Manitoba Hansard — 7 March 2005 (Sitting 14, 38th Legislature, 3rd Session)

38-3-14

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Thirty-Eighth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LVI No. 14 - 1:30 p.m., Monday, March 7, 2005

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Eighth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation AGLUGUB, Cris The Maples N.D.P. ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thom pson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. CUMMINGS, Glen Ste. Rose 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. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri 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. LOEWEN, John Fort Whyte P.C. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon.

Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. MURRAY, Stuart Kirkfield Park P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PENNER, Jack Emerson P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. REIMER, Jack Southdale P.C. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. ROCAN, Denis Carman P.C. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SALE, Tim, Hon. Fort Rouge N.D.P. SANTOS, Conrad Wellington N.D.P. SCHELLENBERG, Harry Rossmere N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P. SMITH, Scott, Hon.

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

585 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, March 7, 2005 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Highway 200 Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: Highway 200 is paved from Winnipeg to the Canada-U.S. border except for approximately a 10- kilometre

section between highways 205 and 305 which remains unpaved. School buses, farm equipment, emergency vehicles and local traffic must travel on Highway 200 which is dangerous, if not completely impass- able, during wet spring weather and other times of heavy rainfall. Due to unsafe conditions, many drivers look to alternate routes around this

section when possible and time permits. The condition of the gravel road can cause serious damage to all vehicles. Insufficient traffic counts are not truly reflective of the traffic volumes because users tend to find another route to avoid this section. Traffic counts done after spring seeding, during wet weather or during school recess are not indicative of traffic flows. Maintenance costs for unpaved highways are high and ongoing. It would be cost-effective to pave this section.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux) consider paving Highway 200 between highways 205 and 305 to ensure a smooth, safe and uninterrupted use of Highway 200. This is signed by Lucille Preteau, Charles Courcelles, Arthur Desmarais and others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Addictions Foundation of Manitoba Mr. Jack Reimer (Southdale): Mr.

Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: The Addictions Foundation of Manitoba (AFM) provides intervention, rehabilitation, prevention, education and public information services on addictions for the citizens of Manitoba. Manitoba's provincial budget 2004 cut funding to the AFM by $150,000 and required the organiza- tion to absorb a $450,000 wage settlement. In order to operate within its budget, the AFM was forced to close 14 treatment beds in its primary care unit and eliminate 10 nursing positions.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health to ensure that his attempts to balance his department's finances are not at the expense of the health and well-being of vulnerable Manitobans suffering from addiction. To urge the Minister of Health to consider monitoring the waiting lists for addiction treatment and to consider ensuring that timely treatment for Manitobans with addictions is not compromised by the provincial government's decision to cut the AFM's annual budget. Signed by Jamie Irving, Vivian Bérubé, Jenni Diamond and others.

586 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 * (13:35) Physician Shortage–Westman Area Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: The Westman region serving Brandon and the surrounding area will be without an on-call pediatrician for 20 days between November 10 and December 31, last fall. It is still ongoing.

As a result of the severe shortage of pediatricians to serve the Westman area, Brandon and area women with high-risk pregnancies as well as critically ill children are being forced, at even greater risk, to travel to Winnipeg for urgent medical attention. The chiefs of the departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Family Practice and Anesthesia at the Brandon Regional Health Centre have publicly voiced their concern regarding the potentially disastrous consequences of the shortage.

Brandon physicians were shocked and angered by the lack of communication and foresight on the part of the government related to retention of a local pediatrician. The Minister of Health has stated that Brandon has to put its best foot forward and recruit its own doctors. Doctors have warned that if the current situation is prolonged, it may result in further loss of services or the departure of other specialists who find the situation unmanageable.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To strongly urge the Minister of Health to consider taking charge and ensuring that he will improve long-term planning efforts to develop a lasting solution to the chronic problem of pediatrician and other specialist shortages in Brandon. To strongly urge the Minister of Health to treat this as the crisis that it is and consider consulting with front-line workers, par ticularly doctors, to find solutions. To strongly urge the Minister of Health and the Premier of Manitoba to consider ending highway medicine now.

Signed by Michelle Sawyer, Judy Mytopher and Rita Eslinger. COMMITTEE REPORTS Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs First Report Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, I wish to presen t the First Report of the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs presents the following as its First Report. Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs presents the following as its First Report.

Meetings: Your committee met on Wednesday, December 22, 2004, at 1:30 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building. Matters Under Consideration: Annual Report on the administration of The Elections Act and The Elections Finances Act for the year ending December 31, 2001 Annual Report of Elections Manitoba for the year ending December 31, 2002, including the conduct of the Lac du Bonnet by-election dated March 12, 002 2 Annual Report of Elections Manitoba for the year ending December 31, 2003, including the conduct of the 38 th Provincial General Election dated June 3, 2003

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 587 Committee Membership: Substitutions received prior to commencement of the December 22, 2004 meeting: Hon. Mr. Doer for Hon. Mr. Mackintosh Hon. Mr. Ashton for Hon. Mr. Bjornson Mr. Murray for Mrs. Mitchelson Mr. Loewen for Mrs. Taillieu Mr. Cummings for Mr. Goertzen Hon. Mr. Chomiak for Mr. Santos Substitutions made, by leave, during committee proceedings: Hon. Mr. Mackintosh for Mr. Schellenberg Officials Speaking on Record: Mr. Richard D.

Balasko, Chief Electoral Officer Reports Considered and Adopted: Your committee has considered and adopted the following reports as presented: Annual Report on the administration of The Elections Act and The Elections Finances Act for the year ending December 31, 2001 Annual Report of Elections Manitoba for the year ending December 31, 2002, including the conduct of the Lac du Bonnet by-election dated March 12, 2002 Reports Considered but not Adopted: Your committee has considered the following reports but did not adopt them: Annual Report of Elections Manitoba for the year ending December 31, 2003, including the conduct of the 38 Provincial General Election dated June 3, 2003 Ms.

Korzeniowski: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for The Maples (Mr. Aglugub), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS RCMP Tragedy Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House. I rise today to speak briefly about the Canadian tragedy that occurred last Thursday in Alberta, the horrific shooting of four Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers in the line of duty. There are many reasons why this tragedy has sparked an outpouring of emotion among Canadians.

They were young men at the beginning of their careers, full of hope and promise. Constable Brock Myrol, 29 years old, was posted just last month to the job that was his childhood dream. Constable Peter Schiemann, only 25 years old, was the son of a Lutheran pastor who will now bury the child he baptized. Constable Anthony Gordon was the father of a two-year-old boy, and he and his wife were expecting their second child this summer.

Constable Leo Johnston, 32, was a newlywed of only three months. * (13:40) In Manitoba, these events bring to mind the tragic death of Constable Dennis Strongquill in 2001, and the shooting of Constable Mike Templeton the following year. Searches like the one executed in Alberta last week are performed by police across Canada every day. The incidents remind us again of the dangers faced by police, and it is why we must have stronger sanctions in the Criminal Code for individuals who assault or kill police officers.

On behalf of Manitobans and this House, I extend our deepest condolences to the families and friends of constables Gordon, Schiemann, Johnston and Myrol. I would encourage Manitobans to sign the book of condolences located at the RCMP "D" Division Headquarters on Portage Avenue. Mr. Speaker, after the other leaders have made their statements, I would propose that members observe a moment of silence in memory of these four young officers. Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the members of our caucus to put our thoughts and prayers forward to the families, members and loved ones of Constable Schiemann, Constable Johnston, Constable Gordon and Constable Myrol who so tragically had their lives taken in what was a senseless act. Mr. Speaker, as the Premier said, the RCMP have the reputation throughout not only Canada but

588 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 around the world as being the ultimate in peacekeepers, and we respect that role. That red serge, when we see it, not only makes us proud as Canadians, but it resembles everything that we believe in what is right about the RCMP. Mr. Speaker, we, too, recall these deaths and the tragic loss of Officer Dennis Strongquill and Officer Mike Templeton, who also had their lives taken in the line of duty.

We, on this side of the House, want to pass on our deepest condolences to the family members, the loved ones and all the other members of the RCMP and other police officers who work so hard to make our lives better. 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, last Thursday the sad and tragic deaths of four RCMP officers certainly hit a chord with all of us.

On behalf of the Liberal Party, I join others in this Legislature in extending our condolences to the family and friends of the RCMP officers who died in the line of duty, constables Schiemann, Gordon, Johnston and Myrol. We all need to support the RCMP, and we know the risks that they take. We know that there are still many unanswered questions. I have been asked, for example, how could a person with such a track record be in possession of such firearms. I am sure that over the ensuing time we will find some of these answers.

We are sad, of course, and recognize the deaths of constables Strongquill and Templeton in Manitoba. I think it is also important to note that it has already been a sad year for violent deaths in Manitoba. I would recall, in particular, a horrific shooting death earlier this year of a 15-year-old boy while under the supervision of Child and Family Services. I would take this opportunity to extend our sympathy and condolences to the family and friends of others who have died recently from such violent deaths.

So I join the others in looking forward to a moment of silence in recognizing and remembering these tragic events. Mr. Speaker: Would you please rise for a moment of silence? A moment of silence was observed. * (13:45) Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us today Manitoba's Canadian Women's Curling champions. With us today are Jennifer Jones, Cathy Overton- Clapham, Trisha Eck and also their coach, Larry Jones.

Also with him is Joan Halowski who is the president of the Manitoba Curling Association. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS Budget Tax Increases Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I would like to certainly add my congratulations to those in the gallery today. I think it was resonating throughout all of Canada when everybody saw that shot, and I know that it will be etched in everybody's minds. It was spectacular, and we are proud Manitobans today, and we will be proud when they win the world championship. Mr.

Speaker, tomorrow the Doer government is going to bring in their budget. What we have seen with this socialist approach is the classic tax and spend. While this Premier tried to mislead Manitobans, the Auditor General set Manitobans and this government straight. Specifically, this govern- ment has run deficits for the past three budgets. In 2001-2002, they ran a $10-million deficit. In 2002- 2003, that deficit ballooned to $184 million, and last year, the granddaddy of them all.

Although the Premier tried to say there was a surplus, the Auditor General caught him and explained to Manitobans that no, there was a $604-million deficit. Mr. Speaker, in the last budget this Premier stood in this House and said, "I was not elected to raise taxes." Then he intro duced user fees and taxes to some $90 million. This Premier has punished seniors, he has punished middle-income Manitobans, and he has punished our ag producers. I will ask this Premier today will he stand in the House and declare that there will not be one increase in taxes in

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 589 tomorrow's budget or one in crease in user fees in tomorrow's budget. Will he declare that today? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Auditor also stated that, consistent with our promises to the people of Manitoba, we have balanced the budget under balanced budget legislation, under every budget we presented. The Auditor has asked this Chamber in the past to proceed with the

summary financial statements as part of the primary way of reporting which is, of course, a requirement to amend the balanced budget legislation that was brought in by the former government. The former government, when they were presented this recom- mendation, said no. When we have been presented this recommendation, we have said yes. Mr. Speaker, there are elements of that reporting system that the former Mini ster of Finance, Mr. Eric Stefanson, said was not appropriate for the public sector, and he was an accountant. He mentioned, of course, the fact that you could have situations such as droughts one year, as we had last year,

an act of God, a drought. We can have a very positive situation for Hydro that the subsequent year when there is a considerable amount– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I know members are a little eager, but we will have decorum in the House. Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and you could have situations where the water levels are high, in some cases with a lot of ag ricultural producers, too high, where Hydro produces a revenue. Mr. Speaker, I think members opposite will see those are quite evident, the difference between a drought, which the Auditor said was the primary reason for the

summary fina ncial budget situation. I would repeat, the Auditor stated that the election promise we made of following the balanced budget legislation, the Auditor stated in his report that the balanced budget legislation test was met by us. A promise made and a promise kept. * (13:50) Budget Health Care Services Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, on a promise made and a promise kept, it was this First Minister that told Manitobans that he would end hallway medicine in six months with $15 million. So much for a promise made and promise kept.

Despite this First Minister's promises that he was going to solve all of Manitoba's concerns on health care and despite putting $1.3 billion more into health care, the fact of life, and we heard this at our regional meeting on health in Brandon, is that there are serious concerns that this Premier has misled Manitobans with respect to health care.

Tomorrow's budget is an opportunity for this Premier to put his idealistic sociology, socialist approach to health care, to put it aside and understand that if he really wants to ensure that there is more timely access to care for patients, that there is more opportunity so that we do not see in orthopedics waiting lists grow longer under this Premier, that they grow less. Will he today commit to ensure that there are some dollars in the budget tomorrow to ensure that the private sector has an ability to deliver more care to Manitobans?

It should not be about socialist ideology, it should be about timely access to care. Will he make that commitment today? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe that a Leader of the Opposition is asking some reheated old questions of the past, when we have an agricultural crisis today because the border was closed again last week by a Montana court. I cannot believe the Conservative Leader of the Opposition does not stand up on the lead question and raise the issue of farmers and their situation in this province. Mr. Speaker: Order.

We have just started Question Period and Question Period lasts for 40 minutes. All members who are eager will have the opportunity to ask questions and the members, the ministers on this side, will have the opportunity to answer those questions. So let us just be a little patient and let us have some decorum in the Chamber. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, to continue on an issue of priority for Manitobans, which of course is the agricultural sector. The Premier of Alberta, the Premier of Manitoba and the Premier of Saskatchewan just had a conference call with the Prime Minister. We just completed it a few moments ago.

The Prime Minister conveyed to the Premiers on the line along with the federal agricultural minister

590 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 the fact that the President has reassured him, again, that he would veto any bill from the Congress or Senate. He also explained to us, and I want to explain to this House, that he does not expect a vote of the Congress in a similar way to that of the Senate. That is the information that the Prime Minister passed on to us. We had a number of proposals to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Agriculture. We think that the fact that the Senate debate last week included false information in the U.S.

Senate dealing with the safety of Canadian beef, the fact of the matter is– Mr. Speaker: Order. I have allowed a lot of leeway for questions and I have allowed a lot of leeway for answers, and I know that we have leaders' latitude, but I think we are pushing the envelope a little bit. The question was on health care and I have allowed a lot of latitude, but I would just like to bring a little bit of relevancy to the questions and to the answers. * (13:55) Mr. Doer: I was carrying on with the

preamble that contained the whole budget, Mr. Speaker. We, of course, will ensure that the budget includes measures for health care. It will include measures for education and training. It will include measures for cleaner water. It will include measures for more police officers. It will include investing in Manitoba in terms of providing the needed infrastructure. It will also include tax reductions for farmers and investment for slaughter capacity to deal with the closure of the border. Mr. Murray: Mr.

Speaker, I am absolutely surprised that this First Minister does not believe that health care is important to Manitobans. We on this side do. If he has not the ability to answer with health care, we understand that because it has been six years and every waiting list, every promise he has made in health care, he has failed. Mr. Speaker, a budget is a very important document, a very serious document and this government is going to bring it tomorrow to this Legislature.

The Doer government has an opportunity to say to Manitobans that they will take their tax dollars seriously, that they will ensure that they will eliminate the education tax from residential property and farmland, that they will put money back into the rainy day fund, that they will ensure that there is a cash advance for our hard-fought beef producers in Manitoba, that they will ensure that they will have a plan to immediately ensure that there is slaughter capacity in the province, that they will ensure that there are more police on the streets. Mr.

Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Livestock producers in Manitoba were supposed to be celebrating the American border opening today, but a judicial injunction and an American Senate vote against that border opening will be closed indefinitely. Increasing provincial slaughter capacity must be the top priority for the livestock industry of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, the money is there. It is there in unprecedented numbers. The question is, is the political will there for this Premier to do the right thing? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, when we came into office the cancer treatment waiting list was six to eight weeks.

It is now one week. When we came into office the cardiac waiting list was unacceptably too long. It has been reduced by 60 percent. When we came into office there was no plan for dealing with the gamma knife surgery for neurosurgery patients. This is now in pl ace, and we are attracting neurosurgeons from across Canada. The life and death procedures in Manitoba have been improved. The quality of life procedures still require more effort, more priority.

We are continuing on by hiring more orthopedic surgeons, by making more announcements on more procedures and we will carry on with the deliberate plan that we put in place. Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out that members opposite last spring asked two questions as a lead question on BSE. Th ey asked thirteen on the floodway labour agreement. They are big talkers, but when it comes to supporting the people that need support they kept the taxes high. We have lowered the taxes on education for farmers by 50 percent. They are talkers. We are doers. Livestock Industry Slaughter Capacity Mr.

Speaker, since the NDP government has announced today they are adopting part of our major five-point BSE Recovery Program, will the minister now commit major dollars as our plan did to ensure slaughter capacity for our finished livestock animals?

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 591 * (14:00) Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, it certainly was a disappointment to learn that the border which we had anticipated would be open today did not happen. Since that has not happened we have taken additional steps to what we have in the past, but it is very interesting to hear the members opposite talk about slaughter capacity when their critic has been recognized in the past for saying that investing in processing was not a good idea.

They have now changed their mind when they are saying investing in processing is a good idea. We made a commitment, Mr. Speaker, when the border closed to Manitoba, to Canadian producers, that we would work with producers and processors to increase slaughter capacity. We are working with them. Today we made a further announcement, a further commitment of $3 million. We have also committed to work with processors who have to work– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Eichler: We will see how much money has flowed from that side of the House in the last two years. None of that money has flowed to the processing side of that.

Mr. Speaker, in September of 2003, the Minister of Agriculture told the House, and I quote, "We have to continue to work to increase our slaughter capacity so that if this situation ever happened again we are in a better position than we are at this time and have the necessary slaughter capacity." That comment was made 576 days ago and slaughter capacity in the province has not increased at all. The whole industry is in crisis. Can the minister tell this House if her NDP government has a plan built into tomorrow's budget to deal with cull cows becoming another problem for the cattle industry? Ms.

Wowchuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the member opposite quoted what I had said because I am still committed to increasing slaughter capacity in this province. I think it is the most important step that we can take given the challenge that we have with the continued closure of the border. That is why I said today that we have additional money that we are going to put forward. We are going to work with those processors who are provincially inspected to help them get to a federally inspected standard so that they can export out of this province. Those are the kinds of things that we have to do.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, we have not had the support of the opposition at all times. The opposition has said we do not need processing capacity, there is enough capacity in this province. So let them remember what they said. In this crisis situation what we need is a united front. We need to have members on all sides of the House standing and saying how important it is that we work first of all to get the border open, but also to– Mr. Speaker: Order. BSE Recovery Program Cash Advance Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, obviously they have not been listening on that side of the House.

Six months ago we, as the Official Opposition, presented a five-point BSE recovery program using previously announced but unused government dollars that would have provided a cash advance, increased federally inspected facilities and expanded slaughter capacity. Mr. Speaker, now that the Minister of Agriculture and her NDP government have accepted and adopted one of our recovery plans, will she now commit to the other aspects such as infrastructure investments and the cash advance program? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr.

Speaker, I am not sure what the member has been listening to, but if he would have listened to some of the things that we have announced, we talked about the need for a cash flow. We put in place a loan program. We have now, through Manitoba's negotiation, been able to get a cash advance on CAIS money for producers. I would encourage him to talk to his farmers and tell them to apply for that CAIS program. We have also talked to the federal government about putting a program in place similar to what the grain producers have in order that there can be a cash advance. Mr. Speaker, we are doing things.

They are just not quite sure what they want. They continue to

592 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 change their mind and will not recognize that there are good programs in place. Livestock Industry Slaughter Capacity Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): The minister speaks long and loud about what they have been doing for producers, yet there are very few producers that have benefited at all from the CAIS program. There are very few producers that have benefited from the many programs that she has announced.

When we look at the actual amounts of money delivered compared to the $180 million that they advertised it is no small wonder that our farmers, our cattle producers, are going broke. When will the minister, who speaks very highly of the livestock producers, and we all agree we have the greatest producers in the world right here. It has been 576 days since the BSE crisis began. In Manitoba, the producers have seen no increase, absolutely zero increase in the slaughter capacity. As a matter of fact, some of the small slaughter facilities have closed down since this crisis started.

When will the minister and her government commit to help the slaughter industry, to commit to infrastructure development such as lagoons and water treatment– Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, again I would have to tell the member that he is inaccurate in his statements. He says no money has flowed to producers. I can tell you through the various programs that have been put in place since BSE struck this country, we have flowed $116 million in funds to producers. I would not say that that is a very small amount.

We have also ensured that there is money flowing in advance through the CAIS program, Mr. Speaker. We have had money in our budget last year and before that to ensure that there was money to help people who want to increase their slaughter capacity. We have done a feasibility study to help producers, and we announced additional money today to help producers or processors move from provincial to federally inspected plants. I would encourage the members opposite to be supportive rather than constantly criticizing, and let us have a united front to put to the federal government. Mr. Penner: Mr.

Speaker, the minister stands before this House and lauds the commitment that she has made in the program that she has announced. Can the minister today tell us how many federally inspected plants have opened in this province of Manitoba since she and her government had to encounter the BSE crisis in this province? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, when the BSE situation hit this province, we fully recognized that their slaughter capacity was lacking. The members opposite would recognize that we lost that slaughter capacity during their administration.

They did absolutely nothing to slow down the loss of slaughter capacity in this province. We put in place programs, and we have worked with processors to move along in order that we can increase slaughter capacity. We announced additional programs today. We want the federal government to be on board with their Loan Loss Reserve Program. We want the federal government to come forward with the other programs, but we do have to continue to work with our processors and our producers to ensure that we do increase slaughter capacity in this province. Mr. Penner: Mr.

Speaker, the answer to the question I asked is absolutely none. There have been no new plants opened in this province. What the minister has done is met with the Rancher's Choice Beef Co- operative and kept them on a string and just kept them talking and talking. They are still talking. There is still no plant being built. Can the minister tell this House whether she will commit today to put in place the five-point BSE recovery plan that the Tories announced in this province six months ago? Will she commit to that today?

Will she meet with those processors that are interested in building a major plant in this province and make that commitment to those processors? Ms. Wowchuk: That is really interesting. A few minutes ago the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) was calling us a bunch of socialists, and now the members opposite want us to be the socialists and build a plant. That is really interesting. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. * (14:10)

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 593 Mr. Speaker: Order. I would like to remind all honourable members that when the Speaker is standing the Speaker should be heard in silence and all members should be seated. Also I would like to remind all honourable members that we have guests in our galleries and we have the viewing public, and when I am sitting here and I see guests in the galleries having to lean forward to hear the member who has the floor, I think we have a problem. I would ask all honourable members for their co- operation. We need to maintain decorum in the House.

I ask all honourable members. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to remind the member opposite of a comment that he made and a quote in the paper that says last week the Conservative critic said that investing in processing was not a good idea. But when the Province announced additional funding for Rancher's Choice this month, he fired off a release saying it was a year and a half too late. Well, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot on one hand say government should not be involved, and on the other hand say why are you not doing more. We have listened to the producers.

We have listened to the processors. We announced additional programs, and we will continue to work with those who are interested in increasing slaughter capacity in this province. Police Services Resources Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, this weekend three people were murdered in the city of Winnipeg. Four individuals have now been murdered in this province since the beginning of the year. A new gang, the Banditos, were welcomed into the province by this Minister of Justice last month. Grow ops are being busted virtually every day.

Our officers are putting it on the line every day for the security and the safety of Manitobans, and this Minister of Justice is not giving them the resources they need. Last year he promised 20 new officers. It is a drop in the bucket. It will not do enough when we have gang problems, when we have grow-op problems, where there are murders happening on the streets of Winnipeg. I want to ask this Minister of Justice why will he not provide real resources to our police officers. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (M inister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, I think it is important that members in this House, as members on this side do, support the efforts and particularly when it comes to the operations of Winnipeg Police Service. Indeed, the member was right on one point. They are busting marijuana grow operations every day. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, only this Minister of Justice would be proud that we have that many grow ops in the province that one is busted every day. In Canada, there is one office r for every 47 offences that occur in our country. In Manitoba, there is one officer for every 68 offences that occur in the country.

That is seventh worst in our country. The Minister of Justice's spokesperson, when confronted with these facts said, "Well, we did not think we were the seventh worst in the country, we thought that we were the sixth worst in the country." Well, seventh worst, sixth wors t, we do not care on this side. We do not think it is good enough, Manitobans do not think it is good enough, and our police officers who are putting it on the line every day do not think it is good enough. I want to ask the Minister of Justice when is he going to ensure that we have enough officers to bring it up to the national average. Mr.

Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, I remind members of this House that Manitoba has the second highest number of police officers per capita. I do not think we need lessons from members opposite on the number of police officers. When there were record crime rates under their watch, what did they do? They cut the provincial policing line. This side of the House has increased support for provincial policing each and every year we have been in office. I believe that since we have been in office we have increased support for policing in Manitoba by almost $12 million.

That is an unmatched record of support for our police officers on the front line. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, this Minister of Justice knows full well that the workload of officers is driven by the number of offences, not on a per capita basis. He hides behind the numbers because he knows that his government has not done enough. There are two new gangs in the province since his administration came into the province. The Hells Angels have moved in and now the Banditos have joined us. There are a record number of grow ops.

594 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 There were a record number of murders in this province last year under the administration of the NDP. I want to ask this Minister of Justice will he ensure that in tomorrow's budget there will be the kinds of resources to ensure that we have on a Canadian average basis, that we are up to par, that we have as many officers pe r offence as they do in the rest of the country. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, I find it strange that the opposition would be taking this position because I looked at the budget that they had put forward in the last election in terms of what should be spent in the area of justice. They flatlined all the spending in justice for the last two years. We would have been suffering from massive cuts to policing, to probation services, to courts, to Corrections. That is the vision that they had in the last election. Mr. Speaker, I will remind members opposite that we have committed to 40 more officers over the next two years.

We funded additional dollars to the Integrated Organized Crime Task Force. The government has been putting forward a vigorous, proactive and innovative plan to deal with crime in this province, and I expect that they will support a budget that moves funding forward even more. I expect if there is that kind of support in the budget, they will vote for it. Crocus Fund Evaluations Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr.

Speaker, in 2002, after a number of warning flags were raised with the NDP government regarding a possibility of the overstatement of valuations within the Crocus Fund, I would like to ask the Minister of Industry today if he would advise the unit holders of the Crocus Fund what steps were taken by the NDP government in 2002 to satisfy them that the Crocus Fund valuations were in fact accurate. Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased that the memb er asked this question because I think it is important that all people, all Manitobans, know that right now there are a lot of professionals doing their job. What they are doing is they are investigating to make sure that people follow the appropriate actions as far as regulatory review. The Auditor General is looking at the management and all investment practices and the whole processes there. We have the Manitoba Securities Commission which is conducting an ongoing evaluation.

What we are trying to do is make sure that the professionals have a chance to do their job appropriately to make sure that all people behaved and acted appropriately. Thank you. Crocus Fund Government Investigation Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, I remind the minister that the professionals are involved because his department did absolutely nothing. As a matter of fact, after repeated, repeated assurances from this NDP government that the valuations published by the fund were accurate, Manitobans continued to invest their retirement funds in Crocus.

In 2001, the NDP Minister of Industry brought legislation to this House that gave the minister broad powers to demand any and all information from the fund at any time. Can the Minister of Industry indicate if this NDP government has used any of these powers prior to the halt and the trading of shares of Crocus in December of this past year? Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, I think it is important to note that it was under this government that we actually extended the Auditor's role where the Auditor was allowed to go into third- party areas where government had invested money or whether there was interest from the government. So under this government, not under members opposite, in 2001, we expanded the Auditor's role. Not only that, but it is important to note that when the Auditor made sure that under those rules he had authority to go and both myself and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) quickly responded to say yes, because we wanted open and honest disclosure.

We went and made sure that not only did he have the right and ability to do that, but we made sure that we facilitated that as much as possible. Mr. Loewen: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the unit holders in Crocus would appreciate it if this minister would actually get his facts right for once. I would remind him that it was he who said in December that he did not think the Auditor General needed to be brought in at all. In fact, the Auditor General forced him into this position.

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 595 Mr.

Speaker, when the government introduced in 2001 these amendments, the then-NDP Minister of Industry stated, and I quote from Hansard, "It is important that the government monitor the operations of labour-sponsored funds to ensure they are adhering to the legislation." She went on to say, and again I quote from Hansard, "These important amendments provide audit and inspection powers as well as powers to facilitate obtaining information." Can this Minister of Industry explain to the 33 000 investors in the fund why his department has not utilized the powers that were given to them by the legislation passed in 2001? * (14:20) Mr.

Rondeau: I understand right now the Auditor is doing his job. We extended the Auditor's roles and responsibilities to make sure he had the ability to go in and investigate. Under the Conservative's watch there was no ability to do that. We extended it so that people could have a good, unbiased opinion of what was going on in the fund. It is important to note that we also have a Manitoba Securities Commission that is investigating this. I believe it is necessary to let the professionals do their job.

In fact, under the government that set up the Crocus and ENSIS funds, they said we should not have political interference. They said we should have a fund that is run and managed by experts. Government set up the parameters. Government set up the rules. Our job is to focus and make sure people follow the rules and that is what we did. Crocus Fund Government-appointed Directors Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, the Auditor went in because this government refused to do anything for three years. That is why the Auditor went in.

It has become obvious that this NDP government has either been asleep at the switch or was in collusion with the management of the Crocus fund. This NDP government appoints a director to the board who has fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to report and bring attention to any material changes at the fund as soon as they are known. Will the Minister of Industry identify any issues that were raised with his department by either John Clarkson or Ron Waugh, both of whom are senior staff and have been with the government and are government-appointed directors since 2001? Hon.

Jim Rondeau (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): I am glad that question has been brought up because of the understanding of fiduciary responsibility. Once a board member has been appointed, it is important to note, they are fiduciary. Their responsibility is to the shareholder. It would be not only inappropriate, but it would possibly be illegal for those people to report back to me what happens on the board. They are responsible to the unit holders and what is important is that opinion was not given just by us. That opinion has been given by the nation's experts in fiduciary responsibility.

The job of the board member is to report to the unit holders. It would be inappropriate and possibly illegal for them to report to me. I can assure the member opposite they did not report to me what happened in the board because that would be wrong. Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, John Clarkson and Ron Waugh were appointed to protect the government's investment in Crocus. The people of Manitoba had someone at the table that was supposed to protect our investment and that of the people of Manitoba. The minister should understand the structure and how this was all set up.

Is the Minister of Industry telling 33 000 Manitobans that their retirement funds are going to be slashed because this NDP government was either too lazy or did not care enough to monitor the fund either through the powers given in 2001 or simply questioning their NDP government-appointed directors and making sure that our investment, the people of Manitoba's investment, was secure and not plummeting like we have seen lately? Mr. Rondeau: I would like to quote a simple quote that was given by the Minister of Finance when the fund was set up in 1992 or 1993.

Then-Finance Minister, Clayton Manness, who I assume the people opposite know, said, "Rather than entrust the political interference that can sometimes swirl around decisions made, let us have some trust in the community leaders, business leaders, to make the right decisions. People are skilled." He further went on, and I will paraphrase. He said that we should not have political interference.

596 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 We should have independent board members who have a fiduciary rate to the shareholders. We did not appoint political appointments. We appointed long- term civil servants that know and are experts in the economy. We believe we should not have political interference in the investment or management decisions of the fund. Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, nobody was asking for political interference. What people were asking is that the government was supposed to protect a significant amount of public money that was in the Crocus fund.

That was what the government was appointing representatives for. Will the minister tell the 33 000 investors in the Crocus Fund what efforts his NDP government made on their behalf to ensure that Crocus was adhering to the provisions of the legislat ion, or is this minister going to continue his routine of see no evil, hear no evil, know nothing about it? In the meantime, 33 000 Manitobans lose a lot of their retirement fund. Shame on this government. Shame on this minister. Mr.

Rondeau: I would like to inform the member opposite that the legislation and the rights and obligations of the minister is to ensure that the extra 15 percent, the federal government and the provincial government, 15% credit extra, to ensure the following: 1) investments are made in Manitoba; 2) money is invested in Manitoba. We have the right under sections 11.5 and 15 to investigate if they have made the fiduciary responsibility. In other words, invested in Manitoba. We have done that.

What we have now done is we have the Auditor making an investigation, we have the Manitoba Securities Commission making an investigation to make sure that they have followed the rules. Our job in government is to set the rules. The regulators make sure that the rules are followed, and our job is to not allow political interference in investments. Mr. Speaker: Order. Time for Or al Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Scott Tournament of Hearts Winners Hon.

Nancy Allan (Min ister of Labour and Immigration): I am pleased to rise today to congratulate Jennifer Jones and Team Manitoba for their stunning win at the Canadian Women's Curling Championship in St. John's, Newfoundland on Sunday, February 27. Mr. Speaker, the winning of the Scott Tournament of Hearts was a testament to a strong team effort. The championship game came down to the last rock, a difficult h it-and-roll take-out shot.

Jones stressed the importance of teamwork, saying, "We called the shot, the girls left it for me, swept it great, called it great and I made it." This shot is already being called by many sports analysts as one of the greatest shots in the history of Canadian curling. The team's final shot led to an 8-6 victory ver Team Ontario. o Mr. Speaker, I am especially proud of the Jones team since Jennifer's home club is the St. Vital Curling Club, an important landmark in my constituency. This championship win represents Manitoba's first Canadian Women's Curling Championship victory since 1995.

The Jones' team will now represent Canada at the Women's World Curling Championships in Paisley, Scotland, from March 19 to 27. The win also provides the Jones team with a berth in Canada's Olympic trials for the 2006 Winter Olympic Games which will be held in Turin, Italy. To conclude, Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate Jennifer Jones, Cathy Gauthier, Jill Officer, Cathy Overton-Clapham, Trisha Eck and coach Larry Jones for winning this year's Scott Tournament of Hearts. I also want to wish them the best of luck at the Women's World Curling Championship in Paisley this month.

I know they will make all Manitobans proud. Eva McKay Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise today to honour the memory of Eva McKay. Eva was a well-respected elder and healer from Sioux Valley First Nation who passed away four days short of her 85th birthday. She was a devoted advocate and will be missed dearly by her family, friends and community. Eva was one of the first council members for Sioux Valley and served with distinction as a member for four terms. In 1964, she was among the founders of the Brandon Friendship Centre and

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 597 helped establish the Manitoba Indian Women's Association in 1969. Eva's hard work and support of local community development aided with the opening of a school in 1979 and the Dakota Lodge in 1983. Eva served on numerous committees and panels over the years, sharing her wisdom and skills.

Of note, she served on the National Parole Board in 1996, the Advisory Elders Panel for Brandon University for over 30 year s, the Canadian Panel on Violence Against Women, the Self-Government Advisory Committee for Sioux Valley, and she was an elder adviser at the beginning of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. Eva was well known for her dedication to young people and worked closely with the Dakota Ojibway Child and Family Services agency welcoming many foster children into her home.

Her community involvement was recognized when Eva received a Woman of Distinction Award in 1988 from the Brandon YWCA, and later the Governor General of Canada's 125th Commemorative Award for Public Service in 1993. * (14:30) Last spring I had the pleasure of attending the Keeping the Fires Burning Recognition Ceremony in which Eva's efforts were acknowledged. I sat with Eva's family who were representing her interests that evening. I learned a great deal about Eva's accomplishments.

Her daughters shared with fond- ness how Moses McKay, Eva' s late husband, would drive Eva to many of her meetings and wait with respect and patience for many hours. Mr. Speaker, Eva's accomplishments were many, some of which are only now coming to light to her family. It is truly astonishing how she could have possibly given so much of her time to causes and still have been such an attentive, loving wife and mother. Mr. Speaker, Eva McKay was an amazing woman.

I offer my sincere condolences to Eva's 12 children, 50 grandchildren, extended family, friends and all the individuals whose lives were touched by this extraordinary woman. Thank you. Speaker's Office Outreach Program Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to applaud and bring attention to the outstanding work being done through the Manitoba Legislative Assembly Speaker's office outreach program.

Since 2000, when he first introduced the program to Manitoba, the Speaker has visited over 75 schools and community groups in order to educate young Manitobans about the legislative process and the parliamentary system of government. Recently, I had the privilege of witnessing the Speaker's office outreach program in action when the Speaker and staff from the Clerk's office visited Linwood School. They use such creative and effective methods of teaching that they make learning fun.

The students at Linwood participated in a mock parliament while our clerk, Monique Grenier, walked them through the stages of passing legislation. The visit to Linwood School was a huge success. Not only did the students have lots of fun, but they also gained valuable knowledge that will benefit them for years to come. It was exciting to see the tremendous enthusiasm of the students. I would like to thank the Grades 3, 4 and 5 students at Linwood School for making my time with them so enjoyable.

I would also like to thank the Linwood School principal, Dianne Snider, as well as teachers Leanne Mager, Gina Petty, Paula Andres and Mark Zubrun for taking such a strong interest in the education of their students. I am encouraged by the prospect that in the years to come these students will remember the enjoyable time they had and because of it will be more likely to engage in the political process. In recent months, much has been said about fostering greater interest in the political process among young Canadians. I commend the Speaker's office outreach program for going a long way to address this issue.

I would like to take this opportunity to call on all members of the Assembly to join me in recognizing you, Mr. Speaker, and the staff of the Clerk's office of the Manitoba Legislative Assembly for introducing and fostering this extraordinary program in Manitoba. Thank you. Werner Boeve Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I stand up to honour the memory of Werner Boeve born 1939 and who passed away March 11, 2000.

598 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 Mr. Boeve was married to Parvaneh Boeve and they had children. On March 11, 2000, at about one o'clock in the morning, Mr. Boeve indicated to his wife, Parvaneh, that he was not feeling well. She noticed that he was not looking very well by the discolouration in his face and called for an ambulance. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the first to arrive was a detachment from the police department after which the fire department showed up. Mrs. Boeve went on to state that no ambulance arrived for approximately 26 minutes. Mr.

Speaker, this has become a grave concern, not just for Mrs. Boeve but for the citizens of East St. Paul. The Interlake Regional Health Authority claims that 21 minutes is an acceptable emergency response time

whereas the City of Winnipeg uses the benchmark of 4 minutes. Ambulance coverage for East and West St. Paul is provided from Selkirk which is almost 25 kilometres away. Combined, East and West St. Paul have over 12 000 residents. Thus, we request of the provincial government, in view of the fact that tomorrow is going to be the provincial budget day, that the provincial government consider providing East St. Paul and West St. Paul with local ambulance service which would service both East and West St. Paul.

We also request the provincial government to consider improving the way that ambulance service is supplied to all Manitobans by utilizing technology such as GPS in conjunction with a medical transportation co-ordination centre, which will ensure that patients receive the nearest ambulance in the least amount of time, and request the provincial government to consider ensuring that appropriate funding is provided. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Boeve went on to say that if an ambulance would have arrived at the right time, her husband Werner would have lived following his heart attack. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I Love To Read Month Ms. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, this past February was I Love to Read Month. It is celebrated across North America as an event to promote childhood literacy. Teaching our children to read and write while they are young is essential to ensure that they will live successful and healthy lives. During February, I read to classrooms from Oakenwald, St. Maurice, Ralph Maybank, Arthur A. Leach, St. John's Ravenscourt and École Crane. I also read to children from St. Maurice Day Care, Lyons Gate Day Care, Universal Day Care and Fort Garry Child Care Centre.

Altogether, I had the privilege of reading stories to hundreds of students from the Fort Garry area. Mr. Speaker, it is very important to stress to our children that reading can be an interactive and fun activity. Rusty Palud, one of our volunteers, accompanied me to each classroom and organized a craft for children based around the story, "The Paper Bag Princess." These crafts challenged each child to use his or her imagination and were a big hit with all the students. Rusty, a Francophone, also helped promote bilingualism in our schools by reading some stories in French.

I Love to Read Month signifies the greater need to promote literacy to all children worldwide. I encourage my fellow colleagues to continue supporting literacy initiatives that are occurring here in Manitoba and across the globe. In conclusion, I want to thank the teachers and principals that allowed me to read to their students. I found the experience to be enriching and extremely worthwhile. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. GRIEVANCES Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Inkster, on a grievance? Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Yes. Mr. Speaker: On a grievance, the honourable Member for Inkster. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.

Speaker, I did not anticipate having a grievance today, but after having some time just to reflect in terms of the importance of this Legislature, I thought it was indeed most appropriate for me to grieve. I truly believe that I have consistently articulated in the past to my constituents that I believe a vast majority of Manitobans expect accountability inside this legislative Chamber. It is very difficult to be able to clearly show how open this government is to being held accountable when we see things like we saw

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 599 today during Question Period, and I think we all have to share in some of the responsibilities for this. I have been introducing petitions, and those petitions will in fact continue on one, if not a couple of very important issues to me and, I believe, to my constituents, if not to all Manitobans. In 2003, this House had 35 sitting days. In 2004, we had 55 sitting days.

That puts a relatively few number of days in which we have the opportunity during Question Period to be able to ask questions of the government so that we are best able to have that face-to-face dialogue in holding the government accountable. What we have found, Mr. Speaker, is that in Manitoba– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I remind all honourable members a grievance is a very serious matter, and if members wish to have a conversation, please do it in a loge or take your conversation out in the hallway. I need to be able to hear every word that is spoken. * (14:40) Mr.

Lamoureux: In Manitoba, Mr. Speaker, we have some rules that have been very effective and have done wonders in terms of ensuring that there is a sense of accountability, but there are other rules that we need to seriously look at and how we can change the rules that are going to ensure that there is better accountability. Mr. Speaker, I was encouraged to hear about the Rules Committee and the idea of going over rules, but one of the fundamental issues in parliamentary democracy, whether it is at the provincial or federal level, is indeed Question Period.

If you go back through the history in Manitoba, all the way back into the eighties, when, as an example, the Manitoba Liberal Party has had several opportunities to have questions being asked during Question Period and whether it was Sharon Carstairs as the only MLA inside here, June Westbury as the only MLA, whether it was myself or Gary Kowalski and Neil Gaudry, we have always been afforded the opportunity to ask questions. The concern is now because of this, 35 days one year, 55 days the next year, there is more pressure in terms of the Question Period.

We are starting to see more questions being lost in terms of this Legislature. I think that what we need to do is we have to encourage and allow for appropriate questions and answers to be able to proceed ahead during Question Period. I could stand up and suggest, Mr. Speaker, that one of the rules that we should change is the length of Question Period. There are jurisdictions that have 60 minutes for Question Period, 60-minute Question Periods. Mr.

Speaker, I would suggest to you that if 40 minutes is not doing the job that it should be doing in terms of allowing for questions to be asked inside this Chamber, we then have to look at increasing it to 60 minutes. If we are not prepared to increase it to 60 minutes, then maybe we have to sit down and say maybe it is 40-second answers, 40-second questions. Maybe we need to look at limitations in terms of the Leader and the Premier.

You, me and other members of this Chamber have sat down and we have tried to talk about the importance of Question Period ensuring that there is as much decorum inside the Chamber, and that individuals are being provided the opportunity to ask questions. I think, Mr. Speaker, we need to reflect on the past which has clearly indicated whether the Liberal Party has had party status or it has had a single member inside the Chamber, or it has had three members inside this Chamber.

Every year, all the way going to the early eighties, you will see that this Chamber has respected the importance of that voice being heard. When we proceed ahead, I truly believe that that is one of the issues that has to be dealt with. That is the most important rule from our perspective. It is very difficult for us to deal with other rules if we are not being allowed to hold the government accountable. The opposition, and all members of this Chamber have been in opposition, know that it is not just you walk into Question Period and you pose your question.

There is a great deal of effort and energies and resources that are put into the lead-up of posing questions. There is a certain need to feel comfortable in knowing that you are going to be afforded the opportunity to be able to ask that question. Manitobans have the rights to ensure that their representatives at the political parties are, in fact, being represented. Far too often I hear a comment, "Well, you have two members. If you want more questions, get more members elected." Mr. Speaker, compare in some

600 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 jurisdictions that two members have a heck of a lot more weight than what we have here in the province. Who was it that determined that it is four as opposed to two as opposed to one? It is somewhat of an arrogant argument to say that you do not have the required numbers, so therefore you do not have the same sort of rights. We should be looking in terms of what has happened in the province of Manitoba in Question Period prior to the last two sessions, Mr. Speaker. You and I and other members have seen the record.

You know, I can remember Sharon Carstairs as the sole member asking two questions in the Question Period. I cannot recall ever when she missed a Question Period. So I truly believe that members need to reflect on what it is that they believe that this Chamber is here for. We have been consistently arguing that this Chamber needs to be sitting more. There needs to be more accountability. I had what I believe was a very important question that I would have liked to ask. It is important. Well, the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray) in his opening remarks made reference to the deficit.

You know if I read, and to me this is a critically important issue in the province of Manitoba, the apolitical and independent office of the provincial auditor, and I will quote directly from his annual report which states, this is the March 31, 2004, annual report, the government's media communications continue to emphasize operating fund financial statements. This portrays an incomplete and "misleading by omission" picture of the province's financial position and operating results to the citizens of Manitoba.

For example, it is unlikely that Manitobans are aware that the government incurred the second-largest deficit of $604 million. It is a critically important issue. This is the apolitical office who is saying the public are not even made aware. This is a government that has gone out of its way to mislead the public on this issue. We should be afforded the opportunity to hold this government accountable, and in fact if you read between the lines of the provincial auditor, that is even being implied that the opposition members maybe for whatever reasons are not being as effective as they could be.

Is there a coincidence? When the NDP were in opposition they hammered day in and day out of the importance of Question Periods and the Estimates and so forth in terms of accountability, but in government they have changed their opinion on it. We truly believe that ther e is accountability that needs to be had inside this Chamber. We are concerned when we hear about the need to change rules. We support the need to change rules. As time changes there is a need to change rules.

But there are some fundamental principles that have to be adhered to, and a good example is that you ensure that members, no matter what political status that they might have inside this Chamber, their voice is, in fact, allowed to be exercised during the day in and day out process of Question Periods, of bills and so forth. That is nothing new. As I had indicated with Sharon Carstairs, I could talk about Paul Edwards, I could talk about myself back between, I guess it would have been 1995 and 1999, we did not have party status, yet we had a question every day.

I rise today as a grievance to indicate and try to gain a sympathetic ear from members of both caucuses as to why it is that from this point forward I believe that we need to revisit the way in which questions are being asked in Question Period and to immediately have dialogue among the three parties, or the three groupings, inside this Chamber in consultation with you, Mr. Speaker. As of today I see an impasse, but I am an optimist in believing that whether it is the Govern ment House Leader (Mr. Mackintosh) or it is the Opposition House Leader (Mr.

Derkach), that we are going to be able to overcome this impasse. If not, the only recourse that we have is to appeal to you directly and ask, once again, that we look and revisit the issue of Question Period. We do not have to go that far back to find, I believe, that there is something seriously wrong inside this Chamber. I know when we sat in the Rules Committee, the Government House Leader in the formal part of the committee listed off some concerns that he had. I know that the Opposition House Leader listed off some concerns that he had.

If you check Hansard you will see that I, too, listed off some concerns that I had and you will find that Question Period is right up there at the top. * (14:50) What we are asking and suggesting to members of this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, is that we do what we can to resolve what is a bit of an issue, at least for some members of this Chamber, in terms of ensuring that we are properly afforded the

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 601 opportunity as a political factor inside the province of Manitoba, to be able to hold government accountable. For those days that we sit, we should be able to ask a question. There are tens of thousands of Manitobans that have supported the Manitoba Liberal Party throughout the years. This Chamber in the past has respected that. It has afforded other members, other leaders, other individual members even when we did not have leaders elected. They were always afforded the opportunity to ask a question a day.

I am appealing to you and your office and to the government and the Opposition House Leader (Mr. Derkach) to make this issue of the utmost importance. I am hopeful and optimistic, Mr. Speaker, that hopefully within the next 22 hours we will have a more permanent resolution to this matter. With those few words, I thank you for the opportunity to express my grievance. Mr. Speaker: Is the honourable member rising on a grievance? An Honourable Member: No, I am rising on a matter of urgent public importance. Mr. Speaker: I am asking all honourable members: Is there any other grievance? I am still on grievances.

Is there any other grievance? I see none. Then we will move on the business. MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Mr. Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): I rise in my place this afternoon to ask this Legislature, and I seek leave of this House, to set aside the regular business of this Chamber to deal with a matter that is of significant, urgent public importance. Mr. Speaker, I know there are two conditions that have to be met in order to satisfy this matter to be elevated to the matter of an urgent public matter. I would indicate that we have– [interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order.

Before addressing a motion, the honourable member would have to move the motion first. Mr. Derkach: Yes. Therefore, I move, seconded by the member from Lakeside, THAT the ordinary business of this House be set aside under Rule 36(1) to deal with a matter of urgent public importance; THAT being the issue of the hardship being faced by the agricultural industry, rural communities and farm families as a result of the ongoing BSE crisis and the continued closure of the U.S. border to Canadian live cattle and the lack of attention given to the crisis by this NDP government and the Minister of Agriculture (Ms.

Wowchuk); FURTHERMORE, as a result of this NDP government not taking more timely action to ensure adequate processing facilities are in place in this province, farmers and the entire livestock industry find themselves in a state of crisis. Mr. Speaker: I regret to inform the honourable member that the motion he has moved before the House is not the same as the motion I received this morning, so I would now have to ask leave for the honourable member's motion that was tabled, the original one, to be moved in the House. Is there leave? [Agreed] I will ask the honourable member to move the original.

I will share my copy with him. Mr. Derkach: I move, seconded by the member from Lakeside, THAT, in accordance with Rule 36(1), I hereby file advance notice with you that today I intend to raise a matter of public importance on the following topic: the hardship being faced by the agricultural industry, rural communities and farm families as a result of the ongoing BSE crisis, and the continuing closure of the U.S. border to Canadian live cattle. Mr.

Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable Member for Russell, I believe I should remind all members that, under Rule 36(2), the mover of a motion on a matter of urgent public importance and one member from the other party in the House are allowed not more than five minutes to explain the urgency of debating the matter immediately.

Stated in Beauchesne's Citation 390, urgency in this context means the urgency of immediate debate, not of the subject matter of the motion, and remarks that members should focus exclusively on is whether or not there is urgency of debate and whether or not the ordinary opportunities for debate will enable the

602 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 House to consider the matte r early enough to ensure that the public interest will not suffer. Mr. Derkach: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to begin by addressing the urgency of this matter as a condition for a matter of urgent public importance.

It was only days ago that we learned that the border to the United States for live cattle has been closed once again to the farmers and to the entire nation, if you like, and its impact on this country and on this province specifically is more than I think we should be expected to bear as individual producers, who are, I think, doing their job in producing the best livestock in the world. But we have had no other opportunity to debate this matter in this Legislature up until this moment.

I think it is incumbent upon us to not only show our support to the agricultural industry and to the livestock industry in this province by debating this matter here and today, but I think it is a signal that all of us in this Chamber representing Manitobans throughout the width and breadth of this province have a concern about the impact this particular initiative is going to have on all of us.

It is in this Chamber that matters of this kind need to be debated to underline how important these issues are to Manitobans and to ensure that together we move in a direction that will allow for the borders to open or for some other remedial action to be taken to allow our producers to exist. I daresay that, if we do not have this opportunity to be able to debate this matter, to be able to look for solutions, many of our livestock producer s and the cattle industry may disappear from the landscape.

We heard today that, in fact, the R-CALF group is looking at putting a motion forward that would ask for an injunction on boxed beef as well as live cattle. If that happens, our livestock industry will grind to a halt. It is for this reason that I think, as legislators, we need to set aside some time today. We have a budget coming tomorrow, but today we have the time to set some of our precious time aside to debate and to ensure that we explore every possible avenue of trying to rectify this situation.

The federal government, through the Prime Minister, has to have direct access to the President of the United States. I think it is incumbent that this debate be raised to the highest level in this nation, and that means that we have to signal to the Prime Minister that there is a responsibility on his part to talk directly with the President of the United States. At the same time, I think it is important for us to have the opportunity to underscore the importance of this issue with our Premie r (Mr. Doer) and with our Minister of Agriculture (Ms.

Wowchuk) to ensure that they are going to pay attention to this not just today, but tomorrow as they bring forward the budget. We have heard all kinds of signals that, in fact, this could be a good-news budget, and I applaud that because this province needs it. * (15:00) But, Mr. Speaker, if it is that, then we have to do whatever it is we can to ensure that livestock producers in this prov ince, and the livestock industry, will survive this very, very serious crisis, because if we lose this industry, we are not going to lose it for a day or a month, we are going to lose it for a long time. Therefore, Mr.

Speaker, that is the urgency of the matter. In terms of speaking to how quickly this could be raised, this is our first opportunity. Collectively, this is the first time that we have been able to gather since the decision was made to close the border again, and I think it is important that we deal with this very important matter today, this afternoon. I would daresay that if there are members on either side of the House that need more time than this House sits today, I would say, let us extend the hours.

Let us make sure we have the right amount of debate on this matter and that we take a strong message to our producers, to our American friends and, indeed, to the government of the day, as well as to the federal government. So it is for those reasons that I raise the issue. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): We are certainly pleased that the motion originally read by the member was not the correct one, Mr. Speaker, because we would have vigorous concern about what was said out there, but as the matter of urgent public importance properly filed with the Speaker's office is worthy of consideration.

I will say this I think that in even just two days' time, when we are entering on the budget debate, it would be difficult to deal with a MUPI at that time, given rulings of this House, but the budget debate is two days away. We on this side of the House recognize that this is an urgent matter of public importance. This whole cl osure has been extremely

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 603 difficult on the whole community of Manitoba, but of course it has fallen most difficultly on the producers. But it was the news, the good news and the anticipation of the border opening and then the subsequent change of circumstances that has elevated this matter once again to an urgent matter and, I think, has really, indeed, been painful for those who had expectations of getting on with livestock production in the usual course here in the province of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, I think that members on this side of the House feel very strongly that this is a matter that should be discussed today. We would like to have had, in preference, an all-party resolution presented and debated so that we can unite our voice here as 56 or 57 MLAs speaking together, speaking to south of the border, speaking to the federal government. It appears that we have not yet achieved that all-party resolution.

At a minimum, at least through discussion on a matter of urgent public importance, we think that we can turn our mind to an issue that in every way is critical to the well-being of this province, its economy and those of the lives of its producers. In conclusion, we support this being debated. Mr. Speaker, if you would take my comments as an indication of the will of the members on this side of the House to see the matter debated, even if, in other circumstances, it may be somewhat irregular, we support this as a matter of urgent public importance. Mr. Speaker: Order.

Under our rules, to recognize to speak to the MUPI is usually the House leaders of a recognized political party. I see the honourable Me mber for River Heights is up, so I would have to ask leave of the House if they will allow the honour able member to address this. Is there leave? [Agreed] Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise on behalf of the members of the Liberal Party to indicate that we, too, would like to see debate of this urgent matter.

We believe, as it would appear, that the other two pa rties believe that this is indeed an urgent issue that we face in Manitoba, indeed in Canada with a situation where there was an expectation that the border would be opened, but the border was not opened because of a court ruling last week in the United States.

We believe that it is urgent to debate this, not only because of the court ruling and the continued closure of the border but because today we had an announcement from the government that they were going to change their approach to supporting slaughter capacity and that their announcement demonstrates the failure of their policy to add to slaughter capacity during the last two years.

In 22 months, there has been very little progress in adding slaughter capacity and in converting provincially inspected plants to federally inspected plants and therefore it is ve ry important to bring this forward right now to make sure that the public is aware that the provincial government's policy with regard to slaughter capacity has failed for 22 months. Yes, we are pleased that they are ready to change, but such a change clearly should have happened a long time ago, and 22 months after the beginning of this problem is clearly a long time afterwards. There is another reason why this is an urgent matter.

It is clear from the court ruling in the United States that one of the significant issues from the court was that we were not proceeding in Manitoba or in Canada to have full testing of animals over 30 months, let alone other animals. The court judgment was based, in part, on the fact that at this point we still do not know what the incidence is of BSE. I have argued since very soon after May of 2003 that we should have moved in this province to begin such testing, and had we done so we could have, I suspect, made the court think twice about imposing this ban on the export of cattle from Manitoba and from Canada.

I think the federal gove rnment is clearly to blame in this respect as well as the current provincial government for not taking the adequate steps in this regard. Mr. Speaker, it highlights the importance of having this debate today. It is clearly an urgent matter, and we agree strongly with both the Conservative Party and the NDP party that this should be debated today. Mr. Speaker: Order. From what I have heard, the House has agreed that the debate should proceed. Each member wishing to speak may do so for up to 10 minutes. I rule the motion in order. Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: Shall the debate proceed?

604 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 All those in favour, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, say nay. In my opinion, the Yeas have it. The House has agreed that the debate should proceed. Each member wishing to speak may do so for up to 10 minutes. Pursuant to Rule 36(4), the total debate on this matter may not exceed two hours. * * * Mr. Derkach: Mr.

Speaker, before I get into the issue of the BSE crisis, I want to just signal to the House that, although we only have two hours to debate this matter, I know with leave of the House that we can go beyond the two hours. There are a lot of members in this Chamber who have a concern about the seriousness of this matter, and I would propose at this time that if in fact there are more members who wish to speak after two hours this House do consider extending the time for this debate. Having said that, I want to go directly into the issues as I see them with respect to the BSE crisis. * (15:10) Mr.

Speaker, unfortunately, agriculture producers in this province have undergone another blow. Just as we were anticipating that prices could then move upwards and cattle could start moving across the border and then freeing up some additional slaughter capacity for cull cows in this nation, the door was slammed shut on us again. Mr. Speaker, I do not know how much more agricultural producers can withstand. We have looked at grain prices, as a matter of fact, and grain prices in this province an d in this country are down at their lowest in decades.

Just by way of example, I pulled out some sale tickets from grain that was marketed by my father in 1954 and the wheat prices then were higher than they are today. Now, Mr. Speaker, can you believe that our agriculture industry is facing this kind of crisis, depressed prices, when we have all-time highs in fuel prices. We have fertilizer prices that are moving up and farmers are looking at the prospect of putting in another crop. So, Mr. Speaker, we have an issue on our hands and I do not envy the government for the kind of issue that they have to deal with here because it is not easy.

I am going to be the first one to stand and say that this is not an easy matter to deal with because there are other pressures of the treasury as well, but I think we have come to a point in history where we either are going to support our ag industry in an appropriate fashion or we might lose it. I do not want to see our ag industry lost. Mr. Speaker, I have a young family who would love to get involved in the ag industry, but they are afraid.

Every farmer I speak to who is my age, or perhaps a little younger or a little older, who is looking at perhaps turning over his operation to his family cannot do it because we are facing a time of uncertainty, a time of depression, and it is, I hate to use that word, but it is a time of depression, if you like, in our agricultural industry. I want to come back to the BSE issue, Mr. Speaker, because, you know, we can debate the importance of the BSE issue for a long time. Our party put forward a five-point plan. Was it political? Was it to get the government offside?

What we tried to do was look at the needs of agriculture. We looked at what resources the government had and we said, to the best of our ability we think that we can do, collectively, this for our agriculture producers. Now maybe we did not have the broad panoramic view of what should happen in agri- culture, but I can tell you from our experience on this side of the House, from being farmers, from being involved in the industry, from being close to the industry, we thought we were responding to what the agriculture industry out there needed.

Now we received opposition from the govern- ment, that we were short-sighted, that we did not know what we were talking about, but let us lay all of that aside, Mr. Speaker. Today I am happy that the Minister of Agriculture (M s. Wowchuk) put forward a plan today to help the abattoirs in our province at least expand their operations, raise their level to a federally inspected level and be able then to move ahead with processing animals in Manitoba. That is a positive step forward, something we should have done a year ago, but something that maybe this is the second best time to do it and let us move on with it.

I say to the government you have to understand that out there people are desperately looking for

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 605 solutions. They do not care about our political blindfolders, if you like. They want to see solutions. Mr. Speaker, we have Rancher's Choice out there. I can tell you that operation cannot get off the ground with the limited amount of money that is available to it. It is time for us, collectively, to support government and say go out there and put major dollars on the floor. If you have to put the $40 million on the floor to get a processing industry in this province here immediately, do it. Mr.

Speaker, there is another operation that was looking at Neepawa as a site. They do not need money. They have their money raised. What they need is a commitment from us as legislators to backstop, should there be a turnaround and should all of a sudden they find themselves in a pickle because the border has opened and because somebody is manipulating prices, they want us as legislators to be able to backstop that. Secondly, they want infrastructure and that is our responsibility. That is government's respon- sibility.

That is local government's, federal govern- ment's and provincial government's responsibility to make sure that we have the infrastructure in place for the industry to get on with it. I say this is an opportunity. I look at this as an opportunity for the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk), the Premier (Mr. Doer) and all of us as legislators, and we will support, if, in fact, the mi nister goes out there, the Premier goes out there, and says we will put the dollars on the table to make sure that this happens.

We will look after the solutions that perhaps have to come as a result of the amount of money we have invested later. I think all Manitobans would see this as a good move. What does it do for our province, Mr. Speaker? It does several things. Number one, it creates the capacity to process animals that are today sitting in feedlots and have nowhere to go. Number two, it allows us to look for export markets, markets that we will compete with the United States rather than being dependent on the United States to market our product for us.

This is an issue that both the provincial and the federal government have to get their act together on. The marketing is not just a federal responsibility, not just a provincial responsibility, it is both. It is the two levels of government plus the industry coming together and getting out there and marketing our product. I go to Alberta, Mr. Speaker, and I look at the marketing programs they have got there. These are initiated by the cattle industry and by government. It says eat Manitoba beef, eat Alberta beef. When you go to a restaurant, they serve you Alberta beef.

When you go to Manitoba restaura nts, we just serve beef, and we serve Canadian beef. I think it is time that we had to put a label on it. Let us brand our beef. Let us say that it is Manitoba beef. Let us be proud of it. Let us get our chefs' association on board. Let us get our restaurant association on board. Every time we go to the restaurant, let us make sure it is Manitoba beef. Mr. Speaker, that takes an effort, that takes an effort from industry, that takes an effort from agriculture, that takes an effort from all of us as legislators. We put forward a five-point plan.

Now perhaps the government does not want to buy every single point on that five-point plan, and I am not saying that it is gospel, that it should be treated as that, what I am saying is let us open our minds. Let us look at what is good in that five-point plan. Let us take what is good and let us put it to work. The minister did that today. She did that today by announcing that she is going to move ahead with improving our abattoirs, and I commend her for it because that is the right thing to do. The next right thing to do, Mr. Speaker, is putting some cash in the hands of our producers.

Now I know that there has been resistance to this because the government does not see this as a good way of doing it, but, I say it is time to lay aside some of those fears. It is time to put some money into these hands of these producers through a cash advance program. That means that if I have got an animal on my farm that is going to be marketed three months down the road because the border is not open, I can get some cash to feed that animal, than I can get some cash to at least buy some groceries for my family, or pay for some expenses on my farm because that animal is there.

The first call when I go to market that animal, the first call is for that cash advance, just as it is in grain. In other words, if you give me $500 on an animal in my feedlot, the first $500 when that animal sells goes to pay the cash advance. There is nothing wrong with that, Mr. Speaker. Is the government putting up the money for the capital? No, all it is doing is putting up the interest for that cash advance program because that money is coming back. It is no different than the grain cash advance program. So let

606 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 us not be resistant to that. Let us open our minds. Let us do the right thing for the producers out there. Let us get these families to a point where there is less stress. Mr. Speaker, I want to say one other thing. On Friday, I called Bunge Foods who market Canola. The manager there told me, "Len," he said, "I have had more calls this morning on the BSE issue than I have had about Canola." He says it is to the point where I am almost recommending that some of these producers seek help from the stress line. That is how critical it is out there.

He was talking not just about producers in Manitoba. He was talking about producers in Saskatchewan as well, because they are facing the very same thing. So I say to this Premier and I say to this Minister of Agriculture, please do the right thing. Please make sure that we take off our political blindfolders and that we do what is right today for the farmers, the families, the communities and the industry in this province because that is our responsibility as legislators. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. * (15:20) Mr.

Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable First Minister, when the honourable Member for Russell was speaking, he had indicated a desire for the Speaker to ask the willingness of the House that if this debate goes on more than two hours that leave be granted. Order. I have to ask the House that if all members that wish to speak have not concluded their comments, is it the will of the House to exceed the two-hour limit that we are limited by our rules? Is there will of the House for leave? Is leave granted? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Some Honourable Members: No. Point of Order Mr.

Speaker: The honourable First Minister (Mr. Doer), on a point of order. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): You are asking us to make a decision about how much time we should allocate before we get to that point. We are certainly willing to have all members speak, but I think it would be prudent for us to have leave granted at the two-hour mark and at the three-hour mark in a systematic way as we sometimes do in committees, as we sometimes do in this House, as opposed to sort of a blank-cheque leave before we get there. I would strongly suggest that you canvass the House at the two-hour mark.

I guarantee our House will grant leave at that point, and then we can do it in a way that is predictable because this is the most important priority we have. But some of what people are going to do is actually talk to people about the BSE crisis as the day progresses. I would suggest that, Sir. Mr. Speaker: Just for clarification of the House, when any member asks the Speaker to put a request that departs us from the rules, it is my job to put that request and to inform the House that under our rules, the member had asked to extend the debate if there are members wishing to debate it and if it exceeds two hours.

But under our rules, the debate on a MUPI cannot continue past the adjournment hour. If you look at the clock when we started and when we adjourn, there is very little time in between. If the members wish to go beyond the two hours, but under our rules it cannot continue past the adjournment hour so the leave I heard the member asking for was just to continue past the two hours. Under our rules it states that at adjournment hour the MUPI is finished. The honourable Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach), on the same point of order? Mr. Derkach: On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. I think the Premier (Mr.

Doer) does probably have a good point, and if we have to amend it so that it becomes a more practical, more workable approach, then the House would be ready to do that. I know the minister will probably be wanting to meet with members in the livestock industry today so if we can continue the debate, and when we have reached the two-hour mark, then certainly I would be in my chair and prepared to ask for leave at that time, Mr. Speaker, so if we can continue. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Okay. There seems to be agreement that I do not put the request for leave at this time.

What I am hearing and I need the advice of the House is: Prior to two hours expiring, you are asking

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 607 me to put the proposal forw ard for leave if there is a request. The onus will be on you to ask me to put forward asking for leave prior to two hours being up. It is entirely up to you, the members, to put that forward. Also keep in mind that if you are asking for leave to extend the speaking time, under our rules, it still states that the MUPI expires at adjournment time unless you ask leave for that. * * * Mr. Doer: Thank you for your ruling, and thank you to the member from Russell on his resolution before the Chamber today.

I think it is a very timely and helpful resolution. I thought his comments were generally very constructive on this debate, and I actually do believe that the desire for all our producers across all the constituencies of Manitoba is to have, I think the terminology used by members opposite was, "Take our political blinders off and try to do what is best." Now we obviously think that is a good idea, and I know we are trying to balance off what is best in the short term and in the long term with the producers.

I was pleased that the Prime Minister did call today with the other western Canadian premiers and did relay to us his conversation with the President. I think he feels that the President will back Canada's view to open the border. He feels the minister of agriculture in the United States will help back the position of the Canadian producers, and he also feels we will be consulted on legal action that is going to be necessary.

We also agreed that we cannot let some of these statements being made in the United States including sometimes, by the way, the courts in the United States that generally give credence to the argument that the Canadian food supply is unsafe. We cannot allow this kind of statement to exist without being challenged. Unchallenged statements become, some- times, the unfortunate conventional wisdom. Last year Senator Daschle stated that the Canadian beef was unsafe.

Senator Daschle might be eating a hamburger out of the United States that had BSE, because BSE was in the food supply with the one cow that was detected in Washington state. BSE was not in, and never has been to date, in the food supply in Canada, and whether it is a judge in Montana or a senator in Washington, we have got to say it loud and clear, that the Senate was wrong, those senators who said, as Senator Daschle said last year, that our beef was unsafe, are absolutely wrong. Every situation has been detected, has been inspected and has been rejected from the food supply.

That is a fundamental difference from the one case in Washington, and that is why Mike Johanns and other senior American officials know that science is very much on our side. Where the weakness was, I thought, was in the SRMs that two years ago stated that we had to have a policy common to Europe, Japan and Korea on the SRMs.

It was Canada that was saying that the policy on SRMs was going to leave us behind and it was Canada and this minister and other ministers that argued we could not have the European protocol which was identified in a scientific report by the experts, we could not have a two-tier SRM policy that would be bad for the United States in terms of Japan and Korea and would be bad for Canada in terms of the European markets. I am glad that, again, it took right until July 2004 to get that changed and we think that that is positive. Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to our press release.

We are talking about five-point plans and other plans. I recall we actually waited an extra week to incorporate slaughter and marketing in the press release we issued in August of 2003. When we got involved in the initial slaughter capacity, or slaughter subsidy, we recognized very early that that was not working, and we actually amended it to include marketing, slaughter and a subsidy program not based on slaughter but based on feed. We further amended it another additional time to deal with the fact that there was a drought going on in 2003. We actually had slaughter and slaughter capacity early on.

The problem always has been that everybody agrees with slaughter ca pacity, but not everybody signs up for it. The border then opened in August for boxed beef. All of a sudden the slaughter desire slowed down out there. Then the rumour the border was going to open in December of 2003, and then we had the case in Washington, and we went right through 2004 with an unacceptable situation, but at the end of 2004 we had the Ag Minister, again, say the border is going to open for cattle under 30 months.

This is frustrating because the capital and some of the equity commitments that we announced last year, for Rancher's Choice for example, that remains. The announcement made by the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) builds upon the commitments we

608 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 have for Rancher's Choice, but we need also with any slaughter capacity, and that includes the Neepawa plant which I am somewhat familiar with, they are worried about the government being there if they need us. We are worried about cows being there if we need them. We cannot– An Honourable Member: We will have the cows there. Mr. Doer: We can and we will, but we want to get the enrolment level at a sufficient level to ensure that the investment is solid.

Having said that, I agree with many of the statements made by the member from Russell, and I also agree that many of the federal- provincial programs are not agile enough for the producers. One of the areas that we thought we had to deal with was the whole issue of cash, not only for beef producers, but for wheat producers and oil seed producers. Members opposite will know what the tax regime was when they were in office. They know what it was.

They were responsible for the levels of taxation on farmland, and we have taken the first two steps through a rebate program, which is cash in the hand, which we announced last November in the Speech from the Throne. We did not wait for the budget to announce it at the 33 percent and we did not wait for the budget to announce that this budget would be a rebate program of 50 percent of the farm education tax in Manitoba. We did that because we knew people were hurting. We knew people were hurting; we acted. * (15:30) This Minister of Agriculture acted in a positive way for the benefit of producers.

I think the members are right, that we need to have a proper program for our producers in Manitoba. I think we have to have a long-term strategy on the herd size in Canada. I think we need to have a long-term strategy. Some of the interesting parts about the Neepawa plant, as I understand it, they will have less products in the cattle. I think there is a vulnerability for the U.S. feed business, by the way. I think there is a vulnerability down Highway 83, if you will, of the safety of their beef and some of the products that are utilized in the production and the feed lots.

God knows we want to continue to work with one market with the United States, but, if we cannot, I believe our ability to turn our Canadian production around and the safe food and safe beef like Neepawa will provide us greater agility to compete into Japan and Korea.

If we cannot get a market open, there are lots of consumers in the world that have views on materials, and I certainly do not want to undermine the feed lot industry here in Manitoba, but, having said that, we have to deal with the fact the border is closed for live cattle under 30 months, and the only progress we have made is for cattle with the box beef cattle.

We believe that many of the measures that the minister has put in place have been helpful, but nobody on this side of the House is going to say that any one measure has bridged the income loss that cattle producers have felt since the first cow in Alberta was inspected and rejected in May of 2003. All of us know that these measures that have been put in place try to get us to more slaughter, and we are still committed to that. They try to get us to more long-term management of the herd working with other provinces. We would like to have a made-in- Canada and made-in-Manitoba safety marketing strategy.

We have met with the chefs, the hotel industry, the hospitality industry, the health care industry. We have met with people to talk about Manitoba beef. It is not always that easy what looks to be easy. Even in Alberta you can get beef from New Zealand sometimes, and you just cannot understand it. Even big chains– [interjection] I understand that, but I am just saying that it is not that simple. We have put in the loan advance, and when members opposite said the second year was too high, we dealt with it. We dealt with the Drought Assistance Program.

We have lowered the issue of the taxes for the first time ever, and I am pleased to speak on this resolution and I want to thank the member from Russell for putting it forward today. It is very, very timely. Thank you very, very much. Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker. I want to applaud the member from Russell for bringing forward the matter of public importance, the issue about the fact that today was to be a day where there was to be some celebration in Manitoba, and across Canada for that matter, that the border would be open to cattle under 30 months.

We know today that we are standing on

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 609 this MUPI, this matter of public importance, because that is not the case. And so the Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach) has very el oquently argued why we should be debating this issue, and I applaud him for that initiative, as well as the member from Lakeside who has seconded the motion.

I think the reason we bring this issue forward is that it was May 20 of 2003 where our cattle producers in Manitoba woke up as they normally did every day to go out to do the kinds of things that our producers in Manitoba do, and that is to produce the best beef in the world, to supply beef to those countries, to our provinces, to North America to ensure that they had the ability to taste and be a part of what is the best beef in the world. That suddenly was closed to them through no fault of their own, through no doing of their own. So, Mr.

Speaker, they wondered, "What next?" What was going to happen over the fact that this border was closed and the fact that they would have their businesses interrupted? So they, quite rightly so, look to their provincial leaders, their provincial premiers, they look to the federal government, quite rightly so as they should, and basically said, "Where do we go from here?

What are the options that we can do?" I think it is important during this debate that we as legislators, because as we know, governments come and governments go, but one thing is very clear, and that is that the previous government was very, very clear to promote the opportunities of rural Manitoba to diversify, to do different things, to ensure that there was dive rsification throughout the province of Manitoba. In fact, the Member for Russell was a driver behind that because he was the Minister for Rural Development looking at other opportunities.

So what did our producers in rural Manitoba, the entrepreneurs do? They listened and they followed through. They decided that they were going to go out and diversify and do different things. And so I want to make that point, because I think it is important that we as legislators in this House realize that if we ask the rural entrepreneurs to go out and do something different, and they do, and they run into a situation, as we see, that is none of their own doing. It is something that has just been foisted upon them.

Then I believe it is important for all of us in this House to stand and say, "You did what we asked, and now what we must do as legislators is we must be there to support you in your time of need." In fact, I would say that we have used the word "crisis" and perhaps we use it as almost a throwaway term, but it is not a throwaway term. It is, in fact, a very serious crisis.

I would say to the current government, the Doer government, that we saw barbecues taking place here in Winnipeg, taking place in Brandon, great support from the communities to come out and buy our Manitoba beef, to show that we are standing four- square with our producers. That is what we did. Now, the second anniversary happened in Brandon just in the summer pa st, and again there was tremendous support from all elected officials to be out, to be there to help serve, to help promote that industry.

But underlying that second annual barbecue in Brandon was the very reason that I believe that we are here debating this issue, and that is that our producers are suffering, and there is nothing being done in real terms to solve the issues that our producers are expecting from the government of the day. I know that we, six months ago as a party, said, "We have got to come up with a plan. We have got to come up with something that we can bring forward to the Legislature." And we did.

It is not perfect, we admit that, but we came forward with a five-point plan that addressed what we were hearing from producers, and that is that we need to increase slaughter capacity immediately. We need a short- term solution and a long-term solution, and so our five-point plan. I think the important part of our five- point plan is that we did not ask the current government to spend any more money than they themselves had committed to this issue, to this crisis.

They talked about $180 million, and they themselves indicated that they had put around $100 million or so into the program, so it left some $80 million. That was the basis on which we brought forward our five- point program. We ask that there be money put into building a slaughter facility. Now, I understand that members opposite might say, "Did I hear the Leader of the Opposition correctly? Did he say that government should go out and build something?" Well, I come back to my initial point. The answer is, yes, I said that. The question is why.

Because we believe, on this side of the House, that there is a crisis in the province of Manitoba with our producers. I always believe, and I have not been in public life for as long as some of the members in government have, but surely there has to be a sense that if there is a crisis in our society, in our province, is it not the role of

610 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 government to help families in times of crisis? That surely must be the underpinning reason that we are sitting debating this issue. I know that in the flood of '97, the government was there because there was a crisis in the province of Ma nitoba. I know also that when there was extra flooding the former govern- ment was there to help the families because there was an issue of a crisis. * (15:40) Here we are, Mr.

Speaker, close to two years with this border just being slammed shut on producers, again through no fault of their own, and we do not see the current government helping those producers. Yes, they have talked about programs. Yes, they have had announcements, but why is it, as recently as Friday, when we went to the Winnipeg Auction Mart, that we were listening to producers who were saying, well, yeah, we have got a program all right, and there are forms to fill out for these programs, but when we fill out the forms and if we make one slight error, we get rejected. Mr.

Speaker, there is no sense of saying wait a minute. Again, is this not a crisis? If it is, then we should be there to support our producers in every way we possibly can. So, if there is a little misunderstanding, we will ensure that we are there to get this thing through, on time, so that you can get the kind of assistance that you need, but we do not hear that from the current government. I think that is why all our producers in Manitoba are very frustrated, because they hear announcement after announcement but there is nothing to really meaning- fully help the producers.

That is why in our five- point plan we were very clear and we said, and I say again today, six months ago we tried to say to the current government, "Look, this is about making Manitoba a better place. This is about understanding that we have got a serious crisis in the province of Manitoba." Let us not talk about any parties or any politics. Let us talk about how we as legislators can work together to ensure that our industry is supported, Mr. Speaker.

So we would have been delighted if the current government would have said, "Well, you know, we might have some issues with your five- point plan." We have acknowledged that it is not perfect, but our concern was to ensure immediate slaughter capacity and to ensure that there was a plan for the future for our producers in Manitoba, so that issues like the seventh of March, when we know that the border is supposed to open, but in fact we know that the Americans are a litigious society. They are always going to court over some issue. That is nothing that we can help.

What we can help is that we can ensure that we have something in place for our producers, so that if the border does not open next week or the week after, and we hope it does, we really hope it does, that has got to be the ultimate answer for all of us, but in the meantime, what do producers do day-in, day-out? They hope and they pray and their frustration is boiling over because it is not enough to hope and pray anymore. They have done that, they have done that, they have done that and nothing has changed. So, Mr. Speaker, I stand before this House, saying that this issue is as a crisis.

If we believe it is a crisis, then we will move mountain and earth, we will ensure that any regulations to proceed to ensure that we have proper slaughter capacity here in the province of Manitoba, that we get it done properly, that we do not dither any longer, that we take action on behalf of our producers in Manitoba. We say it in the Legislature, that they are the best producers in Canada. Let us stand and ensure that we not only talk about it, but that we show some action. I ask the Doer government that we start today to do exactly that. Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Hon.

Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise today to talk about this important issue, and the member from Russell brought this urgent matter of public importance forward, we were looking at how we could bring an all-party resolution forward, where we could all support a resolution.

The Conservatives were there to support us, because what we really wanted was to put in place a resolution that would spell out what our concerns were and what direction we thought that we could be taking as a provincial government, what direction we could send to the federal government, and send a united voice from the Manitoba Legislature that we were all in support of standing strongly behind our producers on this important issue. Unfortunately, we did not get support from all sides of the House, from all members, so that meant

March 7, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 611 that we are now talking about a matter of urgent public importance, but let us proceed with this issue as it is. I have to say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that when the news came on Wednesday that the border was not going to open, it was a huge disappointment for– Point of Order Mr. Deputy Speaker: Opposition House Leader. Mr. Derkach: I apologize to the Minister of Agriculture. I do not want to put her on the spot, but I rise on a point of order because, Mr. Deputy Speaker, she said that she did not get support for the resolution.

It was our understanding on this side of the House that we were prepared to go into the debate on that resolution, and, certainly, we would support the resolution as well. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Differences of opinion are not points of order. * * * Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am pleased that we have this resolution but– An Honourable Member: A point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Point of Order Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think it is very important to clarify this issue from all parts of the House. The minister is talking about a resolution which has not even been presented to the House.

We have not had an opportunity to say yes or no, quite frankly. It was a last minute resolution which we were told about, and quite frankly, when we are done with the MUPI, if there is time, then we will wait for the minister's resolution, but right now, we are debating the MUPI. I think we should proceed on the MUPI. Mr. Deputy Speaker: There is no point of order. Let us proceed with the debate. * * * Ms. Wowchuk: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. There is a disagreement on whether we had a resolution.

I know that there are members of the House that commented and I thought we had some agreement, but since we cannot come forward with an all-party position on a motion, we are here debating the MUPI and I believe that that is very important. I wanted to say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that it was a great disappointment for me when I heard that the border was not opening because there had been a tremendous amount of hope built up by our producers. Prices had started to come up based on sales. There were people that were filling out all their forms. In fact, that is where a lot of emphasis was being placed on.

How are we going to make sure that we can get all the right paperwork so that we can get back to some normal trade again. Unfortunately, that did not happen. It just makes you wonder how one judge in one state can make a ruling that will change the whole policy of the U.S. government. We have the assurance of the Secretary of Agriculture, and the President has indicated to the Prime Minister that they are going to move forward on this. This outlines very clearly the challenges that we have and why it is very important that we move forward with the repositioning strategy that we talked about.

A strategy that will increase our slaughter capacity, and a strategy that will help us develop new markets as well as other programs to help farmers as they keep their farm animals on the farm for a longer period of time. The members opposite talk about their five-point plan that they brought forward six months ago. Well, I can tell you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we brought forward a plan. We recognized well over a year ago that slaughter capacity was an issue, and we put in place programs that would help to increase slaughter capacity in this province. We have to continue to work in that vein.

We have to continue to work to move from provincial slaughter capacity to federal slaughter capacity becaus e there is beef being imported into this country, into other provinces that we cannot sell from Manitoba because we only have one federally inspected plant. We have to continue to work in that vein to ensure that we move Manitoba beef into many other markets. * (15:50) Others have talked about the need to market Manitoba beef, and certainly there have been programs in that vein where we have worked with the restaurant industry to get more Manitoba product

612 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 7, 2005 into Manitoba restaurants. The first program was for beef. The last program that we just announced is for all ru

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	38-3-14
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	38th 3rd hansardpdf 14.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	2bdb860e2166ff9bcf362519a8303b7c95de3f17

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