Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 23 (35th Legislature, 3rd Session)

35-3-23

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Thirty-Fi fth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 39-40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis c. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLI No. 23- 1:30 p.m., THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1992 Printed by the Office of the 0.-.s Printer. Province of MIIIJ/toba ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS,Ciif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY,Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage Ia Prairie Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Asslniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Ain Aon La Verendrye Fort Garry St.

Johns Swan River PARTY Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP Liberal NDP PC PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC NDP PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

965 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, March 5, 1992 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESE NTING PETITIONS Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Terrence G. McCallum, Derek A. Sutherland, Gerald Levesque and others requesting the government show its strong commitment to dealing with child abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. READING AND REC EIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member.

It conforms with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth THAT child abuse is a crime abhorred by all good citizens of our society, but nonetheless it exists in today's world; and It is the responsibility of the government to recognize and deal with this most vicious of crimes; and Programs like the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign raise public awareness and necessary funds to deal with the crime; and The decision to terminate the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign will hamper the efforts of all good citizens to help abused children.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the government of Manitoba show a strong commitment to deal with Child Abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. (Ms. Barrett) I have reviewed the petition, and it conforms with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth THAT child abuse is a crime abhorred by all good citizens of our society, but nonetheless it exists in today's world; and It is the responsibility of the government to recognize and deal with this most vicious of crimes; and Programs like the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign raise public awareness and necessary funds to deal with the crime; and The decision to terminate the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign will hamper the efforts of all good citizens to help abused children.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the government of Manitoba show a strong commitment to deal with Child Abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. (Mr. Chomiak) MINISTERIAL STATEME NTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House with copies for all members and a copy of a working group report on breast cancer screening.

When I became Minister of Health, I made a commitment that the most fundamental concern of my ministry would be to improve the health status of Manitobans and that I would see that resources were appropriately targeted to those Manitobans who were most at risk of ill health. In that context, I recognized that women's health would be one of the highest priorities for my ministry. That is why we created the Women's Health Directorate and why we gave women's health a high profile in the healthy public policy programs division of the ministry.

I made another commitment that we would not simply keep doing things in the same old way. We would not continue along the all too familiar pattern where planning for health care is distracted by emotion, by inaccurate inform ation and by inadequate research.

966 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 I am pleased to provide you with the Report of the Working Group on Breast Cancer Screening. The work done by the Working Group on Breast Cancer Screening challenges the old approach and is based on sound scientific data, analysis and research. This scientific data may make some people uncomfortable, but I have a responsibility to respond to the valid conclusions of scientific research.

I made the commitment that the new initiatives and programs of the ministry would receive priority on the basis of the evidence for their effectiveness in terms of improving the heal th status of Manitobans. I have attempted to ensure that I have received the best and most expert evidence-based advice as the basis for reforming the health care system. For example, that is why I established the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation and why I called together the high-profile professionals to advise me on one of the most critical women's health issues, breast cancer screening.

Every year, in Manitoba, over 600 women will get breast cancer. Except for skin cancer, it is the most common form of cancer in women in Canada, and it is the leading cause of cancer-related death in women. It Is a tragedy that directly and indirectly touches most Manitoba families. As with many cancers, the cause and cure for breast cancer continues to elude researchers. In this province, we are committed to do whatever we can within the resources and the appropriate technology available to assure the best possible protection against the incidence of breast cancer in women.

One year ago, in January 19 91 , the ministry convened a working group to address the issue of breast cancer screening and to provide a report and recommendations to me on the advisability of instituting mass mammography screening in Manitoba. The report of the working group is based on work conducted by an ad hoc technical committee struck in 19 89 in response to events in other jurisdictions and in response to changing patterns of practice in Manitoba. The technical committee had the mandate to assess and identify effective options for early detection of breast cancer.

The committee then turned its work over to the working group which was asked to look at implementation options. It should be emphasized that a mixture of clinical mammographies and screening mammographies is already occurring in Manitoba. In 19 91 , while the working group was reviewing the evidence, there were over 45,000 mammograms conducted in Manitoba.

The working group was able to concentrate most of its efforts on consideration of the evidence for the effectiveness and risk of various options. * (1 335) The membership of the working group was carefully chosen to represent the best available expertise on breast cancer screening in Manitoba. Several of them will be present today at 3 p.m. in Room 254 to go over details of the report, Mr. Speaker. The working group was chaired by Sue Hicks, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Healthy Public Policy Programs and also the Director of the Women's Health Directorate.

The rest of the working group consisted of 13 representatives from medical oncology, surgery, radiology, pathology, the Manitoba Medical Ass ociation, the University of Manitoba, Department of Community Health Sciences, the Women's Health Clinic, the Canadian Cancer Society and the Women 's Health Branch of Manitoba Health. Nine of the 13 members including the chairperson are women researchers, health educators, medical practitioners, health care providers or administrators.

I will not read the list of membership of the committee, but I am sure all members of the Chamber would like to thank the dedicated professionals for their advice and the many hours of work spent on researching to present the report that I am tabling today, Mr. Speaker. This group has spent the last year intensively reviewing the current research on the benefits, risks and li mitati ons of mass screen ing with mammography. It has also looked carefully at mammography programs that have been established in Europe, the United States and in other provinces in Canada.

To date, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Nova Scotia have established mammography screening programs. Women themselves have been asking for clarification of the breast screening issues, and measures are currently underway to provide them with up-to-date balanced information about the risks, benefits and limitations of mammography screening. The Women's Health Branch will work

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 967 with women's health agencies and others in educating women about breast screening. Access to women who, in conjunction with their health care providers, choose periodic screening will be in no way affected by this report, and diagnostic services will remain available as usual. We will place special emphasis to ensure that women who are in high-risk categories will continue to have access to screening and diag nostic services.

What this working group has found is that many questions remain to be answered about the effects of mammography screening. * (1 340) The earlier optimism and hoped-for benefits are not convincingly supported by the evidence at this time. Women under age 50 do not appear to benefit from periodic screening with mammo graphy in terms of reduced mortality, and the benefits to women over age 50 are still being determ ined. The exten t of prob lems tha t ma y resu lt from mammography, such as false negative results and false positive results are just beginning to be understood.

We also do not know the risk from additional exposure to X-rays posed by the screening. The working group has recommended that no program be established this year until there is further evidence of benefit to women from mass screening. Studies such as the Canadian National Breast Scre ening Study in whic h Mani toba women participated are expected to provide important information on the issues in question.

These studies have been undertaken precisely because questions exist about the benefits and risks of mammography screening, and to proceed without benefit of their findings at this time would be premature and not in the best interests of women in Manitoba. This report has the support of the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation, and it is consistent with our government's approach to have solid supportive data before introducing new programs. I would like to announce action the ministry is taking in response to the report of the working group.

First, by summer, we will launch an educational campaign to educate women about breast cancer and to educate health professionals on the risks and benefits of the options avai lable for breast cancer screening. Secondly, in addition, in conjunction with the Ce ntre for Eval uative Clin ical Scien ces in Dartmouth, New Hampshire, and based on the most recent medical research available and on the best available clinical expertise in Manitoba, we will produce a video on breast cancer screening and make it widely available to women and their physicians.

The video will contain the most up-to-date information on the risks and benefits of screening and will contain the kind of detai l that will empower women to make informed choices about their own health. I will shortly announce the establishment of a breast cancer screening advisory group with approp riate memb ership to monitor evidence regarding breast cancer screening. In particular, one of the first tasks of the group will be to review the results of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study which are expected to be released this spring.

The group will also continue to monitor and reassess the appropriate options for breast cancer screening and prevention so that we can take immediate action as new evidence becomes available. Fourth, the ministry will continue to support and encourage national and Manitoba research on breast cancer prevention, treatment and screening. Few of us have not been personally touched by breast cancer, and all of us sense the urgency to deal with this tragic disease .

This government's commitment is to the health and well-being of all women, and with this commi tment comes the responsibility to ensure that health services for women are truly effective and based on sound evidence of benefit. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ms. Judy Wasy ly cla -Le ls (St.

Johns): I appreciate the opportunity to put some comments on record in response to the Minister of Health's statement on breast cancer, and I begin on behalf of our caucus by thanking the mi nister, this government, and the working group who have devoted considerable time delving into a most critical issue for women, that of breast cancer. We appreciate the focus that this minister and this government have given to this issue, and we appreciate this update report. As the minister has said, this is a very scary issue for over half the population of our province and our country.

By the minister's own statistics, in 198 9, there were 157 deaths and 655 diagnosed cases of breast cancer. That is a very scary thought for all of us, Mr. Speaker, for all the women in this House, in this province, in this country. By the minister's other

968 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 statistics in our Estimates debates, he has indicated that one in 11 women in this country are struck with breast cancer. That means one of us in this House can face that prospect at any time. It is scary, and it needs urgent attention. • (1 345) The minister has indicated that he recognizes the urgency of the problem. It is urgent because we are getting so many different mixed messages about how to detect, how to treat and how to deal with breast cancer. The minister has appropriately addressed the mixed message we are getting.

I, for one, was very concerned and took a very adamant position in Estimates that this government was breaking its promise reiterated in a couple of Speeches from the Throne about the need to have a breast screening mammogram. I remember yelling from the rooftops and going after the minister like crazy about the lack of action on this issue. He pointed out to me some of the studies that were coming in indicating that this technology may not be as foolproof and as sound a piece of technology as we had originally thought.

However, there are still mixed messages out there, as the minister knows, and women like us do not know what to do in terms of getting tested. Some reports have indicated that the breast screening mammogram has increased the chances of cancer among women by a considerable percentage. Othe r studies show that the mammogram has, In certain age categories, improved or reduced deaths among women from breast cancer by 20 percent. There is confusion and uncertainty, and a need to deal with It urgently. I trust that this minister's statement today will be backed up by resources allocated in next week's budget.

I trust there will be staff and resources pulled together to ensure this wide-sweeping, massive education campaign to tell women about the need to get involved in self-examination, to get good physical examinations on a regular basis and to study the relationship to diet, stress and physical environment. I am concerned that this be done on an urgent basis, and I am concerned about a number of other women and health issues.

The minister has addressed in the past the question of Depo-Provera, an injectable contraceptive for which there are rumours that it will be imminently approved by the federal drug protection agency. The minister has indicated he is prepared to fight that kind of approval, but we are asking him today if he will fight the use of that injectable contraceptive among vulnerable target groups in our population, right now in the province of Manitoba, when they are injected with this contraceptive for purposes of sterilization .

We know that only about 3 percent of all medical research funds goes toward dealing with women's health issues. That is a very small percentage for over half the population. We have had the discussions before about what would be an appropriate allocation, and I would like today to use this opportunity to suggest that, for too long, the health of women has been treated as a very secondary second-class issue, that in fact, many times, women have been treated as guinea pigs for the purposes of trying out and advancing certain products when it comes to contraception or breast implants.

Everyone in this House knows full well the horror stories around the Meme breast implant and contraceptives like Depo-Provera, where women have been used as guinea pigs. We have a saying on this side of the House that, if men could get pregnant, perhaps a lot more money would be devoted to research into contraceptives. I would conclude by saying, once again, commendations and congratulat ions to this minister, and particularly to the members of his working group, who have put long hours into this very important issue of breast cancer screening.

We look forward to being updated with respect to this study, these inquiries and reviews. We look forward to this issue being treated on an urgent basis. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.GulzarChHma(The Maples): Mr. Speaker, I would like to applaud the government for this step. In 1 988, in our campaign, and 19 90 campaign, that was one of the issues. During the discussion between 19 88 and 1990 , in all the Health Estimates, that was one of the major issues that all the parties discussed, and we asked the minister to look at the issue very carefully.

I think we should learn from this very good example, that the data which has been given to us today-and we do not have the time to review the whole process, but it is a good example that we should look at the data very carefully in terms of developing a major policy which is going to have a long-term impact, and not just follow one example in one part of the world or the other part of the world and just jump on the policy conclusions. This is a

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 969 very important issue and is one of the examples where we can develop a long-term policy. • (1 350) Also, how the health policy centre has been helpful in this issue, that again emphasizes the point that we must be very careful in health policies to develop a policy which will save us money in the long run. This is one example which will not only save money, but most importantly, it will help more than 50 percent of our population. I think it is a very serious matter that this cancer in women is one of the leading causes of death in this country.

For an industrialized nation to be worried about such a major issue and not do analysis, I think, is very sad, but now the governments are realizing , and Manitoba has taken the lead. I am sure the other provinces can learn from us, because we have data, we have individuals who have worked very hard, and they will continue to develop a policy which will help in the long run. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to reinforce again that the other aspect which is very important in our health care policy is the education of the public and the education of this particular group, to teach them that we have this health risk problem. Then each and every person knows the risk factors, and that can be dealt with in terms of health care pro fessionals as well as through the Department of Health. The minister should take a positive stand . They have taken in fact one part, to have a video developed explaining to the wom en of Manitoba how they can have acc ess to a lot of services.

I think we should also make sure that these services are not only available in Winnipeg but also in the North and other rural communities, because this procedure can be done in any community, and if you give advance notice, people can come there and have those procedures done. We want the minister to make sure that each and every Manitoban has equal access to this good program, and we will continue to monitor and make sure that we are on the right track. Finally, I would like to pay our special thanks to the group in this particula r

section which has worked very hard. They are very knowledg eable people, and they have no political bias, another good example of how the people of Manitoba can work together to achieve this very meaningful way to provide health care to our people. Thank you. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, from St. John's-Ravenscourt, thirty-five Grade 9 students, and they are under the direction of Mr. Einarson.

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodre y). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Clean Environment Commission Report Provincial Park Land Usage Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I have a question to the Minister of Environment. The new Environment Act passed in 19 88 or proclaimed in 19 88 provided for a public process and an open process for licensing for all new proposed forest management plans in the province of Manitoba.

The government has followed through on the legislation with the Clean Environment Commission hearings and report that is now in the hands of the government and now before the public. There are a number of key recommendatio ns in that report that have a great deal of significance for the people of Manitoba.

I would ask the Minister of Environment, dealing with specific recommendations in the report, dealing with Nopiming Park and the recomm endation asking the government to cancel all commercial forestry activity in all provincial parks in terms of a phased-out way, whether the government is going to support that recommendation before the ministry, or is it going to act in a contrary way to the recommendations? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr.

Speaker, the member is correct in stating that this report identifies an issue that has been in front of the public for a number of years in this province, going back to the time when he and his colleagues were the government of this province as well, an issue that is one that frankly this government welcomes a further debate on, and we look forward to an open discussion and a process that will allow public input on the policy issues that are raised around this particular recommendation.

970 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 There were a number of recommendations regarding the future use of park lands. Mr. Speaker, it is not an issue from which we intend to shy away from. I would remind the member of the process under which these recommendations are dealt with. The director within the Department of Environment will deal with those portions of the recommendations that are the responsibility of the department. In the broader policy issues, we look forward to an open and public process of discussion and, in fact, following very much along the lines that were recommended in the report. *

(1355) Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we have had the open public process with the licensing process. I would remind the minist er that the Premier even got involved, Premier Pawley, in 19 85, in the Atikaki Park, in stopping the logging that was granted by a licence in 1979, stopping the logging in tha t wilderness park and negotiating with the company for al ternat iv e wood supply outside of tha t wilderness park. The question is, Mr. Speaker, what is the government going to do on those majo r recommendations?

I recognize that they are broad policy Issues, as the minister has Indicated, but he has not told us today in the House where the government stands. I would ask the minister another specific question. In 19 89, I wrote the minister recommending a process of stakeholders' involvement in many of these licensing and monitoring processes.

A similar recommendation has been provided to the minister in this Clean Environment Commission report, calling on the government to establish a stakeholders' advisory committee to not only advise the government and stakeholders on the various resources and issues at stake, but also to monitor the conformity of the company and the province to the terms of the licensing agreement. I would ask the minister, will he follow through on that recommendat ion, a recommendation, quite frankly, that has been before the minister for a number of years on dealing with forest management plans? Mr. Cummings: Mr.

Speaker, I welcome the Leader of the Opposition raising that question because, as a matter of fact, that is a process that has been written into and used in a number of situations already in this province. We have involved advisory committees in the Oak Hammock licence. We have had advisory committees in relationship to operations with Repap, a number of examples where that type of process is used. The member knows the process probably as well or better than I do.

I would think that he should recognize that to ask me to respond definitively to certain conditions that may or may not be in the licence as written by the director, a licence which, by the way, I am the appeal to. It would probably be inappropriate for me to comment much further than that. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, If the minister is using the model of Oak Hamm ock Mars h and Ducks Unlimited, and the Repap project where they had chlorine bleach proposed, the last jurisdiction in the world to go ahead with a project like that, then we are in a lot of trouble in this province in terms of where we are going.

Clean Environment Commission Report Provincial Park Land Usage Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): A final question to the minist er responsible for the divestiture of Repap corporation. Last week, the minister released terms of reference in this House, terms of reference quite a bit altered from the original terms of reference that the minister had incorporated in the contract he had negotiated.

My question to the minister responsible: Will he incorporate in the terms of reference and amend the terms of reference that he now has with the Repap corpo ration to inc lude some of the re commendations in the Clean Environment Commission report that do impact on the Repap situation, specifically dealing with provincial parks and also dealing with stakeholders' committees, stakeholders' committees that include the inclusion of aboriginal people who are directly affected in the areas that are very, very crucial to this set of discussions with the minister and very much outside of the government's discussions right now?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister responsible for the administration of The Crown Corporations Public Review and Accountabil ity Act}: Mr. Speaker, what we will not do after the public dialogue leading to the government ultimately making a decision is, we will not forcibly expel cutters from one region and put them into another park like the former government did in 19 85.

March 5, 1992 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 971 Mr. Speaker, page 113 of

Article 9 of the Purchaser's Covenant Agreement between Repap and the province spelled out that, and I will quote: Manitoba reserves the right to withdraw certain areas within the forest managed licensed area. It stipulates a number of reasons why, or other uses, which Manitoba deems to be in the public interest. That is part of the covenant that we have entered into with respect to the Repap agreement.

I would fully expect, as we are structuring the agreement, that certainly a commitment will be made to retain that element within a new agreement. * (1 400) North American Free Trade Agreement Manitoba Opposition Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, in July of 199 1 , this government set down six conditions which the government said must be met before they would approve the entering into of a free trade agreement with the United States and Mexico. On February 17 , when I asked the Minister of Indus try, Trade and Tourism (Mr.

Stefanson) what the government would be doing if these six conditions were not met, he did not answe r. Mr. Speaker, it has today become very evident that the six conditions outlined by the provincial government will not be met in the free trade discussions, that in fact Canada is prepared to give up, and the United States continues to ask for concessions that would open the free trade agreement and establish other conditions which would violate the principles set out by the minister.

My specific question to the Mi nister of Industry, Trade and Tourism is: What specific action is this government going to take when it becomes evident that the free trade agreement will cost Manitoba jobs and not be in Canada's best interest? What will they do specifically to highlight their opposition? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, firstly, I would like to correct the honourable member for Flin Flon that I did answer his question when asked in terms of what our position is, was and will continue to be.

We have said on many occasions that, if those six conditions are not met, we do not support the agreement. That is what was tabled here at the House back in July of 19 91 , that we do not support a North American free trade agreement unless those six conditions are met. In terms of the one specific condition that he has referred to today in terms of the reopening of the Canad a-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, that is one of our six conditions . It has been a condition to date of the federal government, if you listened to the Honourable Michael Wilson, that they do not support the opening of the Canada -U.S.

Free Trade Agree ment because of concerns rel ative to particular industries like our cultural industry . That is our position. We have stated it on many occasions, and we will continue to state that, Mr. Speaker. Impact on Manitoba Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Well, Mr. Speaker, the minister did not answer the question. The question was: What specific steps is the minister going to take if he opposes it? Is it going to be a muted opposition- Mr. Speaker: Question please. Mr. Storie: -Mr. Speaker, or are they actually going to do something to protect our interests? Mr.

Speaker, my follow-up question is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism. Can the minister tell this House what he is going to do to protect the vegetable producers, in particular, who will be devastated by a free trade agreement with Mexico? Can he tell us how many jobs will be lost as a result- Mr. Speaker: Order , please. Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): First of all, Mr. Speaker, in terms of the Manitoba position, it has been outlined in writing to the federal minister, Mr.

Wilson; it has been put on the record on at least two occasions at federal-provincial trade ministers' meeting, and probably, as a province, we have more often stated our position than any other province within Canada, and I want to make that clear. In terms of any trade agreement, there are some winners, there are some losers in terms of the adj ustments that would happen to any economy. Clearly, a major part of it is also one of our conditi ons, Mr.

Speaker, whereby under any free trade agreement, there have to be the necessary ad justment provisions, and that would relate to any industry that is in any way negatively affected by a North American free trade agreement. Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, we are talking about justice. A Canadian study-

972 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr.Storle: Mr. Speaker, my specific question was: Can the minister tell the House how many jobs are going to be jeopardized by Canada's acquiescing to the U.S. demands and getting into this free trade agreement? A simple question. How many jobs? Mr. Stefanson: As the honourable member should know, and I would hope he realizes that, under any of these types of negotiations, there are a series of reviews that have been done by all different sectors, by all different industries.

Unfortunately, it is not a science; many of them point to different statistics. Some indicate that Manitoba and Canada might well be a net winner, even under a North American free trade agreement. We do have concerns. We do not support a North American free trade agreement unless six fundamental conditions are met. I have outlined those for the benefit of the honourable member on many occasions when we debated this under private members' resolutions, on two different occasions. I outlined them for this House and for the honourable member, and I would encourage him to read Hansard so he gets them perfectly clear.

Forestry Industry Sustainable Development Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, this government has been long on rhetoric on a policy of sustainable develo pment. The Clea n Environment Commission's recommendations yesterday clearly are a blueprint for providing for sustainable development, particularly in the forestry industry. We have already heard earlier in this session that, despite this blueprint, the government will not commit itself to phasing out commercial forestry, it will not commit itself to ending commercial forestry in the park lands covered by the Repap agreement.

My question is to the Ministe r of Natural Resources. Will this government commit to a comprehensive, provincial forest policy consistent with the principles of sustainable development before any other forest management licences are renewed, including Repap's? Hon. Harry Enns (Minis ter of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, for the sake of some 10 ,000 Manitobans whose livelihoods depend on commercial forestry, we would want to be very cautious about disrupting their lives in an economy that is already in some difficulty.

If I understand the honourable member's question correctly, my department is very much interested in looking at sustainable forestry in the province of Manitoba. My department, and more importantly, interested parties such as the Naturalists Society, The Wilderness Society-Mr.

Roger Turenne just a few weeks ago was in my office--are well aware of the fact that senior officials in the department have been working towards putting together the necessary documentation and mechanics for extensive public hearings that will, I suspect, take place later on this spring, extend into the summer and perhaps the fall, that will address some of the very issues that the Clean Environment Commission report draws our attention to.

I welcome that opportunity because there are a number of issues that need to be addressed, not least of them, one that I know that is near and dear to the heart of my Premier (Mr. Almon) and to which this government is fully committed, our commitment to the Endangered Spaces Program here in Manitoba. Noplmlng Provincial Park Wilderness Status Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): If the minister and if this government are truly committed to a sustainable forestry policy, then they will come up with a policy. They will not commit in this House today to, in fact, establishing that policy.

In light of his response to me, will this government commit itself to designating the northeast corner of Nopiming for wil derness status, given its commitment, he says, to the Endangered Spaces Program? Hon. Harry Enns (Min ister of Natural Resources): I have just had the privilege of returning from Ottawa where I, on behalf of the Province of Manitoba, affixed my signature to a national forest strategy that indeed this province, along with all other stakeholders, worked very diligently for the last several years to develop.

It was, by the way, a very encouraging ceremony, with all provincial forestry ministers present, federal government, Canada forestry present, a large number of-1 always have trouble with this bureaucratic term for it, I believe they call them NGOs, but it means nongovernment agencies or something like that-other people there that were

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 973 not directly affected. A number of them, including representatives of the Canadian Wildlife Federation and others, affixed their signature to that. Manitoba, I might say with some pride, had a great deal in developing this policy. I take this occasi on-a former de puty mini ster of my departm ent, Mr. Dale Stewa rt, chaired the review comm ittee that led to the successful signing ceremony that I attended yesterday in Ottawa. Mr. Speaker, these kinds of policies are ongoing commitments. They began not just with forestry.

In fact, we began, and my predecess or, with water and soil, with my colleague with agriculture. We are doing it with forestry. This gove rnmen t is committed ; this government leads the nation in taking the round table discussions seriously. This province leads the nation in taking- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. * (14 1 0) Forestry Industry Sustainable Development Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): One has to wonder how many trees were destroyed for all the paper that moved all around those tables during the signing procedures.

The problem is we wanted just a little commitment to a northeast corner of a wilderness park to get a designation so it would not be used for commercial logging, and we cannot get that. Well, perhaps we can get another commitment from the Minster of Natural Resources. Will the government at least commit today to develop a comprehensive provincial forest policy consistent with the principles of sustainable development? Hon. Harry Enns (Min ister of Natural Resources): Mr.

Speaker, it has been my experience, having been resource minister of this province on several occasions-you know the one thing, the general public and particularly those who are, if you like, watchers of the environment, that concerns them the most is if governments do things without consultation. I cannot talk about a cottage development in a park without being criticized if I do not take in the broadest consultation. Mr. Speaker, surely nobody on that side suggests that a fundamental alteration, a fundamental change in policy and in management should take place without consultation.

These consultations are going to take place, and what is important to know is that it is just not myself reacting to today's question. Mr. Roger Turenne of the Wilderness Society knows that to be a fact; Ms. Alison Elliot of the Manitoba Naturalists Society knows that to be a fact. They have in fact been working with some of my officials since fall in developing the process that will lead to that broad public discussion that the Clean Environment Commission calls for. That will be the first order of business. That will commence, I suspect, on or about May or June and no doubt will lead into the fall.

CareerStart Funding Restoration Mr. Leonard Evans (Br andon East) : Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. According to Statistics Canada, the youth unemployment rate in Manitoba has increased dramatically to 16 .8 percent. As of January of this year, there were 17 ,000 unemployed youth in this province, an increase of 31 percent over January of last year. In view of the fact that this government cut youth employment programs in half last year, is the government now prepared to rei nstate these programs to at le ast the 19 90-91 lev el?

Specifical ly, will last year's $3-million cut in Caree rStart program be continued, or can we expect CareerStart to be increased to the $6-million level of the previous year? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, budgetary decisions have been made, even before the question being put by the member today. They will be announced in their complete fullness, Wednesday next. Mr. Leonard Evans: The 17 ,000 unemployed young people will be anxiously awaiting the minister's announcement, I am sure. Northern Youth Corps Job Program Funding Restoration Mr.

Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Will this government reinstate the Northern Youth Corps job program that was killed last year in spite of the fact that unemployment levels in northern Manitoba are the highest in this province? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, one of my colleagues has helped me

974 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 in my response to the member. He will know that fully in six more sleeps. Mr. Leonard Evans: This is not a laughing matter with the 17 ,000 young people who do not have a job in this province. Talk to their families, to the thousands on welfare in this province, and you are doing nothing about it. Student Temporary Employment Program Funding Restoration Mr. Leonard Evans (Br andon East) : Mr.

Speaker, is this government prepared to increase funding of the Student Temporary Employment Program this year in view of the fact that there has been a sharp increase in youth unemployment in this province to 16 .8 percent? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, this is not a laughing matter. I say to the memb er opposite, his questions will be answered fully.

Also, it was no laughing matter indeed when the former government applied a 2 percent tax against everybody that earned $1 1 ,000 and more, destroyed jobs and sent the youth in this province outside, and killed the business initiative in this province. That was no laughing matter. I say to the member, if they want to look at the reason for some of the problems we have today, all they have to do is reflect on the decisions they made around the cabinet table from 19 84 to 19 87. Domestic VIolence Ball CondHions Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

Despite the Pedlar report, despite the fact the Crown has now opposed bail in situations of abuse and abuse victims and in spite of federal lack of action in this area, often abusers get out on bail. As a concrete suggestion, I wou ld like to ask the minister: Will he not ask his Crown prosecutors, in cases of bail, that a bail condition be imposed on an abuser that requires daily reporting to probation officers in orde r to ensure a check on the abuser and to provide some comfort and security to the victim of an abuse? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : Mr.

Speaker, that is a suggestion that I have raised and encouraged upon prosecutors so that they could ask for such things in cases where judges feel that it is appropria te that accused abusers be let out on bail. That kind of submission is available to the Crown, and we are aware of it. We take that suggestion very positively and thank the honourable member. Mr. Chomlak: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for that response. Rehabilitation Programs Mr.

Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): In conjunction with the Pedlar report, I am wondering if the minister can advise us whether or not the Crown has instituted any programs to deal with abusers in order to stem the tide of abuse in our society. Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): By the Cro wn, I take it the honourable member means the justice system and the system that we have in general. The Pedlar review does identify a need to deal with abusers while, at the same time, deal as well as we can with people who are victims of abusers.

In that regard , we are pleased with the performance of the Department of Family Services, under successive ministers in the last four years, with regard to funding for the shelter system, a very, very significant increase in funding over levels prior to our government taking office. Yes, indeed, the Pedlar report deals with going eyeball to eyeball, as it were, with abusers and making them responsible for their behaviour. That includes things like sentences that include probation and counselling as a condition of that probation. Mr. Chomlak: Mr.

Speaker , my final supplementary to the same minister is along the same lines. I wonder if the minister can advise me whether or not the working group has met and whether we can expect concrete actions in the form of programs, as recommended in the Pedlar report, in which there has been no action-i n abeyance basically on most of those recommendations since the fall of last year? Mr. McCrae: Mr.

Speaker, I su ppose the honourable member could say that there has been no appearance of action, but indeed a couple of days ago the working group met, the community advisory group will be meeting later this month, so we believe there is nothing stopping us from proceeding along. There is progress which wou ld flow from the Pedlar report. Just before I sit down, since the honourable member for Kildonan has shown an interest in trying

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 975 to curb violence, I wonder if he could encourage his colleagues to take a stand with respect to the deplorable language used by Daryl Bean in dealing with people who choose to work during the week whe n-- Mr. Speaker: Orde r, please. • (1 420) University of Manitoba Student Food Bank Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, for four years now, we have been warning the government about the inadequacy of the student aid provided to university students in this province and other students in this province.

The situation has gotten so bad at the University of Manitoba that they had ex hausted their emer gency aid budget by November. Their annual budget ran out in November, and studen ts on the campus have begun to organize a food bank to ensure that other students have adequate food. I think it is deplorable that we have reached a point in this country where food banks outnumber McDonald 's, and that is the only alternative left to people. I wo uld like to ask the Minister of Education if it is her government's policy to use food banks as an alternative to adequate financial aid for students? Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, the conditions that students are experiencing are of great concern to this government and great concern to me as minister. I was a student until I was elected to this gove rnmen t as well. I know many of those students, both young people and also adult students who have come back to study. The issues are of great concern. I am raising the issue at a federal level as well to press the federal government, through the Council of Ministers of Educati on and individual meetings, to try and provide adequate assistance to students in Manitoba. Mr.

Alcock: Raising the support might help, Mr. Speaker. Department of Education Underspendlng Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, will the minister assure the House that the $6.6 million underspent in her department was not in part taken from the Student Aid Program? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I am reviewing the results of that with my department now, but as the member will know, that percentage within my departm ent, which is an extremely large budget, was an extr emely small per ce ntage . I am examining it at this point-less than 1 percent. Budget Student Aid Mr.

Reg Alcock (Osborne): Well, Mr. Speaker, 1 percent of $1 billion wou ld provide a lot of aid for students in this province. Will the minister ensure the House that the budget will contain sufficient support for students so that the opening of this food bank at the university will become unnecessary? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I can say again that I am very concerned with the need for a food bank at the University of Manitoba and for any students who find themselves in that type of need, but the budget will be tabled next Wednesday in this House.

Department of Health Employee Morale Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St. Johns) : Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are very concerned about the loss of Dr. Margaret Fast from central decision-making role within the Department of Health. Margaret Fast, a reputable public health doctor and expert on communicable diseases, and a me ritorious civil servant, her departure is indica tive of low morale and chaos in the Department of Health as a result of a two-person dicta torship at the centre and more than 45 study groups going about in separate orbit.

I want to ask the Minister of Health: What is he doing to stop losing the best and the brightest among his civil service? What is he doing to restore confidence and morale within this department? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, with all the respect I can muster, I am not taking advice from my honourable friend the New Democratic critic on this particu lar issue; on others, I will. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Fast is taking a position at Cadham Lab, where her expertise will be still contributed to the province of Manitoba.

In fact, one might be able to argue that, given the professional training that Dr. Fast has, her responsibilities at

976 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 Cadham Lab will enable her to more appropriately focus her medical training, her public experience into the issue of sexually transmitted diseases from a position of prominence at Cadham Lab. Mr. Speaker, the emphasis on commu nicable diseases is not lessened. In fact, with replacement of Dr. Fast in the slot that she vacated for Cadham Lab, we expect to double the team-bench strength, having Dr. Fast fully and readily avai lable from Cadham Lab plus the recruitment, we hope, of a competent professional replacement for Dr.

Fast, who has contributed a significant amount of good to the public policy of Manitoba from her former position and we know will continue from the current position that she occupies. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr. Speaker, this is not an isolated incident. I would like to ask the minister: Why was action not taken to correct the problem of low morale and organizational chaos in his own department after Dr. Peter Cooney, with his position as Executive Director of Dental Services, not too long ago, out of concern as well for what was happening in the department, went to work for federal medical services? Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, again, Dr. Cooney, I had a very close working relationship with him in his professional capacity. He was an excellent director of the children's dental health program . It is my unde rstanding that the offer from the federal government was one that was very, very attract ive, and in terms of discussions with Dr. Cooney, I accepted with regret his decision to move over there. I want to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that Dr. Cooney has very much appreciated the relationship and the working ability he had within the department.

He has given us the commitment that he will be avai lable for whatever advice we may need, given his experience as di rector of the children's dental health program, and we intend to keep the lines of communication absolutely open with Dr. Cooney in the hopes that maybe, after finding the pastures may not be as green as one expected, we can welcome him back to the ministry. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Let me ask a final question pertaining to low morale, chaos and confusion in the minister's department. It pertains to John Robson, a civil servant in the Department of Health who worked for this government for 29 years.

I would like to know why the minister told this House that John Robson was being fired because of the melding of rural and urban facility executive dir ector positions when now we see a new organizational chart for the department, showing the destination of those two positions- Mr. Speaker: Orde r, please. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I would like to reply with the same rhetorical flourish, but you know how calm I am about these sorts of things.

If my honourable friend wishes to discus s the organi zational development within the ministry of Health, I would be fully prepared to discuss that in detail when we discuss my Estimates. When we made the amalgamation last year of commission functions with departmental function, in trying to bring the system of health care delivery together for the betterment of patient care delivery services, it was unfortunate that there were a numb er of folded-in positions which became redundant. Mr. Robson's position last year was one of those, Mr. Speaker. It is with regret- Mr. Speaker: Orde r, please. Point of Order Ms.

Wasylycla-Lels: Yes, once again, the minister did not hear that I said both positions were restored. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts. *** Mr. Orchard: As I indicated to my honourable friend, it would be my absolute deli ght that we share an open discussion in Estimates of the continuing process of making sure that Manitobans have the best ministry of Health in Canada. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Rent Regu lations Rollbacks Mr. Doug Martlndale(Burrows): Mr.

Speaker, on the issue of rolled-back odometers, the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs contradicted the RCMP and said there was no problem. On the issue of fraudulent home repairs, the same minister said she could not do anything because she had not had any complaints. On the problem of windfall profits for landlords, she says, I cannot do anything; my hands are tied; it is a complaint-driven system.

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 9n My question is: What is this minister going to do as a result of provincial portioning of property tax assessm ent to ensure that red uced la nd lord expenses and taxes will be passed on to tenants? * (1 430) Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): First of all, I would like to correct an error in the

preamble. I will just correct the one, because I happen to have the Hansard right in front of me. The member opposite said that I said there was no problem with odometers. That is not what I said, Mr. Speaker. What I said was-1 just happen to be reading it, very timely-f rom our department's experience, we had at the time the question was asked, received no complaints. In that sense, it was not a widespread concern of consumers to the government; however, the RCMP had a concern which we shared. That is what I said. I did not say there was no problem. Since that time, Mr.

Speaker, I should indicate that I have been in close communication with the RCMP on that issue, as we are in our department on a number of issues, including the home renovations that he referred to in his

preamble. We work in conjunction with the RCMP in numerous investigations, in co-operation with them ; we have then, we do now, we will continue to do so. That is my answer to the pream ble. In answer to the question Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Martindale: How can this minister justify a tax break for landlords whose property taxes in Winnipeg will go down by 4 percent and, at the same time, sanction rent increases for tenants? Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Speaker, this was a question that was asked the other day, which I answered the other day. I will answer it again. There is a system of appeals.

There is an ability to have the problem addressed in the subsequent year. The system is complaint-driv en; it is driven by application, as are most of the laws in this country. If my house is broken into, I call the police. I do not expect them to be standing at my door wat ching my house . There are ma ny, many, ma ny thousands and hundreds of thousands of people in Manitoba who respond to the law by indicating they have had a problem and having the law enforcement officials take action on their concerns. Consumer Protection LeglslaUon Government Support Mr.

Doug Martindale (Burrows): The minister is saying she cannot or will not do anything, so I will. Is the minister responsible for protecting consumers prepared to support a private member's bill in order to allow for rents to be rolled back in cases of windfall profits to landlords? Will she support a private member's bill to amend the legislation- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I will not answer the

preamble on this occasion because I know Question Period is nearly over, nor will I address hypothetical questions. Howeve r, I will say this: my department, in landlord and tenant affairs and in all other aspects of my department, is concerned about an effective and workable marketplace wherein the consumer and the corporation, the la ndlord and the tenant, have a wor kable relationship that is fair to both parties. I will examine any bill put before this Legislature to see if it meets my criteria of being fair and worka ble to all those concerned on either side of the marketplace .

Student Aid Clarification Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, lw ould just like to add to my answer to my criti c to give some further information so that the accurate information appears on the record , that my department for student aid overspent its budget by $600,000 for the third quarter. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister had ample opportunity to answer that question before. Orde r, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired. Point of Order Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, on a point of order, I would suggest that Hansard be reviewed, that the minister did not take the question as notice. There are many other opportunities for the mi nister to put on the record in terms of the information. She could have asked for leave after Question Period . There are other questions that need to be asked, and the government does not

978 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 want to allow the questions to be asked from this side of the Chamber. She should be ashamed of herself. Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker, we have just had the height of the ridiculous. The members opposite asked a specific question on student financial aid. The minister did not have it at the time. She tried to rise and provide that same information. She did so, and the members opposite hollered her down. I say to the members, apologize for your actions. The member has the right to answer questions. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised, I had already indicated to the minister that she had had ample opportunity to respond to the answe r. Order, please. Speaker's Ruling Mr. Speaker: Now I have a ruling for the House. On Monday , March 2, 19 92, the Acting Speaker the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr . Sveinson) took under ad visement a point of order raised by the honourable member for Emerson (Mr . Penner) during deb ate on second reading of Bi11 9. In his point of order, he indicated that comments by the Leader of the Second Opposition party (Mrs .

Carstairs) ma de dur ing Question Period on February 20 did not reflect what he had said from his seat about Dutch Elm disease funding. I have some concern that the point of order may not have been raised at the earliest opportunity. However, mo re impor tantly, the honourable member for Emerson did not have a point of order. It may have been a dispute over the facts.

Let me quote from our rule book, and I quote: "Points of order are questions raised with the view of calling attention to any dep arture from the Stand ing Orders or the customary modes of proceeding in debate or in the conduct of legislative business . .. w Beauchesne, Citation 322 states, and I quote: "Points of order are justified when there is some flagrant misuse of the rules, butthey are unfortunate necessities which should not be regarded as usual phases of procedur e . .. w I would encourage all honourable members to restrict their use of points of order to the purpose for which they are intended.

ORDE RS OF THE DAY Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call ad journed debate on second readin gs of Bill 45 and then call the other bills in the order as they are shown on the Order Paper. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 45-- The City of Winnipeg Amendment, Municipal Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst), Bill 45, The City of Winnipeg Amendment, Municipal Amendment and Consequential Amendmen ts Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Ville de Winnipeg, Ia

Loi sur les municipal ites et d'autres dispositions legislatives, standing in the name of the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen). Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave? It is agreed. Bill 9-The Economic Innovation and Technology Council Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon), Bill 9, The Economic Innovation and Technology Council Act;

Loi sur le Conseil de !'innovation economique et de Ia technologie, standing in the name of the honourable member for the Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans). Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain stand ing? An Honourable Member: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave? It is agreed . Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): I am pleased to be able to add my comments on Bill 9, The Economic Innovation and Technology Council Act. I believe the government first raised the notion of a new council in the 19 91 budget .

In its attempt to present an image of action, it shuffled some existing cabinet committees and research organizations. • (144 0) This Innovation and Technology Council replaces the Manitoba Research Council and, of course,

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 979 ironically, the Manitoba Research Council budget was cut by $700,000 in the 199 1 -92 year. The net effect is an actual reduction in the support for research and development in this province. Why did the government do this? Well, with a motive. Again, there is an attempt to appear to be doing something, to be doing something for the 50,000 Manitobans out of work, for the record number of recipients of social assistance in this province, for an economy, Mr. Speaker, mired in failur es of this gove rnmen t and the federal Conservative government.

The council is simply a public relations gesture to deflect from the real issues in this economy, and of course, that is the dismal state of our economic condition. Now I feel very compelled, of course, to relate some of those conditions to the House and to the members today. I would like to start off with, of course, Selkirk and some of the conditions that we are faced with there. One of the head lines in the paper: Food bank posed for March opening-and Selkirk will be the second rural area in the province to set up a food bank.

Over the next two weeks, volunteers will be stocking shelves and deve loping a system for distributing and collecting of the food. The tentative plans will see the food bank open for two days a week and, of course, the individuals who will be using this service will be required to show their medical numbers to determine family size, make-up and so on. This, of course, is just simply a Band-Aid solution to the larger problem that we have in this province. It is not really the solution to the problem.

It is a problem, of course, faced by all MLAs in this House, and more recently, I think, in ours-1 believe our case load has more than doubled in the last year as the economy deteriorates and as the government's response to the needs of these individuals diminis hes. For this reason I get calls from the Springfield riding, I get calls from Lac du Bonnet riding and from Gimli riding. Recently I received a call from a woman from a nearby municipality. She was having trouble receiving sh ort-term social assistance, so I contacted the reeve of that municipality and asked the reasoning why.

He gave me the conditions of the council. The rules state that there would be no assistance provided to anyone while they are waiting for longer-term assistance. I relayed that in Selkirk, of course, there is assistance at any level. He said, well, this is not Selkirk and, as a matter of fact, we are interested in cutting our social services allowance by 20 percent. There is a real trend out there, I think, to be tougher on social assistance recipients as opposed to offering them broader assistance.

The reason why we have food banks, of course, is because of inadequate social assistance levels and the very high unemployment rate in this province, upward to 57,000 Manitobans out of work. Again, read beside that headline about the food bank, in Selkirk, Mandak Metal Processors are laying off 14 workers on February 14 . As the operations manager, quote : We are seeing a slowdown with the railways perhaps more severe than other years. Soon, they hope, of course, that full production will be expected to resume again in the spring. (Mr.

Harold Neufeld, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) I have a list of a number of small businesses which have closed in Selkirk in the last short while.

We have one of the first, I guess, Finesse, which is a women's clothing store; More Than Kitchens, which is a kitchen cupboard store in Selkirk; the Husky gas station closed, again, every one of these having two or three individuals work for them, all of them unfortunately out of work at this point; the Esso gas station; we had Riverside Furniture, which is a very old store in the Selkirk community, closed ; we got Francines in the mall and one of the managers of the store was an old friend of mine, she was a single mother, and now unfortunately she is out of work; Nite Owl Foods store closed; Stepping Out Family Footwear closed, again in the mall, so we are finding two side-by-side stores in our mall in Selkirk have closed recently; Adi's Video store, Mr.

Acting Speaker; Sports Card Fever; a coi n-operated carwash. I think one of the sadder closings of course was the closing of our Macleods store, which has been a mainstay in Selkirk for many generations. I know that my grandfath er, in the early '60s, was interested in buying this store. On the weekend I walked into the store. I knew some of the staff and, as I walked through the store, all the em ptying shelves reminded me of all the empty promises of this government.

There was this young gentleman there, and I knew him from my previous visits to the store, and as we walked down the shelves, he relayed the message of his situation to me that he would be out of work in a very short time and, unfortunately, he does not see where else he can

980 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 find alternative employment. It left him in a very depressing state and, unfortunately, myself as well . (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau , Acting Speaker, in the Chair) Last year on Bill 70 we debated, which was of course the freeze of public sector employees in our province. I made some comments then to the Minister of Finance about how this wou ld have a direct impact on the Selkirk economy, and I would not mind relaying some of the information again, the fact that the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) closed the school of nursing, which was a direct loss to the economy there in Selkirk of $3 million. The other problem, the Rolling Mills asked the employees of the mill to take a 1 0 percent cut in pay. Fortunately, though, that did not occur, so we did not lose that addi tional revenue. Unfortunately, as I calculated then, there are 1, 775, approximat ely, pr ovincial government em ployees in the constituency of Selkirk. It has been estimated that there wo uld be a $70- million loss to the province and to the provincial economy.

If you were to divide that by 48,000 employees, it works out to approximately $1 ,500 per employee. Again, that represents the loss of over $2.6 million to our riding, so we have the $3 million from the school of nursing, and we have the $2.6-m illlon loss by the wage freeze. Of cou rse, there is a magnifying effect of approxima tely 10 times. I remem ber during the presentations to Bill 70, there was a presenter, and he represented a small business concern, and I asked him who shopped at his store, and he said, well, a broad range of the general public, of course.

I said, would public sector employees be included in that, and he said, well, definit ely. I said, what do you think the factor would be on their ability to purchase service if their wages have been frozen? Well, he said, very, very much in the negative way, obviously, so you can see that this is the case now in Selkirk with all these different retail outlets closing-Fin esse , More than Kitchens, Husky, Esso, Riverside Furniture, Macle ods, Francines, Nite Owl, Stepping Out, Adi's, Sports Card Fever, car washes. Again, this government's policy is having a negative effect in the community of Selkirk.

What I would like to do now is to talk again in a broader sense, on broader issues related to the Tory economic failures, and speak more about the Conservative agenda. I have been reading an interesting book by Maude Barlow. If I can find my notes, there are a number of points I wou ld like to raise from that article. There are seven points I would like to raise from that particu lar articl e. I will read the points and then I will address the points further.

Nu mb er 1, tie the Canadian economy by a free trade agreement to the most powerful economy in the world in which the corporate sector controls the government's agenda and an unfettered free-market ideology is firmly entrenched. Force economic restructurings; i.e., cut jobs. Force alignment of cost structures; i.e., force down wages, weaken union bargaining powe r. Force down labou r laws and envir onmental standards . Force down taxes. Force down government spending on social programs, et cetera .

Do it in the name of harmonization-to harmonize means to Americanize. * (1 450) Just this week, all members of the House received this booklet, this ballo t, from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. I have mine here, and they have polled their members just recently this year, mandate 15 8. Question No. 4 says, should Canada sign a free trade agreement with the U.S. and Mexico? In Manitoba, they have Manitoba and they have Canadian results.

In Manitoba, 42 percent said yes; 39 percent said no; 18 percent were undecided, and 1 percent had no interest in this issue, so 58 percent of all the respondents of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business either said no or are undecided about further extending the free trade agreement between Canada and the United States to Mexico. Nationw ide, 41 percent of the respondents said yes, but 43 percent of the respondents said no; 15 percent were undecided. Why would they change so dramatical ly?

Undoubtedly, this federa tion, four or five years ago when the Free Trade Agreement was proposed and debated, was a fervent supporter of free trade with the United States, but now all of a sudden they are no longer interested in supporting any free trade with Mexico. Why is that? I think it is relevant again to quote a particu lar story or anecdote dealing with this specific issue. I will talk about a boat manufacturer in Ontario, ACF Grew Inc., a Canadian boat manufacturer based in Ontario that had a reputation for quality and described in the trade as unquestionably the largest

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 981 and the most successful manufacturer of power boats in Canada. The owner, Peter Francis, testified before a parliamentary committee in 19 85, and he was not intimidated by taunts that opponents of free trade were weak and inefficient. He saw clearly the real dangers of fighting the U.S. giants with their huge production, financial marketing and distribution advantages in the continental market. We are geared to a population of 25 million, he said. The task of expanding to compete in a market of 250 mill ion is staggeri ng.

The Canadian powerboat industry was protected by a 15 percent tariff and a 71 -cent dollar. Unfortunately, A.C. Grew Incorporated declared bankruptcy in the fall of 19 88, an early casualty of the Free Trade Agreement. Its rival , Doral Boats, again a Canadian company, the only way it could remain afloat, Mr. Acting Speaker, was to move to Clinton, Tennessee. Since the free trade deal went into effect, 25 companies have followed this company into bankruptcy, the highest rate in Canadian history. Again, I would like to make some comments about free trade. Free trade was supposed to create jobs.

Of course, here is a quiz: Free trade will create more jobs especially for our young people and put more money into the pockets of Canadian work ers. The Economic Council of Canada predicts that free trade will provide 250,000 ad ditional jobs. That was a quote by Brian Mulroney in the election of 19 88. Unfortunately, Brian was only out by about 700,000 jobs. When you look at the actual jobs that were created- this is the monthly average-in 19 87, 40,000 jobs; 19 88, 26,000 jobs; 19 89, 13 ,000 jobs; 19 90 there was actually a minus 7,500 jobs created.

Eight hundr ed thousand jobs were created in Canada during the two years prior to the free trade, while only 37,000 jobs were created in the last two years. Tories said free trade will bring us jobs, jobs, jobs. Instead Canada has lost over 335,000 well-paid manufacturing jobs between June of 19 89 and March of 19 91 . One out of every five manufacturing jobs has disappeared since the deal was signed and there is no end in sight. Every day the newspaper reports new plant closures as industry after industry is battered by the effects of the Free Trade Agreement.

Unemployment, of course, has risen dramatically to more than 10 percent, just under, and now it is probably approaching one and a half mi llion Canadians who are unemployed. In this province, of course, there are 57,000 Canadians unemployed. A large portion of jobs lost are in the well-paid man ufacturing sector, and according to the Organization of International Cooperation and Development, manufacturing em ployment has fallen from 19 percent of total employment during the period before the deal was signed to 16 percent in 19 91 .

An increasing number of workers are confined to low-pa ying, nonunion service sector jobs. In contrast, the number of decently paid unionized manufacturing jobs is declining. At the top end, a small group of professional executives has seen income rise dramatic ally.

The federal and provincial Conservatives said that free trade would give a major boost to Canada's economy by creating a positive investment climate, and still we have high interest rates, dramatically higher than the Americans, perhaps the severest recession in the past 50 years, a massive shutdown of our manufacturing sector as more and more firms transfer their operations out of Canada, both to the United States and to Mexico. Business investment has fallen dramatically. In 19 88, the last year before the agreement was signed, investment rose 24.7 percent.

During 19 89, it rose by only 5 percent, while in 199 0 it fell by 2.3 percent. A further 6 percent to 1 0 percent decline is expected when the 19 91 figures are known. The agreement was supposed to benefit our export industries because tariffs would be lowe r, giving firms easier access to the large U.S. market. Instead , our current accounts balance with the U.S. has plummeted since the deal was signed from a surplus averaging $5.3 billion per year over the preceding five years to an average annual deficit of $1 .5 billion over the first two years.

Interest rates: We have a particular issue right here in Manitoba dealing with free trade, a number of them of course. We have the Morden plant, the Tupperware plant, we have the Varta battery plant that was taken over by a firm from the United States which promptly closed it down and shipped this operation down to the States in order to survive.

Cedric Ritchie, who is the chairman and chief executive officer of the Bank of Nova Scotia-and again I mention it is not too often you will be seeing us quoting a bank president here-he said, there is no doubt that Canadian firms are adjusting to the Free Trade Agreement. The problem is that too many are ad justing by leaving Canada.

982 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA March 5, 19 92 Arthur Donner was quoted again: By early 199 0, high interest rates have made a recession virtually inevitable. The combined effects of the Free Trade Agreement, the high interest rates and the high Canadian dollar has decim ated our Canadian economy. Michael Wilson once said, bilateral free trade with the United States is simplistic and naive. It would only serve to further dimin ish our ability to compete internationally. Of course, he said that when he was running.

He was challenging Brian Mulroney for the leadership of the federal Conservative Party, and he was echoing the eventual winner. Of course, Brian Mulroney was saying the very same thing at the same tim e. Mulroney has lied to Canadians about free trade and its impact on social programs. He said there is absolutely nothing in the Free Trade Agreement that wil l stop the Governmen t of Canada from maintaining all its social programs, all its regional development programs; there is absolutely nothing; we are going to maintain all of our social programs; social programs are a sacred trust.

Now, of course, you see the erosion of medi care. We see the erosion of the federal transfer payments. Does Canada in fact spend too much on social programs as Mulroney and the corporate elites in this country tell us? Canada's social spending is actually slightly below average for the industrial nations. Italy, France, Germany, the United Kingdom all spend considerably more than Canada on social programs as a percentage of GNP. The Tories said free trade would benefit consumers by reducing price &-W hat a misnomer.

I will continue on with point No. 2, use monetary policy, that is, interest rates and exchange rates to speed up restructu rin g , to wee d out weak companies, accele rate the loss of jobs and downrate pressure on wages by speeding up import competition and creating a recession. Nothing will produce massive unemployment as fast as high interest rate policy combined with the policy to cut public spending. High unemployment keeps wage demands low, also a high interest rate is a good way to transfer more wealth to those who have weal th.

In the name of fighting the deficit, use high interest rates to increase the deficit, focus public attention on the urgency to reduce the deficit as a smoke screen to hide the slashing of public spending. * (1 500) I have some quotes I would like to read to you from a Maclean's article-som e of the business elite in our country.

We have Douglas Peters, chief economist of the TD Bank: "The first thing the government has to do is to say, 'Look, this recession is deeper and worse than we expected,' and then start to do something about it. w Matthew Barrett, chairman of the Bank of Montreal declared: "Helping Canadians without work makes good business sense." Helping Canadians without work makes good business sense-hardly a friend of New Democrats. We have Miller Ayre who is the current chairman of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.

He was expressing his personal views when he said: "The government has to face the fact that there are short-term economic problems that have to be dealt with. They cannot continually look to the long term for solutions.w He concludes with: "Right now , there is a perverse logic that the sicker we are, the healthier we must be getting. w In the Investment Dealers Association of Canada little leaflet that again all members received , it says here: Federal and Provincial Financing, Budget Deficit (Surplus).

This is for Manitoba, in 19 88-89, the government was dealing with a surplus of $59 million, again the surplus that was left by the New Democrats. The next year, $34-million deficit; in 19 90-91 , $334-million deficit. Again we just had in di cations from the Finance minis ter yesterday-{i nte�ection) Well, it states right there. Mr. Acting Speaker, we had an indication from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) yesterday that the deficit will be even higher than he initially projected . Number 3, bring in tax subsidies for high-income earners in large corporations.

Say the purpose is to free ou r pr iv ate sa vi ngs and un leash the entrepreneurial energies of Canadian business. Increase taxes for middle incomes and the working poor. Where possible, do it through a mechanism such as inflation, de-indexing of tax brackets. The National Council on Welfare calculated that by 19 88, the tax bill for the working poor had increased 44 percent, while that of the wealthiest Canadians decreased by 6 percent. In 19 89, the latest year for which statistics are available, 1 1 8,000 profitable corporations paid no taxes on profits of $25 billion.

Under the federal Conservatives, the federal revenue from corporate tax was haH, from 17 percent to less than 9 percent.

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 983 The most recent data that is available- again, 15 Bronfman-owned companies pay tax of less than 0.5 percent on a collective profit of $1 .598 billion. Power Corporation paid no taxes on profits of $214 million. Xerox Canada paid no taxes on profits of $10 6 million. Fletcher Challenge paid no taxes on profits of $1 19 million. Montreal Trust paid 1. 7 percent on profits of $80 million. Repap Enterprises paid no taxes on profits of $17 6 million. CP Hotels paid no taxes on profits of $47 million. S N C Group paid no taxes on profits of $21 million.

Dominion Textiles paid no taxes on profits of $7 million. Of cou rse , all of these corporations are hug e contributors to the Co nservative Party, as I have decl ared several tim es here through different documents which I have raised. Point No. 4, cut back social programs, especially the universal ones. Do it in the name of targeting those who need them most. We just witnessed that with the federal government budget that was brought down just this past week where they have decided to cease uni versality of the family allowance progr am. We see this here in the government's where they have de-indexed 55 Plus.

Number 5, in the name of fighting inflation, strengthen measures such as sales tax and high interest rates. Do this di rectly to public sector em ployees by im posing a wage freeze. That sounds very ominous. We know that Bill 70 froze 58,000 Manitobans, public sector employees in this province. I related earlier how this has negatively affected my own commu nity in Selkirk. Number 6, privatize profitable public sector enterprises, deregulate, privati ze. We see this now and unfortunately I witnessd-one of my own critic areas, of course, is the MTS telephones.

We have noticed that as our government begins to deregulate the industry, it allows the federal government to take over control of MTS. At one time, they were radically opposed to the notion, but now, for some reason, they are responding quite favourably to the idea of the CRTC taking control of MTS. We have a quote from our Premier. In October of 19 89, he said: local phone rates are bound to go up if the federal government seizes control over the Manitoba Telephone System. There could be dramatic increases in the cost of basic phone service because of lowering of long dis tance rates for big consumers.

We know now that the ministers, fortunately, have now changed their tune in supporting CRTC control over MTS. Again, we hav e a document from Man itoba Tele phone Syste m, Com petiti ve Preparedness for Message Toll Competition, which is a competition of long d istance rates in this country. Is this innovation? I will quote from the art icle : Message toll competition wi ll have a significant financial and operational impact on the Manitoba Telephone System. Capital and expense resources requirements are expected to increase dramatically while settled revenues experience a substantial decline.

The following points summa rize the impacts under the assumption of a competitive environment in 19 94 framework: Netw ork and information systems modifications alone will require an estimated $88 million to $89 million in additional capital expenditures. Settled revenues are expected to decrease by $70,000 in 19 98, dropping to an estimated $1 18 million loss by the end of 2002, assuming a competitive situation in the 1994 time frame. This impact is especially signHicant because it relates to Telecom Canada's reference plan.

Expense requireme nts to accomm odate a new com petitive envir onm ent will consu me approximately $25 million over the 19 91-1 996 time frame with an estimated $1 .8 million in ongoing expenses per year. Expense requirements to acc omm odate a new com petitive environment- there is a Tory catch phrase there, competition. It is going to cost the firm $25 million initially and another $2 million per year to compete with Unitel. We already know that the CRTC will probably this year grant Unitel its licence to compete with MTS and other publicly owned companies in this country.

Because of that, we know that local rates which have been subsidized by long distance revenues will now unfortunately increase. All estimates are that it will only benefit nine out of 1 0 users. One out of 10 , of course, will benefit from it. It has been stated time and time again, even the Premier (Mr. Film on) mentions it, thatthe only beneficiaries of this will be the large corporati ons in this country. Recently, long distance reve nues from the telephone system were reduced by 15 .5 percent, and it is because of reductions in long distance calls.

It seems like the only winners in this game are big business users who use long distance in bulk and competitors such as Unitel. Bud Sherman, a former mi nister of the Cr own, of the gove rnment, mentioned that nine out of 10 Canadians would end

984 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 up paying more, paying higher telephone bills under competition. Only 1 percent, only one out of 1 0 will actually benefit from a competition in telephone rates. This government seems inclined to support that- when we remember what happened with Community Calling and the incredible outroar people expressed during that. *( 15 10 ) So we have No. 7, bring in all these policies in the name of international com petitive ness. What exactly does that mean, Mr. Acting Speaker? We have heard these terms mentioned before by this government.

We know just as I mentioned there before what it is going to cost for international competitiveness. It is going to cost, unfortunately, the Manitoba Telephone System $25 milli on initial cost and $2 million per year to maintain apparently this Tory competitiveness, as they like to mention. I would like to make a few more comments about Manitoba's provincial economic situation, Mr. Acting Speaker. I would like to compare our performance now with the performance of 19 90, and it is evident, un fortu nate ly, that Manit oba's economic performance was significantly weaker in 199 1 than in 19 90.

Of the 11 indica tors reviewed, eight declined while three remained approximately the same. The neoconservative policies of free trade, privati zati on, deregulation, high interest rate s, issues that I have already touched upon in my presentation this afternoon, have had terrible results for the Canadian and Manitoba economies. The past few years have been characte rized by high unemployment, bankruptcies, factory closures, escalati ng welfare rolls. Man itoba's overall economic performance rate was negative 1 percent in 19 91 , which meant that there was a general reduction in economic activity.

Our province declined from 19 90 to 199 1. In comparison, the economy grew by 2.4 percent in 19 90. Our level of employment declined by 2.3 percent in 19 91 from the 1990 total. In other words, Mr. Acting Speaker, Manitoba lost jobs in 19 91 . On the other hand, the number of jobs increased by only 1. 4 percent in 19 90. The unemployment rate for 19 91 averaged 8.8 percent, up significantly from the 19 90 average of 7.2 percent. Retail sales declined by 2.4 percent in the first 11 months of 19 91 over the same period in 19 90. In 19 90, retail sales showed zero growth from the previous year.

Obviously, the GST as well as the recession have had a negative impact on the retail sector in this province. Urban housing starts dropped by 36.8 percent in 19 91 from the 19 90 level. This was the fourth consecutive year of declining activity and residential construction reflecting the poor economic situation and stagnated the population level, which resulted largely from the loss of people through interprovincial migr ation. The value of building permits dropped by 22.9 percent in the first 10 months of 19 91 . We experienced a 12 .6 percent decline in 19 90.

Farm cash receipts declined by 6.3 percent in the first nine months of 19 91 compared to the decline of 6.1 percent in 19 90. Manufacturing shipments declined by 13 percent in the first 11 months of 19 91 or the same period in 19 90, while they actually dropped by 3.2 percent in 19 90. Average weekly wages increased by 4 percent in 19 91 , virtually unchanged from the 4 percent rise in 19 90. Manitoba's situation as compared to the other provinces between 199 0 and 19 91 , Manitoba's rank in economic performance: In economic growth we were fifth in 1990 and we were in last place In 19 91 .

Employment growth we were fifth in 19 90, we were No. 8 in 19 91 . Employment rate, well, we did see an increase in employment rate from four to three. Population net, interprovincial migration, we were seventh in 1990 and eighth in 19 91 . Retail sales in 19 90 we were ninth, in 19 91 we were sixth. Building permits, seven in 19 90, ei ght In 19 91 . Man ufacturing shipmen ts we were six th in performance ranking in 19 90, in 199 1 we were tenth, we were in last place . In investment, Manitoba's rank-(i nterjection] The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laurendeau): Orde r, please.

Could I have those honourable members wishing to carry on a conversation in the loge-a t this time I am attempting to listen to the honourable member for Selkirk. Mr. Dewar: Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker. In investment we have 19 90 we were fifth, in 19 91 we were eighth. When you compare ourselves to the national ave rage-com paring the national average of economic performance with that of Manitoba is another way of assessing the relative position of our economy. Of the 11 economic ind icators only two, the unemployment rate and the farm cash receipts, performed above the Canadian average. The

March 5, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 985 remaining nine indic ators indicated that Manitoba was performing below the Canadian average. Mr. Acting Speaker, in conclusion here, the econ omi c data analy zed in the presentation revealed that Manitoba's economy has weakened considerably in 19 91 compared to 19 90. Also Manitoba's economic position has worsened relatively compared with that of the other provinces. Obviously, Manitoba has been hurt badly by the national economic recession.

Agricultural incomes have suffered from depressed world grain prices while our mining sector has also experienced low global prices for output. Coupled with these policies have been the federal and government der egulation and privatization initiatives that have caused further loss of industry and transfer of activities out of our province. Both rail and trucking transportation have suffered in recent years. The federal government's CNR has been moving jobs out of this province to Alberta. Sounds like the lotteries commission moving jobs from here to Stettler, Alberta.

Free trade has tended to lessen east-west traffic from north-south patterns. Manitoba's role in transportation has unfortunately lessened over these last few years. Mr. Acting Speaker, he nce Man itoba is undergoing structural changes with long-term negative conseq uen ces. The Conse rvative government of Manitoba has no economic plans, just the smoke and mirrors, the Innovation and Technology Council, that is just a shifting of cabinet comm ittees. The Conservative government of Manitoba has no economic plan or course of action, Mr. Acting Speaker, to deal with the erosion of our industries and of our economy.

Thank you. Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan) : Mr. Acting Speaker, I reflected for a period of time about what my comments would be on this particu lar bill because I think it is significant, although I get the distinct impression that I have heard it all before and that I have been this way before. I reflect back until the 19 60s, which was my first involvement in actually politics, and up through the '70s and into '80s and into the '90s, we see the restructuring of the restructuring of the restructuring.

We had the dev elopment fund, and we saw the fiasco with CFI and other developments, and I really get this sort of deja vu impression about this particular bill. Mr. Acting Speaker, in trying to determine how I would deal with this matter and precisely how I would in general terms deal with a bill of this nature, I thought of what would happen if I were to do my regular door knocking, if I were to go to the door and ask my constituents, who are the source of all knowledge for us here, I would ask my particular constituents to reflect on this bill.

I get the distinct impression that I would get-alt hough I did not do it on this particular point during my regular door knocking this week-my impression is that I would get the response from my constituents, what is the big deal, and what is it all about? Somehow, I think they would say the same thing that I said. Have we not heard all of this before? • (1 520) Then I reflected on, Mr. Acting Speaker, and thought that one of the reasons I am having trouble in dealing with this particular bill, is that it has so many unanswered questions.

Not only do we have the element of something that we sort of heard before, and we have this credibility problem, I suggest, with respect to Tory governments and economic dev elopment in general, so we have that particular position out there. As well, I think of grave concern to me is the fact that there is a whole raft and a great series of unanswered questions with respect to this bill. I would like to illustrate some of the questions I have with respect to this bill. For example, what is the plan and what is the general objective of this particular-! mean, I have read the objectives, Mr.

Acting Speaker, I have drafted legi slati on. I know what you put in objectives, and I actually read the Premier's (Mr. Filmo

n) com men ts in order to get some understanding as to what the objective and the plan is for this, but he failed to articula te it, and the bill fails to articulate it. There are unanswered questions. What are the parameters of this particular organization, this particular bill? Where is it supposed to fit in, in terms of the Manitoba economy? There are no parameters. It is not enclosed in anything. What are the general goals? Well, we know the goals are economic prosperity.

We know the goals are an attempt in this economy to try to get people back working, and I believe members on that side of the House are attempting to do that. I do not agree with the method by which they are choosing to do that, but Mr. Acting Speaker, I believe they are trying to do that. Clearly, that would be a goal. Where is the end point, Mr. Acting Speaker? In dealing with problems of this kind it has been my philosophy that you start from your objectives and

986 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 your goal and you work backwards to see how you would achieve it. That is a basic principle of problem solving, I suppose. What are the goals of this particular bill? What are the objectives we are trying to obtain other than an Economic Innovation and Technology Council Act? They are not there, which is why it lends itself to political critic ism, which is why it lends itself to members on this side of the House quite rightly suspecting political motivations and being quite suspicious generally about where this bill is going.

Where are the other examples of councils and projects of this kind? Are there other examples? Are there success ful experiments? Are there states, are there provinces, are there countries that have innovated, that have utilized something like this, and what has that achieved? That is not articulated. What was the data that initially prompted the change to move from the former research council to this new body? Upon what empirical basis did the government make this decision?

There is a cynical side of me that suspects, given my experience of dealing with the Department of Education, that there Is no empi rical basis, that it was more like sitting around a cabinet room and kind of saying-okay, Mike, what should w e do now? And this is what we are going to do. We are going to restructure and set up a new council. There is a cynical side of me, Mr. Acting Speaker, that thinks that. There is an idealistic side of me that says perhaps there is a plan, perhaps there is data, perhaps there is empir ical evidence and a whole series of doc umentation that says this is the way we should go.

If that is the case, I would like to see it. Members on this side of the House would like to see it. What was the basis upon which this program , this plan, was adopted ? Does this relate to Winnipeg, to Manitoba, to rural Manitoba? What is the interaction? What is the relationship to the North, Mr. Acting Speaker? Where does this all fit in? Is there a different em phasis in some areas? Is there a different emphasis in other areas? Are there particular regions that are being addresse d? Are there not parti cular regions that are being addressed? Nothing in the bill, more questions than answers.

That is what, again, causes members on this side of the House to react almost instinctively to any initiatives of this government. We get the distinct impression that the old ship of state is kind of adrift, Mr. Acting Speaker, and that it kind of moves this way and it moves that way, but that it is listing quite a bit. I just want to take that analogy a little further, and when it is listing, the deck chairs kind of get stumbled about, so what you do is- hey, what are we g oing to do about this economic problem? What are we going to do about 57,000 unemployed? Let us rearrange those deck chairs.

Let us all shift them around. I know it is a tired and old analogy, but the current of my thoughts was along the analogy of the ship of state, Mr. Acting Speaker. Mem bers on this side I think quite rightly are suspicious of the motivations of this government with respect to this particular bill. Another question is, why was the $1 0 million chosen that was chosen and was adopt ed? Why was that particular amount chosen? What is the future of it? Is it meant to expand or contract? Where is that fund going?

Every time you see In any kind of legislation a fund to be established, at least in my experience, that is what you key it on in terms of the mana ge ment, the control and the accountabi lity. I guess the question I have is, why was that chosen? Again, no answers. I peruse the comment s of the Premier (Mr. Filmon). I desperately am listening through one ear to the comments of the honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger) to try to obtain some kind of acknowledgment or some kind of response to these question but, alas, no response. How were the member s chosen?

Why were those members chosen? I do not want to criticize the 29 members who make up that body; there are some very outstanding citizens, but I do not know why. In fact, I have to admit to a particular bias, Mr. Acting Speaker, in areas of this kind, that we see a retreading of the same individuals generally over and over again in terms of these committees. The same individuals over and over again are used, be it on Winnipeg 2000 or be it other task forces, and I begin to think that maybe there is a problem. I mean, we have seen nothing happen in this economy in the last four years.

In fact, we have seen a regression of this economy in the last four years, and now we are turning to the same people that we have turned to in the last four years to give us some kind of answe rs, some kind of innovation. For that reason, I am a little bit suspect as to how,

March 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 987 and I would like some ind ication as to how and why those particular members were chosen. Further to that, I would like some information as to why-you know, the list of members on the committee does read of a who's who of CEOs in leading companies in Manitoba. Again, I know some of these individuals. They are outstand ing individuals. There is no reflection on these individ uals' talents or ability, but from my experience, individuals of this kind, people at this level do not have a lot of time nor energy to devote to tasks of this kind.

These individuals are on a myriad of bodies, they are on a myriad of councils, and they are on a myriad of boards. I am not sure if they really have the opportunity to chance- Han. Harry Enns (Min ister of Natu ral Resources): None will be so near and dear to our heart as this one. Mr. Chomlak: No, question.

The Mini ster of Natural Resources indicated , there is no issue more near and dear to their hearts, but you know, when they are pursuing their own individual enterprises and their own individual interest, I get the impression that they may not have perhaps the time and energy to devote the kind of gray matter that is required to devote to this kind of a council. * (1 530) Just by way from my own perspective , again no reflection on these individuals, but perhaps second-level people in their organizations, the research and planning types, the analysis types, perhaps some of those individuals should have been put on the council, not those.

I dare say that perhaps individuals, not just-we chose the head of organizations including labour organizations. Why not some individuals just who ope rate small businesses? Why not some individuals just with ideas and why not some individuals just from x, y and z constituency? Surely they have as much to contribute as those individuals. Mr. Acting Speaker, one of the other areas that concerns me is where is the interlinkage between this particular body and organization and the federal government, or in fact international bodies?

If there is anything we have learned, and certai nly the federal government constitutional initiatives are in that di rection-and by the way I do not agree with many of them-but surely we have learned that there has to be some interaction, increasing interaction between governments at various levels, et cetera. (Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) I do not know in this bill where the linkage and the interaction is, so there is another basic question. As wel l, Mr. Acting Speaker, I ask what are the criteria by which this organization and by which this particular council will be judged?

What are we looking for? That ties us back in to the original lack of goals, to the original lack of objectives that I indicated earlier on were a concern of mine. What is the basis by which this organization will be judged? Fundamental to any kind of economic dev elopment and restructu ring, Mr. Acting Speaker, and to anything in our society is the question of what will be the public input into this par ticular organization and to the particular deve lopments.

Now, certainly the public has access, and the public has input through memb ers of the Legislative Assembly, but I have already illustrated that we receive very, very little by way of information. There is very little in the report. There is very little that can be gleaned even reading between the lines of the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) speech. We have heard very little from the government's side as to what this organization is all about. So I am very, very concerned about public inp ut, about pu blic accountability, about the accountability of the public to fund into organizations of this kind.

Because if there is anything we have learned recently in our political history, it is that accountability is a basic requirement in any kind of allocation or expenditure of the public funds. Mr. Acting Speaker, I could go on with question after question after question. In fact, I have spoken now for a good deal of time on my concerns regarding the question, but just let me end this portion of my comments with a couple of other questions. That is, what are the target industries? Are there any target industries? Are there any target groups of industries?

Is there any target geographic area that is being looked at by this council, by this particular industry? Is there any kind of critical mass that is being deve loped ? Is there any kind of target industries? Are there any linkages of industries to other industries that it is supposed to look at? I noted that the Conservative government in its 19 90 election platform kind of targeted industries and targeted sectors of the economy. Of course,

988 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 those have been eroding away so rapidly and have been falling so badly in the last several years that we have heard very little from the government in that area other than the job losses that have occurred. So, Mr. Acting Speaker, understandably, for political purposes, the government did not want to lay its ducks on the line, no pun intended- An Honourable Member: Unlimited numbers of ducks. Mr. Chomlak: Its unlimited number of ducks, Mr. Acting Speaker, with respect to the target industries.

Still it is a very, very open question as to where are the target industries that this particular body is going to address itself to. In the final analysis, with respect to the questions on this bill, it is just too wide open, too few controls, too few questions answered . That causes grave concern for two members on this side of the House with respect to the body and to the bill. I guess another concern that I have with respect to this bill, and I know that we are not to deal with specifics, clause by clause, in the bill because we will have opportunity to do that, is the question of the fund.

The fund is available for the government to give grants to organizations. This government and others have fallen into the trap that these kinds of grants only go to the large organizations and to the large companies, to the large organizations which, frankly, should be capable of raising the capital , if they are so successful and if they are such innovative kinds of entities and organizations.

Ironically, these Conservative governments tend to give government grants and giveaways to these large corporations which should, theoretica lly, if the philosophy is to be followed , be able to raise that capital on the open market. They fall into a trap time and time again of providing grants and loans, usually forgivable, to organizations like this. Mr. Acting Speaker, there is a rhetorical refrain we hear all the time, that small business is the main generator of jobs in the economy, et cetera, et cetera.

I wonder if the emphasis will be on those small businesses, those real generators of jobs and wealth in the economy, or will it be to the large corporations, the large companies that the Tory governments increasingly and continually provide giveaways to in the old fashion. That is a concern not only because of the people I represent in my constituency but because we see what is happening in Manitoba, the strangling and the squeezing out of those businesses and the very fundamental change that has occurred in our economy as a result.

One of my pet points that has come up recently, that has really been forgotten with respect to these large grants to companies, Mr. Acting Speaker, is we end up with these large corporations sort of doubly indemnifying them, that is doubly providing them with benefits.

First off, we train people for the work force, et cetera, and when these industries say, well, we do not have the proper workers, train them again, we go back and give the industry a grant to retrain them, something that indus tries and companies in other jurisdictions, most notably Europe, do on their own , but something which we, in this province and in this country, have failed to do. So we say, okay, sure, we will take back those workers, we will retrain them. Oh, you do not have to pay anything to retrain them, we will do it. Consequently these large entities, these large companies, get double grants.

They get grants in large forgivable loans that come in the first instance, and then when their workers are not trained-in fact it is a triple grant-by the public system the way that they want, they come back in the system and we pay again. We give them another grant to retrain their workers, so it is my concern, with these so-called business managers and these so-called Individuals, who were supposed to under stand the workings of business and the economy. They do a rather shodd y, slip-shod job of dealing with our tax dollars, and it is a grave concern of ours with respect to this bill. This bill has no plan.

There is no general direction . We cannot fit this bill in, I suppose, because the province has no coherent economic plan, a coherent economy strategy, with which to fit this bill in. Is this the economic strategy? I ask, is this the plan? Is this council the generator and the main generator and the thing that is going to lead us out of the recession? If it is, it is too little, it is probably too late, but if this is it, then let us know.

I suspect it is, and if this is the economic plan that is going to save our province and save our economy, if this is what the government is proposing, somehow is going to make us lead in Canada this year, then we are in serious, serious trouble. It is a very serious problem for the province. You know, there is a philosophical question that I want to diverge on. It is funny how this government sort of shifts back and forth. Remember, it was no grants to companies, then it was grants to

March 5, 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 989 companies, then it was no involvement, one day no ownersh ip, the next day 24 percent own ership in linnet. When you get that cork floating on the ocean, you get that kind of response, and you get that situation where one day it is the Research Council, and the next day it is the Economic Innovation and Technology Council, maybe in another year we will hear an announcement of something else. Members on this side of the House have spoken quite accura tely about the redirection of money, previously di rected from the Research Council, into another one.

I guess that is one of the reasons why we, on this side of the House, have concerns about the rhetoric, and about how this might appear to be more of a PR gesture than anything else, because we see money withdrawn from one area and reintroduced with much fanfare, and more bells and whistles in another area. • (154 0) I suspect we will see a lot of that next week in the provincial budget. In several days we will see money taken from one hand and given out with another hand, and saying, hey, look everybody, look at what we are doing now for development.

There is nothing wrong with that except state it clearly and be upright and be forthright about it. Do not play politics with it. I guess that is one of the reasons why members on this side of the House are again concerned about this bill and the direction that it is taking us, Mr. Acting Speaker. The government says that innovation is the cornerstone of economic framework of the province in the 19 90s. I mean, what does that mean? Again, I have to come back to basic questions and fundamen tal questions. What does that mean? What is the directi on? What is the basis? What is the context it fits in?

Where are the studies? Where are the sectors that this should proceed in? Where are the ailing indus tries? Where are the trad itional industries that are having trouble, that need new innovation? Where are the industries that might have future and potential growth? Are those outlined in here? Do we have any concept? Have we heard anything from the other side that identifies that? No, Mr. Acting Speaker. All we hear is that innovation is the cornerstone. It is much like the other rhetorical phrase we often hear, that competition is the key.

We do not know exactly what they mean by that, but they keep saying competition is the key. We see no flesh tied to that particular course of action. This rush toward under standin g and dealing with technology and innovation is something that has clearly been identified , but again, what is missing in terms of this rush to it, Mr. Acting Speaker, are the goals and where we should be proceeding. Let me perhaps illustrate by way of example what I am trying to outline in terms of my criticism s of this particular bill. We hear over and over again, Mr.

Acting Speaker, that we need technical training, we need professional training. We have a myriad of programs. We have programs offered in some institutions, we have prog rams offered in other institutions, we have some that have withdrawn here, some that are there. We do not even have something as basic as an inventory, Mr. Acting Speaker, of what programs are available, what the waiting lists are, what opportunities are provided for you, whether there are jobs avai lable once you get this training in the first place. We do not even have the basics, and we are talking about doing all this technical innovation.

We are talking about deve loping these jobs when we have not even identified what they are. We have not identified the training that is necessary, and we have not even provided the public with the means to obtain that, Mr. Acting Speaker. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau , Acting Speaker, in the Chair) I get very frustrated when I hear this refrain and this constant reference to technologically innovative or being innovative or being technologically adv anced, specifically along the lines oftraining, Mr. Acting Speaker, and the basis upon which it is made. We just do not know.

It is because the government has not done its homework, Mr. Acting Speaker. It is because the government does not really know, and that is why the public perceives that the ship of state is adrift, and that is why we on this side of the House recognize that the ship of state is adrift . That is what causes great concern in a bill of this kind. Let me illustrate again, Mr. Acting Speaker, by way of example, in dealing with the whole area of training and the whole area of training individuals and programs, we do not even know the Department of Educa tion, the number of students we have or the dropout rate.

990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 5, 1992 We talk about vocational program ming and technological training, that there are 300,000 jobs in this country that go unfulfilled because the training is not there. We have not identified what that training is, where it can be obtained, who should be provid ing it, who should be taking it. It really strikes me that, frankly, the government does not know where it is going. It brings out a bill, it reconstitutes another council, another committee, Mr.

Acting Speaker, another organization that is somehow going to tell us what we are going to do, and where we are going to go. I am happy to hear the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) is with me on this entirely. One of the things I like about the bill, Mr. Acting Speaker, and unfortunately it is not in the bill, but I picked it out from the comments of the Premier (Mr. Filmon), in fact the press releases of the Premier, that they are going to adopt a co-ordinated approach of government departments.

Now I do not know if members on that side of the House have heard my broken record references time and time again to the co-or dinated approach that must be taken in many areas of government, but I have done it constantly with the Minister of Education. I am happy. I welcome the initiative to co-ordinate the approach of all departments. In fact, I would like to see the government go much further.

I will use the opportunity, since I am talking about the co-ordinated approa ch, to urge the government to respond to an initiative in that area, which was a joint presentation of the Manitoba Teachers Society, the Manitoba Association of School Trustees, the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents and MTS to the government of Manitoba to adopt a co-ord inated approach and a co-ordinated strategy by December 31 , 19 91 , to education programs and delivery of services to children. Unfortunately, Mr.

Acting Speaker, even in this area, which is probably more readily identifiable than the co-ordinated approach that one could take for the Economic Innovation and Technology Council initiative , even in that lim ited educational area the government has not met that guideline. It has not met that deadline, and again does not know where it is going. Having said that, at least the First Minister (Mr. Film on) in his press release indi cated that there was going to be, and there is, a council or board I guess of ministers of those government departments that are working together in this area.

I actually welcome tha t co- ord inated appr oa ch and co-ordinated initiative , and I would urge on the government in fact that they go much further in this area, because it is an area that clearly-the time of pigeonholing problems and pigeonholing things approach, the one department versus another department versus another department, are over. It is my viewpoint that appr oach to problems is something that perhaps

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-3-23
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 3rd hansardpdf 23.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	243165f00debafd339c236abab2022e2ff442632

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