Manitoba Hansard — 11 September 2008 (Sitting 67B, 39th Legislature, 2nd Session)

39-2-67b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LX No. 67B – 1:30 p.m., Thursday, September 11, 2008 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P.

DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P. Vacant Elmwood

3119 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, September 11, 2008 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Long-Term Care Facility–Morden Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background for this petition is as follows: Tabor Home Incorporated is a time-expired personal care home in Morden with safety, environmental and space deficiencies. The seniors of Manitoba are valuable members of the community with in creasing health-care needs requiring long-term care.

The community of Morden and the surrounding area are experiencing substantial population growth. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) to strongly consider giving priority for funding to develop and staff a new 100-bed long-term care facility so that clients are not exposed to unsafe conditions and so that Boundary Trails Health Centre beds remain available for acute-care patients instead of waiting placement clients. This is signed by M.J. Hildebrand, Sharon Fehr, Ruth Dyck and many, many others. Mr.

Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Provincial Nominee Program–Applications Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: Immigration is critically important to the future of our province, and the 1998 federal Provincial Nominee Program is the best immigration program that Manitoba has ever had.

Lengthy processing times for PNP applications causes additional stress and anxiety for would-be immigrants and their families here in Manitoba. The government needs to recognize the unfairness in its current policy on who qualifies to be an applicant. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to consider establishing a 90-day guarantee for processing an application for a minimum of 80 percent of applicants that have family living in Manitoba.

To urge the provincial government to consider removing the use of the restrictive job list when dealing with the family sponsor stream. This is signed by T. Valerio, D. Valerio, J. Advincula and many other fine Manitobans. Physician Recruitment–Southwestern Manitoba Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition: The Town of Virden has the last hospital in Manitoba on the busy Trans-Canada Highway travelling west.

For the safety of recreational travellers, long- haul truck drivers, oil and agricultural industry workers and its citizens, Virden, a town of nearly 4,000, requires emergency services at its hospital. On June 30, 2008, the emergency room at the Virden Hospital was closed due to this government's failure to recruit and retain doctors for southwest Manitoba and its failure to plan for the departure of doctors whose contracts were expiring. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Ms.

Oswald), to consider creating a health-care environment in which doctors want to work and build their careers in Manitoba. To request the Minister of Health to consider making it a priority to recruit doctors to southwestern

3120 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 Manitoba so emergency rooms do not have to be closed when they are needed most. This petition is signed by Darcy Coughlan, Adam Van Niessen, Dorothy Hunter, Michelle Vincent and many, many others. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Anniversary of 9/11 Terrorist Attacks Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I have a statement for the House. Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the horrific terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and to pay tribute to the police officers, the firefighters, the paramedics who were climbing up the stairs of the Twin Towers in order to help others climb down from them. The events of that day left a haunting and lasting impression in the minds of people around the world. It's important that we ne ver forget 9/11. We must never forget that, on that day seven years ago, almost 3,000 innocent people were killed by a terrible act of violence, and one of those innocents was Manitoban Christine Egan.

We must also never forget the bravery of our emergency responders and th e sacrifices they make so that all of us will have them when we need them and live in safety. Mr. Speaker, I would ask that, following the commemorations and tributes from other members, this House observe a moment of silence in honour of the sacrifices of those who lost their lives on September 11 and to offer silent thoughts and prayers to the families who grieve for them today. Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): I thank the Premier for that statement.

We all know that today marks the seventh anniversary of the September 11 attacks that claimed the lives of over 3,000 peop le. These are events that will be seared forever on our hearts and in our memories, and we'll never forget the innocent people who were lost in this terrible tragedy, including 24 Canadians and one Manitoban, Christine Egan. To commemorate this day, the International Peace Garden held a memorial service at the 9/11 memorial at the Peace Garden, a permanent site constructed from 10 twisted pieces of steel which once stood as girders in the World Trade Center. The keynote speaker was Dr.

Earl Beal from the Department of Counselling, Psychology and Community Service of the University of North Dakota. Mr. Beal was involved in assisting the families who were affected by the attacks on the Pentagon on 9/11. The International Peace Garden also hosted their first Freedom Walk today in remembrance of 9/11 to reflect on the lives lost on that day, to renew the commitment to freedom and honour our veterans past and present. The words, "May Peace Prevail" are written in 28 different languages on seven peace poles to remind us of the common objective shared by millions of people around the world. Mr.

Speaker, let us take this day to celebrate the resilience of the human spirit and recognize the courage and strength of those who survived this attack. Let us also remember and acknowledge the heroic efforts of the poli ce officers, firefighters, paramedics and regular citizens who were involved in helping those in need. Let us also give thanks and acknowledgement to our Canadian troops acting so courageously for peace, freedom and security in other parts of the world. So we second the request by the Premier (Mr.

Doer) for a moment of silence, and we hope that, through our remembrance today, we can look forward to greater peace among nations and all people in the future. Thank you. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I ask for leave to speak to the Premier's statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? [Agreed] Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, I join the other leaders in remembering the events that happened on September 11, 2001. It was indeed a tragic and traumatizing day when the United States was attacked at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and some 3,000 lives were lost.

We must remember the heroic efforts of those who were emergency responders and pay tribute to those who are emergency responders, not only there but elsewhere, in the important role that they play in our day-to-day lives. At the same time as we move forward to find solutions, to find avenues for peace, we have to remember that it is justice and fairness, tolerance and inclusiveness, which are really important in laying the groundwork for a p eaceful world and that

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3121 addressing issues like poverty and discrimination are fundamental if we're going to achieve peace in our world and end such attacks. Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement for a moment of silence? [Agreed] Please rise for a moment of silence. A moment of silence was observed. * (13:40) Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us today Mr. Japinder Singh who is the general secretary of the Golden Temple in Amritsar, India, and also Mr.

Amarjeet Warraich from the Manitoba Indian community. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS Plea-Bargaining Process Attorney General's Intervention Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, all Manitobans are well aware that the tragic death of Crystal Taman was the result of the criminal actions of Derek Harvey-Zenk. Mr. Speaker, in the aftermath of that tragedy, there was an expectation on the part of all Manitobans that justice would be done, that the justice system would perform its duties to the highest standard possible and that Mr.

Harvey-Zenk would be held accountable for his criminal actions. Mr. Speaker, we know through the conduct of the inquiry, which the government reluctantly and under pressure agreed to es tablish, that evidence has come to light about multiple contacts between the so-called independent prosecutor and the Department of the Attorney General. We're also aware that an alert was provided to the Attorney General's office with respect to the pending plea bargain that has created so much outrage for the Taman family and for all Manitobans.

We know as a result of exhibits tabled at the inquiry that the Attorney General's responsibility is, and I quote, to bring, manage and terminate prosecutions; however, that he must do so in a way that's fully independent from partisan political concerns, which were not present in the Taman case. I want to ask the Premier: Is he satisfied that the Attorney General did his job appropriately when he was advised of the pending plea bargain? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, we were not reluctant–and I take great exception to the statement made by the Leader of the Opposition.

We were not reluctant to call a judicial inquiry dealing with the circumstances that flowed from the tragic death of Crystal Taman. We felt it was our duty, our responsibility. We quickly moved to have the judicial inquiry. The Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak) basically decided and determined that the public should have a right to know what happened in the investigation, evidence- gathering, prosecution of this case.

We called this inquiry because of a responsibility to the public of Manitoba and to the citizens and the victim's family, that people should know clearly what happened, why it happened and who's responsible. So I want to make that point perfectly clear. It was no reluctance on the part of the government. We did it because we believed we had to have a full judicial inquiry. We did so with the broadest terms of reference and we await the accountability that we expect will be in the justice's report, which I understand is going to be ready shortly. Failing that, Mr.

Speaker, I know members opposite will ask questions with the evidence that's before the inquiry, but the evidence is placed before an independent justice to determine responsibility, accountability and to ensure that circumstances that are already before the inquiry, if ther e is any weakness or fault or accountability, that all of us will be responsible for making changes that clearly reflect the recommendations in the justice's report. So I just want to say again, we did this quickly. We took this action to have the inquiry quickly.

It wasn't reluctantly, and I take great exception to the terminology used by the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. McFadyen: I'm sorry that the Premier is taking exception to the terminology used by the Leader of the Opposition. If he goes back and reads the transcript of proceedings in this House and reads the newspaper clippings in the days leading up to the call of the inquiry, he will see that he said on the record that there was no need for a public inquiry because the Attorney General had ordered a review into the conduct of the East St. Paul police force and therefore there was no need for a public inquiry.

3122 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 Following the comments made by Judge Wyant which appeared in the media, the Taman family appeared on CJOB radio and a question was put to the Premier in this House by the same Leader of the Opposition that he's now debating with as to whether they would call an inquiry and in response to that question announced that they would, in fact, have an inquiry.

But until Justice Wyant's comments appeared and until the Taman family was in the media and until the question was put to the Premier in this House, his position was there's no need for an inquiry because we'll do a review of the East St. Paul police force. So he is just wrong in terms of the position with respect to the inquiry.

Now, turning to the real issue and the question which he hasn't responded to, I want to ask the Premier, given that his Attorney General was made aware through an alert of the pending plea bargain which contravened his own department's policy to not agree to house arrest in situations involving death or grievous bodily harm, given that that was the case and given that the Attorney General's own policy, which he approved earlier this year, provides him with the right to veto recommendations from the so- called independent counsel, will the Premier now respond to the question which I asked the first time: Is he satisfied that his Attorney General acted appropriately in not vetoing this plea bargain?

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we have called three inquiries now dealing with matters of public confidence in the justice system, regrettably. Regrettably, we have had to call three. One was the Sophonow case. One was the Driskell case and this one, the Taman case and the charges against Mr. Zenk. We always said that we would wait for the disposition of the court, which we did, and call the inquiry shortly and very quickly thereafter.

So there was no reluctance on our part to be fully accountable, because there were questions being raised that haven't been answered, and there were questions raised considerably throughout the inquiry as all of us in Manitoba observed the various evidence that was presented to the commission. The commission has a counsel. A counsel commission is required by law to go down any area of evidence that's presented before the inquiry starts and during the inquiry.

If th ere is evidence presented in an inquiry that requires further witnesses to be called to ensure that full accountability in the justice system is fully examined at all levels, the commission counsel has the legal responsibility–I would suggest has a lot more experience than members would suggest–to go down and call other witnesses. For example, the existing chief of police was in a position of supervision at the time of the death of Crystal Taman with the horrific accident, and the chief was called as a witness based on evidence that was presented before the independent commission.

Counsel has the responsibility to call witnesses and to hold to account those witnesses under cross- examination, and the judge who has been brought in to hear the evidence, who is independent of everybody in this Chamber, has a responsibility to write the report, and I certainly await the report and the recommendations of accountability that will flow from it.

I think that members of this House have had a tradition of allowing independent counsel and independent commissions of inquiry to proceed with evidence and cross-examina tion, and then when the report is released, accountability will appropriately be assigned and appropriately be debated, if it has to be, in this Chamber. * (13:50) Mr. McFadyen: He has yet to respond to the question. He's not disputing the evidence of the multiple contacts between the independent counsel and his department. He's not disputing the fact that the Attorney General was briefed.

He's not disputing the fact that a weak plea bargain was entered into. But he is spending a lot of his time talking about matters of process. The fact is that the mandate of the inquiry was not to examine the conduct of the Attorney General. Those issues of accountability and those questions and answers are properly put and responded to in this Chamber. It is outside the scope. The Attorney General (Mr. Chomiak) did not– [interjection] The Attorney General is saying from his seat–it would be great if he would get up and say it on the record–that I'm wrong again. The Attorney General didn't testify at the inquiry.

He didn't go under oath and provide evidence as to his role in it. So the only way that we can know what role he played is for him to get up and respond to questions in this House. If he's going to use the inquiry as a shield to deflect attention away from his conduct, then that will be consistent with what every other minister in this government does. Every time there's trouble, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) on Crocus and every other minister who has been involved in these

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3123 situations finds a process reason to not accept personal responsibility and accountability for their actions. Let me just ask the very same question a third time in a row hoping for a direct response: Is he satisfied that the Attorney General exercised the proper judgment in permitting this plea bargain to proceed? Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member is asking a question about the authority of the Attorney General dealing with the plea bargain. This is a matter before the judicial inquiry. This is a matter that will be evaluated by the judge.

The commission counsel has the right to call you. He has the right to call me. He has the right to call the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak). He has the right to call the critic. He has the right to call the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. McFadyen) who praised Mr. Minuk in his capacity as a lawy er. I know Marty Minuk and others who were involved. I'm confident they put forward the best case that they had with the evidence they were presented with. The evidence was incomplete. You know, I don't have any problem with the member saying that. Mr.

Speaker, there may be evidence presented in this case that deals with all the comments any of us have made. The counsel has the right to call the Minister of Justice. The terms of reference are absolutely broad. Any aspect of this case should be further studied, reviewed or investigated, if so, by whom, is one of the terms of reference and any other matters related to the case deemed relevant by the commissioner, not by the Minister of Justice, not by the Leader of the Opposition, not by the critic, by the commissioner.

We will stand by the evidence presented under cross-examination and the independence of the commissioner and we will be accountable for his report, Mr. Speaker. Plea-Bargaining Process Attorney General's Intervention Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, the Premier misses a key difference and that is the Minister of Justice knew what was going on in the department. Nobody else on this side did before the inquiry revealed it. The Attorney General of Manitoba has the power. In fact, he has the duty to bring, manage and terminate prosecutions when necessary. That was confirmed in the Taman inquiry itself.

The minister's own independent prosecutor's policy, the one that he was involved with drafting and said that it's good, gives him the right to refuse the recommendation of the independent prosecutor. In fact, across the country, other policies give other ministers of Justice th e right to refuse the recommendation of an independent prosecutor, and there's a reason for that. Here his own policy was broken in his own department. If there was ever a time for him to stand up and say, no, this is not right, it was now. Why didn't he say no? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, people have died in wars and in revolutions to preserve the integrity between the legislative branch and the judicial branch for the very principle, as it was, for example, where my father came from, where the government would tell the courts what the laws were. The Leader of the Opposition, himself, stood up in this Chamber when the matter was adjourned and said, I know Marty Minuk; he's a great lawyer and I knew it was shoddy police work in East St. Paul. I didn't make that. I didn't make that statement. I could not make that statement, Mr.

Speaker, because there was an independent process going on and it was before a judge who was ruling on the case. Now members are going back and trying to make a political case out of this. It reminds me of some of the most sleazy tactics I've ever seen in this Chamber. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice was being briefed that a recommendation for a house-arrest sentence in the death of Crystal Taman was going to be put forward. In his own policy, he gives himself the right to veto, to override a recommendation by an independent prosecutor.

The time to have stood up and said, this is not right was then. The Taman family–and Mr. Taman is with us here today–wanted somebody at that time to say, no, this is not right. House arrest for a death is wrong. His own policy said it. He had the right to say no. Why didn't he stand up and do the right thing when the time was right, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, it is inappropriate, when a matter goes to sentencing, for the Attorney General of a province to intervene in the sentencing disposition. In fact, Attorneys General who have done so and have interfered have been forced by

3124 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 parliamentary procedure to resign as crossing the bounds of their office. I don't think it would be appropriate for any Manitoban to have any Attorney General interfere in the disposition of a case. In fact, that would get us back to the days of fascism, communism and something that is very fundamental to the rule of law, to the rule of law, Mr. Speaker. I really regret that members are making a political issue out of an independent commission that has not yet reported and had the broadest mandate to report of any commission in our time, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, this is absurd. The Minister of Justice is saying his own policy, his own policy that gives him the right to veto a recommendation, is illegal. It's not illegal. There's a reason why the policy is there, because he has the right to not take a recommendation from an independent prosecutor. That's why he put it there. That's why across the land, in other provinces, the policy is there. If there was ever a case where it needed to be enacted, it needed to be enacted now.

The department has a policy that they're not going to accept or they shouldn't be accepting house-arrest recommendations where there is a death involved. We needed an Attorney General who would stand up, apply his own policy for the Taman family, for the family of Crystal Taman, and say, it is not right to give house arrest for a death in this province. He failed to do so. Why didn't he stand up, apply his own policy, and say no? Mr. Chomiak: The sentencing provisions with respect to the Criminal Code are found in the Criminal Code or are made by federal law and by

interpretation of courts. With regard to conditional sentences, the law changed last year as a result of efforts of the former minister and myself to have conditional sentences changed, Mr. Speaker. For the member to have the audacity to suggest that an Attorney General should interfere in criminal proceedings is, in fact, not only inappropriate but I think might be criminal. The commissioner, who has experience, knows the law far better than th e Member for Steinbach and, in fact, has very broad powers to inquire into any matter.

We haven't even been provided with the recommendations, and already the members opposite are hanging people, Mr. Speaker, typical of the Conservative-type right-wing party. Plea-Bargaining Process Attorney General's Intervention Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Attorney General has tried to suggest that an Attorney General who does his job in supervising the department that undertakes prosecutions is interfering and that this is akin to fascism and communism.

The Department of Justice Act, which is a provincial piece of legislation, says under the minister's duties: The minister shall superintend all matters connected with the administration of justice in the province. The document tabled by commission counsel, whom the Premier, I know, has a lot of confidence in, as do all of us–commission counsel tabled a document as evidence at the inquiry, and it says, and I quote: The Attorney General must superintend the prosecution service, directing the course of criminal prosecutions conducted by the state and supervising private prosecutions.

It goes on to say that in conducting and overseeing prosecutions, the Attorney General must act independently of partisan concerns. * (14:00) There's not any issue of partisan concerns. If the Attorney General was intervening to protect a partisan friend of the government, that would be a partisan consideration, but that is not the type of situation contemplated. In fact, the thing that soldiers in this country fought for was legislative accountability, not dodg ing responsibility and accountability.

When people go and elect officials and elect a government, they expect accountability, they expect transparency, and they expe ct the Attorney General to do his job. Will the Premier today acknowledge that the Attorney General failed Manitobans in allowing this plea bargain to go forward? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the commission justice, who knows the law and knows the law, I would suggest, more than any other lawyer in this House–with the greatest respect to lawyers on both sides–the commission justice knows the law, knows the procedures, knows the separation between the executive branch and the legal branch, knows the separation of issues between the prosecutors and the Minister of Justice. That individual counsel is going to make recommendations. That individual may, in fact, concur with the Leader of the Opposition or not

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3125 concur with the Leader of the Opposition in terms of the chain of responsibility and the division between the executive branch of government and the administrative branch of Justice. They may agree with the allegations of the member opposite, or they may disagree with the member opposite. All I know is commission counsel, with the evidence before them, independent of government, independent of the opposition, independent of any part or stakeholder in the justice system, is allowed to call witnesses and present evidence.

The commission judge has all that evidence before them. That individual can come to the conclusion the member opposite's come to or can come to a different conclusion. I will wait, and the public should wait, for the report that's being produced by a person with a lot more experience, with a great deal of respect to the member opposite, on justice matters and the law. The individual that was asked to come in, as I understand it, has credibility across the line, Mr. Speaker, understands the law, and will write a report.

I believe it's incumbent, for accountability in this House, that facts are not invented, allegations are not invented, but the evidence that's there and factual be examined by an independent person with a great deal of legal knowledge, a great deal of legal experience, and be produced to restore the credibility of the justice system in Manitoba where, clearly, in our view, it failed. That's why we called the inquiry to begin with. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, as usual, the Premier has completely missed the point.

We are not questioning the legality of the Attorney General's decision to allow the plea bargain to go forward. It is not a legal issue. It is an issue of competence to hold the office, which is not something that is a legal question. The commissioner, whom we all respect greatly, is an expert on law and an expert on interpreting evidence. He will not comment on the issue of whether or not the Attorney General acted legally or illegally because it is not a legal question. It is a question of judgment. He had the legal right to do nothing, which is exactly what he did.

The question is: Does the Premier think that that's what a competent Attorney General does when presented with these facts– not whether he thinks it's legal or not, does he think it was the right thing to do? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, there are going to be judgments made at all levels of this investigation. There'll be judgments made about the investigation with the one police force, with the second police force. There'll be judgments made about the external police service investigation. There'll be judgments made by who or who was not interviewed by the independent Crown counsel.

There'll be judgments made about the evidence presented in the court. There'll be judgments made about the references that members opposite have made on consulting with members of the Justice Department, and there'll be judgments made by the commissioner on the issue of the alert that's been raised by members opposite. Mr. Speaker, we were not going to substitute the judgment of an independent commissioner and an independent judge, we're not going to substitute that judgment and that final report based on all the cross- examinations and all the evidence presented.

I am not going to have a situation where the Leader of the Opposition's legal judgment is substituted for the commission of inquiry's justice's opinion. We will wait for the report. We will wait for the full examination. The commissioner, the justice, has the right to comment on judgment. He has the right to comment on law. He has the right to comment on all aspects based on the terms of reference, and we will wait for that report. I won't take the advice of the member opposite.

I will take and the public of Manitoba should take the advice of a person who is much more schooled in these matters, is much more independent on this matter and is going to give the people of Manitoba a report, hopefully within the next number of weeks, Mr. Speaker. Mr. McFadyen: Well, I find it interesting that five times in a row the Premier has defended the Attorney General's decision to do nothing. I think that we have the answer to the question . Clearly, he supports the Attorney General's judgment on this point.

Clearly, he thinks the plea bargai n was acceptable, and so I just thank the Premier for confirming that. We'll look forward to the justice's comments on the legal issues. What we're talking about here is a question of accountability to the Legislature, the discharge of the Attorney General's responsibilities under the act, and to Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. We don't have any expectation that the judge will go on making comments on matters of oversight of the department or political accountability.

3126 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 The Premier's right on this point, that this is for the House to debate. It is up to the people of Manitoba to pass judgment. The Premier thinks the Attorney General made the right call. We think he made the wrong call, and I guess maybe the Premier, if he would be straightforward enough, could just put that on the record instead of skating around and evading. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I believe the member opposite has made statements about the independent counsellors. I'm not going to condemn him for making a statement before the report is concluded.

I believe the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak) acted properly in having a full independent inquiry. I believe that the Minister of Justice acted properly by having those terms of reference in the inquiry include anyone or any matter, including the Attorney General, that the commission of inquiry and the justice of the inquiry feels is appropriate for the credibility of the justice system. There are no narrow term s of reference in the inquiry's terms of reference established by the Attorney General, and we will wait for the justice's report.

I believe all members of this House should wait for the justice's report. If there's a matter dealing with the issue and judgment of the Attorney General, it's fully available for the commission counsel to call the Attorney General as a witness. It's fully available for the commission counsel to call the Leader of the Opposition as a witness, call the Premier as a witness. I'm sure we're going to see at the commission of inquiry of Mr. Brian Mulroney–I'm sure a Prime Minister will be called as a witness.

There is no limitation of a prime minister being called in an inquiry, a premier being called in an inquiry, a minister of justice being called in an inquiry. The terms of reference are broad and we fully expect that this is very important for purposes of this inquiry. We will wait for the cross-examination of the evidence to be reported on by a person with more justice experience, knowledge and credibility than the Leader of the Opposition. I think that that's very important, Mr.

Speaker, and it's very unusual to have a Leader of the Opposition pre-empting an independent judicial inquiry and pre-empting the findings of the inquiry and trying to have somebody guilty until the full report is produced to the public of Manitoba. * (14:10) Child and Family Services Devolution Issues Mrs. Bonnie Mitche lson (River East): It's clear now that when the child welfare system was devolved back in 2004, the new agencies weren't ready. Front-line workers were in short supply, and many of those that were hired weren't qualified.

There were no standards, no policies, no training and no checks and balances. Most of all, there was no oversight from this government, and the problems that existed in 2004 continue to exist today. The results, Mr. Speaker, under the NDP government's watch have cost children their lives. Will the Minister of Family Services today accept responsibility for the system that he and his government created and for the chaos that has resulted? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Well, two preliminary points, Mr.

Speaker, child deaths, unfortunately and most tragically, occur probably in all jurisdictions. That is something that is unacceptable. We all have to work together so that there are zero child deaths as a result of caregiver homicides. The member opposite knows full well of the impact of caregiver homicides of children. She knows that herself from her tenure in office. We have to continue to make a stronger system. I also say that it is passing strange that the member would get up and say that there was no training and no standards in place in 2005. First of all, she's reflecting then on her time in office.

Is she saying that there was no training and standards in place when she was in office? Of course there were, Mr. Speaker. There were in 2004 and '05. Mrs. Mitchelson: The reviews and the reviews and the reviews that have been done by this government as a result of their devolution process speak volumes and say very clearly that the agencies were not prepared to deal with the additional cases that they were given. We're just asking the minister to stand up and take responsibility. These are children under his watch that have fallen through the huge crevices that are in the child welfare system today.

Instead of taking responsibility and saying as the architect of this new system that there are problems, he hides behind the authorities and he hides behind the agencies and forgets to tell Manitobans that he was the creator of this system.

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3127 Why has he failed vulnerable children so badly under his watch, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Mackintosh: In 1996, when the member was the minister–because credibility is an important issue in this House since credibility always underpins questions in this House–she was presented with a document from the front-line workers entitled: child welfare in crisis. What was the response? Caseloads of 44 to 80 cases per work er, cuts year after year, freezes year after year to su pport foster children, of all the vulnerable Manitobans.

That was the answer from the member opposite. This side has ushered in changes for children. When it comes to reviews, indeed there will be review after review until we have routed out all the shortcomings, in no small way, Mr. Speaker, a responsibility also that must be shared by the member opposite. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for River East. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable member has the floor. Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not going to take responsibility for the devolution process that has left such big crevices in the child welfare system that children are dying as a result. All of the reviews and all of the bluster from the Minister of Education today is too late for Phoenix Sinclair. It's too late for Tracia Owen. It's too late for Gage Guimond. It's too late for many others that are within this system today that this minister created. This government was the architect of devolution which has left such big crevices in the child welfare system that children are dying.

How many more children are going to die as a result of this experiment that's gone so terribly wrong? Mr. Mackintosh: Well, Mr. Speaker, I've heard some shameful things in this House. First of all, to say that devolution has caused an increase in caregiver homicides is lamentable. I won't talk statistics because I tell you this: A statistic is way out of scale with the harm, the tragedy of that kind of loss.

But what we do, unlike the member opposite when she was asked about the shortcomings in the child welfare system saying, well, that's an arm's- length agency's issues, we have taken the responsibility to work with our partners, to work with the authorities and the agencies for changes for children. We're going to work and work and work until we have reduced the risk leve ls to the most we can possibly do as human beings out of respect for those who are no longer with us. Farm Flooding Call for Standing Committee on Agriculture Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, during Monday's emergency debate on heavy rains and flooding affecting several areas of Manitoba, the Member for Interlake (Mr. Nevakshonoff) suggested opposition members were not willing to work together as a team to address this urgent situation. Mr. Speaker, the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Eichler) has repeatedly called on the Standing Committee on Agriculture to be convened to deal with the challenges in agriculture. These requests have been ignored.

I ask: When will the Minister of Agriculture convene the Standing Committee on Agriculture to address the emergency issues affecting producers in such large areas of the province? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for recognizing the Member for Interlake for the work that he has been doing on this very important issue and bringing information forward. Mr. Speaker, I have been in the Interlake.

I've met with producers there and, in fact, yesterday I met with the Manitoba Cattle Producers to look at the programs that are in place, to look at how the Forage Assistance Program can work, how AgriRecovery can work, how AgriStabil ity can work. There are various pots of money that are available, but there is no doubt there is a seri ous challenge that the producers in that area are facing and we are working with them. We will continue to work to ensure that people get the funds that they need to purchase hay this fall. Mr. Briese: Mr.

Speaker, the Member for Interlake says he has seen no fundamental changes or improvements made to risk management programs and the transition from CAIS to the new Growing Forward program, yet his colleague, the Minister of Agriculture, was at the negotiating table, signed the agreements, says she has faith in the new programs. Why don't the two of them agree?

3128 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Agriculture which view is the right one. Are Growing Forward and Disaster Financial A ssistance sufficient to address this emergency situation or will she provide more assistance to producers in this emergency situation? Ms. Wowchuk: If the member's asking who's right and who is wrong, I'm right; he's wrong. The Member for Lakeside (Mr. Eichler) has not taken the time to look at the programs. Mr. Speaker, these programs–it is the Member for Lakeside that is wrong.

He has not taken the time to look at the AgriRecovery program. He has not taken time to look at AgriInvest. He has not taken the time to look at AgriStability. Mr. Speaker, there are millions of dollars in those programs. There are targeted, there are advance programs to AgriStability. There are advance programs to Agri– Mr. Speaker: Order. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Member for Minnedosa has the floor. Aboriginal Off-Reserve Housing Federal Funding Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): Mr.

Speaker, as part of Bill C-48, $61.5 million was transferred to the Province of Manitoba in 2006 from the federal government for the sole purpose of Aboriginal off- reserve housing. The federal minister of social development and the Province, our provincial Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), have both confirmed this total. This amount transferred in 2006, and two years later there appears to be few tangible results. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Minister of Housing how much of the $61.5 million has been spent and how many houses have been built? Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Well, we certainly were pleased to see what now is called the Jack Layton amendment actually go to work for Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. I wonder with the question, are members opposite now changing their tune and do they, in fact, support social housing, the building of affordable housing? That seems to be implicit in the question, and if, in fact, that is the case then I've got somewhere I'd like to go with the member because there are some serious looming issues with federal funding.

I look forward to her next question. * (14:20) School Enrolment Guardianship Fees Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education. I have a constituent who has a granddaughter that's just over four years old. When she was born, the grandfather and grandmother had taken responsibility of this particular child. This September they brought her in to register her at school, and now they're being told that they're going to have to pay thousands of dollars in order to have this child enrolled at Tyndall Park School.

My question for the Minister of Education: Does he not believe that the gran dparents that are taking charge and taking responsibility of grandchildren should not have to–would he agree with me that they should not have to pay any sort of fees for their grandchildren to be able to attend school? Hon. Peter Bjornson (M inister of Education, Citizenship and Youth): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from the member opposite.

I would appreciate it if the member would provide the specifics of this particular case to my office, and we will deal with that appropriately to ensure that the child is indeed enrolled in school and getting the education he or she deserves. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, immediately following question period, I'll provide you the name, to the minister. But it's the principle of it that I'm looking at.

I'm looking for the Minister of Education to make a policy that would be province-wide, that in situations where you have grandparents taking care of their grandchildren, that a grandparent should not be charged in any way any fee for registering a student anywhere in the province of Manitoba. It's called putting–[interjection] I just found out about it, to the minister. [interjection] Well, Mr. Speaker, I suggest to the minister: Would he give that guarantee today for all grandparents and putting children first? Mr. Bjornson: Well, once again, Mr. Speaker, without knowing the specifics, and the

preamble notwithstanding, once I have the details from the member I can act in an appropriate manner.

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3129 Guardianship is an issue that does come across the table occasionally, and I have asked for the department to examine guardianship questions as they arise. The main concern for me as minister is that the child be in the school and that the child receives the education he or she deserves. So, again, if the member would be so kind as to provide the details, we can deal with it in the department. Mr. Speaker: Time for oral questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Folklorama 2008 Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): Mr.

Speaker, I invite all members to join me in congratulating the organizers and volunteers of this year's recently completed multicultural festival, Folklorama. Begun in 1970 as a one-time event to celebrate Manitoba's centennial, Folklorama has just concluded its 39th year and remains the largest and longest-running multicultural event of its kind in the world. The festival has grown from a one-week celebration with 21 pavilions in 1970, to the two-week festival with the 44 pavilions that we know today.

While the festival has grown substantially over the years, its mandate to showcase the cultural diversity of the city through traditional music, food, folk dance and other cultural demonstrations has remained unchanged. Little wonder, then, that it has been recognized as the Best Cultural Event by the Canadian Event Industry, and The American Bus Association has named it an Internationally Known Super Event. Ms.

Marilyn Brick, Acting Speaker, in the Chair Madam Acting Speaker, I visited no less than 42 pavilions this summer and met many of my constituents from The Maples who were either attending or volunteering their time at the festival. I'm also happy to report that my constituency also played host to the Ukrainian-Kyiv, Alpine and Paraguay pavilions, and I was able to visit the Ukrainian Pavilion on more than one occasion.

Madam Acting Speaker, all of Folklorama's pavilions are run by dedicated volunteers, and its world-renowned success would be impossible without their unflagging time and commitment to this annual event. Accordingly, I ask all members of the House to join me in thanking the approximately 20,000 volunteers, some of whom have not missed a single Folklorama in 39 years, for the countless hours they've put in to ensure the success of this festival. Thank you. George Lindsay Henderson Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): The province of Manitoba lost a great man with the passing of Mr. George Lindsay Henderson.

On behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus of Manitoba, I would like to give our deepest sympathies to all of his family and friends. George Henderson, son of John [phonetic] and Annie [phonetic], was born in Homewood, Manitoba, in 1916. Mr. Henderson had many careers, working as a farmer, real estate appraiser, broker and politician. He was well known and respected in his community. Mr. Henderson invested many volunteer hours in his community and was proud to serve.

As a proud agricultural producer, he was president of the Pembina Hills Co-op, member of the Manitoba Pool Elevators Board and president of the Kaleida Pool Elevators Board. His service on many community boards must also be recognized, including the Manitou Chamber of Commerce, local school board, finance committee of St. Andrews' United Church, Pembina Valley Development Corporation Board, Targets for the Economic Development Board and a member of the land value commission. Mr. Henderson was committed to helping his community flourish and grow. It was a better place because of his exceptional efforts.

I can only commend Mr. Henderson's commitment to public service and hope others will follow his outstanding example. He proudly served as mayor of Manitou and went on to represent the constituency of Pembina for eight years as an MLA, from 1969 to 1977. He was a strong voice and a dedicated statesman for the people of Pembina. George Henderson will be remembered as a loving family man, pillar of his community and a giving individual. For those who knew him, his legacy will not only be the inspiration of his public and community service, but also the countless fond memories we have of him.

I know he would be proud if I rose in the House today and simply said, George Lindsay Henderson was a good, caring man, who always did the best he could for those he loved and those Manitobans who elected him. Thank you very much. FASD Awareness Events Ms. Jennifer Howard (Fort Rouge): Madam Acting Speaker, I rise today to mark this week's

3130 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 events for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder awareness. Children born with FASD w ill face challenges in how they work and learn for the rest of their lives. Despite these challenges, many people born with FASD work hard with the support of family, caregivers and friends to contribute to their communities. Madam Acting Speaker, our government is committed to the prevention of FASD and support for those Manitobans and their families coping with the disorder.

Earlier this week, we announced further initiatives that will assist in preventing and treating FASD, such as implementing the new Spectrum Connections program, hiring FASD specialists in each of the Child and Family Services authorities, increasing the number of Stop FASD program sites, investing in the co-ordination and improvement of services for women with addictions, enhancing diagnostic services, expanding the FASD Youth Justice program to The Pas and providing funding for a new FASD research award. Mr. Speaker in the Chair We know that FASD is preventable.

The Manitoba Liquor Control Commission sponsors With Child, Without Alcohol, a campaign designed to foster awareness and prevention of FASD. Earlier in my career, I had the opportunity to work with women who were overcoming addictions to alcohol and drugs, some of whom had given birth to children affected by FASD. Today I want to salute these women and others like them who are courageously changing their lives, and by doing so, improving the lives of their families.

I know all of us in this House recognize the caring and compassion of families, caregivers, teachers and support staff who work with children and adults affected by FASD. Their work is often frustrating, but I know that they make a tremendous difference in the lives of these children. To these individuals, and the organizations that support them, let us all express our gratitude and support. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. National Trucking Week Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I'm very pleased to rise today to put a few words on the record about National Trucking Week, which runs September 7 to 14 across Canada.

Now in its ninth year, National Trucking Week is organized by the Canadian Trucking Alliance, the Manitoba Trucking Association and the other provincial trucking associations. The week is designed to mark the important contributions made by the 400,000 Canadian men and women who keep freight moving both across our country and beyond our borders. The importance of the trucking industry to Manitoba's economy cannot be understated. Manitoba is home to the headquarters of 12 of Canada's largest for-hire trucking companies and, in addition, there are approximately 425 for-hire trucking companies based in Manitoba.

More than 40,000 Manitoba residents are directly or indirectly employed in the industry. That's roughly 5 percent of our labour force. For every 10 jobs created in our trucking industry, seven more jobs are created elsewhere in Manitoba through suppliers, the service industry or road departments, to name a few. * (14:30) Moreover, 95 percent of the goods moved within the province move by truck, and the trucking industry is responsible for shipping 80 percent of Manitoba's merchandise trade with the United States.

Manitoba's truck drivers log thousands of hours and kilometres on the road, often driving in adverse weather conditions or on roads ranging from smooth pavement to challenging winter roads. I would encourage everyone to think about the high level of skill involved in driving a truck. Trucking companies also take their commitment to their customers very seriously. They take many steps to ensure goods are delivered to customers on time and in a safe manner. We salute all their efforts.

On behalf of the Legislative Assembly, I would like to congratulate the trucking companies, the managers, drivers and all support employees for making the trucking industry such an important part of Manitoba's economy and to wish them all the best during National Trucking Week. International Literacy Day Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, September 8 was International Literacy Day. On this day, the international community is reminded of the global need for literacy and adult learning.

Today, I would like to take a moment to recognize three outstandin g individuals for their work to overcome the barriers of literacy and education here in Manitoba. Last Monday, the Premier (Mr. Doer) presented Anita Martens, a single mother of three, with the Fourth Annual Council of the Federation Adult

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3131 Literacy Award. Ms. Mart ens arrived from Mexico nearly 30 years ago with limited English skills. She worked hard to learn English and eventually completed Grade 12. She is currently attending Red River College and working towards becoming a health-care unit clerk. Lorri Apps is the executive director of the Literacy Partners of Manitoba. She received the Canada Post Literacy Educator Award for her work in promoting literacy through the province with Literacy Partners.

She is currently working on developing Canada's first institute for literacy and learning. I would also like to recognize Ms. Lisa Forest from Ile des Chênes, who received the Canada Post Literacy Award for Indi vidual Achievement. Ms. Forest is a mother of five who was motivated by her daughters to receive her high school diploma and then her diploma in office management. In Manitoba, there are nearly 200,000 adults who do not have a high school diploma. Our government recognizes that literacy is not a luxury but a right and a responsibility. It is the basis of well- being for individuals and our society.

The Minister of Advanced Education and Literacy (Ms. McGifford) has declared September as Literacy Month. Manitoba is committed to adult and family literacy by the proclamation of The Adult Literacy Act which will come into effect on January 1, 2009. This act is the first of its kind in Canada. I encourage all members to join me in congratulating Ms. Anita Martens, Ms. Lisa Forest and Ms. Lorri Apps on their outstanding and exemplary achievements.

I also urge everyone to continue promoting literacy throughout our province while remembering the struggles that millions go through around the world to get even minimal access to education. ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if you would call for second reading of Bill 47, The CentrePort Canada Act, followed by report stage amendments to Bill 37, The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, followed by, if we still have time this afternoon, report stage amendments on Bill 38, The Balanced Budget, Fiscal Management and Taxpayer Accountability Act. Mr. Speaker: This afternoon we will start off dealing with second reading of Bill 47, The CentrePort Canada Act, and then we will move on to report stage of Bill 37, and, if there's time, we'll deal with report stage, 38.

For right now, I'm going to call second reading, Bill 47, The CentrePort Canada Act. SECOND READINGS Bill 47–The CentrePort Canada Act Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): I move, seconded by the Minister for Competitiveness, Training and Trade (Mr. Swan), that Bill 47 , The CentrePort Canada Act, be now read a second time and referred to a committee of the House. Motion presented. Mr. Lemieux: I'm pleased to take this opportunity to talk about The CentrePort Canada Act.

This new legislation is part of the government's economic agenda and marks a significant step forward in developing our inland port. The CentrePort Canada Act is a result of Premier Doer's leadership and productive– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Members in this House are recognized by their constituencies or ministers by the portfolios they hold, not by name, please. Mr. Lemieux: The CentrePort Canada Act is a result of the Premier's leadership and the productive partnerships with municipal, business and community leaders.

I want to acknowledge a few of the many people who are supporting the development of our inland port and encouraging us to pass The CentrePort Canada Act: The City of Winnipeg, Mayor Katz and Deputy Mayor Brenda Leipsic; the R.M. of Rosser, Reeve Bourgouin; Winnipeg Airport Authority, Mr. Barry Rempel; the Premier's Economic Advisory Council, which is Bob Silver as co-chair and Robert Ziegler; Manitoba International Gateway Council co-chairs, Mr. Arthur Mauro, Mr. Art DeFehr; the Business Council of Manitoba, Mr. Jim Carr; the Chambers of Commerce, Mr. Dave Angus and Mr.

Graham Starmer; the Manitoba Federation of Labour, Darlene Dziewit and many of her associates in organized

3132 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 labour; Manitoba Heavy Construction Association, their chair, their board and Mr. Chris Lorenc. Together, together I repeat, we are working as one community to build a stronger economy in Manitoba and attract new jobs, investments to our inland port. It is in this spirit of co-operation that I call on all members of this House to pass The CentrePort Canada Act as soon as possible during this session. What is our vision for an inland port?

It is a new centre of transportation, manufacturing and warehousing on 20,000 acres of land around the James Armstrong Richardson International Airport. It is new infrastructure that connects and integrates our inter-modal transportation system–planes, trains, trucks, ships–from the Port of Churchill to the Emerson border to the Pacific gateway. It is new international trade routes for goods travelling via Manitoba to the United States, China, Europe, the Americas and across Canada. It is working with companies to create and assemble new products in Manitoba that can be exported to global markets and, Mr.

Speaker, it is about creating new jobs for our growing and educated work force. This legislation is good for all Manitobans, rural and urban, and will mean greater funding for our roads, highways and other transportation infrastructure. It will mean an expansion in manufacturing, trade and transportation sectors. The CentrePort Canada Act in our inland port is good news for all Manitobans. The CentrePort Canada Act in our inland port builds on Manitoba's strong economic fundamentals and significant transportation assets.

We already have a network of railways, highways and inter-modal yards, a 24-hour international airport with cargo capacity, convenient access to the United States via Emerson border crossing and growing international shipping through the Port of Churchill.

As well, recent initiatives include provincial legislation for tax increment financing to support the inland port's development; an $85 million federal- provincial investment for improvements to PTH 75, Manitoba's key trade route to the United States; $68 million in federal-provincial funding for the partial twinning of PR 221, Inkster Boulevard, a central route to the inland port; and $55 million in federal-provincial fundi ng for an interchange in rail-grade separation where two Asia-Pacific corridors meet in Manitoba, the junction of Trans Canada Highway and PTH 16; $68 million for upgrades to the Hudson Bay rail line and the Port of Churchill; the expansion of the international airport, the only unrestricted 24-hour airport on the prairies.

This is in addition to the Canada Post, Greyhound Canada and Standard Aero expansions near the airport. All this is to say that we have a bright vision for the future and a strong tr ack record from our past. The CentrePort Canada Act is an important part of our plan to move forward on the inland port. Mr. Speaker, it will take years to implement the plan and this is why we're taking action now.

The CentrePort Canada Act would establish CentrePort Canada Inc. a non-share capital corporation with the mandate to operate Manitoba's inland port as well as attract and co-ordinate investment in the inland port area. * (14:40) The act describes 20,000 acres of land near the James Armstrong Richardson International Airport that would be designated for the inland port. This land would be developed based on a single- transportation infrastructure and land-use plan that will be created in consultations with businesses, municipalities and citizens.

As part of this planning process, the 24-hour operation of the airport will be protected to ensure that development does not limit this competitive advantage for our inland port. Implementation of this single plan for transportation, infrastructure and land use will allow for fast-track investment and economic decisions so that companies can get to work in the inland port. We want to provide companies with the confidence and certainty that our inland port is a great place to invest. The act creates a private sector corporation with a mandate to develop, invest and promote in the inland port.

This means that CentrePort Canada Inc. will be a one-stop shop for business that we want to come to this inland port and to Manitoba. However, allow me to be clear to Manitobans. The corporation will not have the authority to tax. Also, we expect that the corporation will become financially self-sustaining. The act also outlines the governance of the board of director. The corporation would have between nine and 15 members, with the majority of directors from the private sector. Labour and governments would also have the opportunity to nominate a director to the board.

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3133 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, based on input from business, municipal and community leaders, we believe that The CentrePort Canada Act is the right model for Manitoba and the best approach for our inland port. We are confident that The CentrePort Canada Act will deliver results for Manitoba, and we call on all members of the House to support this new legislation and our inland port. In our history, we were once known as the gateway to western Canada.

We believe with this legislation and our initiative on the inland port, we will be the gateway to the world and the gateway to North America. Thank you. Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): I move, seconded by the Member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire), that debate on Bill 47 be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Mr. Speaker: I will now call report stage amendments on Bill 37, The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act.

There are amendments to be moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen). Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): I wanted to debate on the last report stage amendment that was presented yesterday before 5 o'clock. Mr. Speaker: I've received the request. It's government business, and I received the instructions from the Government House Leader (Mr. Chomiak) that would have to be negotiated between the Official Opposition House Leader (Mr. Hawranik) and the Government House Leader. Mr. Hawranik: You didn't close debate. Mr.

Speaker: So you're asking for leave to change the order from report stage, but now to deal–to resume debate on report stage amendments to deal with the amendments that are listed on Bill 37. You're asking leave to change the order? Mr. Hawranik: Point of clarification, Mr. Speaker. I thought the order was to be at this point after second reading of Bill 47, that we were to go to report stage on Bill 37. If you can clarify that for me. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member is correct. We are doing report stag e amendments. But what you're asking for is to resume debate on report stage amendments.

That's a different category. Mr. Hawranik: Yes, I am, Mr. Speaker. I'd be asking for leave to resume debate on report stage amendments. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave to change–order. The honourable member is asking leave of the House to change from report stage amendment of Bill 37 to resume debate on report stage amendment of Bill 37.

Is there agreement? [Agreed] Yes, there is agreement DEBATE ON REPORT STAGE AMENDMENTS Bill 37–The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act Mr. Speaker: Now, I'm going to be calling the report stage amendments as listed. The first one is the amendment, No. 1 is clause 3(2)(4) of

Schedule A, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Family Services and Housing. What is the will of the House? Is it the will of the House for the amendment to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Family Services and Housing–or the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr. Mackintosh)? Is there agreement? [Agreed] There is agreement. That will remain standing. Now, I'm going to be asking the House if there is agreement for the debate on the amendment of No. 2, clause 5(1) of

Schedule B, standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Family Services and Housing. Is there agreement for it to remain standing? [Agreed] The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of clarification. Mr. Hawranik: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the table officers have brought to my attention that the amendment that I wanted to debate at this point was the one that we ended off with yesterday, which would have been, I believe, amendment No. 4. Mr. Speaker: We will get to it, but I just have to do them in order because the request was to resume debate on Bill 37.

There was no specific request at that point. So, when I get to it, and if members wish to speak, that's when they'll have the opportunity. I

3134 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 only have a couple more. If we just have a little patience here. So No. 2, it's been agreed to remain standing? [Agreed] Now, No. 3, clause 6 of

Schedule B 49.1(1), standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr. Mackintosh). Is it the will of the House for the amendment to remain standing in the name of the honourable minister? Is there agreement? [Agreed] Okay, that's been agreed to. This is the one I guess he's waiting for. No. 4, clause 6 of

Schedule B 49.1(2), which the debate remains open. THAT Bill 37 be amended in Clause 6 of

Schedule B by replacing the proposed subsection 49.1(2) with the following: General election on second Tuesday in June 49.1(2) Subject to subsection (1) and

section 51.1, (

a) a general election must be held on the sooner of (

i) Tuesday, June 14, 2011, or (ii) a Tuesday not later than 35 days following the dissolution of the Legislature by the Lieutenant Governor pursuant to the Lieutenant Governor's exercise of those powers referred to in subsection (1); and (

b) thereafter, a general election must be held on the sooner of (

i) the second Tuesday in June in the fourth calendar year after election day for the last general election, or (ii) a Tuesday not later than 35 days following the dissolution of the Legislature by the Lieutenant Governor pursuant to the Lieutenant Governor's exercise of those powers referred to in subsection (1). Are there any members wishing to speak? Mr. Hawranik: Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think we got it all straightened out now in terms of where we wanted to go, but I thank you for that. [interjection] Yes, absolutely, and I thank you for that, and we got to the point where we wanted to be.

I wanted to put a few brief remarks on the record with respect to this particular amendment. I think I made my thoughts known yesterday just at 5 o'clock. So I wanted to deal with some of the issues with respect to that particular amendment. I would support the amendment being brought forward, Mr. Speaker, by th e Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen). I commend him for making that amendment, in particular because it certainly clarifies some of the language that is within Bill 37 with respect to when an election will be called. So I support that amendment.

Having remembered when that bill was introduced last session in the spring, Mr. Speaker, I thought, first of all, when it was introduced that it was either ill-thought-out or it was pre-planned. I wasn't sure how to take this bill after I started reading the provisions. Was it pre-planned in a desperate attempt by this NDP government to try to continue to stay in govern ment? I wasn't sure. It was either ill-thought-out or pre-planned. I looked at how it was introduced. It was introduced the very last day that it could have been introduced to become a specified bill last spring.

At the very last day, a very controversial bill introduced, and knowing full well, the government knew that under the sessional order, if everything went as planned, that, in fact, it would have received concurrence, it would have received third reading debate, and it would have received third reading vote. So they knew that, with respect to the sessional order, they were going to be introducing controversial bills at the time, that there was a very good chance, an excellent chance that a bill such as this, which was very controversial, would, in fact, be passed at some point. * (14:50) In any event, Mr.

Speaker, when I looked at the bill itself, and I looked at the press release after the bill was introduced, I noticed that the Premier (Mr. Doer) went out into the hallway and he stood on his soap box and told all the reporters there, in fact, that this bill was simply a bill to set election dates. That was what the focus was on in terms of the press release. That was the focus of the scrum afterwards, and he convinced the media at the time, in fact, that that's what this bill was all about.

But, as we got into the bill and dealt with it a little more deeply and thought about the consequences of what was in that bill, there was much more to this bill than was originally thought. The bill does several things. It sets an election date on June 12, 2011, and every four years

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3135 thereafter. Unless, Mr. Speaker, he calls it on June 11, 2011. But hold it. Maybe–maybe–he could call it on June 1, 2011, and still get away with it, and then again, he could call it in 2009. He could call it any date in 2010 and still comply with the legislation. That's our concern. It's not that there are set election dates. We are certainly in favour of set election dates, and every four years thereafter. We don't have a problem with that.

In fact, one of our members, about a year prior to that, introduced a bill for set election dates which was not voted on as a private members' bill in this Legislature. The government refused to vote on it, and therefore it died on the Order Paper. We're not opposed to that. What we're opposed to is setting an election date and then saying to the public, when time is right, when the political winds are in your favour, you can change the election date and still comply with the law. That's our concern.

The Premier got out in the hallway and he stood on his soap box in front of all the cameras, and announced an election date three years into the future. The reality is, that may not necessarily happen. It's still at the political whim of the Premier as to when he really wants to call the date of the next election. Secondly, when we looked at the bill, we noticed that there was a vote tax in there, Mr. Speaker. Everybody who votes in the last general election will be–they aren't assessed, but the money comes out of the provincial coffers, gene ral revenues, to pay to political parties.

That's not only this year, but next year and the year after and so on. Not just the year of the vote, but for the next three or four years until the next election, and then continuing thereafter in perpetuity. I know the Premier (Mr. Doer) is on the record. He's been on the record as, in fact, indicating that he wants to increase the number of people coming out to vote. He thinks that there's a general malaise in the province that Manitobans at times should be encouraged to come out to vote, and yet at the same time he brings in this vote tax. We're concerned about that and the inequities that may result.

We should be attracting donations to our political parties on the basis of our policies and on the basis of whether Manitobans really want us to govern, and whether we're able to govern, and so on. Political parties should be able to convince voters to give them funds in order to run campaigns. We shouldn't have government telling taxpayers of Manitoba that if they vote, there's a vote tax and the political party of the day gets funded for the next election. The third thing that this bill does is it muzzles the opposition, Mr. Speaker.

When you look at some of the provisions in there, what it does is it ensures that government has control over communications from this Legislature. That's not fair because we, in this Legislature, as opposition parties, don't have control over third parties, for instance, when they advertise during elections. We don't have control over government advertising even during election periods or prior to election periods–advertising that sometimes we've taken issue with because of the amount spent on advertising in terms of, say, budgets and throne speeches, has gone overboard.

What it does is it gives the governing party an advantage over the opposition. This particular bill muzzles the opposition in terms of what's in a particular piece that goes out to their constituents. It really amounts to censorship. No one on the government side seemed to know what was in this bill. They all assumed, when the Premier went out in the hallway and when he introduced the bill itself, they assumed what he said was completely accurate. It seemed to me that, when I was looking at the Premier introduce this bill, and the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Chomiak), I believe, who also was on as part of this bill in terms of the seconder to this bill, that they seemed to know what was in the bill. But other government members didn't seem to know what was in the bill. When the final details came out, when we found out really what was in this bill, I think even members of the Premier's own Cabinet and backbenchers of the government, I think they took exception to it as well. So it would be interesting to see whether or not they'll have a complete vote on this bill, whether in fact all government members will vote for this bill. I'm not sure whether they will.

I think they've gotten a lot of feedback from their constituents as I have from mine, indicating that it's wrong, that we shouldn't have a vote tax in this province, and it's wrong to muzzle the opposition to tell Manitobans what's really happening in this Legislature, and it's wrong for the reason of censorship alone. So, with those brief comments, Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to put some of my thoughts on the record with respect to this particular amendment. I support it, and I would hope the government side supports it as well. Thank you.

3136 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, I'm very encourag ed by my colleague the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) in regard to his clarity in regard to this particular clause, clause 4, if you will, in regard to the proposed amendment to Bill 37. Of course, Bill 37 is The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act. Mr. Speaker, there's a lot involved in rolling it all into this one particular act.

I think that says in itself that the Premier tried to hide a lot of the things that are in this act right from day one. My colleague from Lac du Bonnet certainly clarified that the intent, the way the Premier had hoped to lead the public, was to say that we'll have an election in June 2011, and that was his intent, but the clauses in the act do allow the Premier to skate on that to allow him to set a date whenever he likes. While our side of the House certainly did bring forth–one of my colleagues brought forward a private member's bill to deal with set election dates which we were in favour of.

We needed to support a bill that did just that, set an election date. This bill, although the Premier–and I was here as well–I know of what the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) sp eaks, and our leader when the Member for Fort Whyte (M r. McFadyen) introduced this amendment in report stage, we were sitting and we watched the Premier leave the Chamber, go out in the hall, mislead Manitobans by saying that this bill was all about set election dates; we're going to have an election on June 14, I believe it was, of 2011.

The people of Manitoba, I think most polls that you would take today would show that they are in favour of a set election date, and other jurisdictions have done that. Our municipal elections, our school board elections are now held every four years on a particular date in October, and the public has accepted that as an opportunity to express their view at different levels of government. The Premier read it correctly in saying that if Manitobans want this, we'll provide them with that opportunity here in Manitoba, but what he didn't say in this bill, Mr.

Speaker, or out in the hall to the press that day or the media or all of Manitobans, was that he still reserved the right by the clauses in this act, in his bill, to set an election date prior to this date or maybe even not use this date if he so chose. It could be later in regard to the bill that was there. So that, of course, was one of the first red flags that went up to us as opposition members on this bill, and why this amendment has been brought forward by the Member for Fort Whyte, the Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, that the general election be held on the second Tuesday in June.

A general election must be held on the sooner of the Tuesday, June 14, 2011, or a Tuesday not later than 35 days following the dissolution of the Legislature by the Lieutenant-Governor pursuant to the Lieutenant-Governor's ex ercise of those powers referred to in subsection 1. * (15:00) Mr. Speaker, of course we're not in that situation in Manitoba now, but there are a number of situations across Canada and particularly in Canada, and, of course, we're having a federal election as we speak, where you end up in a minority government situation.

When you have a minority government situation, you have to reserve the right to allow an election to be called at the dissolution of the Legislature by the Lieutenant-Governor, and that is something that very, very much separates this from any kind of Americanization of Canadian politics because, of course, in the U.S. system, they don't have a minority situation. They have two parties, they have a clear election resolve in each election, and they don't need a– An Honourable Member: Not in 2000. Mr.

Maguire: Well, still had one president, and they don't need to have a reason to defer from the fact that they will have that election every four years in November. This is why the clause has been written in the form that it has, and in other circumstances, Mr. Speaker. I have to concur with others who have said that the bill put forward by the Premier (Mr. Doer) was an ill-conceived bill to lead Manitobans in an area where he felt they wanted to go but still provide the Premier with a slippery slope to make the decision of whatever day he wanted to have an election on.

Of course, when we delved into it further, Mr. Speaker, all of the issues that we've talked about came to light. Of course, the first one being the vote tax. I've stated in this House last summer in the previous part of this session how this bill allowing for a collection of funds by the government through

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3137 general revenue on a basis of a dollar amount per voter in the election, and if my memory is correct– because I haven't seen the numbers lately–but I'm pretty sure that the numbers were that the NDP under that number would have collected about $252,000-plus, and so the Premier chose to cap the number at $250,000. Well, my goodness, he saved the province of Manitoba's citizens 2000-and-some dollars, and he's asking them to commend him for that. Well, I can't imagine anyone would do that.

It also meant that our Progressive Conservative Party would have attained some $190,000 from the people of Manitoba for th eir right and thanks for voting for us as a party here in this province, and my two Liberal colleagues in the House would have received somewhere in the neighbourhood of $60,000, if I believe is correct, somewhere in there. [interjection] Absolutely. You know, a vote tax taking money from the citizens of Manitoba–because they had the right and took the right and the privilege to vote for us–is not something that I'm very proud of in this House.

If the government chooses not to accept this amendment or not to bring one of their own in–because, of course, they're allowed to do that at any time that they wish, Mr. Speaker, as well–then they will be judged by the decision that they've made.

I believe, as my colleagues have stated, and our leader, that the political parties of Manitoba should be able to raise funds as we've done historically on our own basis, on our own merits and, by speaking directly with our colleagues in our constituencies and our members whether or not they agree with the policies that we have, then we'll be–decisions of finance will be put forward on their open and generous donations to our parties, all of us, Mr. Speaker, in this House. I think that that's certainly consistent with some of the issues that I dealt with as a farm leader.

Many of my colleagues in one organization I was with wanted me as a leader to lobby several organizations or provincial governments across the Prairies to allow them at that time to have a check-off, if you will, for funds to have an organization at that point. In the particular situation that I was in, because it wasn't a general farm organization as we have in Manitoba today, in one province, like the Keystone Agricultural Producers, it was across political boundaries.

I felt it would be quite some task to bring three provincial–in fact, it was actually four, because we had members in British Columbia, as well, at that time, on board for that type of legislation, and the organization had been run and is still being run clearly from past donations of individuals that helped make it run. That's the number of reasons, one being consistency, Mr. Speaker, that I choose to vote against this bill because of the vote tax that the NDP has put into this bill.

I believe that it's an unnecessary part of managing the political process and certainly one that would give the governing party about a quarter of a million dollars head start on any opposition in the next election. I don't think any particular government in power should have that ability. When I look at the other flaws in this bill, of course, the biggest one is the fact that when I was to send out a piece of information to my constituents, the government had a clause in there that would have vetted that information going out, that they would have muzzled the information– Mr. Speaker: Order.

The honourable member's time has expired. Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Carman): I certainly rise to put my comments on the record in support of this amendment to Bill 37. We all know how it was introduced, at the very last minute in order to make the sessional order, and it's all about perception and reality. The perception was that it was going to set fixed election dates, and the media certainly bought into that idea, and many of our constituents also bought into the idea that it was fixed election dates. However, as we know with many other actions of this government, perception and reality are very seldom the same.

In reality, what this bill did in terms of fixed election dates was yes, it set a date somewhere off in the future, but it also allowed the Premier (Mr. Doer), at hi s discretion, to call the election at any time. It's fascinating to watch the medias put the spin on the media and the general public and it really fell to us as the opposition to bring out what is reality here, that there was no actual fixed election dates. This amendment here will go a long way towards addressing this, to make it fair and open and not up to the Premier's discretion. It was absolutely entertaining to watch.

The media buys into it and I go home to my constituency after the bill was introduced, and people are telling me, well, that fixed election date's a good thing. I said, did you know about the other parts of the bill,

3138 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 like the vote tax and how it's going to muzzle up the opposition and the control of the legislation. It's always in the details. Of course, the general public had not been informed of this, and it was only through our own due diligence that we see what was involved. The vote tax, when you mention that to our constituents, they are not happy with this at all. It certainly speaks to the NDP's fundraising abilities. Apparently they've run out of ideas on how to go out and fundraise, either run out of ideas or just run out of ambition to go out and fundraise.

Now they're just going to tax the general population of Manitoba to promote their ideas and to try to hold on to government at any cost. The thought of putting a quarter of a million dollars, $250,000, into th e NDP's coffers each and every year for a million-dollar slush fund for the next election, it gets many of my constituents, for sure, very upset about this. The thought that my own tax dollars could go into the NDP is pretty disturbing. That my tax dollars could go to the Communist Party I find is even more disturbing. Their motives on this are certainly for themselves.

We are not in favour of that part of it at all in this bill. In fact, there is very little in Bill 37 that we can be in favour other than cleaning up this part of the election calls. * (15:10) Bill 37, as it was introduced and as we did our own due diligence on it, we discovered that there was also muzzling opposition in this in terms of advertising dollars and in terms of having to have our communications vetted through a Cabinet posting, is just bizarre. In this day and age, it's censorship in the worst way.

W e w i l l w o r k v e r y h a r d t o m a k e s u r e t h a t t h e general public knows about what their real intentions are in this bill. The fact that they've stooped so low, unless, maybe, it comes from being in government for so long they've lost touch with reality in Manitoba. We are certainly doing our best to make sure that we do have the reality checks in here. Going back to the day that the bill was introduced, how it was distributed to the media, our impression was that the caucus themselves, the NDP caucus themselves, didn't know what was in this bill.

It seems surprising that the government's own caucus would not at least know about it. Of course, they were no help to us to realize what was in this bill because they were caught off- guard just like the rest of it. It certainly would be interesting to know what their constituents thought about a vote tax, but we've managed to hear back from a lot of those ridings, also, that they don't like this at all. As a caucus here, we're trying to clean up; we're trying to do our best to clean up a bad bill. The government will persist on this.

I have the feeling that, in spite of themselves, they won't take a sober second thought, if I may call it that, and look at aspects of this bill. I highly doubt that the individual caucus members will back off from this. In fact, when we were in committee and it was actually on Bill 17–but I'm sure the thought pulls through on all these bills–when we were speaking back and forth with some of the backbenchers in committee, we asked them, you know, like, won't you, why don't you reconsider this? Why won't you think for yourself? Why won't you speak up and speak your own thoughts on this? The Member for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale) just told me that then they support this. This was payback for selling MTS. It's incredible that, if that's their reason for supporting bad legislation is because it's get-even time, in their opinion, that's a sad statement on the NDP caucus members if they are not able to think for themselves. However, that being what it is, I guess that's the way they will go, and this bill is just bad from the word go. We've seen this time and time again, this coming out of the Premier's (Mr. Doer) office. This is not well-thought-out legislation. They have run out of ideas.

They've run out of fundraising abilities, I guess, so, if nothing else, tax the taxpaying public to keep their ideals going. The press releases in regard to this, which this particular amendment relates to for the fixed date in the election, just show how hypocritical this government really is when they go out and send out press releases and try to tell the public that, yes, they've set fixed election dates. Yet, on the other hand, they've put a clause in there saying, well, no, it's really up to the Premier's call for whenever. It's an arrogance that shows through time and time again. We've seen this on Bill 37.

We've seen it on Bill 38. Bill 17 is a classic example of the arrogance of not listening to heartfelt stories from everyday, if I may call them that, Manitobans, and we intend to continue to push on this. We will promote our

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3139 amendments and, hopefully, the government will see the light of day here and that these amendments really do make sense and that everyday Manitobans are expecting the current government to listen to them as we move on here. As we continue to debate these, there are other amendments coming forward and we hope that the government will at least sit back and think about this and start to think on an individual basis of what they're actually doing and not just vote along party lines.

But you know, I'm not expecting miracles out of this, so we will–I urge all the government members to sit back and look at this amendment here. It goes a long way to providing clarity that all Manitobans expect out of their government. Certainly, with that, Mr. Speaker, I want to again just issue my support for this amendment and I hope that all government members will support this amendment as well. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr.

Speaker: The question before the House is the amendment moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen). Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment? Some Honourable Members: Yes. An Honourable Member: No. Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the amendment, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it. Mr. Hawranik: On division, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: On division? On division.

REPORT STAGE AMENDMENTS Bill 37–The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act Mr. Speaker: As previously agreed, we will now deal with report stage amendment to Bill 37. Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik), THAT Bill 37 be amended in Clause 12 of

Schedule B by striking out " must" and substituting "may" in the proposed subsection 64.1(1). Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Op position, seconded by the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, THAT Bill 37–dispense? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, this is an amendment that changes one word in the proposed

section of Bill 37, but it is an important word. It changes the bill to say that, rather than making it mandatory for the Chief Electoral Officer to undertake an enumeration and prepare a list of addresses in connection with preparing voting lists, but it provides discretion.

The reason that we would want to provide that discretion is that we currently have, at the federal level, a high level of sophistication and much investment that's been made by Elections Canada in the compilation of a national voter registry, one that includes input from a variety of different data sources and which has provided, as it evolves, an increasingly comprehensive list of voters throughout Canada, including here in Manitoba.

So the intent of the amendment is to lay the groundwork where it is appropriate and where the Chief Electoral Officer believes that it may provide some efficiencies or provide a more effective and accurate list of voters here in Manitoba, allows them to make that choice as to whether they want to undertake their own process of preparing a list or whether they want to simply enter into an arrangement with Elections Canada to make use of the federal list. We don't, at this stage, want to substitute our judgment for that of the Chief

3140 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 Electoral Officer in terms of what list may be more comprehensive or appropriate. At the end of the day, the bottom line for all of us is to have an accurate list that includes every Manitoban who would be legally eligible to vote in an election campaign. So th e preparation of accurate voters lists is important fo r a number of reasons, as we know. It ensures that people receive communications from Elections Manitoba about where and when they can vote.

It ensures that they receive communications from political parties that would attempt to put forward their platforms and ideas in the campaign, and ensures that when people do arrive to vote that they are properly accounted for and able to exercise the most important right that we have in our democracy.

So it may seem administrative in nature in many respects, but it is fundamental to the exercise of our democratic rights in Manitoba that we have a comprehensive and accurate and up-to-date list of voters. * (15:20) We have an opportunity to find efficiencies and to save scarce Manitoba tax dollars to apply them to areas that would perhaps provide more value in the electoral process, and so we would want to have the Chief Electoral Officer have an option on this point.

We don't want to direct them in one way or the other in terms of whether they want to go and conduct their own enumeration or make use of the federal list through an agreement w ith the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, but certainly to provide them with that option going forward. We think that in due course it may very well be necessary for this House to revisit the issue again and to determine whether we want to make it a permanent feature of our legislation to make use of the enumerations and the list generated at the national level. I want to credit former city councillor Jae Eadie for this proposal.

He had come to committee hearings on Bill 37, presented a number of constructive comments, very many criticisms about Bill 37. I know Councillor Eadie, who, whether you agree with him on every policy position or not, certainly is a strong believer in our democratic institutions and somebody who's operated within them throughout much of his career, who knows a lot about elections and election processes, and that he was very much in opposition to many of the provisions of Bill 37.

He expressed his concerns about the attempt on the part of the government to muzzle opposition political parties through their communications. He expressed concerns about a variety of other areas, but not being content to merely stand up and criticize, he offered some constructive ideas about how we might move our electoral process forward with some concrete new ideas and suggestions that could improve the administration of elections here in Manitoba.

So one of those ideas which we took note of and which we believe was a constructive one was his proposal that we look here in Manitoba at using the national list of electors–which is, as we understand it, updated on a fairly continuous basis–that this may provide a more comprehensive list of voters as well as provide us with effici encies in the enumeration process, thereby saving Manitoba taxpayers money and improving the administration of elections here in Manitoba. So, as I have said, Mr.

Speaker, this is an opportunity to perhaps eliminate some overlap and duplication, I know something that is not near and dear to the hearts of members of the NDP, members opposite, who we know love to spend tax dollars at every opportunity. They continuously see these expenditures on wasteful items as a way of perhaps attracting votes to their party, but in this case we think–we side with the taxpayers in Manitoba who get up every day, work very hard and pay their taxes. We side with them in wanting to seek efficiencies where we can. So this is one example of an area where perhaps efficiencies can be found.

We leave it to the Chief Electoral Officer to exercise his or her discretion in terms of the appropriate way to administer elections in Manitoba efficiently and fairly to include all Manitobans who would be eligible to vote in an election campaign. So this amendment simply goes from requiring the Chief Electoral Officer to do certain things in connection with gathering lists of addresses and preparing voters lists and makes it something that they would have discretion over in pursuit of the most comprehensive, fair and efficient voters list that can possibly be assembled, and so it's a common- sense amendment.

We know, and I'm confident the members opposite will not vote to spend money needlessly, tax dollars needlessly, and, for that reason I'm confident that they will support this amendment and encourage all members to do so. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question.

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3141 Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is the amendment moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen). Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment? An Honourable Member: No. Some Honourable Members: Yes. Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the amendment, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it. Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Offi cial Opposition House Leader): It's on division, Mr.

Speaker. Mr. Speaker: On division. * * * Mr. Speaker: Okay, we will now move on to the next amendment. Mr. McFadyen: I move, seconded by the Member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen), THAT Bill 37 be amended in Clause 12 of

Schedule B by replacing the proposed clause 64.1(3)(

c) with the following: (

c) the permanent register of electors established and maintained by the Ch ief Electoral Officer of Canada. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Op position, seconded by the honourable Member for Steinbach, THAT Bill 37–dispense? Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Mr. McFadyen: This amendment was tied to the previous one, providing for, or enabling within the legislation, the use of lists compiled at the federal level in order to improve the efficiency of elections here in Manitoba.

The intent is to ensure that we have a comprehensive list of voters any time we go into an election campaign, to ensure that those voters are listed accurately in terms of their residence and their addresses so that they can be on the receiving end of important information from Elections Manitoba about things such as polling locations, hours for advance polls, hours for polls on election day itself, and any other information that might pertain to voters, who obviously have a profound interest in being able to exercise their right to select the governing party of the province.

I know many voters, as time goes along and this NDP government remains in power for an increasingly long period of time–it's now nine years– nine years that they've been in power, the nine lost years of no accountability, nine years of drift, Mr. Speaker, that the voters of Manitoba will want to, some three years from now, have the opportunity to take a hard look at what will then be 11 years of failure in health care, 11 years of inaction with respect to law enforcement and safety of communities. They'll certainly want to take a hard look at the financial mismanagement, evidence of which is emerging every day.

I know many will be taken aback to learn, after the Premier's (Mr. Doer) vigorous attacks on our party in and around 1999, that at the very time he was attacking us in a highly partisan way, four members of his current Cabinet were running campaigns that filed false election returns in order to trigger unwarranted rebates. That's information that has only come to light recently. Unfortunately, voters in the last general election didn't have that information because the government of the day had successfully concealed it, but that information has come to light now.

That, along with many other factors, will be things that voters in the next election will want to consider when they decide whether or not they want to extend the life of a government that is clearly out of gas and lacking the credibility to govern the province. That's why election lists are so important. It's why we want to see this act amended in ways that ensures that Manitobans have the franchise, that they're on the list, that the list is accurate, that they find out where they can go and vote for change when the time comes. Mr.

Speaker, this amendment, while not in any way predetermine the outcome of the next election, would certainly help move it toward being a fair and open process and one that all Manitobans would have the opportunity to participate in. * (15:30) In addition to that, it is an opportunity to gain efficiencies to perhaps rededicate resources that are

3142 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 currently used in an enumeration and address list updating process and, perhaps, be able to reinvest those resources in other areas that are important to Manitobans who want to see their taxes used wisely, applied in areas of priority, certainly not seeing their dollars go toward hydro lines to nowhere and other such wasteful projects. They are going to want to see their money used well. I know that every member of this House who cares about taxpayers, who cares about spending their money wisely will want to support this amendment, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Inter- governmental Affairs): I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Mr. McFadyen: I move, seconded by the Member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen), THAT Bill 37 be amended in Clause 25 of

Schedule B by replacing the proposed subsections 186.1(2) and (3) with the following: Notice of results of investigation. 186.1(2) The commissioner shall make public the outcome of all investigations and may include, in the commissioner's discretion, in the publicly recorded information (

a) the name of each person investigated; (

b) the nature of the matter investigated with reference to the relevant sections of this or any other Act; and (

c) the disposition of the investigation and the reasons for the disposition. Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Op position (Mr. McFadyen), seconded by the honourable Member for Steinbach, THAT Bill 37–dispense? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Mr. McFadyen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Every member who believes in integrity and openness in the election process is going to want to support this amendment. The facts that have given rise to this amendment are significant ones.

We have had, in the course of recent history, examples of allegations of improper conduct on the part of people engaged in the electoral process that have been looked into. There have been, in some cases, announcements made that a decision was made to not proceed with charges, but no explanation accompanying those announcements, Mr. Speaker, as to what the reason was for the decision. We believe, Mr.

Speaker, that this is in the public interest for Manitobans to understand that, when allegations are investigated by Elections Manitoba, such as the allegations that were made by two individuals who were present in a meeting with the Premier's Chief of Staff, Mr. Balagus, allegations that one of them was offered a position in exchange for dropping out of an NDP nomination process. Those allegations were made by two people. There was one person who alleges that he was on the receiving end of the offer and a second witness present who corroborated the evidence of the individual. The matter then came to light.

It became public, thanks in no small part to the efforts of members of this House, including the Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) and others who brought the information to light and certainly and justifiably had concerns that there was this level of involvement by the Premier's chief of staff in the process. We know that the allegations were made. We know that the individual involved did, in fact, withdraw from the nomination process. We know, as well, that the matter was then referred to Elections Manitoba for investigation.

We were, I guess, surprised and disappointed, not with the decision itself, but with the lack of information that came out with respect to the reason for the decision, Mr. Speaker.

If, in fact, there was a finding on the part of the council that the witnesses had no credibility or the evidence wasn't sufficient or, perhaps, there was even a technical finding in their review that perhaps the conduct complained of didn't fall squarely within the existing provisions of The Elections Act, that maybe there was a technicality, maybe the allegations were credible, but the individual involved didn't fit within the definition of candidate under that act, which is actually a possibility that's been raised by other lawyers.

We just would've liked to have that explained publicly so that all Manitobans could be satisfied as to the reasons for that disposition. Ms. Marilyn Brick, Acting Speaker, in the Chair

September 11, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3143 In other cases, Madam Acting Speaker, such as where we have a situation where election returns are filed claiming rebates on the basis of claimed expenditures, and it turns out that in fact the issue was a donation in kind, and there's no prosecution. There were no charges laid. There's an opportunity provided for the governing party to repay the money some three years later without interest or penalty. We think it's important that there be disclosure as to the investigation and the reasons for the disposition.

Not to suggest that the decision was wrong, per se. It may have been and it may not have been, and we have a very bad feeling about this decision, but we would want to know that the public was provided with an explanation and that all members of the Legislature were provided with an explanation so that we could be confident in the way that these investigations are carried out and administered.

As it stands right now, and it's been the subject of some media commentary, Dan Lett writing for the Free Press, and others have commented on the fact that there's this veil of secrecy when it comes to Elections Manitoba investigations and how they're handled and how they're disposed of at the end of the day. So this amendment is designed to lift the veil of secrecy to allow Manitobans to have a clear view as to what was investigated, who was investigated, what the outcome was and what the reasons were for the decision to either proceed with charges, or to drop charges, or to not proceed with charges at all.

This is something that Manitobans are calling for. It is something that's appropriate. It's something that will enhance public respect for the electoral process. It will strengthen public confidence in Elections Manitoba as the body that is charged with being the referee in the conduct of elections in Manitoba, and we'll ensure that we don't have a repeat of the situation where communications are issued that something is being dropped without any further explanation. So we know that Manitobans want to be confident in what happens. We know that Elections Manitoba administers elections well.

We certainly, though, have some worries and concerns about the way in which certain investigations are carried out and the basis for some of the decisions that are made. So I want to thank those who spoke out at committee in favour of this change. It was a multi- party consensus on this point. Certainly Progressive Conservatives believe in openness and accountability, and I was pleased to see the Liberal members in favour of openness and accountability.

We were disappointed at the opposition coming from members of the NDP when it comes to openness and accountability and this, pe rhaps, is one of those things that happens after nine years in government, Madam Acting Speaker.

It is one of those things that perhaps happens when a government–a party– believes it has a divine right to rule, and that its decisions and actions shouldn't be subject to scrutiny or question, that it doesn't have to play by the same rules as everybody else because they're above the rules, and that they have th e right to try to exercise their influence over bodies that need to be independent in ways that may be inappropriate.

So we were disappointed that they were opposed at committee, but have every confidence that, with the benefit of several months to sleep on it, the benefit of a summer break and some opportunity to perhaps regain thei r footing, to come down to earth and start to view themselves as the mere mortals that they are, that perhaps members opposite will revisit this decision, take into consideration–and I know that they find this hard to believe, and every party that spends time in government believes that they will be there forever. I know that that is a mindset that can set in.

They believe that they'll be there forever in government, that they can't be defeated and shouldn't be defeated, and that righteousness, obviously, is something that will be put to the test in a couple of years from now. But they should take the time to study history carefully to know that no party has lasted forever in power.

They may very well find themselves in a position in opposition at some point down the road looking at these laws and rules and asking how it was that they could have become so arrogant as to think that they would be above the law, that they would be opposed to disclosure and accountability, that they would be against open, fair and highly thorough investigations disclosed publicly. * (15:40) They may one day look back and wonder how they could have been opposed to these very high principles.

They may even want to look back to earlier years, the idealism of the years that they may have had before getting into government, and ask themselves whether this is something, the position they're adopting today is something that they would have adopted in earlier years. I know the Member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) was Senior Stick at one time for the University of Manitoba students' union, was a young idealistic

3144 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 11, 2008 student leader–UMSU presid ent, UMSU president, I want to correct that. The Member for Thompson has corrected me. He was UMSU president and in that I know shares a great deal with the current member of Parliament for Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia, but I know in those idealistic days of student activism that he would have stood up and said that investigations should be open and public.

He would have supported the idea that if an infraction occurred to the election laws, people would be held to account for that and he would have supported fair and open elections. I know he would have been appalled by the thought that a Premier's ch ief of staff would offer a position to somebody in exchange for dropping out of an election, and he would want it investigated and if it wasn't brought to a conclusion, that he would want the reasons for that investigation to be made public. These are positions he would have adopted when he was running for student president of UMSU. I know the Member for Minto (Mr.

Swan) in his earlier days as a young activist would have believed in these principles. In his earlier days as a student activist I know that the Member for Minto– [interjection] The Member for Minto is hollering about the 1990s from his seat and I know that they're stuck not just in the last decade or the last century, Madam Acting Speaker, but the last millennium is where they are focussing all their time and energy.

I know they believe in–or did, I know they did believe in open and fair elections–[interjection] I hear the Member for Thompson talk about the 1999 election, and I know the Member for Thompson wasn't one of the 13 NDP MLAs that filed false election returns in 1999. Maybe he's, perhaps, being so vociferous from his seat because he knows that it's only 13 of the former party candidates that are going to be held accountable for this, including four current members of Cabinet: the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), the current Minister of Labour (Ms. Allan), the Minister of Northern and Aboriginal A ffairs (Mr.

Lathlin) and the member–I forget who the fourth member was involved–oh, the Member for St. James (Ms. Korzeniowski).

I know that those four members are not going to be making comments about the 1999 election campaign because obviously that will be something that would be deeply sensitive as they go back and look at those falsely filed returns and discover the rebates that were triggered, even as their leader, who was apparently orchestrating this with his senior campaign staff, even as he was charging other parties with misdeeds, that he would be overseeing this scheme, that the Minister of Finance had the presence of mind to get a get-out-of-jail free letter from the Premier's campaign manager.

Only the Minister of Finance had the presence of mind and the political instincts to ask for that letter. I think it's unfortunate that the other three weren't provided with the same courtesy by the Premier's staff, but in any event, that promises to be a very interesting part of the debate as we go into the next election campaign.

So I know members will want to take this opportunity to reclaim some of the idealism of their earlier years, to do what's right and to support an amendment that would provide openness, transparency and co nfidence to Manitobans in terms of the conduct of investigations into allegations of wrongdoing in the course of election campaigns, and they are allegations. We simply want to be sure that the way they're investigated and disposed of is made public so that all Manitobans can be confident in the administration of elections in our province.

So I look forward to the support of members opposite on this amendment, and I thank all members who express their support for it today. Thank you. Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): I would, first of all, like to open my comments by thanking the Member for Fort Whyt e (Mr. McFadyen) for bringing forward an amendment that speaks to the heart of why we're here, why we decided, in our own minds, for what reasons we wanted to run for politics, to run for elected office and to represent t

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-2-67b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 2nd hansardpdf 67b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	293ee78dd9307e4afc85208dfee862435caa9e2b

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