, in The Clipper Weekly newspaper on November 19 of last year, said that the Rural Municipality of Springfield is getting the shaft for political reasons. She says Transcona is a long-standing supporter of NDP philosophy while Springfield is predominantly Conservative and fiscally responsible. This political decision benefits no one. Again, it creates animosity with government. The chair of the Assiniboine South Board of Trustees, in a letter of November 26 last year, expressed concern over perceived lack of plan ning on the part of government to implement amalgamation plans.

These are only some of the comments that people are making and creating animosity toward government as a whole, and I think all of us know of plenty more comments that are out there. Secondly, I think that forced amalgamations produce bad results because they produce divisions within communities. I think a classic example of that is the Agassiz School Division amalgamation with the Whiteshell School Dis trict that was proposed. On November 8 of last year, the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) announced the amalgamation of school divisions including Pine Falls, Whiteshell and Transcona Springfield, the rural

section of that, with the Agassiz School Division. The school district of Whiteshell was created as a special revenue district in 1968 under a master agreement between Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and the Province of Manitoba. That master agree ment established the LGD of Pinawa and set out

2366 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 conditions regarding the payment of funds being in the amount of approximately $1. 3 million every year for the operation of the schools and the operation of the town. This agreement was done at the request of Atomic Energy of Canada who wanted to ensure that Pinawa provided the best educational opportunities possible to attract top scientists and engineers to the Whiteshell plant. * (15 :10 ) Under that agreement, the boundaries of the school district were established to conform with those of the LGD of Pinawa. It made absolute sense.

It, in fact, provided that the boundaries could not be changed without the consent of the LGD of Pinawa, the Whiteshell School District and the Province of Manitoba, and there was no expiry date for that agreement. The mayor of Pinawa, Len Simpson, told the Minister of Education that the LGD of Pinawa was not prepared to open that master agreement.

It was then, because his homework was not done, because his research was not done, that the Minister of Education, who did not even know of the existence of the master agreement, that he did another flip-flop and decided to include the school district of Whiteshell in the amalga mation plans with the Agassiz School Division. Later, the minister suggested to the trustees of the Whiteshell school division to attend negoti ations with the school boards of Agassiz and Springfield as observers.

I think this further alarmed the community of Pinawa in the sense that they now believe that a forced amalgamation is inevitable, and they believe that it will happen at some point in time. They are concerned that, if a forced amalga mation occurs, their school may disappear, or it may be downsized and students will be bused out of the community to other centres in the Agassiz School Division.

This would be a major blow to the community, and this would be a major blow to the community at a time when the community is already reeling due to the downsizing and the intended withdrawal of Atomic Energy of Canada from that community. A few years ago, 13 00 employees worked at Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, and today less than 200 employees work at AECL. Within five years, it is anticipated that there will be fewer than 50 employees left in that community and the federal government has completel�' ignored the pleas and the requests of the residents of Pinawa and the Pinawa council to replace those jobs.

It is completely unpre cedented where the Government of Canada completely pulls out of a community yet does not replace at least some of those jobs that are lost. I call on the federal government, members opposite, my colleagues and the Premier (Mr. Doer) to join with me in holding the federal government accountable for this withdrawal and to join with me to ensure that the federal government replaces those jobs. The time for a study of the situation is long past.

What we need is action, and now, to ensure the continued growth and the continued viability of Pinawa so that their education and health services can be maintained. In the meantime, the council of the LGD of Pinawa, led by Mayor Len Simpson, and all the council members are working extremely hard to revitalize this community, including, of course, the volunteers of the Pinawa Development Corporation and their economic development officer. Mr.

Speaker in the Chair Some of the comments made by the school district of Whiteshell during this amalgamation process illustrates the division between the communities of Lac du Bonnet constituency. They include comments by the school district of Whiteshell indicating that research has repeat edly found that small schools are superior to large schools on most measures and equal to them on the rest.

Pupils and communities and taxpayers, they say, have the right to expect that education dollars are being invested in effective, research-based ways that maximize the benefit for children and not for politically popular movements. Local trustees in the school district of Whiteshell are most concerned that extensive consultations with the board, the Local Govern ment District of Pinawa, and the community did

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2367 not take place prior to that announcement. They also state that the board and the Local Gov ernment District of Pinawa council are united in their concerns about the proposed amalgamation. Taxpayers across the entire new division would have to pick up increased costs and ongoing costs of harmonization of collective agreements, increased compensation costs, debt servicing, capital debts and other costs.

Another example that forced amalgamations produce divisions within communities includes the proposed amalgamation between Agassiz School Division and the Springfield portion of the Transcona-Springfield School Division. The decision to force amalgamation here really pits the parents of Springfield against all the con stituents in all the communities in the Agassiz School Division. On January 10 of this year, more than 900 people attended a public meeting at Springfield Collegiate. They expressed their concerns to the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell).

At that meeting, residents could not get the Minister of Education to cite any benefits to Springfield children of the amalgamation with Agassiz School Division. Residents also informed the minister about their concerns regarding sky rocketing taxes, loss of teachers, transportation of children, and losses of programs. Outcry against the proposed amalgamations has been greatest in Transcona-Springfield.

One concern is that under the plan, students enrolled in French immersion at Dugald School will have to travel 200 kilometres to Powerview in order to continue their education in French past Grade 8, again, a concern, of course, of increased busing and decreased educational opportunities. Another issue is that the division was being split at the floodway rather than at the city limits, a move that the reeve of the R.M. of Springfield suggested would cost Springfield $1.5 million in taxes.

Reeve Holland stated that the bottom line is that the chunk of his tax base would stay with Transcona and go to River East, while 98 percent of the students will go to school in Agassiz School Division. On the response from the Minister of Education, Holland continued: I am disappointed with everything I have heard from the minister. The forced amalgamation process pitted the parents of students in Springfield who are un happy with the forced amalgamation process against the Agassiz School Division.

The parents of Springfield, who are desperate to prevent the forced amalgamation at times, I feel, said things that they should not have said and criticized the educational program and the educational system in the Agassiz School Division. I believe that the criticism is unfair and unwarranted. I can tell you that the educational programs offered by the Agassiz School Division are as good as any offered in any school division in the province and have done so at a lesser cost than most other school divisions.

Over the years, the trustees of Agassiz School Division have ensured that a high-quality education was provided to students at a reason able cost to the taxpayer. However, given the frustration of these parents and the lack of local control over education as a result of this bill, this Bill 14, I can understand, in their desperation, why those parents made those statements. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, forced amalgamations do not reduce costs, as many members opposite have laid claim. I do not believe they reduce costs at all.

One of the major benefits, according to the Government, with respect to amalga mation, is the fact that they stated that the amalgamation will reduce costs. One of the arguments used by the current Government is that costs will be reduced because there will be fewer trustees province-wide. * (15:20) Trustees are really inexpensive when it comes time to educational costs. Being a trustee is really a volunteer service. When one compares the number of hours a trustee works to the indemnity they receive, they are really per forming a community service. They are really volunteers.

In the year 2000, school divisions across the entire province only spent $7.14 million on trustee salaries, trustee expenses and trustee support. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the Education budget. Even if

2368 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 trustees were reduced to only two-thirds of their numbers, the cost saving would only amount to less than $2.5 million annually. But what about other costs which will most likely increase exponentially? The Government did not take into account all of the factors before announcing the forced amalgamation of Agassiz School Division with the Springfield portion of Transcona-Springfield School Division.

It was initially proposed that all land within the R.M. of Springfield but outside the Perimeter Highway would go to the Agassiz School Division, yet all land inside the Perimeter Highway and within the R.M. of Springfield would join the River East School Division. This led to the MLA from Springfield to correctly comment that: Why are you going to send 99 percent of Springfield's costs and students to the Agassiz School Division and only send 85 percent of the rev enue? That is what the member from Springfield said.

The reeve of the R.M. of Springfield, John Holland, on December 10 of last year, noted that with the new school division boundaries, minus the tax revenues, residents of the R.M. of Springfield are destined for drastic tax increases, drastic tax increases. Eric Towler, the chief administrative officer of the R.M. of Springfield, stated on January 11 of this year that the current plan would lead to a 13.3% jump in Springfield's school taxes.

A trustee at the River East School Division, Wayne Ritcher, stated on November 21 of last year that, on the challenges posed by the amal gamation, what I do not like is spending time, money and expertise and ending up with a pocketful of rain. We know this is going to be a huge cost to the ratepayers with no significant benefit. The trustees of the Agassiz School Division, on January 14, indicated that they could discern no financial efficiencies in the amalgamation of the Springfield portion of the Transcona-Springfield School Division with Agassiz.

Areas of concern included the wide differentials in existing labour contracts and in the mill rates. There is more than a two-mill difference in mill rate between the Agassiz School Division and the Transcona-Springfield School Division. That difference will likely be added to the tax bills of property owners within the Agassiz School Division. In addition, the salaries of the two divisions will need to be harmonized.

Harmonizing sala ries between Agassiz School Division and the Springfield portion of Transcona-Springfield School Division will cost taxpayers an additional $400,000 annually, and that is year, after year, after year, because it gets added to the base cost of salaries. Homeowners, businesses and farmers will have to bear the brunt of that tax increase, and those tax increases come at a time when residents can least afford it, particularly farmers. Farmers are being squeezed with the U.S. farm bill, as we have seen earlier in debates in this Legislature.

The U.S. farm bill is going to decrease the gross annual income of farmers. They have absolutely no control over the price for their product. They also have absolutely no control over the cost, the input costs in their farms. They have absolutely no control. Those costs are skyrocketing, and the net incomes of farmers are decreasing. They have absolutely no control over it. This comes at a time, I believe, when farmers can least afford it. Mr. Speaker, forced amalgamations increase costs, particularly in Agassiz School Division.

I believe that more school construction will be required in the new Sunrise School Division, which, of course, is the amalgamation of the Agassiz School Division with the Springfield portion of the Transcona-Springfield School Division. The Agassiz School Division currently depends upon the Selkirk School Division for access to a regional school, because the cost of constructing a regional school is high compared to the number of students within the Agassiz School Division.

With the proposed amalgamation and the increased numbers of students in the new Sunrise School Division, most likely a new centralized regional school will need to be built. This will come at a cost to the provincial tax payer. I believe that other school division amal gamations will produce the same result with the same increased costs. In the new Sunrise School Division, larger administrative offices will be required for the new, larger school division,

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2369 because there will be, of course, increased num bers of students and increased numbers of teachers and support personnel. Some employees will be redundant. We do not need two superintendents. We do not need two chief financial officers. We do not need those kinds of duplicated numbers of employees. What we are going to have to do, I believe, is in fact early retire a number of employees from the division. A number of them will be receiving retirement or early termination packages. That comes at a cost, of course, to the provincial taxpayer.

I believe that increased costs to tax payers in this province will be as a result of the amalgamation of Agassiz with Springfield and will likely be in the neighborhood of at least $10 million in capital expenditures due to the possible construction of a regional school and expenditures related to larger administrative offices within the division. In addition, Mr. Speaker, the amalgamation, I believe, will increase the salary base line for employees by at least $400,000 annually. Settle ments to buy out and to reduce the number of employees will again increase the cost sub stantially.

I predict that within the next year, in 2003, taxes will go through the roof as a result of the amalgamation of Agassiz School Division with the Springfield portion of the Transcona Springfield School Division. The Manitoba Association of School Trust ees agrees. It is not just my prediction. The Manitoba Association of School Trustees agrees with that assertion. Mr. Speaker, the president, Don Dunnigan, noted that changes like that do not come cheap. That is what he said. He also said amalgamation efforts are hugely complex and time-consuming and generally cause signi ficant disruption in school systems.

There are also substantial cost factors, he says, to be considered such as harmonization of salaries, benefits, and working conditions for all em ployee groups, short-term costs to redesign service delivery models, costs incurred to extend or expand existing programs and services to larger numbers of students. There are going to be facilities modifications. He agrees with me. He agrees there are going to be upgrades where required and to be technology and equipment acquisitions. All of these add to the costs. Those I think are things that are going to happen within our division as well. Fifthly, Mr.

Speaker, forced amalgamations will not increase educational opportunities or enhance education. That is why we are bringing this bill forward, I thought. Are we not bringing it forward to enhance education? I do not think it enhances education. If we are not doing that why are we forcing amalgamations? I think firstly there will be fewer trustees for more population in school divisions. In our division there are now 11 trustees, but after amalgamation there will only be 9 trustees for twice the school popu lation in the Sunrise School Division. There is less local control.

Trustees should be there for more local control and more local input to education. * (1 5:30) Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member from Seine River, THAT all the words aft er the word "THAT" be deleted and the fo llowing be substituted therefo re: this House declines to give Second Reading to Bill 14 - The Public Schools Modernization Act (Public Schools Act Amended), until such time as the Minister of Education, Training and Youth undertakes meaningful consultations with all effected stakeholders within Manitoba's education system. Mr. Speaker: The amendment is in order. Motion presented. Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I move, seconded by the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), that debate on Bill 14 be adjourned today so that we can move on to other legislation. Mr. Speaker: Order. On the motion put by the honourable Member for River Heights, he used the words "on Bill 14." We are now debating the amendment, not Bill 14. Mr. Gerrard: I stand corrected. The debate on the amendment of Bill 14 be adjourned. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Member for River Heights, seconded

2370 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 by the honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), that debate be adjourned. Agreed? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Some Honourable Members: No. Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of adjourning debate, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to adjourning debate, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it. Formal Vote Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Official Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.

Order. Following Manitoba practice, please tum the bells off. The question before the House is the motion of the honourable Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) that debate be adjourned. Division A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as fo llows: Yeas Cumm ings, Dacquay, Derkach, Driedger, Dyck, Enns, Faurschou, Gerrard, Gilleshamm er, Hawranik, Helwer, Laurendeau, Loewen, Maguire, Mitchelson, Murray, Penner (Emerson), Penner (Steinbach), Pitura, Reimer, Schuler, Smith (Fort Garry), Tweed.

Nays Aglugub, Allan, Asp er, Barrett, Caldwell, Cerilli, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Friesen, Jennissen, Korzeniowski, Lath/in, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Martindale, McGiff ord, Nevakshono.IJ, Reid, Robinson, Rondeau, Sale, Santos, Schellenberg, Selinger, Smith (Brandon West), Struthers, Wowchuk. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 23, Nays 29. Mr. Speaker: The motion is accordingly defeated. *** Mr. Speaker: Now we will resume debate on the amendment to Bill 14. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, I rise to put a few words on the record on Bill 14 and the amend ment made by the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik).

In looking at the legislation which we are discussing today, this legislation is about edu cation. It is about school boards. It carries the title modernizing education, but the legislation, itself, has very little in the way of focus on the most important and most essential element, that is the quality of education. That is where we should be looking to improve. That is the critical end point that we are talking about here.

We would indeed have been better off with a bill which comes to a direct focus on issues of quality of education and which looks at stand ards, looks at ways in which we will improve directly the quality . of education in working together as a government with the school trust ees and the school boards. Mr. Speaker, there are many ways that the quality of education in Manitoba can be improved.

Certainly, there are good examples in a variety of other jurisdictions of areas where we could focus efforts in this province to improve the quality of education, the access to learning materials, the availability of supports, the putting in place of approaches which will ensure that we have the highest possible quality not only of teachers but principals and superintendents and measures which would look, step by step, at those things which have been done in juris dictions around the world which would focus on the issues directly pertaining to the delivery of the highest possible quality of education.

This bill addresses not the quality of edu cation but the amalgamation of school boards. I think it is fair to say that amalgamation of school

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATNE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2371 boards may give better or worse quality. It is a change in structure, but it is not necessarily a change in the quality of education. Indeed, there are some concerns that this legislation, by taking decisions out of the hands of the local school boards and the school trustees and putting them in the hands of the minister, may in fact lead to decisions which could be detrimental to students, to learning and to the quality of education in this provmce.

I think it is important, as we progress, as we consider this bill, as we look through the com mittee stage, we seek input from individuals, school trustees and others around the province at the committee stage, that we constantly maintain the focus on how we improve the quality of education in Manitoba, and that if indeed we had some measures within this bill which would address quality issues, it certainly might be more palatable than the kind of bill that we received today by the NDP government. * (16:40) One of the significant concerns of this legislation is a significant transfer of authority from the school boards and the school trustees to the Minister of Education (Mr.

Caldwell). This legislation would permit the Minister of Edu cation to make arbitrary decisions, to impose arbitrary decisions on local school divisions, and those arbitrary decisions could even be imprac ticable or unnecessary and may not necessarily be in the best interests of the students or the school divisions or the local ratepayers. I am concerned that the minister, under Bill 14, will have to make sure that once in a while the minister needs to be listening more carefully than he is at the moment to people in this Chamber and to people around the province who are concerned about education.

I am concerned that the minister, under Bill 14, would have a totally unfettered right to impose any change whatsoever on school divi sions, small or large or potentially even in oppo sition to what a division is trying to achieve in its own planning and budgetary processes. The minister does not have an obligation to explain the changes, nor even to present any rationale or educational reason for the changes.

Indeed, there is no limitation, direction, focus or guidance in the legislation with respect to areas where the minister may demand changes to the Budget, nor any requirement that the changes be reasonable. If the minister is inter ested only in reviewing the amalgamation costs to be decided in divisional budgets, then, indeed, the minister could have brought in quite different legislation. It would have been considerably better if the legislation could have been drafted to provide a framework to or limits to the minister's arbitrary budgetary changing author ity, Mr. Speaker.

So one of the major concerns with this legis lation is a transfer of authority from school trustees to the minister. It is an area where I think it is quite important that we get input from school trustees and citizens and ratepayers around the province at the committee stage and that this input is listened to very carefully. One of the concerns that I have with the approach that the minister is taking- Point of Order Mr. Laurendeau: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you might ask the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) to put away his newspaper and listen to the debate. Hon.

Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education, Training and Youth): Mr. Speaker, the member does not have a point of order. I am at my desk here and working and listening to the remarks of the Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard). I guess more to the point, all honourable members in this House know that we have Hansard that is available to apprise ourselves of debates when they are taking place in the House and when honourable members are out in the communities of the province doing their own constituency work, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Official Opposition House Leader, I would like to take this opportunity to remind all honourable members of some rules that we have in the House.

2372 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 First of all, we have a rule that states no reading of newspapers in the House; a second rule, I would like to take this opportunity, no eating of food is to be allowed in the House; and No. 3, there is to be no use of telephones in the House. So I thank the honourable Official Oppo sition House Leader for raising that point of order. I would like to remind all honourable members of those rules. I expect the full co operation of all honourable members. *** Mr. Gerrard: Mr.

Speaker, I have concerns about the overall costs related to the proposed amalgamation and amalgamation process. The Minister of Education, in discussing this bill, has suggested that there are to be $10 million of savings to the education system in Manitoba. I and many others have concerns that in fact past experience and the wisdom of many school trustees in this province who have experience in this area would suggest that the savings, certainly in the short term, are somewhat illusory. There are many reasons why previous amalgamations have ended up costing more than expected to school boards and to ratepayers.

These reasons should have been considered. I think it is very important that the minister be prepared to provide an accounting of all the amalgamation expenses, the costs as well as the benefits. I think it is very important that Mani tobans have an opportunity in due course to be able to look carefully at whether or not we have had savings or expenses on a net basis.

Clearly, to look at the words of a variety of people who have assessed this situation, all the way from Bill Norrie to many others, it is quite likely that there are significant costs associated with amalgamation and that the savings, as a result of amalgamation, are much less than predicted. I think, in looking at how school boards can work together, that there may be benefits, under some circumstances, of amalga mation, that those benefits come from larger school divisions being able to operate a larger variety of courses.

Some of those benefits, on the other hand, could be achieved by better working relationships between school divisions and by an approach taken by the Province which would look and enhance the ability of school divisions to work together to improve the quality of education, as well as the cost, rather than pushing amalgamations on divisions quickly and perhaps much more costly than they would have needed to be.

Certainly, from the point of view of how budgets are run by school divisions, how quality of education is delivered, it is disappointing that there was not an effort here made by the minister to look at ways in which school boards could be helped to co-operate and work together in areas of improving quality of education.

The focus has been primarily on amalgamation and less on the quality of education. * (1 6:50) The budget time frames that we have traditionally had will potentially result in some significant problems if the Minister of Education continues the traditional NDP provincial funding announcement between mid- and late January. Occasionally, the announcement in the past has even been delayed until February.

The result of this is quite tight time frames in terms of how the process may go, particularly with the requirement now for ministerial review and perhaps for significant changes, as I have said, significant and potentially arbitrary changes by the minister. I believe that one of the things which could have been in this bill, but which is not, was a commitment by the Government to a two-year planning horizon so that the Budget, when it is now delivered, comes late enough so that it puts school boards in a difficult circumstance.

It would have been much better in this bill had it been accompanied by clearer budgetary time frames for announcements, and indeed, for a two-year instead of a one-year planning horizon so that school boards would be able to plan, not just for the corning year, but for two years in advance, and be able, through better planning processes, to be in a position to deliver higher quality education. So, certainly, the issue here, which deals with time frames and planning, could have been

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2373 better addressed in this legislation, together with this legislation, than the Government has done. There is, I think, a whole potential variety of reasons why, if the Government had put a focus on quality delivery of education, amalgamations, and school boards and school divisions working together, it might have provided an improved environment for children in our school divisions. It is too bad that a number of these items were not better addressed in the present legislation.

It is too bad that the Government has seen fit to move to a greater central control, ministerial authority versus school board authority, and away from local control and local impact on the quality of education. There is a role certainly for central frame work, for the quality of education, and for en suring that there be high-quality education and strong delivery throughout the province. But the somewhat arbitrary nature of the potential deci sions by the minister and circumstances under which these have been made and are being made lead one to have some concern about this bill, Bill 14.

Certainly, the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell), in his decisions to date on Morris Macdonald and Agassiz to be Sunrise School Division, leaves some considerable concerns in the minds of many citizens in this province. Citizens in the school divisions, Morris Macdonald versus Agassiz and soon to be Sunrise, one school division was provided extra funding and another school division has had a considerable amount of funding clawed back because of circumstances that arose within the two divisions. These decisions highlight the potential arbitrary nature of ministerial action.

They also highlight the fact that there has not been as good a framework for ensuring that school divisions are treated fairly and equally. I am sure the Minister of Education and other members of this Government in this House would complain if the federal government clawed back money from one province but not another. Yet here the Minister of Education and the NDP government have treated two school divisions quite inequitably, clawing back funds from one and providing funds to another. Certainly, there have been major concerns with issues and the circumstances that arose in the Morris-Macdonald School Division.

Cer tainly, there needs to be improved accounta bility, greater transparency, and better running of such school divisions in the future, but at the same time the Minister of Education himself delayed in acting initially when he was first elected. He could have, if he had acted initially when he was first elected and became the minister, in fact resulted in a situation where many of the overexpenditures and problems in Morris-Macdonald would not have happened.

I would like to describe briefly to the Minister of Education my visit not long ago to the Nellie McClung school in Manitou, where the minister's brother, Grant Caldwell, is, in fact, a teacher. This was a school division and a school which is named after Nellie McClung, one of the foremost women in the history of Manitoba. Certainly this school division has an important history and tradition. There were, when I visited the school, many eager students keen to learn, keen to understand better the political process and what was happening at the Legislature.

I believe that, when we look and put in context what is happening at the Legislature, the changes that are being made through bills such as Bill 14, that we need to be quite careful about what is the balance between centralized control and centralized government as the NDP are pushing towards improved ability for local decision-making and improved ability for school trustees to take real responsibility and real action in areas which relate to the quality of education. Certainly, there are some school divisions that will benefit from amalgamation. I think that it is important to acknowledge this.

There are some which have amalgamated voluntarily which have found significant benefits in the ability of people in larger areas to work together. On the other hand, a move, as the present Minister of Education is doing, to grab authority in ministerial hands, to be in a position where he can make a lot of arbitrary decisions, raises questions about the direction of this Govern ment, questions which I think it is very

2374 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 important that they are looked at carefully at the committee stage, at report stage, and indeed at third reading of this bill. I think that it is critical that we have broad input at that committee stage so indeed the measures in this bill can be evaluated and assessed very carefully to make sure that we are not forgetting the most important target of all, which is improving the quality of education for people in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member will have 16 minutes remaining.

The hour being 5 p.m., we will now move to Private Members' Business. * (17:00) PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Mr. Speaker: We will be dealing with the proposed Resolution 13 brought in by the hon ourable Member for Fort Garry, Youth Criminal Justice Act. PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS Res. 13-Youth Criminal Justice Act Mrs. Joy Smith (Fort Garry): I move, seconded by the Member for Emerson (Mr. Jack Penner),

WHEREAS youth crime is on the rise, with Statistics Canada reporting that the rate of violent crimes committed by young people rose by 38 percent between 1989 and 1999, and by another 7 percent in 2000 alone; and

WHEREAS the Young Offenders Act has serious omissions and limitations which severely restrict provincial efforts to fight and prevent youth crime; and

WHEREAS in the spring of 1999 the previ ous government initiated a panel, chaired by the honourable Member for Emerson, to carry out consultations throughout Manitoba on the Young Offenders Act; and

WHEREAS as a result of these consultations it was determined that many Manitobans believe that young offenders must take full responsibility for their actions and that the youth justice system must provides significant consequences for youth who commit serious criminal offences; and

WHEREAS the Government of Canada passed a Youth Criminal Justice Act in the House of Commons on May 29, 2001, as a replacement to the Young Offenders Act, despite harsh criticism of the new act from judges, victims of crime, youth workers and provincial governments; and

WHEREAS the Government of Quebec is an avid opponent of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, claiming that the legislation would inhibit some of the positive justice initiatives that have been implemented in that province, and further indicating that it may refer the bill to the Quebec Court of Appeal in order to challenge its constitutionality; and

WHEREAS the Government of Ontario also feels that the Youth Criminal Justice Act does not go far enough in dealing with youth crime, and has drafted approximately 100 proposed amendments which it submitted to the federal Justice Minister as the No-More-Free-Ride for Young Offenders Act; and

WHEREAS under the act, a person 14 years or older may be sentenced as a youth even in cases of violent crimes such as murder, attempt ed murder, manslaughter, or aggravated assault, and there are no mandatory minimum sentences for weapons offences; and

WHEREAS for many offences the act continues to allow, on an arbitrary basis, youth to be released from incarceration into com munity supervision after two-thirds of the sen tence has been completed, without undertaking a risk assessment or taking into consideration the behavior of the offender while incarcerated; and

WHEREAS the Government of Canada, through the Youth Criminal Justice Act, will be imposing significant fiscal costs onto the provmces without providing the appropriate supports. THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Government of Canada to consider revisiting

June 10, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2375 and strengthening the Youth Criminal Justice Act to ensure that young people are held accountable for their actions by providing more significant consequences for youth who break the law. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Gov ernment of Canada to provide the provinces with the necessary financial resources to implement and enforce any changes imposed under the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Fort Garry, I would just like to get clarification on the last

WHEREAS on the second page where it states: "WHEREAS the Government of Canada, through the Youth Criminal Justice Act, will be imposing significant financial costs" because the word you used was "physical." So is that clari fied, that it will be financial? Mrs. Smith: Fiscal. Mr. Speaker: Fiscal or financial? Mrs. Smith: Necessary financial resources to implement. Mr. Speaker: Very good. Financial then. Mrs. Smith: Yes. Mr. Speaker: Very good. It has been moved by the honourable Member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Smith), seconded by the honourable Member for Emerson (Mr. Jack Penner )-dispense?

Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mrs. Smith: Mr. Speaker, this resolution, as you know, was put into place several months ago to address the lack of strength in the Youth Criminal Justice Act that was being presented at the federal level. As you know, Mr. Speaker, the Youth Criminal Justice Act received Royal Assent in the House of Commons on February 17, 2002, and the federal government anticipates the law coming into force in April 2003, to allow time for the provinces and territories to prepare their workforces and develop programs to support implementation.

The federal government has also committed approximately $1 billion over five years for cost-sharing agreements with the provinces to assist implementation. Mr. Speaker, the bill's passage represented the third attempt-the third attempt-by the Liberal government to reform the Young Of fenders Act and required 160 amendments in order to make it through the House. The act allows provinces to lower the age at which youth can receive adult sentences for serious crimes like murder or sexual assault from 16 to 14 years of age.

Defendants may still be tried under less severe youth rules if their lawyer can convince the court to do so. There is also a clause requir ing mandatory release of young offenders after only one-third of their sentence has been served. The Youth Criminal Justice Act is extremely controversial, Mr. Speaker. It was voted against by the Canadian Alliance and the Bloc Quebecois at the federal level. Quebec argues that the legislation would inhibit some of the positive justice initiatives that have been implemented in that province.

That is a very serious problem with the Youth Criminal Justice Act, and the Government of Quebec has indi cated that it may refer the bill to the Quebec Court of Appeal in order to challenge the con stitutionality. So the Youth Criminal Justice Act clearly has some real problems that need to be addressed. The Government of Ontario feels the act does not go far enough and drafted approxi mately 100 proposed amendments that were forwarded to Justice Minister Anne McLellan in June 2001. The Manitoba government is on record, too, of being critical of the act, and our present Justice Minister (Mr.

Mackintosh) spoke out against it in Ottawa in the fall of 2001. I might say that members on this side of the House have very clearly spoken out against it as well and are critical. Criticisms of the Youth Criminal Justice Act include: (1) it would be extremely expensive to implement; (2) it is too soft on repeat of fenders; and (3) its complexity will only increase backlogs in the courts.

2376 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2002 It needs to be noted again that youth crime is significantly on the rise. It rose 38 percent throughout the 19 80s. In 2000 alone, the number of violent of f ences by teenagers rose by 7 per cent, and the sexual assault charges rose by 18 percent. Mr. Speaker, members on this side of the House have to speak clearly to the Government of Manitoba and clearly to the federal politicians to be addressing the lack of strength in the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

The recently reintroduced Youth Criminal Justice Act contains no significant changes from the legislation debated in the House of Com mons last year. It still does not go far enough to ensure that Canadian youth are held responsible for their actions, particularly repeat violent of fenders. It is frustrating that the federal govern ment has excluded the provinces from this pro cess, since the provinces will be responsible for implementing this act. As we know already, the Youth Criminal Justice Act received Royal Assent February 19 , 2002, and actually comes into force in April 2003.

Even though the federal government has committed some monies over the next five years for cost-sharing agreements to assist implemen tation, it still falls far short of what is needed at the provincial level. In June of 19 99, when the act was first introduced, the former government, members on this side of the House wanted Manitoba to have a provision added to the Youth Criminal Justice Act allowing a court process to consider charg ing children under the age of 12 who were involved in serious off ences or show a pattern of criminal offences.

It can be noted that, over the time that the present Government has come into power in this province, they have lifted up the torch, and there has been at least one press announcement of the current Government lifting up that torch and continuing on under the same venue.

I must say and must put it on record that Manitoba's recommendations in June 19 99 were the first on record standing firm to strengthen the Youth Criminal Justice Act. * (17:10 ) I have to give the present minister credit for lobbying for this inclusion in the Youth Criminal Justice Act because, on February 7, 2001, the current Justice Minister announced that Mani toba would be the first jurisdiction in Canada to initiate a province-wide program for dealing with young of fenders under the age of 12 .

The current minister and the current Government, No. 1, adopted what the former government recommended, because they knew that it was something that had to be done. Unfortunately, no credit was given to the former government for introducing this particular initiative. Having said that, we keep hearing from members opposite it is the first of its kind. Well, we need to work in collaboration on both sides of the

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-3-45
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 3rd hansardpdf 45.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	21d9f2eee391ab48395ff494d7f31ded6d41cb51

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