Manitoba Hansard — 27 July 1993 (Sitting 110, 35th Legislature, 4th Session)

35-4-110

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Fourth Session ·Thirty- Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 42 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLII No.110 • 1:30 p.m., TUES DAY, JULY 27,1993 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty- Fifth Legislatur e Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CE RILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEW AR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME , Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIE SEN, Jean GAUDRY,Neil GI LLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis HE LWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER, Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REI MER, Jack RENDER , Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conr ad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE , Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WASYL YCIA-L EIS, Judy WOW CHUK, Rosann Vacant Vacant Vacant CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington River Heigh ts Radisson Kildonan Ste.

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

Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

6022 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, July 27, 1993 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRE SENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPE CIAL COMMITTEES Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Nin th Re port of the Standing Com mi ttee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Your Standing Commi ttee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources presents the following as its Ninth Report.

Your comm ittee met on Tuesday, July 20, 1993, at 7 p.m., Wednesday, July 21, at 9 a.m. and 7 p.m., and Thursday, July 22, at 9 a.m. in Room 255 and Monday July 26, at 9 a.m. in Room 254 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred: Your committ ee heard representation on bills as follows: Bii141- The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendm ents Act ; Loi concernant les pares provi nciaux et ap portant des mo difications correlatives a d'autres lois Robert Harbottle - Private Citizen Steve Masson - Granges Incorporation Armand Boulet - Lumber and Saw Workers' Union William Burbidge - Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Co.

Ltd. and Northern Manitoba and Saskatchewan Prospectors and Developers Association John Phillips - Private Citizen Gary Harbottle - Private Citizen Edna Harbottle - Private Citizen Bob Yatkowsky - Private Citizen Anthony Hyrorchuk - Interlake Quota Holders Association Glenn Hibbert - Private Citizen Peter Thurston - North Eastern Sustainable Developmen t Association Alice Cham bers - Private Citizen Bria n LePoudr e - Mani toba Park s & Recreation Association John McFarland - Private Citizen Margaret Kapinga - Friends of Oak Hammock Marsh Donna Derenchuk - Cana da Parks and Wilderness Society Freda Roj otte - Private Citizen Harvey Williams - Time to Respect Earth's Ecosyste ms Lindy Clubb - Sierra Club of Western Canada Ted Batchelor - Cominco Limited Ray Rybuck - Association of Private Land Owners in Manitoba Provincial Parks Ivan Balenovic - President, Manitoba Timber Quota Holder s Association Brian Pannell - Canadian Bar Association, Manitoba Branch, Environmental Law

Section lan Greaves - Private Citizen Walter Matlashewski - Private Citizen Herb Peters - Private Citizen Heinrich Mayer - Private Citizen Carol Willson - Private Citizen Barney Ko vacs - Mi nin g Association of Manitoba Lyla Shin gleton - Private Citizen Walter Kucharczyk - Private Citizen Walter Burdeny - Private Citizen Glen Pinnell - Abitibi Price Vincent Keenan - Private Citizen Kelly Sharpe - Private Citizen Sharon and Jack Coote - Private Citizens Gordon Hanson - Private Citizen Henr y Ostrows ki - Mayor of Powerview Dave Nickarz - Private Citizen

6023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 Nick Carter - Private Citizen Joe Melnick - Private Citizen Alison Elliot - Manitoba Wilderness Caucus (On behalf of the Endanger ed Spaces Campaign) Paul Nagerl- Falconbri dge Limited Bruce Sams on - Whi teshell District Association Inc.

William Pruitt - Private Citizen Christine Singh - Coalition to Save the Elms Margaret Pilloud - Private Citizen Don Sullivan - Choices John Jacobson - Private Citizen Diane Cox - Private Citizen Gord Pazerniuk - Private Citizen Leonard Lewandoski - Private Citizen Hendrik Herfst - Defending of Nopiming Joe Kelly - Private Citizen Jean-Phill ipe Sourisseau - Club Sierra de I' ouest Canadian Laird Crawford - Private Citizen Gayle Stilkowski - Private Citizen Jack McMahon - Private Citizen Written Submissions: Robin E. Carpenter and Mary Carpenter - Private Citizens Elen M.

Carpenter - Private Citizen William Ferreira - Private Citizen Mary J. Carpenter - Private Citizen Steve J. Lesavage - Private Citizen Bruce Dunlop - The Prospectors Association of Manitoba Elizabeth R. Sellick - Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties Judith and Claude Hutton - Private Citizens Doreen Ander - Private Citizen Ge rald and Marlene Johns on - Pr iv ate Citizens Gordon and Donalda Gale - Private Citizens Kathy Sangster and Susan Lorden - Private Citizens Wes A. Jones - Private Citizen Margaret A. Reid and R. 0.

Hayes - Private Citizens James Barabash - Private Citizen Harvey Ander - Private Citizen Jor ma Hannila - lnco Lim ited , Manitoba Division Your commi ttee has considered: Biii 41- The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendmen ts Act ; Loi concernant les pares provinciaux et ap por tant des mo di ficat ions correl atives a d'autres loi and ha s agreed to report the sam e with the following amendments: MOTION: THAT

section 5 be amended (

a) by striking out the part of the

section preceding clause (

a) and substituting "In accordance with park classifications and land use categories, the purposes of a provincial park system include the following"; and (

b) by striking out "and" at the end of clause (c), and by striking out clause (d). MOTION: THAT clause 7(2)(

a) be amended by striking out "large" and substituting "representative". MOTION: THAT clause 24(1 )(

c) be amended by striking out "in the opinion of the officer". MOTION: THAT the

Preamble be amended (

a) by striking out "AND WH ERE AS" and substituting "WH EREAS"; and (

b) by adding the following at the end of the

Preamble: AND WHERE AS a system of provincial parks will contribute to the province's goal of protecting 12% of its natural regions; All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Laurendeau: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by th e hono urable member for Niak wa (Mr. Reimer), tha t the report of the com mittee be received. Motion agreed to. ***

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6024 Mr. Jack Reimer (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Economic Development): Mr. Speaker, by leave, I beg to present the Eleventh Report of the Standing Comm ittee on Economic Developmen t. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Niakwa have leave to present the repo rt? [agreed] Mr. Cl erk: Your St anding Comm ittee on Economic Development presents the following as its Eleventh Report. Your comm ittee met o n Monday, July 26, 1993, at 7 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred.

Yo ur comm ittee adopted at its July 26, 1993, 7 p.m. meeting the following motion: MOTION: THAT the committee limit the presentations and questions to a total maximum of 20 minutes per presenter. Your committ ee heard representation on bills as follows: Bill 42- The Liquor Control Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia reglementatio n des alcools et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois Leslie King · Private Citizen Stephen Roznowsky - Private Citizen John Read and Randy McNichol - Manitoba Hotel Association Larry Jocelyn - Gordon Hotels and Motor Inns Limited Leo Ledohowski - Hospitality Corporation of Manitoba, Inc.

George Bergen - Private Citizen John Ford - Private Citizen Daryl Silver and Keith Martin - Private Citizens Keith Pierce - Manitoba Distillers Council Peter Olfer t - Mani toba Gove rnment Employees Union Wes Zieske - Private Citizen Debbie Spence - Social Planning Council of Winnip eg Ray Benoit - Private Citizen Dale Neal - Private Citizen Michael Moore - Manitoba Restaurant and Food Services Association Weiland Ritcher - Private Citizen Peter Ch oate - Alber ta Dis ti llers Lim ited (Calgary) Angie Losce rbo - Osborne Aorists Ltd. Henry Loewen - Conference of Menno nites of Manitoba Chris Contant - C.C.

Biggs Restaurant and Bar Written Submission: George Tsou ras - Private Citizen Your comm ittee has considered : Bill 42- The Liquor Control Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifian t Ia

Loi sur Ia reglementation des alcools et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois and has agreed to report the sam e with the following amendments: MOTION: THAT proposed

section 1 0, as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by adding the following as clause 1 0(1 )(d) : (

d) req uir ing the giving of notifica tion to consum ers purchasing liquor at retail for consumption at a place oth er than the place of sale ab out the pote ntial health hazar ds associ ated with the consum ption of liquor, including the pote ntial damage to a foetus, and presc ribing the form and content of such notice and the circumstances in which it is to be given. MOTION: THAT

section 24 be amend ed by strik ing out "C lause 79(1)(c)" and substituting "Clause 79(c)". MOTION: THAT

section 31 be amended (

a) by striking out clauses (

d) and (e); (

b) by renumbering the

section as subsection 31 (1 ); and (

c) by adding the following subsection after subsection 31 ( 1 ) : 31

(2) The following subsection is added after subsection 96(3): Licensed premises 96(4) For the purposes of subsections (2) and (3), "licensed premises" includes any parking lot that is owned or leased by the licensee or is otherwise under the control of the licensee.

6025 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 MOTION: THAT

section 44 of the Bill be amended by adding the following after the proposed subsection 148(2) : Appli cation of by-laws to specialty wine stores 148(2.1) The pro visions of a by-law of a municipality under this Part that have the effect of prohibiting a liquor store in the municip ality are deemed to apply to a specialty wine store with such modifications as the circumstances require. MOTION: THAT

section 46 be amended by striking out "1 72,". MOTION: THAT Legislative Counsel be authorized to change all

section numb ers and in ternal refe rences necessary to carry out the amendments adopted by this committee. All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Reimer: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon ourable member for St. Norber t (Mr. Laurendeau), that the report of the comm ittee be received. Motion agreed to. *** Mrs. Louise Dacquay (Chai rperson of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Co mmit tee of Supply has adopted a resolution regarding Capital Supply, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr.

Sveinson) , that the report of the commi ttee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPO RTS Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Annual Repor t of The Discrimi natory Business Practices Act for the fiscal year 1992-93. *

(1335) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Cabinet Shuffle Request Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the acting Premier. There are fewer people, in fact 1 0,000 fewer people, working today in Manitoba than there were when the government took office in June of 1988. The education system in this province is in a state of chaos, and our health care system is in even more chaos with the Conservative government of the day in power.

Even mor e disconcerting to all of us and to many Manitobans is the fact that this government, over the last seven or eight months, has proceeded on an agenda that has been tot ally unfair to the people who are most vulnerable in this pro vince, whether it is the silencing of the antipoverty organizations, whether it is the cutbacks and reductions of support in home care, whether it is reducing the grants to the Indian and Metis Friendship Centres, whether it is cutting back on ACCESS and New Careers and putting that money into corporate training, and on and on and on.

This is a government that has a lot of unfair ministers on its front benches, in its government today. I would like to ask the Deputy Premier: Will he be recom mending to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) that there be a cabinet shuffle immediately and that [i nterjection) We ll, you know, we seem to be missing someb ody here today, but I cannot talk about that, because it is unparliamentary. Will this government be changing its ministers after this session is comp leted to give the people of Manitoba some people who are fair, new and fresh, rather than the old, unfair faces across the way? Hon.

James Downey (Dep uty Premi er) : Mr. Speaker, at the outset , I am not prepared to accept any of the prea mble which the Leader of the Opposition has put on the record. Mr. Speaker, this prov ince and this country have been faced with extrem ely diffic ult fin ancial situations over the past few years, with not only a national but an international recession which we are all dealing with. One looks at the difficult decisions that not only Manitoba ns have had to make through their governme nt-a nd I say through their government because we are trustees for the taxpayers of this pro vince.

It is not personal money we are directing or are dealing with. It is on behalf of the taxpayers of Manitoba whom we are entrusted to look after, as are the governme nts of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and the Maritimes. Very

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6026 difficult decisions have to be made on behalf of those people. Our criteria, Mr. Speak er, has been one of maintaining the essential services in this pro vince -hea lth care, education services and family needs through the Family Ser vices programs. Those have been and ar e our pri ority areas for maintaining support for communities and families. On the economic front, there have been many initiatives, Mr. Speaker.

I am disappointed that the Leader and the members of the opposition have never been positive about the economic agenda we are developing and will develop in this provi nce. As far as his recomm endations on a cabinet shuffle, Mr. Speaker, I have to be quite honest. I see it as a possible conflict of interest and would not want to enter into that area. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, in terms of fairness, we also see the action of the go ver nmen t that promis ed us no new taxes during the last election -read my lips, no new taxes-and then, just like George Bush, broke its own promise.

He broke his own promise, and the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) own briefing no tes say that ta x incr eases wer e equivalent to a 5. 7 percent increase in the personal income tax of Manitoba. More of a concern to us is the fact that those taxes were not a challenge to share the pain, as the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) had indicated, but rather a tax incr ease through proper ty tax credits that meant people in Tuxedo paid a 1 per cent tax incr ease, people on Wellington Crescent paid a 1.3 percent tax increase and people in the north end , in St.

James, in the Dauphin areas paid an 8 or 9 percent increase in their property tax credit. That is the sharing of the pain the Tory way, Mr. Speaker-cut the most vulnerable and tax the most vulnerable. That is the Tory way. I would like to ask the Deputy Premier: Will he be recomm ending that they shuffle this old, tired, eco nomic deck to get us jobs and fairness in this pro vince, rather than the status quo that is failing the people of this province? •

(1340) Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, let me at the outset say this to the Leader of the Opposition, who sat in a government that saw Manitoba in the lead in the nation as it relates to taxes on the people of Manitoba. Our personal income tax at 54 percent was reduced by this governmen t to 52 percent. An opposition party that purports to be supportive of the labour movement in this country-major, major tax imposition known as the payroll tax put on the jobs of the people of Manitoba. In fact, it was a jobs tax imposed by the Leader of the Opposition. We have been reducing that.

In fact, I believe there are some 70 percent of businesses in all of Manitoba that now have had that remo ved from them . Mr. Speaker, the sales tax-who was the last gov ernment in this province to increase the sales tax rate in Manitoba? The New Democratic Party of which he was a member. We have maintained the tax level on the people of Manitoba and have taken the tough decisio n of red ucing the expenditures of services to the people of Manitoba thr ough tax cu ts and through contro lled expenditures. I think the people of Manitoba, yes, they have some disagreements but are not tota lly unhappy.

He calls us a tired old bunch. I tot ally disagree. We are a vigorous, young cabinet and cauc• •s ready to govern to the year 2000. Minister of Health Replacement Request Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition) : They are not tota lly unhappy-a mere heartbeat away. What can we say? Mr. Speaker, this whole cabinet needs a heart transplant because they have no heart at all, and they need a brain transplant to go along with it, too. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw those com ments. Mr. Speaker, we have a Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) who loves to fight. He loves to debate. He loves to disagree. He loves to deny.

But his style, his bom bastic style of picking a fight with seniors, with the disabled, with the heads of seniors wards in hospitals, picking a fight with doctors, with nurses, with patients, having a reform package and then having to bring in an American consultant to really tell him what reforms and cutbacks to bring in, has been an absolute disaster for the people of Manitoba . I would like to ask the Deputy Premier, the acting Premier in the absence-1 cannot state that. It is unparliamentary, so I will not. I would like to ask the Deputy Premier today on behalf of the seni ors and disabled and oth er

6027 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 Manitobans who are vitally concerned about their health care syste m today: Will he give us his com mitment and the government's commitmen t that when this Hou se comes back, we will not have the same Minister of Health, that we will have a new Minister of Health who will build partnerships with the people of Manitoba? *

(1345) Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier): Let me, at the outset-and I do not know whether I will get another opportun ity, and with your gener ous endurance, Mr. Speaker, and mem bers of the House-l would like to say that I can only use this example, and tha t is that the Leader of the Oppositi on-and I say this with respect to the former critic for the Department of Health who, I understand, probably will be leaving this House.

She is leaving this House, as are one or two other members, at least one we know of, and I want to wish them well in a meaningful way, in their trying to get through that bottomless pit they are going to try to cross to the next House of Commons. I say genuinely, good health and limited good luck in their next endeavour. But I say genuinely, they have made a con tribution to this House, and I respect them as memb ers of the Legislature. Now, having said that, Mr. Speaker, I think the ability of our Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) has been demons trated by the fact that the Leader of the Opposition had to change critics, that there was not an ability to get, in any way, the point that the Minister of Health was not doing a good job and is not doing a good jo b. We are com mitted, Mr. Speaker, to ensuring the longevity of the health care needs of the people o f Manitob a through the reforms that are being put in place. It is very popular in any political arena to continue to spend and tax and spend and tax and keep delivering additional programs.

These are toug h decisions, and I believe ou r Minister of Health has delivered these programs very responsibly and at the end of the day has told the truth to the peo ple of Manitoba. Minister of Health Replacement Request Mr. Dave Cho mlak (KIIdonan): Mr.

Speaker , almost every single action in the health care field undertaken by this government in the last six mon ths has been to tally contrary to th e gover nment's own health care reform package, be it the ped iatrics conso lidation to Chi ldren's Hospital , be it user fees and ostomy supplies or home care supplies, or be it the cutbacks to the home care maintenance program or the Chi ldren's Dental Progr am, all contrary to their own plan. My ques tion for the De puty Premier, Mr. Speaker: Will they stop blaming the critics?

Will they stop blaming the messengers, take a look at this minister and before they allow him to do any more havoc, because there is a lot more havoc that could be wrought on the health care system by this minister, before that happens, step in, replace him and listen to the people o ut there in the community, be it the MMA, be it the nurses or be it the patients who kno w the truth abo ut what this mi nister is doing? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I think that per chance, this might be the last Question Perio d that maybe my honour able friend is critic, because I have gone through four of them in the NDP, and maybe he is the next one to leave. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that I give a quotation to the House, and we will not have the normal guessing game as to who said this. I will tell you who said this. This is Premier Bob Rae out of Ontario. Premier Bob Rae says, quote : What passes for policies in o pposition is simply the articulation of grievance, and the articulation of gr ievance does not m ake a program for a government.

That, Sir, is why I have said consistently through four critics of the NDP, do not tell us what you are against, tell us what you are for, because in today's environment, whether you govern in the pro vince of Manitoba and have respo nsibility for the Ministry of Heal th in this pro vince, or in Ontario or in Saskatchewan or in Alberta or in New Brunswick, you have to make difficult decisions.

You can disagree with those decisions, but I remind Manitobans who are watching this Question Period that the member for Kildonan will not stand up and commit today at his last opportunity in this session tha t he would re instate all of those programs that he is so egregious about. He will not reinstate one single decision. All he is doing is articulating grievance, telling us what he is against, but never will he tell us what he is for.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6028 Mr. Chomlak: Mr. Speaker, the mi nister knows we would fire Connie Curran tomorrow and put that mo ney right back in to dir ec t patient care , something he is refusing to do. Health Care System Reform Consultations Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): My supplemen tary to the Deputy Premier: Why is it that it is the head of the MMA, it is the head of geriatrics at St. Boniface, it is the head of geriatrics at Health Sciences Centre, it is the nurses, it is the patients, it is the Ontario provi nce, it is everyone else, Mr. Speaker, but not that mi nister who is wrong?

Everyone in the world is wron g, but not that minister. Will the Deputy Premier step in and before he wreaks any more havoc, at least talk to these critics-he does not have to talk to us- talk to the head of geriatrics at St. Boniface, talk to the head of geriatrics at Health Sciences Centre and all the ot hers? Will he at least do that before- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. *

(1350) Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, we have had the one single solution again advanced by my honourable friend the New Democ rat: Cancel a $3.9-million contract. You know what that does? That operates our hospitals for one and one-half days this year-one and one-half days. Now, Mr.

Speaker, what is my honourable friend the New Democrat going to do for the other 363 and a half days, wherein at the end of this process, we expect to have savings without compromising patient care, with prov iding more care by nurses, a saving of a minimum of $45 million every single year in two hospitals alone? That is $45 million that can be used to provide more surgery, that can provide more home care, that can be used to prov ide mor e ed uca tion, mo re economic developmen t supp ort.

It can even be used to reduce the deficit if government so chooses, or it can be used to stop raising taxes , as is the penchant for New Democrats. So my honourable friend's solution provides one and a half days of operation at our hospital in one year, no longer a solution. Mr. Chomlak: Mr. Speaker, they promised that in their health care plan before they brought in their big, hig h-pr iced , $3.9 -mill ion plus $800, 000 expenses tax-free U.S. consultant. They promised that before this. My final supplementary to the Deputy Premier, who has not answered any of the questions to the Premier (Mr.

Filmon), who has refused to answer any questions about this Minister of Health: Will the Deputy Premier at least undertake, before the major changes and all of the reports that are coming out in August and September when we are out of session, to talk to people in the health care syst em , the pa ti ents, the do ctors and the caregivers, not to listen to this minister but talk to the people who really know what is going on in health care? Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, in that very skillful articulation of grievance the New Democ rats are so skillful at in oppositi on, I want to indicate to my honourable friend that we are talking to doctors. Contrary to the allegations of the doctors' union and the president of the doctors' union, there are 41 comm ittees studying health care refo rm, and there are 171 physicians on those commit tees-1 71. That works out to more doctors as a percent of their profes sion than any other single profe ssion.

There are a number of nurses involved in those comm ittees, hospital admin istrators involved in those com mittees, citizens in volved in those comm ittees, the Manitoba Hea lth Organization involved in those comm ittees, and, Sir, the reports that come through and the recomme ndations we accept will make sens e bec ause they will be recommended to us, exam ined beforehand by profes sionals in health care delivery. Now, I know my honourable friend the New Democratic critic will still criticize every single one of them, but he will not offer a single alternative that will work.

Immigration Polley Selection Criteria Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Premier. Tomorrow, the Prime Minister arrives to visit with our Premier. I note that it is reported that one of the very select, few important issues the Premier will be raising has to do with immi gr ation. The Province of Manitoba apparently wants a say in

6029 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 imm igration to t he pro vince, and a quote, albeit attached to simply an unnamed spoke sman, is that the province wants to select immig rantfl with special skills. Now , Mr. Spea ker, that is a reversal of the position put forw ard by the Minister responsible for Multiculturalism, who has said on many occa sio ns she does not favour such restrictions. It also pos es a severe thre at to the ma ny thousands of Manitobans who are applying under the Family Reunif ication Program to be joi ned with the ir relatives from around the world.

Can the mi nister or the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) indicate today whether or not that indeed is a policy of his govern ment, to impose special skills and requirements heretofore not put in place for imm igration , and can he table what the new criteria are going to be, Mr. Speaker? •

(1355) Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we are in ongoing negotiations and talks with the federal government looking toward more control ove r immigration for Manitoba by the Province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, it is in all areas.

Refugees, of course, are strictly a federal responsibility, but family reunification and those who can come here to help fill the job skills and sho rtages that Manitobans have when there are jobs and there is no one avai la ble to do those job s her e in Manito ba-we want to be able to more proactive ly recruit those who can come into Manitoba. We still have major concern over ensuring that those who are coming here for family reunification have access in an expeditious way. Mr.

Edwards: As the minister well knows, quo tas are assigned and if you give to one area, there is going to be a result, a reduction in another area.

I want to rem ind the minister of her comment June 18, 1992, wherein she said: "I have said many, many times that I share the concerns of any policy that might discriminate against any person that might want to be coming to our country to fill job skills or just to imm igrate for whatever reasons." Can the mi nister indicate whether or not she stands by thos e word s and, if not, if we are changing, can she table what the new criteria for immigr ation to this pro vinc e are going to be, beca use tha t is of utmost importance to the thousands of immi grants cu rr ently, rece nt immig rants in this pr ov in ce , who want to be reunited with their families and are applying under the existing criteria for immi gration to this country?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, of course I stand by those wor ds. We do not want to discriminate here in Manitoba against anyone who wants to imm igrate through a process. Mr. Speaker, what we want to do in Manitoba is get our fair share of immigrants, and we all know by the num bers that Mani toba's numb ers of imm igrants have be en decr easing and that, proportionately, our fair share should be around 4 percent of those who immigrate to Canada. Mr.

Speaker, we w ant to ensure through an imm igration agreement that we have some control over expeditiously allow ing those to come to fill job shortages, with jo b skills that are not here in Manitoba, and we also want to expeditiously try to accomm odate those who are com ing here for family reunification. Ther e are several dif feren t classes of immi grants.

I have already indica ted that the refugee class will always be a responsibility of the federal government, but where we can try to gain mo re control and try to get our fair share of com pensation from the federal government for those who are coming to Manitoba, we want that contr ol, and we will move forward as quickly as we pos sibly can to negotia te an immi gr ation agreement with the federal govern ment. Mr. Edwards: I have yet to hear from the minister, Mr.

Speaker, whether or not this government is indeed moving toward a selection process, as indicated, that they want to select imm igrants with special skills based on the Quebec-type model, where those restrictions are put in place. Will the minister table today what the selection criteria are going to be, or will she repudiate that statement? What does this province want, and on what basis are they intending to select imm igrants? Can she be clear for the thousands of people who want to know that, who currently are applying to be reunited with their families around the world? Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr.

Speaker, it seems that the Leader of the Second Opposition is either not hearing or not understanding my answers. I am not quite sure where he is coming from .

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6030 I have indicated that there are different classes of immig rants who come to Canada. There is the refugee clas&-and I will repeat it again because he does not seem to quite be able to get it- there is the refugee class that the federal government will have comple te control over. There is the family reunification class, and that class will still receive the same type of accomm odation as they have in the pa st, but we would lik e to be able to accomm odate those who are trying to reunite as a family as expeditiously as possi ble.

So I want to assure those immigrants that we are not changing that in any way. What we want to be able to do is, yes, to select those who can come to Manitoba with credentials that can accomm odate their being able to work in the same type of occupation they worked at in their homelands. That is why we have the immigr ant credentials branch within the division of Citizenship that is trying to work to accomm odate that. *

(1400) Home Care Program Housekeeping Guideli nes Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St. Johns): First, let me thank the acting Premier for his good wishes in my future career as an M.P. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, let me indicate that I leave here with a great deal of worry and concern about the future of our health care system, something that has preoccupied me for the last three years, and particularly worried about the well-being of our senior citizens who are seeing the most quality progr am , internat ionally acclaimed program go down the tubes-the cuts to home care by this Minister of Health and this government.

I want to ask the Minister of Health if he will not acknowledge that any ina ppropri ate care, any abuse under the home maintenance program of Home Care could be addressed quite adequately through following the guidelines now set out under the Conti nuing Care Program through regular assessments. Will he sim ply assure us he will deal wit h concerns by following those guidelines? Hon. Donald Orchard {Minister of Health) : Mr. Speaker, that is exactly, precisely what we are doing, and I want to remind my honourable friend as to when those guidelines on domestic services, laundry and cleaning, came into place.

They came into place in 1984 when my honourable friend sat around Howard Pawley's cabinet table. They have been implemented in 1985 and on, and what we are doing today is very consistent with my honourable friend's policy guidelines that she put in place, that she endorsed, that she agreed to in 1985. The only thing that has not changed in the five years, except for critics of the NDP in Health, is their me thod of raising issues, because my honourable friend will recall that to raise this great fear campaign in the Home Care Program this year, she tabled the same letter a former critic, Mr.

Jay Cowan, tabled in the House four years previous the identical letter, same issue, same four-year-old lette r, Sir. Nothing new excep t the NDP in opposition refuting their own policies. Review Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels {St. Johns): Since the minis ter says nothing has changed under this government, let me ask him about a memo we have received from Sue MacKenzie, Assistant Regional Director for Continuing Care which outlines case reviews of LPN services undertaken by July 30, meal preparation by October 30, home support work and VON nursing services by August 30.

If nothing has changed, why are all of these areas under review, and will the minister not admit that these are further cutbacks on top of reductions to home care equipm ent, user fees for ostomy supplies and waiting lists for our seniors in all important areas of health care services? Hon. Donald Orchar d {Minis ter of Healt h) : Again, the critic for the NDP did not say and commit today in front of the media that they would reinstate any of these so-called cutbacks that they allege.

They will not reinstate, they will not reverse a single policy, because they could ha ve made that commitment tod ay, from the Leader, from the criti c, and now even a departing New Demo crat could make that commitment, but they will not. The reason they will not is this, that the review on meals, the review on laundry service, the review on housecleaning is consistent with the 1984 policy directive of Howard Pawley and the NDP, and currently, an important fact is that over 50 percent of seniors in Manitoba are now paying for their meals, paying for their housecl eaning, paying for their laundry.

6031 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 This review process will make that policy of the NDP, 1984-85, consistent across the pro vince. Consultations Ms. Judy Wasylycla -Le ls (St. Johns): Mr.

Speaker, since this minister has finally admitted this government's cutbacks to our Home Care Program , will he guarantee in this House today that all of the reviews outli ned in this memo and all of the planned cutbacks will not take place without input from those involved, namely caregivers and clients of home care who have not, to date, had an opportunity for any meaningful involvement in the gov ernment's health care plans? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): First of all, Mr. Speaker, with all respect to my honourable friend, I have to reject her

preamble and her assertions in her

preamble to this questio n. Secondly, I said, alleged cutbacks by the NDP. That is what I indicated. Now, Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend had the opportunity to say they would reinstate the ost omy program and they would reinstate housecleanin g free of charge to all seniors and go against the policy they put in place in 1984- 85, but, of course, they did not, and here is why-and I think it is important to have another quota tion, if I might. This is from Mr.

Barry Pashak, a defeated NDP MLA in Ontario, who said: If we formed a govern men t and tried to imp lement all of our polic y directives, we would bankrupt the government overnight. Now, Mr. Speaker, we cannot say that of these people. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, throughout this session, we have come to see that the minister has originally started off reading his nonanswers into the record. Now we are seeing the minister read in statements from other pro vinces.

We would like an answer to what is happening here in Manitoba under this Tory gove rnment in home care, the cutbacks. We demand an answer from this minister. Mr. Speaker : Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. *** Mr. Speaker: The honourable minister, to finish with your response now, sir. Mr. Orchar d : We could never ma ke that state men t of a New Democ rat in Mani toba, because, as I said earlier, we only know what New Democ rats are against. We do not know what they stand for, what they would do should they be governmen t, so we do not know whether Mr.

Pashak's statement applies here, that they would bankrupt the government of Manitoba should they come back. Some day they may tell us what they believe in. Children's Dental Health Program Cabinet Decision Ms. Rosann Wowc huk (Swan Riv er): Mr. Speaker, an excellent example of a health program demon str ati ng all the positive elemen ts of com mu nity- based care and preventative health care was cancelled by this government, that being the Children's Dental Health Program , an excellent program for northern and rural children, which this gove rnmen t did not recog nize.

Rathe r, they continue to spout about their care for comm unity based care but do no thing about it. I want to ask the acting Premier to explain to this House today why his cabinet did not overrule the decision by his Minister of Health to target this very progressive and commun ity-based program that was very effective and very beneficial to rural and northern children. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, again, from the comfort of opposition, New Dem ocrats decry decisions of government, but when governing in Saskatchewan, they make the same decisions. Mr.

Speaker, let me reinforce for my honourable friend that a key componen t of the health reform package is prevention and education. In the Chi ldren's Dental Health Program, yes, we are elimi nating the treatment portion; in other words, filling cavities, extracting teeth and those reparative services. Mr. Speaker, we intend to maintain the education and prevention portion of that program, because that is the value of health care program ming, to educate, to bring people into prevention so we do not have to spend money on repair.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6032 Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, Manitobans would be happy to have the program that Saskatchewan does, because at least those people care and recognize there is a difference between northern and urban Manitoba. *

(1410) Reduction Justification Ms. Rosann Wow chuk (Swan Riv er) : Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the acting Premier again if he will tell Manitobans why his government chose to ignor e in formation pr ov ided by Canadian dentists stating this would cost rural Manitobans a tremendous amount of money. How could they ignore this information pro vided to them and cut the dental program and ignore the long-term effects there would be by cancelling this program ? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I really appreciate my honourable friend's defence of decisions in Saskatchewan which are not dissimilar from Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, let me tell my honourable friend some of the decisions we chose not to make. We chose not to raise the Pharmacare deductible to $1 ,700 per fam ily, as Saskatchewan did. We chose not to do that. We chose to leave it at $207 for the people of Manitoba. There is no drug coverage for the average family in Saskatchewan because of their decisions. I will put ours in front of them. Mr.

Speaker, we have chosen not to close 52 acute care hospitals in Mani toba, lik e Saskatchewan is doing this budget year. We have chosen an entirely different route which brings together opinion of leaders in hea lth care, profe ssionals in health care, to mak e difficult decisions to preserve and protect medicare, and we are vastly ahead of every other pro vince. Multiculturalism Secretariat Dismantling Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship.

This governmen t often looks to opposition in making suggestions in terms of where we would save money. Mr. Speaker, we want to pro vide a line in which we, as the Liberal caucus, would like to see this gover nment save money, and that is the multicultural secretariat's office. The government of the day could save a quarter of a million doll ars today if, in fact, the government had the will to dismantle wh at is noth ing mo re than an apple-shining group of individuals who do nothing more than prop up this particular government within the ethnocultural community.

My question to the minister is: Will she do the responsible thing and dismantle the multicultural secretariat and save the taxpayers of this province $250,000? Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister responsible for Multiculturalism): Mr. Speaker, I believe and I know our govern ment believes, as a result of a recom mendation that came from the task force on multiculturalism that was comm issioned by the former administration-th e recommen dation was made that we needed more support, internal to government, dealing with multicultural issues.

We acc epted that re comm endation and the Multiculturalism Secretariat was set up. The Liberal critic might believe there is nothing happening in the Multiculturalism Secretariat, but 1 think Manitobans should be asked that question, because I do know that many, many services are being provided, and consultation is ongoing with the com mun ity . So he may not agree but the commu nity does. Justification Mr. Ke vin Lamoureux {I nkster) : We ll, Mr.

Speaker, the report she refers to is to talk about a civil servant positi on, and the secretariat is not who I would classify as the ideal individual to fill that particular position. My question to the minister is: How does she justify having the multicultural secretariat's office when, in fact, the Manitoba Intercultural Council provided all of the things plus more of what the mu lticultural sec retariat provides for this gove rnment and at a cheaper cost? Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister responsible for Multicul tural ism) : Mr.

Speaker, it is unfortunate again, we seem to have a little bit of a contradiction within the Liberal Party, because I listened very intently to speeches from the Liberal opp osition on the repeal of The Mani toba Intercultural Council Act. I did quite distinctly hear the member for River Heights (Mrs. Carstairs) indicate that the staff who

6033 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 were in the multicultural secretariat could probably not be of any higher calibre and that she really believed that the pe rson who was in there was probably the best quaflfied Manitoban to do the job. Point of Order Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs {River Heights): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I really do not think the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship wants to misquote anybody in the House. What in fact was said was, and let me quote from Hansard: So he has been unable to be the quality of the person that he could have been because of the- Mr.

Speaker : Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. That is clearly a dispute ove r the facts. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up in terms of the point of order that has- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I have ruled there was no point of orde r. Dismantling Mr. Speaker: Now, the honourable member for Inkster, with your question. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux {Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, the multicultural secretariat's office is nothing more than a candidate recruitment from this particular gove rnment and does nothing more than to ensure that the Progressive Conservative Party is getting its message out, manipulating the vo te. I am asking the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship today to disman tle the multicultural secretariat's office and save the taxpayers of this province a quarter of a million dollars. Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson {Minister responsible for Multicultural ism) : Mr.

Speaker, I ha ve indicated right from the beginning that when staff was hired in the Multicultur alism Secretariat, Manitobans would be well served by that person. I think it has been pro ven. Ultimately, it will be Manitobans who decide what kind of job this gove rnment is doing and what our commitment to multiculturalism is, not the memb er for Inkster. Swampy Cree Tribal Council Child and Family Services Agency Mr. Oscar Lathlln {The Pas): Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Nort hern Affairs some questions.

The Swampy Cree Tribal Council has for the past six years been working to establish a Child and Family Services agency in The Pas area to service the seven- member bands that comprise the tribal council. It appeared that at one time the pro vincial government was going to support that council's pursuit for an agency, but, unfortunate ly, it appears now they may not be willing to support it or may even be withdrawing that support. My question to the Minister of Northern Affairs is: Could he advise the Hou se whether indeed that support has been withdrawn?

If it has not been withdrawn, I would like to ask him when that agreement, which has been sitting there for about a year now, is going to be signed. Hon. Jame s Downey (Minis ter of Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I think I should at the outset put on the record that this government has over the past indicated and clearly shown our ability to work with the Swampy Cree Tribal Council, unlike when he and his government were in government in this province.

They were unable to accomplish a major northern nursing program in his home community, of which it took this gove rnment to get elected in order to accom plish working with the northern Swampy Cree Tribal Coun cil. As it re lates to the spec ifi c qu estion, Mr. Speaker, I will take it as notice for the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) and have him respond directly to him . Mr. Lathlln: Mr.

Speaker, could I also ask the same minister, when he gets back to me as he puts it, to also outline the reason for having such a long delay in the signing of the agreement, when he confers with the Minister of Family Services? Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member knows somewhat about long delays, as it was in 1986 or '85 that he tried to get the nu rsing agreem ent signe d with the New Dem ocratic government and had not been able to accomplish that until 19 88, when it took a change in government to get some action on behalf of his comm unity. Mr. Speaker, I will, as well, take that as notice.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6034 Mr. Lathlln: My final question to the same mini�ter is: Seeing as how he is in a fast-track mood today , could I ask him then exactly when might we expect the minister and this government to get together with the Swampy Cree Tribal Coun cil fam ily services people and sign the agreement? When will that agreement be signed? Will it be one month, two months-w hen? Mr. Downey: I will do everything possible to get the information back to the member as soon as pos sible. Mr. Speaker: Ti me for Oral Ques tions has expired. Nonpolitical Statements Hon.

Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Speaker, might I have leave to make � nonpol itical statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable minister have leave to make a nonpoli tical statement? [agreed] Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to have the op portunity to reco gnize our Dutch communi ty celebrating the 1 OOth anniversary of Dutch immi gration to Canada. Manitobans are particularly proud of th is anniversary, as the first Dutch imm igrants settled in our pro vince.

When the Dutch people came to Manitoba in 1893, they arrived with few personal posse ssions but a great deal of determination. Like all early settlers, they faced many challenges. Through hard work, they overc ame numerous hardships, and they persevered. Their contributions and achievements helped to build a better life for their families and for all Manitobans. The Dutch com munity has played an integral role in building, developing and stre ngthening our society. To help mark the hundred years of Dutch settlement in Canada , they have organized an exciting array of festivities.

Each year, Manitoba 's Dutch communi ty brings its colourful traditions, delicious food and talented entertainers to help celebrate Folklorama. This year, the celebrations will be further enhanced by a parade re-enacting the street-s weeping tradition and the unveiling of a Leo Mol statue. The centenary celebrations will also include the Netherlands cultural festival. Manitoba has the honour of hos ting this festival in October. Festival events will feature contemporary Dutch films, the opening of the Nether-art exhibition and special musical presentations by Dutch performers.

I invite all memb ers of this assembly to join in cong ratulating the Du tch com mu nity as they celebrate 1 00 years as Canadian citizens. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Does the hon ourable member for St. Johns have leave to mak e a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Ms . Judy Wasylycla -Lels (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, I dearly welcome this opportunity to add a few comm ents on the hundredth anniversary of Dutch immigration to Manitoba. I speak with some pe rsonal in volv emen t si nce , I am not sur e memb ers know, I am half-Dutch. My mother is Dutch; my father is Ukrainian.

It is interesting that just o ver a year ago, we celebrated the 1 OOth anniv ersar y of Ukrainian immi gration to Canada, and now we are celebrating 100 years of Dutch immi gration to Manitoba. I stand with a great deal of pride on this occasion to join with the Minis ter responsible for Multiculturalism (Mrs. Mitchelson) to congratulate all those of Dutch ancestry who have contributed so much to the life and well-being of this province and who have made a real mark on our society. I trust that all members will join in this celebration. My only regret, Mr.

Speaker, as we depart today, is that we do not have time to do a resolution to ensure forever inscribed in the records of this Legislature some offi cial recognition of this very imp ortant anniver sary . Ho wever, this momen t today allows us that opportunity, and I join in this very important celebration. • (1420) *** Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for The Pas have leave to ma ke a non political statement? [agreed] Mr. Osca r Lath lln (The Pas) : Mr.

Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to rise this afternoon in the Ho use to pay trib ute and offe r my sincer e congratulations to all of those First Nations athletes who travelled to Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, last weekend to compete in the Third North American Indigenous Games. Mr. Sp eaker, I know all of thos e athletes sacrificed a lot of their tim e, along with their coaches and families, training for those games. I

6035 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 also want to acknowledge the tremendous support and encouragement that our aboriginal athletes rece ived from their respective First Nations councils, community councils and the aboriginal organizations here in Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker, our athletes, as you may know, not only com peted in the various events in Prince Albert, Saskatc hewan, but they also had a very worthw hile message to carry to th ose young aboriginal athletes who gathered there for those events. That message was the need for more awareness about the harmful effects of alcohol and drug abuse.

Those athletes should be commen ded. I talked with some of the athletes while I was in The Pas over the weekend. They told me they were extremely proud to be called up to the podium to receive their medals on behalf of their individual First Nation communi ties. Our athletes from Manitoba First Nations, Mr. Speaker, won a total of 53 medals, out of which 42 were won by teams representing the Swampy Cree Tribal Counc il. Four medals were won by Cross Lake, six gold medals were won by Moose Lake, and Mathias Colomb won one silver medal.

I do not know the rest of the breakdown of the number of medals that were won by the other First Nations communi ties, but I congratulate all of them . Those athletes have done themselves well. They rightfully should be proud of themselves, because I know I am proud of each and every one of them. Thank you. *** Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable Minister of Finance have leave to mak e a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, from time to time, important personal mome nts and events occur involving members of our House and our Legislature.

One particular memb er on our side has realized an impor tant mi lestone not so often reached anymore in today's society. The Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey ), the affable and gregarious member for Arthur-Vir den, who embodies of course the real spirit of the southwest in every one of his moves, and his wife, Linda, are celebrating their 25th wedding anniversary. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all the memb ers of our side, congratulations to Linda and Jim, and, of course , ma ny more years of good health and happiness to them. Mr.

Speaker: Does the honourable Minister of Ener gy and Mi nes have leave to mak e a nonpol itical statement? [agreed] Hon. James Downey (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I just want to acknowledge and thank the government House leader for those kind words of congratulations. As well, I want to join with the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) in his congratulations on the accom plishments of the aboriginal athletes who per formed so adm ir ably on behalf of their commu nities and for the province of Manitoba in their recent tour to Prince Albert. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for this opport unity.

ORDE RS OF THE DAY Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, re port stage, plea se . Would you call Bills 41 and 42. REPORT STAGE 811141- The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Harry Enns (Mi nis ter of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to move, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr.

Derkach), (by leave) that Bill41 , The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi concernant les pares provinciaux et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), as am ended an d rep orted from the Sta nding Comm ittee on Public Utili ties and Natural Resources, be concurred in. Motion presented. Mr. Speaker: Agreed? An Honourable Member: No. Mr.

Speaker: The question before the House was report stage of Bill 41 , The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendment Act; Loi concernant les pares provinciaux et apportant des modifications correl atives a d'autres lois, as am ended and reported from the Standing Comm ittee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources, be concurred in. All those in favour of the motion, please say yea.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6036 Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it, on division. 811142- The Liquor Control Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister charged with the adminis tration of The Liquor Control Act): I would like to move an amendment in terms of proclamation. I move, seconded by the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst), THAT Bil142 be amended in

Section 48 by striking out subsection 48(3) and substituting the follo wing: Coming Into force: other provisions 48(3) Clause 10(1)(d) , as enacted by

section 4 of this Act, subsection 96(4), as enacted by

section 31 of this Act and

section 47 of this Act come into force on a day fixed by proclamation. [French version] II est propose que le projet de loi soit amende par substitution, au paragraphe 48(3), de ce qui suit: Entree en vlgueur par proclamation 48(3) L'alinea 1 0(1 )d, edicte a !'article 4 de Ia presente loi, le paragraphe 96(4), edicte a !'article 31 de Ia presente loi, ainsi que !'article 47 de Ia presente loi entrant en vigueur a Ia date fixee par proclamation. Motion agreed to. Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst), (by leave) that Bill 42, The Liquor Control Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia reglementation des alcools et apportant des modifications correl atives a d'autres lois, as amen ded and re por ted from the St anding Comm ittee on Ec onomi c Devel opment, be concurred in. Motion presented. Mr. Speaker: Agreed? An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: No ? All those in favour of the motion, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed , please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it, on division. *** •

(1430) Hon. Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call Bill 29, please. THIRD READINGS Bill 29- The Minors Intoxicating Substances Control Act Hon. Cla yton Manness (Governm ent House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 29, The Minors Intoxica ting Substances Control Act (Loi sur le controle des substances intoxicantes et les mineurs), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Ms. Judy Wasylycla -Lels (St. Joh ns) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak at third reading on this bill with mixed emo tions.

The idea behind this bill has been a matter of preoccupation with me for a good part of my life in this Legislature, in fact, represents some five years of work, and I have a great deal of mixed feelings about the bill that we have now before us. The min ister who has sponsored this bill will understand some of those mixed emo tions. All members in this House will recall the history behind Bill 29 and will understand that the idea behind this bill goes back decades, Mr.

Speaker, but in terms of this Legislature, goes back five years when individuals in our com muni ty lo oked to this Legislature for legislative action, brought forward their ideas to some of us in this House and called on us to act. We took up that call to action. The work in the com munity, the need for action, became the basis of Bill 91 . Bill 91 was recognized from the very beginning not to be the only, the final answer to a very serious problem of solvent abuse in our society today . It was recognized to be one part of the solution.

It was recognized that even if one death could be avoided because of such legislation, it was worth while. That bill received thorough dis cussion and debate and input in this Chamber, and the result was a fine piece of legislation in the eyes of many. However, as everyone knows, that bill gathered

6037 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 dust for three years despite commi tment from this gov ernment to ensure its proclamation. Bill 29 was introduced as a replacement to Bill 91. Bill 29 differs considerably from Bill 91 in a couple of significant areas, areas that have caused us a great deal of concern and debate around this particular piece of legislation. It departs in two important ways. Number one, for the first time in the history of this Bill and this Legislature, it seeks to charge the victim, the youth who has been sniffing one of these horr ible, deadly sub st ances. Mr.

Speaker, it also cr eates wi de-open defence pr o visions for someone charged under this act, someone charged with selling to minors that makes us all wonder whether prosecutions will be possible as a result of this change. Throughout all of this process, there has been little understanding, little information given to us to understand why the change, why Bill 91 gathered dust for three years. What were the problems? What parts were so unenforcea ble? What caused this government to break its word and not proclaim Bi1191?

I suppose some of my mixed emotions today have to do with that lack of information, lack of clarification and lack of forthright response to our questioning over the years. To this day, we remain in the dark about the reasons for the government's delay. To this day, no legal opinion has been tabled. No information has been forwarded about why Bill91 was so much mo re difficult to enf orce than Bill 29. Some information would have helped. It would have helped us understand and would have, perhaps, led to a more productive and enlightened process around Bill 29. Having said that, Mr.

Speaker, I do not want to dwell on history. I do not want to live in the past. I think all of us want to do something in this area. We want to ensure that there is some legislation in place to begin to deal with a very serious problem in our society. The government left us in a very difficult position aroun d Bill 29. The Mi nister of Justic e (Mr. McCrae) will know the quandary that we have been placed in as a result of the substitution of Bill 91 with Bill29.

The minister will know, and others who attended the committee hearings will know from most of the presenters that a move to charge the mi nor, to go after the victi m, may be counter productive, may, in fact, do more harm than good. So the question we had to ask our selves throughout this process was precisely that. Does this bill do more harm than good, or is it better to have something as opposed to not hing? Mr. Speaker, we listened carefu lly to all the presenters. We asked those questions, and we heard some very grave concerns from just about every group that presented to us.

One group was not able to come down to Winnipeg in time to make its views known and sent us by fax a copy of their brief. I would like to table a copy of that brief so that it is recorded in our records and so that all parties have copies of this brief. It is the brief from MKO dated July 8, and it is entitled Northern Manitoba Solvent Abuse Treatment Progr am. That brief, along with all the others we heard from during the committ ee hearings on Bill 29, indicated some very serious concerns with Bill 29.

I refer memb ers to page 3 of that brief where MKO clearly states: Governmen t has failed to address solvent abuse treatment and instead are focusing to bring criminal charges to youth who are involved in a destructive behaviour. Number 2, the proposed legislation has many loopholes, as it will be difficult to prove that min ors who purchase solvent are purchasing it for the purposes of sniffing it or for other reasons . Number 3, it is legislation that will be expensive and unnecessary in which to deal with a problem that is a health and social probl em.

Num ber 4, the new legislation is intended to emphasize rehabilitation even though there is no solvent abuse treatm ent. This will bring more youth solvent abusers into detention homes which will serve no purpose for the abusers and will only hinder them further to seek the treatment they really need. Mr. Speaker, I think those four points summarize the concerns that many brought forward to the comm ittee and indicate the kind of dilemma that we face today .

The overriding message from all those who participated at the comm ittee stage of this bill and, in fact, on Bill 91, is that unless the government of the day is prepared to look at the root of the problem, the causes of solvent abuse, any kind of legislative action to restrict the sale of solvents, to crack down on sniffers, is meaningless.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6038 So, Mr. Speaker, the message was left strong and clear for this government. I hope the message has been taken very seriously and that action will follow. I am a little worried, based on some of the comments yesterday in debate on concurrence from the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), that this government may, in fact, again, be hiding behind jurisdictional issues to avoid acting on a serious prob! em. I hope that it is not the case.

I hope that, collective ly, good sense will prevail, and it will be seen by this gov ernment to be a very critical issue that needs action, regardless of whether we are dealing with individuals on reserve or off res erve, in inner cities or in the subu rban parts of our communi ties. Mr. Speaker, it is widely recognized that this is a problem that can touch the lives of anyone in our prov ince today . No one is exclu ded. Young people from all walks of life have experimented with sniff. Some have faced the consequences in terms of very serious heal th probl ems. Some have actually died.

So the overrid ing message out of this whole process has been a call for action to get at the root causes of solvent abuse. Finally, I have to address the question, the dilemma, the quandary that our caucus has been in around this bill and that I face persona lly, and that is, what do we do, wha t is our final recommendation, how do we stand on this bill? • (1 440) want to indicate tod ay, Mr.

Speaker, that we have conclude d that somet hing is better than :1othin g , tha t in tact we wiil give our reluctant 2upport to Bill 29, We will do our best to continue "otking hard in this area bringing ��hese issues to attention of government, communi ty ieaders, organ izati ons, and we will be looking and lor the im pact that this legislation will have �erms o; d ealing with a very serious problem in society today. 'Ne give our reluctant support today on <he understanding that with the belief that should this legisiation prove to be ineffective at cracking down on th ose who sell solve nts to young peo ple, particularly those wh o deliberately prey on the vulnerabilities of our youth, that this government will return to this Legisla tive Assem bly with amendments to this act or with new legislation that will be more effective.

So on that note , Mr. Speaker, I want to end by thanking all those who had a ro le to play in ensuring that some sort of legislation will go down in our books, in our statutes after this legislative session. I want to thank, in particular, all those members, individuals who have been part of the Anti-Sn iff Coalition and the people against solvent abuse organization over the last several decades.

Those who have stuck with this issue, who have fought lon g and har d for ways to have this ma tte r addressed, I want to p ay tribute to that perseverance, that determination for trying to get a ver y serious pr oblem in our co mmuni ties addressed to day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. George Hl ckes (Poin t Dougla s) : Mr. Speaker, I just want to put a few commen ts on record, because this has been the bill that was brought forward and I guess it grew from Bill 91 , and it is a problem that deals with people right across Manitoba and right across Canada. We have seen examples of that even in Labrador. Mr.

Speaker, this is a very, very serious problem that affects citizens right across. It does not only affect minors, but this bill is dealing directly with minors, and it has been a bill that was brought forward , I think, because the government could not foresee the nonpartisan way that Bill 91 was brought forward by my colleague. At this time, I would like to commend her for her dedication, hard work and her co-opera tion with organizations and individuals that were also concerned about the solven t abuse proble m. {;'.1rs.

Louise Dacquay, Deputv Speaker, in the Gi1air) She took the time to consult with the individuals, jo share their ideas and to get feedback from them. 'When i was in commi ttee, I never heard that same !"\hd of participation by the government. Everyone sEdd , how come we were not co nsuited? How come we never had any inpu t :nto this? These are the people that were front line workers, people that worked with the people that were solvent abusers, and it is these people that know first hand.

It is important for any gov ernment, before they bring forward a bill such as this which im pacts, hope fully, posit ively on individuals' lives, that they consult with the individuals, consult with the commu nity, because they are the ones that know

6039 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 firs t- hand what it is all about and what the individuals need to overcome some of the barriers that they need to in order to change their lives around. One thing with this bill, it misses two points.

I heard over and over and over from almost every in dividual that was giving a brief and a presentation, why are the minors being charged, and why are the min ors going to be carrying a record with them for the rest of their life, I guess, instead of looking at trying to overco me what the initial bill and, hope fully, what this bill will address later, to get at the people that are supplying the solven ts to these youths? We heard that from almost every person that spoke. They are saying incarceration will not solve the probl em.

What I heard over and over and over again, and I hope the government will act on it, is they were talking about proper trea tment, proper support back in the comm unities. All we have to do is lo ok at the alcoholism rehabili tation program , just look at that as an example. When individuals need the help, they are not charged. They go for a treatment program where they learn about what the effects of the alcohol abuse is doing to the individuals, to their families, and on and on and on. Then there is a treatment program and a support program for when the individuals come out.

That is what we kept hearing over and over and ov er. Yet, in this bi ll, there is no men tion of increasing or putting in proper treatment programs, proper treatment support systems, and what we hear almo st on a daily basis, we hear about a northern treatment progr am. We hear from the aboriginal leaders. We hear from the aboriginal comm unities. We hear from all northerners. We hear that over and over, and yet there is nothing that has been addressed to deal with that.

It is easy to pass the buck onto the federal government, say it is a federal respons ibility, but this bill is trying to deal with solvent abuse. What all the individuals said, to treat solvent abuse, to solve the prob lem, you need treatment centres. When we were looking at the bill and hearing people giving their presentations, one big area that they saw missing was why is there not something in that bill to deal with the people that are supplying the solvent, whether it is for sexual favours , for money, or what have you?

We heard from people that were front -lin e worke rs , people that were directly involved and directly knew the people and were giving us examples of why these individuals were supplying the paint thinners, the glue and other products, and they were saying that it is unscrupulous sellers that you have to try and do something about. My colleague me ntioned tha t we will be suppor ting this, and one of the reasons that we are supporting it is, what some of the people that were giving their br ief and their pr esen tation had indicated was, at least this is a first step, that this is better than noth ing.

So if that is the case, then I hope that the government will be willing to look at this through a period of time, and if certain areas are not worki ng, certain areas have to be added to, bring in the appropriate amendments to add to it. Let us learn from this. It is a step in the right direction, it is a first step.

What we have to do is try and incorporate some of the recommendations that individuals have brought forward in their briefs, and when we see through court actions or whatever process that the individuals who are supplying the products are getting off scot-free and they are still continually supplying the minors with these solvent products, that we take measures, bring in an amendment to take measures to deal with that. •

(1450) If the courts are being too lenient- for instance, we heard from people giving presentations that one of the fears of this bill was there was no minimum fine or pena lty for people who are selling or supplying solvent products. If the judges are bringing forward too small of a fine or below acceptable fines, then let us brin g back an amendment, bring in an amendment that deals with a high minimum fine to hopefully discourage people from trying it again. We who were in the meeting heard that over and over. I would like to, in my own way, congratulate the government for bringing this bill.

Like I said, it is a first step. Let us learn from it, and let us let the actions grow. Let us do this in the most positive way we can for the betterment of the people who are abusing the solvents and who are ruining their fives. If it takes treatment centres, if it takes support programs, if it takes the education in our school systems, let us seriously look at addressing that so that way we can eventually, in the end, hopefully help some individuals overcome the

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6040 barriers that are holding the individuals back. Let them grow and become po sitive ci ti zens of Manitoba and, hopefully, give something back to the province sometime. So we will support this, and we look forward to see how this bill works out. We look forward to the governme nt's co-operation with the interest groups and citizens of Manitoba to make this bill work, because if it works, it works for the people who need the help the most. I think that is what these kinds of bills are all about. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the questio n? The question before the House is third reading of Bill 29- Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Deputy Speaker, just before you put the question, I would just very briefly thank honourable memb ers for their cont ributions to the debate and discussion, not only here but also in comm ittee , also thanks to those who came forward to committ ee to give us the benefit of their experience and their advice.

I think when you look at the amendments that flowed from comm ittee and repor t stage, it is evident that the go vernment was listening and is at tem ptin g to be respo nsive . Albeit our amendmen ts do not go as far as some peopl e, including the honourable memb ers opposite, would like to see us go, I do think though that we have taken away from the judiciary the right to impose imprisonment on young people for abusing the substances. In the interests of brevity, though, I would lik e to call attention to the contribution made by the honour able memb er for St. Johns (Ms.

Wasylycia-Leis) with respect to her own bill and with respect to this bill, and her service to this Legislature and to the province in general. I may not get another opportunity publicly to speak in this way about the honourable member for St. Johns. She and I, I believe, came into this place at the same time and have served together and disagreed on many things and agreed on some important things. I would just wish her well and let her know, and I think many members will join me in this, that she is not afraid to stand up and speak out on behalf of the issues that she feels are important to do that with.

I respect her for that and wish her well in her future endeavours. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is Bill29, The Minors Intoxicating Substances Control Act (Loi sur le controle des substances intoxicantes et les min eurs) , be now read a thir d time and passed. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed] *** Hon. Cl ayton Manne ss (Government House Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, would you call Bill 55, and then the bills in descending order starting after that Bill 53.

DEBATE ON THIRD READINGS Bill 5&-- The Legislative Assembly Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Madam Deputy Speaker: To resume debate on thir d reading, on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), Bill 55, The Legislative Assemb ly Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur I'Assemblee legislative et apportant des modifications correlatives a une autre loi), standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Finance. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): . Madam Deputy Speaker, our side has certainly made all of our com ments on this bill, and we recommend it and commend it to the House at this time to be considered by way of vo te. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading of Bill 55.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed] THIRD READINGS Bill 53- The Justice for VIctims of Crime Amendment Act Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Deputy Speaker, I am going to speak very briefly on Bill 53, The Justice for Victims of Crime Amendment Act. I spoke on second reading on this particular piece of legislation, and I want to put on record again that our caucus and our party are unalterably opposed to this piece of legislation.

6041 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 According to the minister's comm ents on second reading, it was done to clarify the intention of The Justice for Victims of Crime Act and, Madam De puty Sp eaker, th is bill does not clarify the meaning of this act. It abrogates and changes in a major, very basic way the intention of The Justice for Victims of Crime Act. It allows the provincial government to raid the Justice for Victims of Crime fund which has been established through this piece of legislation from fines paid by individuals who have been convicted of criminal offences.

This fund was established specifically to support projects and services external to the government itself. This "clarification" which is a raid on the part of this government to gain more money at the expense of individuals and victims, literally, victims in this particular instance, is a travesty of justice and the governme nt, but most parti cularly, the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), who in this House day after day after day stands up and unctuously states how comm itted he is and his gover nment is to the concept of zero tolerance for violence, justice for victims, and all those wonderful things.

Yet, time after time in this session, bill after bill brought forward by this particular Minister of Justice, he has given the lie to that principle. He knows it. His government knows it. He is doing this because the Treasury Board has said, thou shalt cut spending- Madam Deputy Speak er: Order, please. I wonder if I might have the co-ope ration of the honourable membe r for Wellington. Regrettably, the mo tion for third reading of Bill 53 has not been duly put prior to the commencement of debate. Hon.

Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Certainly, I think we should strike all of that other material off the record. Madam Deputy Speaker, to properly introduce this bill for third reading, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 53, The Justice for Victims of Crime Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les droits des victimes d'acts criminals), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. *

(1500) Point of Order Ms. Barrett: If I may, on a point of information, or a point of order befo re I begin, I would like to ask if the comme nts that I put on the record prior will remain on the record? Madam Deputy Speaker: Yes, your previous comm ents will indeed remain on the record , and you may continue your debate on third reading of Bill 53. *** Ms. Barrett: I will conclude my remarks. I think I have stated fairly forcefu lly our government's position on Bill 53. An Honourable Member: Is there any way you could make a clear .. . ? Ms.

Barrett: I am not sure, in response to the Minister of Justice's question to me, if there was any way I could make clearer our feelings about this piece of legislation. I must regretfully inform the Minister of Justice there is no way within the bounds of parliamentary procedure, and within the rules of this House for me to make it any clearer.

I wish I could, Madam Deputy Speaker, because perhaps if I could be a little clearer or a little more force ful, I might, on behalf of, literally, the victims of criminal actions in this province who are going to potenti ally and probably in actuality, suffer as a result of Bill 53. I wish that I could speak out even more forcefu lly on their behalf, and I wish the Minister of Justice would listen.

However, we have seen an enormous deafness having arisen on the part of the gove rnm ent mem ber s when listening to the crie s and the concerns bei ng raised by Manit obans from Churchill to Steinbach, from Dauphin to Sprague. With those remarks, I will conclude our debate on Bill 53 and state that we will be, as we did in second reading, un alterably opposed to this piece of legislation. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the questio n? The question before the House is third reading of Bill 53, The Justice for Victims of Crime Amendment Act (Lo i modifiant Ia

Loi sur les droits des victimes d'actes criminals). Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the question? Some Honourable Members: No. Madam Deputy Speaker: All those in favour, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Madam Deputy Speaker : All those opposed, please say nay.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6042 Some Honourable Members: Nay. Madam Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Yeas and Nays, please. Madam Deputy Speaker: A recorded vote has been requested. Call in the members. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is third reading of Bill 53, The Justice for Victims of Crime Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les droits des victimes d'actes criminels. All those in favour of the motion will please rise. A STANDING VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: Yeas Cummings, Dacq uay, Derk ach , Dow ney, Driedger, Ducharme, Enns, Ernst, Filmon, Findlay, Gillesha mmer, Helwer, Laurendeau, Manness, McAlpine, McCrae, Mcintosh, Mitchelson, Orchard, Pallis ter, Penner, Reimer, Render, Rose , Stefanson, Sveinson, Vodrey.

Nays Alcock, Ashton , Ba rrett, Ca rsta irs, Cer illi, Chom iak, Dewar, Doer, Edwa rds , Evans (In terlak e), Evans (Br andon East) , Friese n, Gaudry, Gray, Lamour eux, Lath lin, Maloway, Mar ti nda le, Plohman, Reid , San tos , Sto rie , Wasylycia-Leis, Wow chuk. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Yeas 27, Nays 24. Mr. Speaker: The motion is accordi ngly carried. Mr. George HI ekes (Point Dougla s) : Mr. Speaker, I was paired with the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik). Had I not been paired, I would have voted against the bill. Bill 49-- The

Summary Convictions Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae), that Bill 49, The Sum ma ry Convictions Amendmen t and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifian t Ia

Loi sur les poursuites

sommaires et apportant des modifications correlatives a une autre loi), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it, on division. 811147- The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Cla yton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintos h), that Bill 47, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act (2) (Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia location a usage d'habitatio n), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to speak one last time against these amendment s. These are ver y significant amendments. They are going to affect appro xima tely 100,000 apartment units in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, they were done with undue haste. It is only 10 mon ths since The Reside ntial Tenancies Act was pro claimed. Th is mini ster claims to have had broad consult ation, but in fact she has not even appointed her advisory comm ittee.

This process has been very different than the process that was used to bring in The Residential Tenancies Act,

an act that was supported by all three parties in this Legislature because the process was fair and just. There were represen tatives of tenants. There were representatives of landlords, and there were representatives of civil servants. They issued consensus recomme nda tions and near-consensus recommendations, and their report was made public. It was the basis of the legislation. That legislation had a rough trip, but eventually it got passed with the support of all three parties. What happe ned this ti me? This time this minister consulted her Tory landlor d friends. She

6043 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 alleges to have consulted one group, the Housing Coalition. She said I am a member of it, I would like to put on the record I am not a member ::�f the Housing Coalition. It does have one or two people who are renters on it, but they do not primarily represent tenants. They represent people who are interested in housing issues, including some civil servants. All goo d peop le, bu t not tru ly a tenants-only organization. *

(1520) This minister has made major changes in The Residential Tenancies Act. One of the mo st contro versial areas of the review comm ittee discussion was on secur ity deposits, tenants' money. We are talking here about $25 million of tenants' mo ney in security deposits, and the issues are who is going to moni tor the m, who is going to control it, and who is going to make sure that the money is there when the tenants move out?

The compromise position, not the position that tenants wanted, not the position that landlords or proper ty managers wanted, was there would be security-de posit-in -trust pro visions, which this government did. They gave landlords one year to set them up, September 1, 1993.

I think it is very significant that we are passing this on July 27, 1993, because if these amendments have not been approved or were not approved-they are certainly going to pass because the government has a majority-but if these amendments had not been brought in, those landlords would have been required to put the security deposits in trust by September 1. Now they do not have to. Do we know whether the money is there? Do we know whether the landlords lobbied this minister and said, we do not want to put these security deposits in trust by September 1, 1993 because we do not have the money?

Some of them have probably spent it. Some of them use it for their cash flow. In fact, that is why we were opposed to landlords having control over security deposits in the first place, because we believed many landlor ds used it for their cash flow. In fact, I did some research for thes e amendments. I phoned my landlord. I said, what do you think of these amendments. He said, oh, they are great. I said why? He said, because we need that money for our cash flow. Well, that is exactly what I was saying about landlords for the last 1 0 years.

Some of them I would have to say, not all of them, but some of them do not keep the money in a bank account so that it is there when the tenants move out. This leads to all kinds of problems when tenants do move out. Tenants need that money for their next security deposit. The rules for social assistance have been changed, so they do not get a second one. What do they do? They take the money out of their food allowance, their personal needs allowance, or their household needs allo wance, and then they go to a food bank so they can eat.

This is unconscionable that this minister should not have strict pro visions to make sure that that money is there. What have they done? They have given this gift of $25 million to landlo rds and said, do whatever you want with it. They did not even wait one year to require them to put the money in the trust provisions that were in the act. What is going to happen now? Well, security deposits in trust are not the only concern. Not only do they not have to return it to the tenant or the department within 14 days. Now they have 28 days, and the minister sent me a note .

I appreciate the note she sent across the Chamber. She said, well, the reason we are doing this is because it helps tenants, because in the past the landlor ds came down and they said, oh, we do not have a final estimate of the cost; give us a few more days. They kept dragging it out and dragging it out. Well, how much time does a landlord need? All they need to do is go into the suite once when it is empty, ascertain how much it is going to cost to make repairs, if any repairs need to be made, and then tell the department what that figure is and remit the money with a claim. Landlords do not need 28 days.

They are just going to put it in a daily interest account and earn interest on that money for 28 days, and it is the tenants' money. When tenants sign a lease, they have to make the deposit up front at the same time they sign the lease. What do landlords get? Landlords get 28 days. These are two gifts that this minister has given to landlords. First of all, she has given them a gift of $25 million. Now she is saying, you can keep that money for 28 days instead of 14 days. There are so many things that are bad about this bill, that in the time I have been allocated I could not begin to list them all.

This minister has made major changes in the area of furniture. Now, furniture is

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6044 another area wh ere lo w-income tenant s in particular are very vulnerable, because the landlord can charge an exorbitant amount for the furniture and the contro ls that used to be there are not there. The landlord can withdraw services. If a landlord wants to get rid of a tenant, the landlord can withdraw all kinds of services in order to encour age the tenant to move out. An Honourable Member: They can open his windows, take his windows away. Mr. Martindale: Well, the member for Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans), gives a very good example.

When we were on the review comm ittee, one of the things we had to put in the act was a requirement that the landlord have a door. That may seem kind of absurd, but the reason was that somebody had a problem at the Residential Tenancies Branch, and they won because the previous act only said a doorknob, it did not require a door. So some slum landlord went and he won because the act did not refer to a door. I mean, there are all kinds of tricks that landlords will play. For exam ple, I was on a board of directors with an individual I will not name because I would not want to em barrass a current city counci llor.

We were afraid that a particular tenant would not move out. He said, well, my father and I, when our tenants do not move out, we take the doors off-tot ally illegal, because the landlord must provide heat at a certain temperature. I think these laws need to be greatly improved for many lo w-income tenants. They need the protecti on. What landlord and tenant laws are really about is balancing the power between landlords and tenants, and landlords have always had more power. They have always had the ability to hire lawyers who understand the legislation and to protect their interest.

Ten ants normally do not have the wherewithal to hire a lawyer to protect their interest. In fact, the act costs $11 or $12 at Queen's Printer. This minister has an obligation to do as much education as she possibly can with landlords and tenants to emphasize and to educate people as to what their rights are and what their responsi bilities are. One of the good things about the act is that it does talk about righ ts for landl ords and respo nsibilities for landlords and rights for tenants and responsibilities for tenants.

That is one of the good things about the original act, and fortu nately the minister did not touch that part of the act. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible bill. These are terrible amendments. They are not going to provide the kind of protection that tenants need tor their money, the $25 million of security deposits that is their money. Thank you. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to say a few things about this bill.

One of the difficulties of legislation coming in close to summer and being debated through the July month is the very little public debate that has taken place on this bill, which we believe is a mani festa tion of the landlor d lobby that has ope rated tully with the Conser vative Party of Manitoba ever since the Premier (Mr. Filmon) was the Min ister responsible for Consumer and Corp orate Affairs in the early '80s, and has continued on through successive ministries to fulfill the agenda of the landlords of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, there is no question that legislation dealing with landlor ds and tenants ha s to be balanced. We want a fair retum for the investmen<, and we want fair accom m oda tions and arrangements for accommodations for tenants. But there is no qu estion in our mind that the government has, in a very, very insidious way, changed the balance dramatically to side with the landlords and friends of the Conserva tive Party, rather than with the tenants. *

(1530) Let me go over a couple of issues in this bill that have not caught any public attention. One is the issue of

Section 134(3), dealing with condomin iums. Maybe this is the Donald Trump

section of this bill by the minister responsible for this bill, a bill that allo ws cond omini um- well, the minister makes some very rude gestures, but that does not change the fact that by stating that 134(3) is repealed, that is dealing with 136-[interject ion] Well, the minister mentions Jimmy Carter. The minister will know one of the things that was stated at the ecum enical presentations of Hab itat for Humani ty was the whole issue that people should own houses and be fairly treated in housing, not have a few people control the housing stock for many. But, Mr.

Speaker, this is a conversion of condos, and the notice for conversion of rental apartments to be converted into condom iniums. This was

6045 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 meant to protect, particularly those people who lived in residences, particularly seniors who lived in the downtown area of Winnipeg, from capricious changes made by landlords at a certain period of time when the market changes, to kick people out unle ss they bough t their apa rt men ts as condom iniums. Ther e was a procedure in place to allo w particularly elderly people to protect themselves with the old Sections 136 and 136(2). The government never had that, and the minister never had that in her press release.

They did not want to tell the people of Mani toba wh at was really intended in this bill. It is one of these little, little insidious amendmen ts, that this

section is repealed. If the minister was confident of the changes, why was it not in her original press release? Why did she hide that from the people of Manitoba? Why did she not declare that as part of the legislative changes? It is very, very, very difficult to raise this issue, and we are very disa ppointed with the minister in that change. A second change is in the way in which landlords can unilaterally change-boy, the landlords have done very well with this minister. They may make her the person of the year, Mr. Speaker.

The may make the minister responsible person of the year, because look at 138(1) and 138(3). The tenants' rights when services are withdrawn could be dealt with by an adjudicator. The minister may turn her back on the tenants of Manitoba and may turn her back on the people in this Chamber, but we are not going to let the tenants forget who has allo wed the landlords of this province to unilaterally change the services and deny them the ri ghts to deal in a fair an d reasonable way with those changes. How would you like it, Mr.

Speaker, if your services, your fridge services, your stove services, your other essential services could be unilaterally changed? Your apartment could be painted pink in the middle of the night; your apartment could be painted Tory blue in the middle of the night, it could painted all kinds of colours and what could you do about it? It may not be the apartment you originally rented, it may not be the services you originally intended to have, but you could have it unilaterally changed by the government of the day .

You know, the government has again given a major power to landlords to use the change of services to kick people out of their apartments. Some Honourable Members: Come on. Mr. Doer: Wel l, Mr. Speaker, the memb ers opposite are naive or are not paying attention, because even though the vacancy rate in Winnipeg is high, of course because of the terrible economic policies of members opposite, this does not mean that all vacancy rates in all regions of the city or the province are very high.

Again, usually it is the downtown areas or the older areas where a lot of seniors reside or people who are not necessarily having all the means to be as mobile as they would like, and landlords could just willy-nilly change the services. Look at the definition of services. Now, did the Mini ster of Cons umer and Corporate Affairs (Mrs. Mcintosh) tell us about that amendment, that little insidious change for the landlor ds in this pro vince? No. She is turning her back on those peop le. Mr.

Speaker, I really believe that any government that allows landlords to change the conditions for fridges and stov es in apartments does not understand the plight of tenants and certainly has again had another Donald Trump clause in this contract to just trample over the rights of tenants and trample over the rights of 100,000 renters in this pro vince. They do not care. This minister does not care. She just walked out on all the renters in Manitoba. Lastly, there are conditions under this bill dealing with the whole issue of calculations for purposes of rent regulation period.

The rent regulation period has gone from 15 years down to three or four years, or for six years. The changes in late fees for rent gives landlords much mor e power for establishing interest rates, et cetera. This bill is clearly a result of a very quiet and dir ect land lo rd lobby, a very effective lo bby because they have Tory ministers that do their bidding in bringing in unbalanced legislation that allows the few developers in this city to profit at the expense of the 100,000 renters in this pro vince.

The minister said before in this Chamber that she had literally thousands of names of renters that she has talked to and listened to. We do not know who they are. Certainly the people in the rent advocacy

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6046 area have not been consulted on this bill. I hope that all political parties oppose this bill at third reading. I was a little disappoi nted the memb er for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) voted with the gove rnment at second reading at comm ittee, but I am sure they have caucused this issue and I am sure they are aware of all the very negative effects on renters.

I would ask the Liberals to join with the NDP and vote for a fair and balanced treatment for tenants and renters in this province and vote against the landlord lobby as manifested by the Tories in this bill before us in this Chamber. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I just want to put on the record that it is a pretty tough time for a lot of tenants in Manitoba right now. I know in my own constituency I have talked to many people facing 1 0 and 11 percent rent increases even with our existing rent control legislation.

I think this is a really disgus ting piec e of back-room legislation. This is the clearest attempt on behalf of a minister, I think, in this session, to show bias towards a lo bby group that has the ear of the Cons ervative Party, that is an arm of the Conservative Party. That is some of the landlords. I do not say all, because many landlords have not even asked for this kind of legislation. I have fought four elections in Thom pson and, lo and behold, surprising as it may be, I believe that a handful of landlords in Thompson have financed the entire Tory election campaign. In 1981, they outspent us three to one.

We won. In 1986, they outspent us three to one again. In 1988, the same thing. In the last election, 1990, I think they outspent us four to one. They had a candidate who was able to walk into a $75,000-a-year job when she lost, but the power of the landlor d lobby could not defeat the power of the people. The lesson to this government is: Remember the lesson of 1981. You took on the tenants of this province. You said, yes sir, yes madam, to the landlords, to that landlord lobby from within your party. The end result was you were defeated. I look to some of the memb ers opposite who will rememb er that.

The Mini ste r of Government Services (Mr. Duchar me), I wonde r where he stands on this bill, because when he was minister dealing with this particular legislation he said no to the landlor ds. This minister said yes. This minister said, what do you want? We will put it in. They did it, Mr. Speaker. That is why we are opposed to this bill. I say in the next election it is going to be like 1981 all ov er again. There is only one party that has stood for the tenants of this province. It is not the Liberals who voted for this bill in comm ittee. It is not the Tories who say anything to the landlords.

It is the New Democratic Party. Hon. Jim Ernst (Mi nister of Ho usi ng): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Ducharme), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. * * * Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call Bill 46, please. Bill 46- The Crlmlnallnjurles Compensation Amendment Act Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Gove rnment Services (Mr. Ducharme), that Bill 46, The Criminal Injuries Compe nsation Amendmen t Act (Loi mo di fiant Ia

Loi sur l'indemnisation des victimes d'actes criminels), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) , that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. *** Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speak er, would you call Bill 45, please. Bill 45- The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey), that Bill 45, The Coat of Arms, Emblems and the Manitoba Tartan Amendment Act (Loi mo difiant Ia

Loi sur les armoiries, les emblemes et le tartan du Manitoba) , be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented.

6047 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 "( 1540) Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson) : Mr. Speaker, 1 move, seconded by the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. *** Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you call Bill44. Bill 44- The Alcoholism Foundation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cumm ings), that Bill 44, The Alcoholism Foundation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modi fiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Fondation manitobaine de lutte contra l'alcoolis me et app ortant des mo difications correlatives a une autre loi), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. George Hl ckes (Poin t Dougla s): Mr. Speaker, I just want to put a few words on record pertaining to this bill. Mr. Speaker, the Alcoholism Foundation has always dealt with people who ha d dr inkin g problems, and then they stepped into narcotics addictions. Now they are working with alcoholic s and people who are abusing substances pertaining to narco tics.

One caution I would like to bring up again is by changing the name of the Alcoholism Foundation to Addictions Foundation, I hope, like I said before in my speech, that is not a guise to try and put individuals who have solvent abuse problems to treatm ent centres that are set up to deal with alcoholism across Manitoba. We have treatment ce ntres now in Winnip eg, we have treatment ce ntres in Ste . Rose du Lac and we have a treatment centre in Thompson that has assisted many northerners who have had alcohol-rela ted problems.

Through the treatment program and the su pp or t sys tems that are in pla ce in the com mu nities, a lot of individuals have had the opportunity to overcome their problems dealing with alcohol. If this name change, the government hopes, will take care of the solvent abuse problems, I think it will be a big mistake unless they have adequate funding and resources and appropriate training for the staff who are there to deal with a tot ally, to tally different problem pert aining to solvent abuse versus alcohol or narco tics. Mr.

Speaker, with those words , I just caution the government and will be monitoring it very, very closely. If they are going to be tying in solvent abuse proble ms, put adequate training doll ars in place and make sure there are adequate dollars to hire additional staff, so that for the staff who are in place now dealing with the problems that exist for the cen tres , ther e will not be additional responsibilities on top of their existing workload . So with those cautionary words, like I say, we will be watching this closely, and we will be supporting the government on this, in trust.

We hope it will be just a name change and not a paper guise to look as if they are dealing with solvent abuse across Manitoba. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading of Bill 44, The Alcoholism Foundation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Fondation manitobaine de lutte contre l'al coolisme et ap portant des mo difica tions correlatives a une autre loi, be now read a third time and passed. [agreed] * * * Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): Would you call Bill 43, please. Bill 43- The Manitoba Lotteries Foundation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer), that Bill 43, The Manitoba Lotte ries Foundation Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Fondation manitobaine des loteries et apportant des modifications correlatives a une autre loi), be now read a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: No? The qu estion before the House was third reading of Bill 43.

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6048 All those in favour of the motion, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it, on division. *** Hon. Jim Erns t (Acti ng Government House Leader): Mr. Speak er, could you call Bill 42 , please. Bill 42- The Liquor Control Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Jim Ernst (Acting Government House Leader): I mo ve, seconded by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) , (by leave) that Bill 42, Th e Liquor Co ntrol Amen dment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia reglementation des alcools et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), be now read a third time and passed. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable acti ng government House leader have leave for third reading of Bill42? [agreed] Motion presented. Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, I will be fairly brief on this legislation. I want to begin by thanking members of the committee, including the minister and the member for River Heights (Mrs. Carstairs) last night for prov iding leave for the comm ittee to introduce an amendment to the bill which was technically out of scope.

The amendment had to do with an amendment requiring the Manitoba Liquor Control Comm ission to warn consum ers of alcohol of some of the dangers inherent in alcohol consumption. One of the principal reasons why that issue was before comm ittee was a concern that I and other members of the Legis lature and cert ainly many, many memb ers of my constituency have with respect to the impact of alcohol on unborn children. The fact of the matter is fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects are more com mon in North America than any other form of impairment.

We used to talk and hear a great deal about Down's syndrome. We used to talk about spina bifida. The fact of the matter is that fetal alcohol syndrome is now the mos t important source of impairment on unborn children on our continent. Mr. Speaker, I and others who have taught and travelled in northern Manitoba know that many of our comm unities are affected by alcohol cons ump tion. Now her e are the effects mor e apparent or more devastating than on the children who are afflicted by fetal alcohol syndrom e. The costs to society are horrendous. They measure in the millions and millions of dollars.

I think that although it is now up to the Manitoba Liquor Comm ission, which has been given the power by regulation to warn consumer s of alcohol of some of these dangers, I believe that it is an impor tant first step. I believe that the Manitoba Liquor Commis sion will be taking on the task of implementing the amendments to The Manitoba Liquor Control Act in a responsible and diligent way. That is my hope, Mr. Speaker, and I will be watching that with a great deal of interest. Mr.

Speaker, I kno w there are some in our society who would suggest the application of a warning label is not in and of itself sufficient, that It is not going to make that much difference. I remind people that 25 years ago when many people began to lobby for the applic ation of a warning label on cigarett es, ther e were those, parti cularly the industry, who said it will not have any imp act. To this very day, people inside the tobacco industry would deny that warnings on cigarette packages have any impact. *

(1550) But, Mr. Speaker, something caused the change in society's attitude towards smoking. Something caused it, because today it is unacceptable for people to smoke thoughtlessly in the presence of others. It is unacceptable for people to smoke in many, many public places by by -la w and by custom . I believe that over the long haul beginning to make people aware of the effects that alcohol can have on the developing fetus is an issue which education and awareness over the long run will serve to correct. Mr.

Speaker, we are never going to stop in total the effects of alcohol during pregnancy, but I think we can start here. Mr. Speaker, having said that and having indicated last night that my caucus wholeh eartedly supports that amendment and thanks the memb ers of the comm ittee and the government for agreeing

6049 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 27, 1993 to include that amendment in the bill, the fact of the matter is that this bill falls short in many respects. It was instructive to listen to presenters at commit tee last night, because this did not represent simply a collec tion of individuals who oppo se alcohol consu mption for their own personal or religious reason. There were representatives of the Mennon ite communi ty there, representatives of the United Church. There were representatives of other interest groups who expressed concern over the liberalization of liquor laws in the pro vince of Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker, what was interesting was that we saw a coalition developing who have genuin e concerns about the approach the government is taking with respect to liquor sales in particular. We had representatives of the Manitoba Government Em ployees' Union, me mb ers of the Manitoba Liquo r Comm ission, liquor in spec tors, ot her in di viduals who are concerned ab ou t the privatization of liquor sales in the provi nce. We have concern of the average citizen with the prospect of private liquor stores on every street corner.

We have the prospect of Harry's liquor emporium being open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, the Americanization of the sale of liquor. Mr. Speaker, even Mrs. Loscerbo, who was men tioned here, who would have liked some liberalization of the resale laws, acknowl edged, when asked a direct question, that she did not want to see the Americanization of liquor sales in the province of Manitoba. We have a custom and a practice in Manitoba that has served us well. I think we have to be very careful in amending it.

Virtually all of the people who presented last night would ask the government in all sincerity to withdraw this legislation, to start again and have the public consultation that is necessary before we conti nue on in any massive way with the liberalization of alcohol sales, and par ti cularly before we begin the proces s of privatizing alcohol sales. Mr. Sp eaker, one of the mo st in teres ting presenters last night was a man by the name of Mr. Cho ate who represented Alberta Distillers Ltd., one of the largest purchasers of rye from western Canada in the production of alcohol.

What he said was quite interesting, because Alberta and B.C. have considerable experience with wine boutiques and the privatization of wine sales. What he told us was that most of those private wine stores would not be surviving were it not for the indirect subsidy the gover nment was granting them. I remind member s that this government is not about creating a level playing field with the Liquor Comm ission.

What this government is about is giving private wine sellers the right to remain open longer hours than the Liquor Commission, and they are giving deeper discounts to the individuals; in other wor ds, costing the government of Manitoba revenue to ope rate in competition with the Liquor Comm ission. Mr. Sp eaker, even the presenters who are interested in pursuing the possibility of selling wine privately acknowledge that the Man itoba Liquor Com m ission has done a good job.

They acknowledge that the Liquor Commi ssion over the past few years has worked diligently to be more customer-oriented, to meet the needs of wine enthusiasts, to be informed as sellers and suppliers of wine, to answer questions the public may have. So this is an unnecessary move. I want to add to that coalition which opposes the liberalization of liquor sales and the privatization of liquor sales, and some other amendme nts that were suggested.

Added to that coalition has to be the Mani toba Ho tel Association and a repres entative of one of the largest chains of hot els, cockt ail lounges, beverage licence owners in the province, who expressed concern about the changing of the rules of the game so dramatically and so often. Mr. Speaker, so it was not simply a matter of those who have personal concerns about the consumption of alcohol who were there opposing this legislation. It was a coalition of those people who have genuine personal , religious convictions opposed to this kind of a process .

It was a coalition of people who are emplo yed by the Manitoba Liquor Commis sion , who are suppor ters of the Manitoba Liquor Commission, who believe the Liquor Comm ission has done an adequate, if not an excellent, job. Then it is a coalition, as well, of members of the hospitality industry who believe the playing field is adeq uate and tha t the am endm ents the government was introducing were going to cost jobs, were going to create uncertainty with respect to future investment, large-scale investment, and I

July 27, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 6050 think that is something we should be concerned about. Having acknowledged the co-ope ration of the gov ernment in passing a single amendment that I think goes some way towards balancing the di rection the gov ernm ent is taking by ackno wledging the problems we are creating, in fact there are many, many problems with this particular piece of legislation as we heard last night in committee. Mr. Spe aker, with thos e re ma r

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-4-110
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 4th hansardpdf 110.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	2e068d1df8ceecff312766868c56f3ea6bba4759

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