Manitoba Hansard — 16 March 1995 (Sitting 20, 35th Legislature, 6th Session)

35-6-20

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Sixth Session- Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker Vol. XLIV No. 20 (Revised)- 1:30 p.m., Thursday, March 16, 1995 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation ~ ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon.

GRAY, Avis HELWER, Edward IDCKES, George KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LA THLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCORMICK, Norma McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER, Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Harry STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon.

WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant Vacant Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste. Rose Seine River Rob lin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charles wood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli Point Douglas The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St. Johns Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Osborne Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St.

Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Rossmere Kirkfield Park La Verendrye Fort Garry Swan River River Heights Flin Flon ~ NDP NDP NDP NDP P.C. P.C. P.C. NDP NDP P.C. P.C. P.C. Lib. P.C. P.C. NDP NDP P.C. P.C. NDP Lib. P.C. Lib. P.C. NDP Lib. Lib. NDP P.C. NDP NDP P.C. NDP P.C. Lib. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. NDP P.C. NDP P.C. P.C. NDP P.C. P.C. NDP NDP P.C. P.C. P.C. NDP

1009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, March 16, 1995 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Communities' Public Education Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Eva McFarlane, George McFarlane, Sam Umpherville and others requesting the Minister of Education and Training (Mr. Manness) to reconsider the funding model to ensure that Thompson and other communities in this province are able to maintain quality public education. Physical Education in Schools Mr. ClifEvans (Interlake): Mr.

Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Carla Cameron, Donna Marcyniuk, Roberta Stocki and others requesting the Minister of Education (Mr. Manness) to consider maintaining physical education as part of the core curriculum from kindergarten to senior high. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Physical Education in Schools Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Maloway). It complies with the privileges and the practices of this House and it complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS the proposed changes to the Manitoba curriculum would have no physical education required for students after Grade 8; and

WHEREAS the social, intellectual, emotional and physical benefits of physical education have been proven through extensive research; and,

WHEREAS requiring physical education for high school sends a message that physical activity is important for life and encourages high school students to make life choices to stay active and it fits into a preventative health strategy; and,

WHEREAS many parents, students, medical professionals and educators, health and recreation specialists are urging that physical education be increased in schools. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Education to consider maintaining physical education as part of the core curriculum from kindergarten to senior high. Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Lathlin). It complies with the privileges and the practices of this House and it complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

WHEREAS the proposed changes to the Manitoba curriculum would have no physical education required for students after Grade 8; and

WHEREAS the social, intellectual, emotional and physical benefits of physical education have

1010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 been proven through extensive research; and,

WHEREAS requiring physical education for high school sends a message that physical activity is important for life and encourages high school students to make life choices to stay active and it fits into a preventative health strategy; and,

WHEREAS many parents, students, medical professionals and educators, health and recreation specialists are urging that physical education be increased in schools. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Education to consider maintaining physical education as part of the core curriculum from kindergarten to senior high. Public Housing Rent Hikes Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the authorities and practices of the House, I must now report that I have examined the petition of the honourable member for Radisson (Ms.

Cerilli) received on March 13, 1995, and find the petitioners have not complied with the said authorities and practices in the following respects: A petition cannot call directly on the government to take some specific action. Instead, in this case, it should call on the Legislative Assembly to request the government to consider taking the action mentioned. In addition, this petition is not addressed to the Legislature of the province of Manitoba as required by Appendix A to the rules of this House and Beauchesne's Citations 10.17 and 10.19. The petition is therefore out of order.

Physical Education in Schools Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Lamoureux). It complies with the privileges and the practices of this House and complies with rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

The petition of the undersigned residents of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT in July 1994, the Minister of Education introduced an action plan entitled Renewing Education: New Directions; THAT this report will make physical education an optional course in Grades 9 to 12; THAT the physical education curriculum should be regularly reviewed to ensure that it meets the needs of students; THAT the government is failing to recognize the benefits of physical education such as improved physical fitness, more active lifestyles, health promotion, self-discipline, skill development, stress reduction, strengthened peer relationships, weight regulation, stronger bones, reduced risk of health diseases and improved self-confidence.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly urge the Minister responsible for Education to consider reinstating physical education as a compulsory core subject area. *

(1335) Communities' Public Education Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Ashton). It complies with the privileges and the practices of this House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Yes? An Honourable Member: Read it. Mr. Speaker: The Clerk will read.

March I6, I995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA IOII Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS funding for public schools by the provincial government has been cut twice in the past three years; and

WHEREAS provincial funding for the school district of Mystery Lake has dropped by nearly $2 million over the same period, more than I 0 percent; and

WHEREAS funding for private schools has increased by over II 0 percent under the same provincial government; and

WHEREAS Thompson was faced with a 48 percent increase in the education support levy tax as a result of reassessment in I993, resulting in $500,000 leaving our community; and

WHEREAS the Thompson school district is now faced with a massive $I.8-million deficit equivalent to a 48 percent increase in local school taxes; and

WHEREAS unless the minister reviews this funding the Thompson school district will be forced to consider both a $500,000 tax increase and severe program cuts totalling over $I.3 million. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly request the Minister of Education and Training (Mr. Manness) to reconsider the funding model to ensure that Thompson and other communities in this province are able to maintain quality public education. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr.

Speaker, it is my pleasure to table the I993-I994 Annual Report of the Manitoba Arts Council. Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): I would like to table the 1993- 94 Annual Report of the Clean Environment Commission. Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Quarterly Financial Report for the Nine Months, April to December, 1994. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Department of Health Capital Program Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement to make to the House. Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to table the I995- 1996 Capital Program for the Department of Health. This is my second capital program as Minister of Health, and 'I am pleased to announce that the themes of my leadership and that of our government have remained strong and healthy. We continue to actualize the principles of Quality Health for Manitobans: The Action Plan and the principles of universality and accessibility of the Canada Health Act.

Funds have been allocated to the revitalization and refurbishment of rural health care systems guaranteeing rural Manitobans with sustainable and accessible services to the continued restructuring of urban, rural and northern facilities to address the changing methods of delivering care. This is to accommodate shifts to outpatient surgery, install state of the art equipment for patient care, diagnostics and treatment.

Personal care home beds continue to expand in number within a plan for equitable dispersion of resources throughout the province, and significant capital has been made available to modernize our older care facilities to modem concepts of care that are in keeping with the changing nature of the residents we serve.

1012 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 This capital program reflects the priorities, concerns and needs expressed to me by thousands of Manitoba patients, professionals, health care students, board members, researchers and special interest groups across this province.

As Minister of Health, I have been honoured in many meeting rooms, large boardrooms filled with professionals arguing their cases for resources, community halls filled with concerned and committed citizens seeking stability in their local health care system, banquets, small dinners, and, of course, the comfort of my own office in the Legislative Building. I have engaged in discussion, debate and listened to a variety of competing wishes. In this forum and with the support of my colleagues in cabinet and most particularly my friend the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Stefanson), I am proud to announce a robust and balanced capital program for 1995-96. More specifically, Mr. Speaker,

Schedule I, Projects in Construction total $180,957,000. These projects provide for the construction of two rural hospitals, St. Pierre and Stonewall, three personal care, long-term care facilities in Winnipeg and five personal care home facilities in rural Manitoba. It also prepares the site for the expansion of the Manitoba Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation and numerous maintenance repairs and modernization projects. Mr. Speaker, this capital program brings total construction of beds to well over 1,000 since the election of our government in 1988.

Schedule II, Projects Approved for Construction, totals $191,884,000. These funds provide for a 25-bed acute psychiatry project at Brandon General Hospital, as well as a free standing facility for child and adolescent services. In addition, Phase I of the Brandon General Hospital redevelopment provides for the replacement and expansion of the Westman Laboratory. The powerhouse and the maintenance shops will begin construction this fall. This

schedule provides for the construction of a Red Cross blood transfusion facility and prepares the site for the construction of the William A venue project at the Health Sciences Centre. *

(1340) The William A venue project will be the largest single project in the history of the department's capital program and will provide for the replacement of the adult and pediatric emergency, surgery and intensive care services of the Health Sciences Centre. These funds also replace and maintain rural hospital projects in Thompson, Central, Interlake and Westman regions and continue with personal care home development in five of the eight health regions: Westman, Interlake, Central, Eastman and Winnipeg.

Schedule IV, Approved for Architectural Planning includes projects totalling $306,474,000; the design of three rural hospitals, . five urban personal care homes and five rural and northern personal care homes dispersed from Flin Flon and The Pas in the North to Notre Dame, Altona and Shoal Lake in the south. This capital program provides funds to assist hospitals with their fiscal targets, providing funds to install efficient systems that support the provision of care or move care to less costly but effective delivery models.

Every region of the province will benefit from this program, and every aspect of our delivery system from community health centres to the highest level of complex technologically sophisticated care is supported in this document. Mr. Speaker, the 1995-96 capital program of the Department of Health is a testament to our commitment to the infrastructure of our society, to our strong economy, our ability to set appropriate priorities amongst articulate and competing interests and our commitment to provide service and resources to all Manitobans wherever they may live.

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1013 I am very proud to present this capital program to my colleagues in the House, a program that reflects our values, our commitment and our leadership in a complex environment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity of replying to the minister's statement. I do not recall in the past that ministers have stood up and made statements regarding the capital programs but, then again, these are interesting times with respect to potential events that may occur in the next few days. So I can understand that.

While the government announces a massive capital program, they have done more in their seven years in office to destroy the human capital program in the health care sector than any other government, and I think that the government ought to have spent some time and spent some attention with respect to the human capital program, Mr. Speaker, as they have spent on this capital program.

Three years ago in this Chamber we raised questions about the deficiency of some of the operating rooms at Children's Hospital and the Health Sciences Centre, and there was nary a word from members opposite who in fact accused us of misleading this House or attempting to do that. Now we see that the project, the $113-million capitalization of the William Avenue project, which has been before Treasury Board now for eight or nine months, has all of a sudden materialized days before a provincial election. *

(1345) The dilemma and the problem with this government is, quite frankly, they do not have a consistent plan or approach to health care. They have 102 committees studying health care and they leave that information secret. But now, days before a provincial election campaign, we have dropped on us a massive capital plan for the province of Manitoba, at the same time when they have studies like Bell-Wade that says, well, we should maybe have adult psychiatry moved back to St.

Boniface after we have decided in our previous plan to have adult psychiatry over at Health Sciences Centre, after we have closed beds and after we have built a $45-million structure. There is only one word for it-inconsistent. It is very difficult on short notice to deal with all of the projects in here, Mr.

Speaker, but it is pretty clear to members on this side of the House that this government plan is an attempt to try to show the public of Manitoba that they are actually doing some building, quote, in the area of health care, and after seven years of tearing down the system and cutting and slashing, they are finally moving along to perhaps put something back in the system. I warn members opposite, we have said consistently now for four to five years that it is too late in the process, that they should have looked at the people resources.

They should have looked to improving the quality of care in the health care system a long time ago, and now close to the election campaign, we have thrust upon us-and just by way of example, Mr. Speaker, the members talk about the expansion of the Brandon Hospital to allow for the psychiatric centre. This is way behind schedule. Their plan is two years out of date, and now days, again, before the Premier (Mr. Filmon) takes his walk to see the Lieutenant-Governor, they say they are now going to be building something. They say to the people of Manitoba, trust us, we are now going to build something.

Trust us, we are now going to improve your capital facilities, at the same time when the largest capital project ever undertaken in this province in health, $150 million for a computer system, is not even mentioned in here. It is not even touched upon in here, and they refuse to table the contract. They refuse to table their studies, and in a five-year plan, Mr. Speaker, I find it surprising that they refuse to table and provide

1014 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 information on what will be the largest capital plan, $150 million to the Royal Bank to build a computer system. I think members opposite ought to provide all of the information, table the secret committee reports, table all of the reports that are there, table the Royal Bank contract, and then we can look at all of this and see if there is, in fact, some kind of semblance of a plan for order and direction in the health care system. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Mr.

Speaker, I think I will limit my comments to the information that the minister has given us in this capital program and save my comments on the health care system in general for my speech this afternoon. Let me start with some of the positive comments. Again, this is on very short notice so just briefly, given what we have heard the minister comment on this afternoon, we are certainly pleased that we are seeing more personal care home beds that are to be developed here in Manitoba. We have consistently called for that since 1988.

It will be interesting to know where, in fact, those personal care home beds are placed. I know that every community in Manitoba may want to see a personal care home in their community, but we hope the decisions made as to where the personal care home beds will be will be based on need in the community and not based on who the MLA is for that particular area. I hope we have moved away from that in politics. As well, I am pleased to hear that the acute psychiatric beds at the Brandon Hospital are going forward.

That is a very, very important component of the transition of the move from the Brandon Mental Health Centre to community services in Brandon. We are pleased to see that this is moving ahead. It is going to be an important component. Again, we support that move from the institution of Brandon Mental Health Centre to the community and also to ensure there is more up-to-date acute care services which will be provided in Brandon, unlike the New Democrats who want to see that facility left open and, in fact, want to move back in terms of where we are going with mental health in this province.

What I have not had a chance to see in this schedule, and I would wonder and I would be interested in the minister's comments on this, I am a little skeptical about the area that talks about

Schedule IV and the projects that are approved for architectural planning. I am skeptical of that because many of the projects that get approved under architectural planning oftentimes do not come to fruition as indicated in the timetable. One example is, of course, the architectural plans which were approved to move ahead for better facilities of Cadham Lab to assist Dr. Markesteyn, to assist the medical examiner's office. Those were scrapped in a former capital plan. I do not know if they are in this one or not.

I would hope that they would be, because certainly I think the Department of Health, this minister and this government should be listening to their own staff in the Department of Health when they see a need for expansion of those services. I would leave my comments at that. I do find it very interesting how quickly things can happen in terms of presentation of capital plans when we know an election is only a few days away, because it is usually very difficult to get these capital projects. We usually get it at the end of the Estimates.

So we are very pleased that this year we are able to get this capital program ahead of time. Thank you very much. *

(1350) March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1015 INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill16-The Maintenance Enforcement (Various Acts Amendment) Act Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), that leave be given to introduce Bill 16, The Maintenance Enforcement (Various Acts Amendment) Act;

Loi sur l'execution des ordonnances alimentaires - modification de diverses lois, and that the same now be received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to introduce for first reading our government's maintenance enforcement legislation, which is designed to enhance Manitoba's ability to collect maintenance payments. This government's approach reflects the fact that the end of a relationship does not release an individual from their obligation to support their family.

The proposed amendments before this Legislature will substantially strengthen enforcement efforts, will provide invaluable information on the location and the assets of delinquent payers and help us to get more money into the hands of children and families.

The proposed initiatives before this House to expand our enforcement powers are: suspending and refusing renewal of driver's licences and motor vehicle registrations; reporting delinquent payers to the Credit Bureau; attaching pension benefit credits; attaching jointly held monies; permitting garnishing orders for monies other than wages to remain in effect indefinitely; increasing the maximum jail term to 90 days from 30; and raising the maximum fine to $1,000 from $500. Mr.

Speaker, this government is taking significant steps to force those individuals who are defaulting on maintenance and support payments to live up to their obligations. Thank you. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon from the Linwood School forty-five Grades 5 and 6 students under the direction of Mr. Ed Hume, Mr. Will Peters and Mrs. Bonnie Christianson. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine).

On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Trade Deficit-U.S. Statistics Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I have asked in previous years about the deficit-of-trade situation with the United States. In previous questions I have asked the government, they have indicated to me that they expected to see a much more positive situation in terms of our balance of trade or deficit of trade with the United States.

We were certainly hoping that with the lower dollar one of the benefits of that lower dollar would be, of course, on the one hand increased exports to the United States, which we have certainly seen, but a decrease in the imports to Canada in terms of our trade situation. The federal government and the federal Canadian deficit of trade has produced an increase or an improved surplus of trade with the United States. In fact, the surplus of trade in 1994 has gone up by 18 percent. I would like to ask the Premier of this province why our situation remains a deficit of

1016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 trade with the United States, and why that deficit of trade has decreased by some 12 percent to a record high of $1.28 billion. Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I find it really interesting that the Leader of the Opposition always, in his doom-and-gloom scenario, looks for the darkest cloud that he can find to try and make a point. The fact of the matter is that we have had the largest increase in exports to the United States of any province in Canada this past year-a 32- percent increase.

In fact, we have narrowed the gap of the trade balance with the United States. Our imports from the United States have not increased as rapidly as our exports to the United States, so we are in a far better position today than we were a year ago in both respects. We have narrowed the balance-of-trade gap, and at the same time we have increased exports substantially at the highest level of any province in Canada. *

(1355) Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the lower dollar is producing some excellent exports to the United States from Manitoba Hydroelectricity, with the Limestone agreement, has gone up again in producing something over $280 million in trade. The machinery is improved, cereal goods, other oilseed products, other products, the forestry products. The lower dollar has helped us and has been good. It has been good for Canada that it has produced a surplus-of-trade improvement of about 18 percent.

Why, with the lower dollar, in the last four years but particularly between '93 and '94, has our balance of trade gone to a deficit of trade of $I. I 4 billion in '93 to $1.28 billion, a decrease of I2 percent, while Canada is improving? We all know that a deficit of trade with a jurisdiction gives us a deficit of jobs, and we all want jobs in this province. Mr. Filmon: Mr.

Speaker, what the member is not even aware of-he looks for blind figures that he can try and tum into something negative -there has been a substantial increase in the importation of production equipment here because our manufacturing sector is booming like it has never boomed before. Our manufacturing sector: increases in production, increases in exports, investment growth has been amongst the best in Canada. That is resulting in production equipment being brought in here to create jobs and long-term opportunities. I repeat for him, the situation is substantially better.

The exports have increased more than the imports have on a year-over-year basis, and most of the import increase has been in that area of production equipment which is going to establish more manufacturing, more jobs in Manitoba. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the Canadian trade situation with the United States is producing increased surpluses of trade. The Manitoba situation, with the same Canadian dollar, is producing higher deficits of trades in this province. I would think that the Premier would have some concern about this issue and what its impact is on jobs. We have had improvement on international trade.

The government cites exports always in their budget. They do not cite imports. On the international trade, the world trade, which includes the United States trade, we have seen an improvement, but we are still running today, in 1994, a $540-million deficit of trade,

whereas in I 988 when the government came to office there was a surplus oftrade of some $42 million. I would like to ask the government: Why have we gone in the opposite direction on our international deficit of trade, why are we going in the opposite direction of Canada and what impact is it having on job opportunities for our province and for our future?

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1017 Mr. Filmon: Let us compare apples to apples. When that bunch across the way, the New Democrats, were in office in 1985- Mr. Doer: I said '88. Mr. Filmon: We will take it all the way through. Our figures are better than every year that you were in office. Let us take the figures in 1985 or 1986. Manitoba's exports to the United States represented half the level of imports. There were 53 percent one year, 52 percent the next year in '85 and '86 under that government. Today they are running at 72 percent. They are gaining substantially.

Our exports continue to gain faster than our imports do, and we are in a better position vis-a-vis our balance of trade with the United States than we ever have been. I would just ask the member opposite to try and look a little positively from time to time. Stop being the master of gloom and doom and once in a while look at all the good things that are happening in Manitoba *

(1400) Property Taxes Education Levy Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, if we had a cynicism meter in this province, it would have reached an all-time high with the daily statements of this government, particularly in the area of education. We have had cuts of 4.3 percent, that is $35 million. We have seen what we call the Gary Filmon tax, the local property taxes for education, increase as much as 90 percent, since this government was elected, in School Division No. I; 85 percent in the Assiniboia Division.

We are seeing property tax increases this year ranging from 2.9 percent to 16.2 percent for school taxes because of the offloading of this government. My question, Mr. Speaker, and I will use not my words but the words of another public figure. I would like to ask, and begin by saying, and this is a quote: I do not believe that it is going to be in the long-term interests of Manitobans to have a government who hides the manner in which it raises its taxes. I would like to ask specifically to the Premier (Mr.

Filmon): What is the government doing, I ask, to ensure that senior citizens, that people, the low-income earners, the low-income homeowners, can continue to live in his or her own home because of these kinds of tax increases? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister ofEducation and Training): Mr. Speaker, I gather the member is referring to property taxes that have been called upon to support Mystery Lake School Division's decision to increase taxes.

I want the member for Thompson to know that his school division has an operating expenditure per pupil of $6,324, which is significantly above the provincial average of $5,838. Also, Mr. Speaker, this is in spite of the fact the enrollment has decreased 1.3 percent. Also, the average salary in the member's school division is $50,137, far above the provincial average of $48,078. I could go on and on. I hope the member asks questions. The main reason then that the taxes are going up on the ratepayer in Thompson are decisions that have been made locally, autonomously, within that school division. Mr. Ashton: Mr.

Speaker, it is interesting that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) did not answer because the quotes were his quotes, and, in fact, he is failing by his own definition, because they are offloading onto the property taxpayers of this province massively, with massive property tax increases. I will ask the Premier again, because we are seeing just in the last few days, as school divisions finalize their budgets, just how much property taxes are increasing. Once again, how

1018 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 can he justify cutting public schools by $35 million, 4.3 percent over the past three years, something that is leading to major program cuts and property tax increases in this province? Mr. Manness: Again, Mr. Speaker, some more facts as to what drives up the taxes within that particular school division. The '94-95 pupil teacher ratio for regular instruction is 17.7 which is far below the provincial average of 18.7.

These are the decisions that the elected individuals within the Thompson area have made, as they are legislated to do within the autonomy given to them. Mr. Speaker, do not let the member stand here and blame tax increases that are fully the responsibility of that school division on this government. They are fully within the power and the legislative responsibility of the trustees elected within that school division. Government of Manitoba Spending Priorities Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): It is interesting, Mr.

Speaker, that they blame the federal government for oftloading, but they accept no responsibility for oftloading onto the school boards in this province. If they will not answer the question in terms of the cuts and the property tax increases, I will ask one final question on priorities. I am wondering if the tax money of this province might be better spent on the public school system, rather than the massive government advertising and a $40,000 newspaper put out that has 14 pictures, or whatever number of pictures, from the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach). What are the priorities, Mr.

Speaker, shameless advertising or the school kids in this province? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister ofEducation and Training): Mr. Speaker, as we announced in the middle of January, $760 million has been directed to support of the public school system, more than $200 million than when we came into government eight budgets ago. Those facts are indisputable. Nobody can disagree with them. They are real. Anybody who wants to come close to the subject of education, the issue is not funding, Mr. Speaker, because we are at the rank of the second or third highest on a per-pupil basis in Canada.

We have an equalization model that distributes fairly the $760 million that I referenced. Because some school divisions decide to pay their teachers far in excess of the provincial average, that have pupil-teacher ratios that are far below the provincial average, that is a decision that is made locally. That is the way education has existed in this province for a number of years and continues to exist today. Government of Manitoba Advertising Guidelines Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

For close to a year now, both we and the opposition party have been asking the government to come forward with guidelines on the use of taxpayers' dollars for political advertising. We now learn that there has been, in that last year, $44,000 spent on these four newsletters. Just one of these, the most recent, includes 17 pictures of members of that caucus. Seven of those are of one member, the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), but nevertheless, 17 pictures of people in that caucus in one newsletter costing $44,000.

My question for the Minister of Finance: What is the standard, given that this same government recently paid I believe over $1,000 to have the centre page of the Manitoba Sport Fishing Guide ripped out, which simply states-and no pictures of cabinet ministers-that there was a program initiated by the Honourable

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1019 Dr. Jon Gerrard, occurred this year when we agreed to contract with the Government of Canada to operate in a pilot youth training project, Youth Service Canada was announced by the Honourable Lloyd Axworthy, etcetera. That is it. That is the total politicization. They spent over a thousand dollars ripping that out of the sport guide. What is the standard? Boo. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that the Leader of the second opposition party has asked before.

At the time I indicated to him that we were corresponding with all provincial governments in Canada, we were corresponding with the federal government. We have done just that. Not a single provincial government or the federal government have any guidelines so to speak in terms of how you deal with advertising on behalf of governments. We are continuing to work with those levels of government around the entire issue of formulating guidelines. Mr.

Speaker, I want to tell you that everything we have done would fall within any guidelines that would be established, because it is information being provided by the government to the taxpayers of this province. He makes a big issue of referring to pictures ofthe Minister of Rural Development in a rural development publication but obviously also includes dozens of pictures of individuals from throughout Manitoba, which is certainly not uncommon for a publication that deals with rural development issues. Once again we will continue to work with other jurisdictions.

To date there is not a single government, including the federal Liberal government, that has any guidelines in place for advertising. Everything we do would fall within any guidelines that would ultimately be established. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, such is the political neurosis and hypocrisy of this government that they spent over a thousand dollars ripping out even a reference by an independent organization to a member of Parliament who does not happen to be in their party, yet they publish $44,000 worth of pictures of themselves.

My question for the Minister of Finance: Given that he said, June 3, 1994, in this House ". .. we will come forward with a position on the whole issue of appropriate guidelines and so on. So we are undertaking it. We take it very seriously."-where are those guidelines? That was nine months ago. Where are those guidelines? Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, I think, unfortunately, the Leader of the second opposition party did not listen to my first answer, but we have worked with all other levels of government.

In fact, the Provincial Auditor herself took the time and effort to attempt to get information on guidelines that would exist with other governments across Canada, and again, was unable to provide any significant information in that area because they do not exist. The ultimate test is right here in this Chamber, where we can be asked questions about the kind of advertising. The ultimate test is with the people of Manitoba. We will continue to work with other levels of government around the whole issue of guidelines, but that is the ultimate test.

Everything that we have done is informing Manitobans about initiatives, about programs, about opportunities, whether it is Grow Bonds, whether it is Rural Economic Development Initiatives, whether it is Business Start, a whole series of initiatives, whether it is the Home Renovation Program, whether it is the new home purchase program. The list goes on and on in terms of information that Manitobans should know, so that they can access programs and utilize those programs. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, my final question is for the minister. He says the test is in this

1020 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 Legislature. The test is here, and we are apparently going to find out the test. Can he tell us what the test is?-because, Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused when they spent over a thousand dollars to rip out a private advertisement that happens to mention Dr. Jon Gerrard or Lloyd Axworthy, yet at the same time spent $44,000 with 17 pictures of themselves. Now, what is the test? Do you have to be a Conservative to get taxpayers' dollars? Is that the test?-because there does not appear to be any other credible explanation. What is it? *

(1410) Mr. Stefanson: This is an interesting line of questioning, Mr. Speaker, from the Leader of the Liberal Party. We all remember his utilization of the postage services in tenns of the amount of money he spent sending out infonnation to Manitobans. I have outlined for him that we believe as a government that it is important that Manitobans know what governments are doing.

We believe it is important that Manitobans know what programs are available, and, obviously, by infonning Manitobans about Grow Bonds and REDI-and I know the Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that those are small potatoes, to quote him directly. We do not think they are small potatoes. We think Manitobans should know about those initiatives, so that they can access Grow Bond programs right across our province, access Rural Economic Development Initiatives, access Business Start programs. I could go on and on about the infonnation that Manitobans should have. We believe in infonning Manitobans.

We will always infonn Manitobans, unlike the kind of attitude we see from the second opposition party. Capital Projects SmartHealth Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I think there might have been an oversight or some inaccuracies in this capital program that was tabled this afternoon by the minister insofar as he said the William A venue project would be the largest capital.

From what I understand from the minister's own press release, the Royal Bank contract would be the largest capital project ever undertaken by the Department of Health, be it $100 million, $118 million or $150 million depending on which aspect of the minister's speech you take from. Can the minister confinn whether or not the Royal Bank deal which will probably be the largest capital project in health history is in this capital plan, Mr. Speaker? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Initially, Mr.

Speaker, I am tempted to remind the honourable member that it may be his imagination from which he withdraws the numbers he uses when he asks questions in this House, but the honourable member surely, even though he lacks the medical background of one Derry Deeter in Brandon West that the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) royally insulted, his own Health critic of the last year and a half or more when he spoke as he did about Dr.

Derry Deeter in Brandon, but he will pay a price for that. [interjection] He knows something about health, unlike-that is right-the member for Kildonan, but the honourable member for Kildonan has been around long enough to know that arrangements like the one we have with SmartHealth do not fonn part of the capital budget of the province. SmartHealth Contract Tabling Request Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, if the minister would table the capital project for

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1021 Health for next year, will the minister today table the contract which is almost as large as some of these capital projects or larger? Will he table the contract with Royal Bank that he has refused to do over and over again in this Chamber? Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the contract is being negotiated and as the honourable member knows, it is a contract that has many, many pieces, many, many parts, many, many modules to it. There are many, many go or no-go points.

The honourable member just needs to be reminded one more time that our implementation committee composed of the many, many stakeholders in the health system who are our partners in all of this have the say about the go or no-go parts of the contract. The honourable member needs to be reminded one more time that any cost overruns are the responsibility of SmartHealth. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, this sounds so familiar. The minister knows the same thing was said with Connie Curran, go, no go, and we paid and paid and paid Connie Curran $4 million plus $800,000 in expenses. My supplementary is to the minister.

They are working on this contract. Offices have been set up. Will the minister, today, table the Royal Bank contract so the people of Manitoba can have the same assurance and can review it before we commit these horrendous funds to a computer project on behalf of the minister and the Royal Bank of Canada? Mr. McCrae: As I did the other day, Mr. Speaker, I am going to refer the honourable member to the stakeholders and he can talk to those people who are our partners in the smart card system that we are putting together in Manitoba.

I ask him to refer to the Manitoba Society of Seniors, to the Manitoba Association of Registered Nurses, to the Consumers' Association of Manitoba, the Manitoba Association of Rights and Liberties, the College of Physicians and Surgeons, and on and on. Let him talk to the stakeholders in the health system, including the consumers I work for. The honourable member, we are not sure who he works for, Mr. Speaker. Rural Manitoba Physician Requirements Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Mr.

Speaker, Arborg Hospital is currently looking at shutting down every third weekend because they cannot get an extra doctor in their community. They are left with only two doctors, when they had three. Eriksdale presently is closing every third weekend and has been doing so for the last year. Other communities, like Russell, Souris, Gladstone, only to mention a few, are all suffering the fact that there are no physicians for their areas. Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell the House today what plans he has in place to encourage doctors to move to rural Manitoba to ensure that we do not become a two-tier system?

Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the honourable member raising this question. The honourable member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) raised a similar question the other day, and I laid out for the honourable member the various [interjection] I did answer that question. answered the question to the honourable member for The Pas the other day, laying out several initiatives that are brought forward, which are partly the result of the interim report of the Physician Resource Committee.

No one knows more than the honourable member or myself, I suggest, or the honourable member for The Pas, how important it is in our communities to have medical services to go along with the facilities that we have built up over many, many years.

1022 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 So, with the continuing partnership of the College of Physicians and Surgeons, the Manitoba Medical Association, the communities themselves and, hopefully, honourable members opposite, we will resolve these physician resource issues. Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Speaker, the minister signed an Order-in-Council in February which changes the criteria for determining professional qualifications for foreign-trained professionals.

The minister has sent a letter to the physicians in Manitoba who have provisional billing numbers, encouraging them to practise in rural Manitoba, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister tell this House why nothing has been communicated to the hospitals that are trying to recruit these doctors? Mr. McCrae: It would be quite incorrect to say nothing has been done with respect to the hospitals. My visits to hospitals in communities that have hospitals now exceed over 60 visits in this province, Mr. Speaker, to hospital facilities in communities that have an interest in health care issues.

It is not correct to say what the honourable member has said. Mr. ClifEvans: Mr. Speaker, will the minister then outline to this House what resources his department has put in place, is willing to further put in place, to assist the numerous rural communities and hospitals that are trying to recruit doctors, to simplify the process and help the health care system in rural Manitoba? Mr. McCrae: Well, a lot more resources than any New Democratic government ever put into the coffers for Health in the history of this province. Frank Maynard Settlement Package Ms.

Avis Gray (Crescentwood): My question is for the Minister of Health. When Frank Maynard, the former Deputy Minister of Health, left the employ of the Department of Health, can the minister tell us if he was given a settlement package upon his leaving? Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): assume that whatever arrangements are available to other people in the same position would have been made available to Mr. Maynard. Ms.

Gray: With a supplementary to the Minister of Health: Can the Minister of Health then indicate to this House today exactly what that settlement package was?-since in a Freedom of Information request dated a month ago, we received information that, in fact, we were denied that information. Mr. Maynard was employed by the public. It should be a matter of Public Accounts, when the next Public Accounts document comes out. Can the minister then tell us how much was Mr. Maynard paid for his leaving as deputy minister of the Department of Health? Bon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, I can just confirm for the member that there were no special arrangements whatsoever, no special severance or any other provisions. Whatever he was entitled to under his status as a civil service officer he would have been given, because I know that we were not required to make any provisions whatsoever for him. Ms. Gray: Mr. Speaker, can the Premier then perhaps tell this House why we were not given that information when we asked for it through Freedom oflnformation, particularly since, when we asked for the CEO's contract at Red River Community College, that entire contract was provided to us?

If it is very up front, as the Premier suggests, why were we not given that information when we asked for it through FOI? Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, normally employment contracts are private information. There is no question about that. Any

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1023 remuneration is always accounted for in the Public Accounts. It is shown what they get in black and white, so there is absolutely no opportunity for anybody to hide it. Employment agreements, as in almost any other form of employment, are normally the private information between the employer and the employee. Certainly nothing that we were doing would be anything special for this individual. He would have gotten what he was entitled to as a public servant who served some 25 years in the government of Manitoba-no special provisions. That is all I can assure her. *

(1420) Treaty Land Entitlements Interim Protection Zones Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, on February 6 the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Praznik) wrote to the treaty land entitlement committee, stating that the provincial government would set aside interim protection zones for treaty land entitlement consideration. I want to ask the Acting Minister ofNorthern Affairs if this is now government policy and what steps this government has taken to fulfill this promise made on February 6. Hon. James Downey (Acting Minister of Northern Affairs): Mr.

Speaker, we will be more than glad to take that question as notice. I do not have the information available. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, in light of the minister making that statement, can the acting minister then tell this House if lands are being identified and whether they have contacted the Swampy Cree Tribal Council, Shoal River First Nation, Indian Birch Band and Pine Creek Band to identify lands to be set aside for their treaty land entitlement? Mr. Downey: Mr.

Speaker, I, in responding to the member, just want to remind her-1 will take the specifics of the question as notice, but I want her and the members of this House to know that it was this Premier (Mr. Filmon) and this government in the history of Manitoba that made the first land settlement in history in the northeast part of this province with the Island Lake communities, never before carried out by any government in this province, a record settlement with the First Nations of this province. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr.

Speaker, I will ask that same minister if they will make a commitment today to meet with the bands that I just raised, the Swampy Cree Tribal Council Bands, to ensure that there is land set aside for them so they will have the opportunity for economic development in their area that they have been asking this government to do for some time now? Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, again, I will take the specifics of the question as notice. Not only on meetings but action as far as the First Nations of this province are concerned has clearly been demonstrated by this party and this government over the last eight years.

We are proud of our record. You can bet that we would be more than prepared to meet with any of those individuals. Clean Environment Commission Elimination Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St Johns): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Environment. Water is one of our most precious resources. A couple of years ago the Clean Environment Commission determined that it did not have enough data to approve the proposed diversion of the Assiniboine River. We have now learned that the government intends to scrap the Clean Environment Commission.

My question to the minister is: Would the minister tell Manitobans what changes to environmental assessment the government plans

1024 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 and whether there will be a balance between development and the environment, that is, sustainable development of our water resources? Bon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I will not let the member put on the record false information about the future of the Clean Environment Commission.

He knows better than anybody else in this House that under the principles of sustainable development and the requirement that we are placing on all departments in this government, wherever they are involved with environment, to make sure that they take into account that there is an expanded role for environment, not a reduced one. He better quit misleading the people. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, given that we understand from a former member of the government benches that it wants the Assiniboine River diversion project to proceed, and in light of the government's plan for assessments to be unabashedly prodevelopment, is the scrapping of the Clean Environment Commission designed to allow quick passage in the backrooms of this project and such projects as the arena at The Forks- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, that is unmitigated misleading of the public. It may make good politics in St.

Johns, that is the only place I would presume, given that he must know his area reasonably well. Mr. Speaker, the very fact that he would imply that somehow the Clean Environment Commission or any commission that would take on the responsibilities that it presently has would not acknowledge the paramount importance of protection and enhancement of water resources in this province-perhaps he thinks that the public would stand for that. Is that the way that New Democrats would run it? They did not even have a hearing when they built Limestone and he wants to stand up and talk about protection of the environment.

He is a joke. Point of Order Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, the member may be quite exercised. I ask him to withdraw that reflection. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable member for St. Johns. The honourable member for St. Johns, with his question. Mr. Mackintosh: I ask the member, Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, to withdraw the comment. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. We have a point of order here. You are asking for which comment to be withdrawn, sir? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, I am an honourable member like the other members in this Chamber. I am not a joke.

I ask the member to withdraw that. Mr. Speaker: Which is true. The honourable member does have a point of order. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, that was certainly not a reflection on his person, but it was a reflection on his politics- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I am asking the honourable Minister of Environment to withdraw that remark. These are all honourable members in the Chamber. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that he is an honourable gentleman. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the-

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1025 Some Honourable Members: Withdraw. Mr. Speaker: That is a withdrawal. *** Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, even with this government's interferences in the Clean Environment Commission processes, the splitting of assessments that we now see and the ignoring of Clean Environment Commission decisions, I ask the minister what particular Clean Environment decision is of such concern to the government that it wants to scrap the Clean Environment Commission? They are scrapping it, Mr. Speaker. His people say scr- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate that I would suggest there is probably no better example before all of us today than the very example of the disagreement between the City of Winnipeg and the Rosser landfill being proposed by BFI.

Where the Clean Environment Commission has a number of responsibilities that go beyond simply environmental regulation, that in fact the very questions that the city is asking, the questions that the member is asking and his colleagues about how we will capably deal with such a complex question, it simply begs a question about the expansion of the role of a commission to deal with more than just environmental matters or just economic matters. It talks about a sustainable development concept, an approach that is fair and reasonable and provides for jobs and the environment in this province.

Budget Revenue Transfers Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. This budget has shown a surplus of $48 million in large part because of a special one time transfer of $145 million from a Lotteries fund. We note that in addition, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) has transferred $30 million of revenue from 1994 to 1995 including as is shown in the estimates of revenue, the Manitoba Mineral Resources Limited, Manitoba Development Corporation and A.E. McKenzie Limited. Those monies were received in 1994, but he is showing them as being received in 1995.

Can the minister explain why he has transferred '94 revenue to '95 to contribute to his surplus figure? Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see that the member for Brandon East is taking the time to go through the budget in some detail and to acknowledge that there will be a $48-million surplus in 1995- 96, the first balanced budget in Manitoba since 1972-73. That revenue he is referring to is money that will flow from the finalization of the sale of Manitoba Mineral Resources, from the fmalization of the sale of A.E.

McKenzie Seeds and from a dividend from the Manitoba Development Corporation. Upon finalization and completion and the winding up of those various entities, Mr. Speaker, that revenue will flow in 1995-96. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, McKenzie Seeds was sold this last year, this current fiscal year, and we were told monies were being received. Now you are telling us there are no monies received from McKenzie Seeds in 1994- 95. Yet, another member of this government has indicated that those monies were received by the government of Manitoba.

So can the minister explain the contradiction between what he is telling me today and the

1026 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 minister responsible for A.E. McKenzie told us a couple of months ago? *

(1430) Mr. Stefanson: There is absolutely no contradiction, Mr. Speaker, and I did not leave the impression that there is any contradiction. Those sales are completed and have been completed but in terms of the winding up and the transferring of the funds to us, it will occur in 1995-96.

If the member for Brandon East looks at our 1994 Quarterly Report that we just tabled today, he will see in this year that we are coming in with a deficit of $218 million as opposed to the original deficit of $296 million that was projected at budget time, some $80-million improvement because our revenues are doing better and the whole economy is performing better. There are more jobs in Manitoba and so on. So our performance in 1994-95 is significantly better than originally projected.

We have the opportunity to wind up those entities and to transfer those funds in 1995-96 and balance the budget here in Manitoba for the first time in 23 years and make sure it stays balanced from this day forward in Manitoba. Mr. Leonard Evans: Well, it is obvious that the minister is taking great liberty with how he transfers funds, because the people of this province were told that they received the money from McKenzie Seeds in '94-95, and that money should have been registered as that type of revenue received. It is obvious a sleight of hand is going on here.

It is a shell game, just like the VL T transfers, a shell game, and we all know it. I would like to ask the minister, Mr. Speaker, is it this government's policy to continue to sell capital assets, provincial government assets, to bolster its revenues or to be able to balance its books in the future such as, for example, the sale-God forbid that this government is re elected--of MTS. Mr.

Stefanson: I know that it really pains the member for Brandon East to see a surplus here in Manitoba because of the kind of track record and the kind of deficits that we saw under their administration from 1981 till 1988, and you need look no further, Mr. Speaker, than the budget that they introduced in 1988 that had a $334- million deficit. It was so bad that one of their own members voted against it and defeated them. Thank God for that day for the good of Manitoba's economy and for the fiscal management of this province.

Whenever it makes sense for government to get out of a function that they should not be in, where the private sector can perform better, more efficiently, and provide that service to Manitobans, we will do that every time when that makes sense, but we will also maintain our commitments and our priorities for health, education and support to families in this province. Capital Projects Cadham Provincial Laboratory Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): My question is for the Minister of Health.

Can the Minister of Health tell us why the-1 see the Cadham Provincial Laboratory expansion is again showing up in architectural planning as it was a number of years ago. Can the Minister of Health tell us why that particular project has not moved to the

section under approved for construction? Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the various schedules in the capital budget have got the architects and all of the facilities and the management of those facilities and the government terribly busy trying to keep up with the amount of expenditure this

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1027 government is willing to make on capital projects. That as much as anything else may very well account for what the honourable member is asking about today. There are discussions and negotiations that go on throughout the piece, especially the earlier parts of the development of a capital project. The decisions made at the early stages of the development of a project are very; very important, because it is hard, once you have a building half built or a project half completed, to change your mind at that stage and do it differently.

There have indeed been negotiations leading to what you see in the capital Health program for the province of Manitoba, and those negotiations and planning account as much for the passage of time as anything else that the honourable member might want to bring forward. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY BUDGET DEBATE (Sixth Day of Debate) Mr. Speaker: On the adjourned debate, the sixth day of debate, on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr.

Stefanson) that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) in amendment thereto and the motion of the honourable Leader of the Second Opposition (Mr. Edwards) in further amendment thereto, standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Agriculture who has 30 minutes remaining. Hon. Harry Enos (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I would like to resume debate on the budget by giving out a beef and a bouquet.

By the way, it demonstrates to some extent a very important issue that we all will face in how we have to deal with what you will be hearing a great deal about from me when I describe it as a post-WGT A era. First of all, the bouquet, surprisingly, is to the federal Liberal government, and I am absolutely serious about this. Things can happen in a positive way without millions of dollars of tax money involved. What the federal government has announced today with respect to our ongoing sugar dispute with the Americans is precisely the action needed.

They have undertaken to investigate the offshore sugar, often subsidized, being dumped into Canada and then Canada being used as a back door for entry into the American market. You see, Mr. Speaker, that is what the Americans are mad about. They are not mad about our sugar beet producers, not mad about the sugar beet producers in Alberta-we only produce 8 percent to 10 percent of domestic sugar-but they do not like cheap, subsidized, foreign sugar coming in the back door to access the American market.

Today, I am pleased to report to the House that Canada is on the verge of perhaps instigating a major trade war with a number of countries, which include Denmark, Germany, Holland, Britain and Korea, for imports of sugar from these countries, worth billions of dollars, but who are suspected of dumping them into this country at prices below their costs of production and triggering the kind of trade dispute that is currently jeopardizing our sugar industry in Manitoba. So I hand a bouquet to the federal government for acting precisely in the way that I advised them to act several weeks ago when this thing started.

That is the way that action has to be taken. I hope that they are successful, and I would like to urge all members of the House, particularly those of the Liberal Party, to Jet it be

1028 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 known to Messrs. Axworthy and others that if they want to help the Manitoba fanner, this is how they can support them in this instance. (Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) Now, as for the beef, because it is equally serious. Yes, regrettably, it is to the official opposition, the NDP. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I am appalled, and I am angry that at this late date, on February 27, '95, a member of this Legislature would still go out of her way to attack a $100- million industry, our PMU industry, to try to destroy jobs in Manitoba, jobs in Brandon and primary production-for immediate release, February 27, 1995, the excerpts from The Business of Estrogen Production prepared by the office of Marianne Cerilli, member of the Legislative Assembly in Manitoba. Now, I thought we had dealt with this matter. The member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Doer), that party that reports to be a government-in-waiting, cannot speak out of both sides of their mouths on these kinds of issues. That is what gives all of us politicians a bad name. More importantly, it runs totally against the very things that we are trying to develop in this province, and that has to be stopped. The Leader of the Opposition has to discipline the member. The Leader of the Opposition has to disassociate himself from that kind of attack, and it has to be done now.

This is at a time when we are talking about value adding, when we are talking about what to do about grain that we cannot ship out of our country or out of our province, when we are talking about trying to utilize some of our more marginal lands, our pasture lands. To have the official opposition associate themselves with a track that is full of blatant lies-that is all you can call them. Every second paragraph, every second sentence that Ms. Marianne Cerilli attaches her name to is blatant Iies-[interjection] Pardon me. I withdraw, Mr. Acting Speaker, the honourable member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli).

But we are talking about- *

(1440) Point of Order Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): On a point of order, the honourable member across knows full well that we are all honourable members in this House, and for him to use the reference word "lied" is unparliamentary, and I ask him to withdraw on both points. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Sveinson): The honourable minister has withdrawn already. *** Mr.

Enos: I made no reference tcr-1 made very specific reference to the material that the honourable member for Radisson feels comfortable associating herself with as being filled with blatant lies, distorted truths and totally unacceptable to the agriculture industry in the province of Manitoba So that is, regrettably, the kind of beef that I have to hand out to the honourable members of the opposition on this particular occasion. Point of Order Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): The Minister of Agriculture is referring to a document which he says has inaccurate information. He is reading from the document.

I would ask that he would table that document so that we can see it, please. Mr. Enos: Mr. Acting Speaker, I have no difficulty in tabling the document. This is just a short

summary. I might tell the honourable member that in addition there is a great deal of other material, some of it gathered not in this province of Manitoba but in North Dakota, of all places. All of that, though, is being used to

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1029 attack this industry. I am pleased to table this information. Point of Order Mr. Reid: Mr. Acting Speaker, I believe it is a policy of this House that when any member of this House refers to a document that that document be tabled in this House. We have asked for that, and there does not need to have any further comment attached to it before it is tabled. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Sveinson): Order, please. The document was tabled. *** Mr. Enos: I suppose that is where the sensitivity is.

That, regrettably, is a lesson that politicians better start learning, and that is, when you want to attach yourself to special interest groups, you want to be very careful. It is that desire, I suppose, that is within us to be everything to all people, and you simply cannot do that. In this particular instance, let us deal with this special interest group that the member for Radisson chooses to identify herself with, the animal rights group. Now, let us talk about the animal rights issue openly, and let us talk about it sensibly because, Mr. Acting Speaker-[interjection] That is right.

Now let us understand that while the instance in this case is horses, it does not stop there, of course. It is all animals. It is the dairy industry. It is poultry. It is beef. It is even pets. It is harness racing at the Downs or thoroughbred horse racing events. It is the exploitation of any and all animals by mankind. That is what we are talking about. Now, if we want to take up that cause seriously, then let us consider the consequences. There would be no health care to debate about. There would be no universities, no schools. How do you think this country was opened up?

Not by a spanking-new John Deere diesel tractor that we drive around now, it was done by horses. How do you think any civilization started agriculture? Whether it was oxen, whether it was mules or whether it was donkeys, let us lay it right on the table. If we pay even cursory lip service to this nonsense that the activists in the animal rights movement are talking about, we are talking about losing immediately thousands and thousands of jobs in Manitoba. We are talking about immediately at least closing down most of our education facilities.

We are talking about immediately closing down most of our health services. Are we seriously talking about that?

If you want to court even for a moment for a few cheap votes, if you want to ingratiate yourself with a group of very well funded, totally funded on taxpayers' support, I might say, with tax contributions, who operate out of Washington in United States, who are on this agenda, who pay themselves exorbitant executive salaries and who will pick and choose, whether it is the seal one year or decade, it is the horse the next decade-my understanding, my information, by the way, is that they are now moving off the horse. It is the beef animals that are going to be the target in the next onslaught.

That is what we are talking about. Let us be fair and open and honest about it, Mr. Acting Speaker, and let us not pretend that we can deal with this in any other way, particularly for the challenges that agriculture faces in the post-WGT era, where it is by deliberate government design, by deliberate government policy-it has to be. It is the only policy that I can hold out to my producers-that, as an alternative to some of the traditional cereal cropping reliance that we have had in the Prairies, we and Saskatchewan and Alberta, land-locked as we are, tum to more expanded livestock production.

If that represents a problem for somebody, that represents a problem for the Liberal Party, that represents, as it obviously does, for the New Democratic Party-although I do not think so. I really do not

1030 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 think so. It ought not to. [interjection] No, I am talking about the position that you are putting the New Democratic Party in. (Mr. Jack Penner, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) If for a moment you even flirt with the idea, if you even walk down the hall with an animal rights activist, you are flirting with that kind of nonsense and that kind of idea If you want to take that measure even just the slightest step forward, how plausible is that for what our primary producers face on the Prairies, land locked as we are, distant from ocean-going seaports? Mr.

Acting Speaker, we are going to actively encourage greater production in poultry. We are going to actively encourage greater production in pork, in hogs. We are going to actively encourage greater production in livestock. Yes, we will actively encourage, and certainly through the extension divisions of the Department of Agriculture, all kinds of ventures into nontraditional livestock raising, such as have been mentioned by the Leader of the Liberal Party-emu, ostrich, bison.

The search for different opportunities, different ventures will accelerate because of the changed circumstances that we will face as of August I, I995, when all of a sudden it becomes prohibitive for us to ship too much of our feed grains, a low-priced, high-volume product, product that is only worth 3 cents a pound, out of our province. Mr. Acting Speaker, let us be very clear. That is the direction that agriculture has to take, not just under this ministry or under this government.

That is the direction that prairie agriculture will take, whether it is by an NDP administration in Saskatchewan or a Conservative administration here in Manitoba or any other administration that may represent the farm community in the coming election. What it does, of course, to those involved in the industry-particularly I challenge our producers in the so-called supply-management areas-poultry, turkey, eggs-because when I speak of expanded livestock, I speak of all livestock. I appreciate that there has been perhaps an undue focus on hogs and on pork. Let me be very clear about it.

I see great opportunities for expanded livestock productions in a very inclusive way. It comes about in a very natural way. What happens with the disappearance of the Crow-if we are not spending tax dollars to move our feed grain out of our province, then it enhances the position that Manitoba already enjoys as being one of the best places, economically speaking and environmentally speaking, to raise these valuable food stocks. That is the future. That is the direction of agriculture as we move into the year 2000. Some of our arrangements that we have, particularly in these products, that you, Mr.

Acting Speaker, are well versed in, you understand this, will be tested because as cost of the feed supplies are stabilized and perhaps even lowered as a result of this federal government action, feed costs will rise, particularly in eastern Canada, and one cannot overall maintain that argument that no, we shall strictly adhere to the quotas that have been allocated to each province. It is natural, and it will be a responsibility for the departments of Agriculture, for our people involved in the vicinity, that more of that production should occur where it makes most sense to produce it, and that is in Manitoba.

That is a challenge that I provided to the Broiler Producers association who are meeting today at their annual meeting. I gave out the same challenge to our turkey producers a week ago. I am more than prepared to work with them. They have, in the main, done an excellent job in doing two things: No. I, not imposing on the Canadian taxpayer, or the taxpayer generally, for a great deal of help, for instance, in the running of their businesses. They have, of

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1031 course, been in a preferred position. They have received considerable protection in tenns of their market position, and they could position themselves to do that, but their challenge in the post-WGTA era is how to live with the challenges that they face under the international trade obligations that we have entered into when we signed on to GATT. That has a six-year time clock running. They have to face up to the challenge that we are facing currently, again with our major trading partner, the Americans, on their

interpretation of our obligations under such trade agreements like CUST A and NAFT A. Their position tends to be that they take precedent over GATT. That is part of the argument. We insist that GATT is the operable tenn of reference for our industries, and that gives us at least a six-year period of phasing in any necessary changes that might have to be brought to these industries. Nonetheless, those are the challenges, Mr. Acting Speaker, that Manitoba farmers face, and they begin facing them very soon. This is not a question that is maybe or may come. This comes with a clarity on August I, 1995, this summer.

This is why I am particularly concerned, among other things, that right now we are sitting with yet another rail strike. You ought to remember that 5,000 cars of grain are unloaded every week when the trains are running, and it is important because the time is clicking. If I am a farmer sitting with 30,000 bushels of feed grain, it has got to be sold now. It has got to be exported now, because after August I it is going to be very hard to move it out of the province. So there is a double reason for the Transportation critic of the New Democratic Party to assist us in getting the rail workers back to work. *

(1450) I regret that it appears to have to take legislation to do it, but again, I acknowledge that the federal government has acted with dispatch. My understanding is that legislation has in fact passed through the House and is now currently before the Senate, so hopefully the trains will be rolling and this grain movement, the record movement of grain, can continue to roll off our farms and off our elevator points and collection points on to their final destination. Mr. Acting Speaker, I am surprised that my friends opposite find themselves in such a kind of tradition-bound reactionary role. It is not too late.

I am going to use the last few moments that I have in this debate-I am pleased to see the House leader for the official opposition at least to come back and to be able to listen to this, because this is a tremendous budget that we have placed before you. Why do you not prove to the world that you are not really the tradition-bound reactionary groups that you have developed a reputation for in opposition and do something that is different, vote for this budget? You just heard the capital estimates of hospital construction and health construction. I know that is a big-ticket item with your group. It is there.

I sat in those chairs and I listened to a pretty good budget brought down by a New Democratic Party Premier, Premier Schreyer, in '73. I voted for it, as did the entire official opposition. We voted for it. An Honourable Member: We voted for your '89 budget. Mr. Enos: Well, in '89, but there were special circumstances there. That relationship that was established in '88 and '89 in the minority years between the New Democrats and the Conservatives was somewhat suspect, Mr. Acting Speaker.

We at least always felt that their coming close to us was not really indicative of a sudden realization of what great folks we were or that they were secretly falling in love with us or they were starting to buy our philosophy. It perhaps had something much more primal to do with it. It had to do with survival as a political entity. They did not want

1032 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 to see an election in '88 or '89 so they did indeed support us on those budgets. Mr. Acting Speaker, they now have a golden opportunity. They have a golden opportunity to depart tradition and acknowledge what I will tell them. You never like everything in a budget, in any budgets. I will tell you, there is a great deal in this budget that was presented to this Chamber last Thursday that the majority of Manitobans are prepared to support.

I cannot understand politically why you would not consider demonstrating that and acknowledging that by supporting this budget at nine o'clock on Monday night. It is the best advice I can offer them. If they choose not to take it, that is their concern of course. I can only tell them, this advice comes from somebody that expects to be back in this House and will be back in this House. I am not sure about all the rest. Thank you. Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Acting Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to join the debate on this budget. I am calling this the Filmon fantasyland budget.

I think it is one of the most cynical things we have seen from a government for a long time. Cynicism and fantasy seem to be what is the basis for this budget. I do not think that people are going to buy this very dishonest approach to government financing, and I do not think they are going to fall for either the proposed balanced-budget legislation. It is a sorry state for politics and for government when we have a government after so many years in power, going on seven years in power, to try and do this kind of fiscal voodoo, fiscal shell game for the public. No wonder, Mr.

Acting Speaker, people are getting a little disconcerted about the prospects for government. We continue to have governments like the Filmon government who really do not believe in governments at all. I think that is essentially what the problem is. We cannot have people though lose faith in government. We cannot have people start to feel that there cannot be governments that are going to represent citizens who are going to stand up for justice and equality.

We have to believe that our democracy can be fulfilled by a government that is not going to cave in to the international money marketeers and large transnational corporations as the federal Liberals and the provincial Conservatives have. It amazes me that this government could bring in a budget such as this that is not going to account for the losses in the Western Grain Transportation projections. This is part of the fantasy, Mr. Acting Speaker, that on the revenue side they are not accounting for the loss in revenue so we are seeing a projected balance.

Let us remember that this is just a projected balance coming from a government that has had a very poor record on projecting budgets. There is no account in this budget for the decrease in transfer payments in health and education, the hundreds of millions of dollars there that are going to be lost to Manitoba through to the end of this decade. There is no account for the fact that we are going to have to face that because of the federal Liberal abandonment of their promises in the election, because of the federal Liberals' shift to the right.

We are seeing that we are losing an estimate of $391 million in federal transfer payments by the end of this decade. To think that by some magic this government is going to come up with a $48- million surplus this year with that kind of loss in revenue from the federal government is ridiculous. *

(1500) There is no account either for the loss to the economy with the one-time financial grab of selling McKenzie Seeds and the Manitoba Development Corporation and the Manitoba Mineral Resources corporation. There is no accounting for the future, the impact that is going to have on revenues to government. It is

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1033 a very cynical ploy to try and grab a few things that they can sell off to pump up the revenues. The biggest thing that is cynical about this budget and the sham of this budget is that they are going to be using over $200 million in revenue from lotteries while studying the possibility of reducing VL Ts in Manitoba.

That to me is the clearest example of how on the one hand they are saying they are going to have all this money and on the other hand they are saying they may look at reducing the VL Ts that have done serious damage to the economy in Manitoba, serious damage to the rural economy in Manitoba. I think people are not going to fall for this. They are not going to fall for the kind of media advertising campaign where one day before the budget they are announcing a study on VL Ts because they know that people are concerned about the effects on families and the economy.

On the other hand, they are saying that they are going to balance the budget based on this VL T lotteries revenue. It is buying into a very false economy. I do not think people are going to buy that. I cannot believe the desperation of this government, the desperation to do this, to realize that other governments, like Saskatchewan, our neighbouring province, balanced the books last year and are also projecting to do that again this year, and it would have been very bad fortune for a Conservative government to not be able to do the same going into an election.

So they have gotten desperate, and they have resorted to this fantasy ofthis Filmon budget. The other thing I think that we should keep in mind is that they are trying to play it both sides also with showing a number of areas in Education and Health and all these departments that are not going to have major cuts, trying to make it seem like they are not going to eliminate programs that are important to Manitobans when in fact, given the revenue projections, they are going to be leaving the finances of this province in a very serious state of chaos, a very bad state.

I think this kind of budget is a testimony of the failure of this government's economic policy. A testimony also is the incredibly high number of people who are unemployed and the booming welfare rolls.

When we see in the city of Winnipeg that over the last five years, since 1990, we have had welfare recipients in the city of Winnipeg go from about 8,000 cases to 17,000 cases, you have to wonder what is going on in the economy, you have to wonder who is steering this ship and the refusal of this government to come up with some innovative job creation program so those people are not wasting their skills, are not sitting at home but are in fact working to produce goods and services for the economy of Manitoba and are also able to pay taxes into the betterment of services that we all use.

So here we have a government that has had some of the highest deficits ever in the province trying to tell us that they are going to balance the budget, trying to tell us that they now have a magic formula when they are still subscribing to the kind of economic policies that are destroying this province and destroying this country. They cannot continue on the same economic track of less government services, reducing taxes, privatizing services. We have to ask ourselves, where is this going to end? Wages are not increasing.

The real wages for people are decreasing, and we are seeing the unravelling of our economy, the unravelling of communities. We cannot get to the point, as this government seems to be heading, where everyone is going to have to pay user fees for health care, user fees for education and going to have to pay for every government service that is there to protect their health and safety, like getting their water tested. That is the direction that this government is going in, and that is no direction for Manitoba.

1034 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 We do not want to see that kind of a society here. It is the vision of Canada, of Manitoba to have democratic governments who work for the benefit of all by collecting taxes in a fair way, collecting taxes in a way that is going to ensure that the brunt of our government services are not going to be borne by the people who require those services. That is what is happening when they do things like eliminating Student Social Allowances.

So the real alternative for balancing the budget must come from tax reform so we can get away from this shift of the tax burden onto individual citizens that we have seen in this country. We have talked about it over and over again in this House, Mr. Acting Speaker, where we have had in this country a tremendous shift of taxation from industry and corporations onto the backs of the average ratepayer, and now we are seeing that we have this fanaticism with the deficit which is compounded by this increase in taxation on individuals.

People are throwing up their hands because they are being overburdened with taxation in a very unfair way. So we have to end this lie about the deficit, and part of that is thinking that we can cut spending to balance the budget when we know that social spending and programs like health and education are not the problem and are not the reason. It is the high interest rate policy. It is unfair taxes for corporations, and it is policies that have kept wages artificially low and have kept high unemployment. Those are the reasons that we have a deficit problem.

It is not because of spending on social programs and on necessary government services like health and education. So I also then want to caution the government in their move to more and more unfair taxes that the move to lotteries funding and VL Ts, which can be termed very lucrative taxes, are not fair ways of raising revenue. It is hurting families in Manitoba, and this is not the way for governments to raise revenue. Gambling cannot replace fair taxation and honest taxation by a government that is going to have a sense of justice and equality.

So the ministers on the opposite side, though in cabinet, are actually admitting then that they have a problem on the revenue side because they have had to engage in this fantasy exercise of not accounting for the elimination of the Crow rate and not accounting for the decrease in transfer payments from the federal government and relying on this lotteries revenue. They have admitted that they have a problem on the revenue side.

I talk to constituents regularly who say to me that they do not mind paying taxes if it is going to go for decent services and if the taxation is going to be done in a fair and democratic way so that we share the burden of taxation, and I hear over and over again, including at the board meeting yesterday for the Transcona-Springfield School Division where people do not want to lose their public education system and they want to ensure that it is going to remain accessible for a high-quality education.

We have had a number of institutions across this country that are now being threatened by the federal Liberal government, institutions like the CN Rail and CBC, the Wheat Board, all of these things we are now threatened with losing across this country that have knit this country together, that have shown that governments can intervene for the benefit of the entire country and create a system that is going to benefit the entire country.

It is sad that we have governments that are buying into the corporate agenda, the pressure by the money markets to move away from this kind of approach where a nation can work to have its regions interdependent and create a system that is going to benefit the entire country rather than pitting one region against the other, as we are seeing with this drive for competitiveness. We are going to see more and more, I think, fights

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1035 over resources, over shipping of goods and services as we are seeing now with the potential strike regarding the port shipments in the west coast of the country. *

(1510) Mr. Acting Speaker, the other thing that I find glaringly absent over and over again. I have talked about this regularly in various budget debates is the lack of recognition of this government for the serious impact of poverty on this province, and I have said before that their policies are actually increasing poverty in Manitoba. The most recent statistics show that almost 200,000 people are living in poverty in Manitoba, almost one in every five of the population according to a 1994 National Council on Welfare study.

Of this total, 60,000 are children, and Manitoba's poverty rate for children is at 22.4 percent, among the highest in the country. The poverty rate for women is over 1.3 times that for men, and furthermore, the poverty rate for single-parent women is 58.4 percent nationally. The poverty rate for children of single-parent mothers is a staggering 64 percent in Manitoba. Almost one in five women over 65 live in poverty. This is given no recognition by this government. They have eliminated program after program, underfunding child care, eliminating Student Social Allowances, eliminating ACCESS programs.

All these programs that are supposed to allow people to get out of the cycle of poverty and into the workforce have been eliminated by this government. The incidence of poverty among aboriginal people is also shockingly high for very significant and historical and institutional reasons, which must be addressed if poverty is to be eradicated. We cannot just focus on this fad of child poverty, because there has to be a recognition that poor children come from and live in poor families.

There have been a number of international declarations about child poverty, which Conservative governments and Liberal governments have signed onto from Canada, and then they have turned around and implemented economic and social policies that are contributing to the poverty of families. There are almost 49,000 people on social assistance in Manitoba. About 14,000 families are reported to be relying on food banks.

I can say that recently I visited a food bank through a church in my constituency in East Kildonan, and I was appalled to see the number of repeat users of food banks from certain demographic communities. We can see that there are some very serious demographic trends happening in terms of the use of food banks and poverty, and that has to be addressed. Thus in 1980 the incidence of poverty among women over 65 was over 41 percent. The rate has fallen dramatically because of government assistance, which now accounts for 90 percent of their total income.

Poverty though is only the flip side of growing inequities in income and wealth in Manitoba. As the poor have become poorer, so the rich have become richer. Between 1988, when the Conservatives came to power, and 1992, the last year for which figures were available, the number of people earning more than $70,000 per year increased by 60 percent, or over 6,000, while the incomes in this group rose by 50 percent, to $1.3 billion after taxes. What this is showing is that, and I have said this before as well in the House, there is becoming this widening gap between the haves and the have-nots in this province.

It has been exacerbated by the taxation policy of the Filmon

1036 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 government and by their other economic policies. The previous Finance minister admitted in '92 that he had a rationale for cutting spending and holding down wages. It would be necessary, he said, if Manitoba is to be competitive with the United States. That is the kind of attitude that has contributed to this loss of government services as we race to the bottom by reducing government revenue and we end up creating a very, very large number of people who are living in our communities who are very poor.

The Minister of Finance thought that the rewards would come from higher growth rates in income and employment in '92 and '93, and this did not happen. The real GOP growth in those years was minimal, while the unemployment rate at the end of '93 was well in excess of that in '91. Their policies, again, are proving not to work. They have not had accurate projections in other budgets and now they have had the most wild projections for a balanced budget that we have seen so far.

In the second budget, they reduced income taxes by $61 million per annum, and some $20 million of this probably ended up in the pockets of those earning less than $30,000 per year, but two-thirds of it benefited those earning more than that amount. So we can see the inequities in their policies and how, as I said earlier, they are not doing any favours for people who are low income earners. Any benefits that were gained through changes in income tax were reversed by the introduction in 1993 of the sales tax.

They continue to refuse to put money into job creation, and they have done other things, like reduce funding for daycare by 7 percent and reduce funding for post-secondary education by 22 percent in last year's budget. Mr.

Acting Speaker, the point I think in all this is that we do not have a government that is going to address the inequities in our communities, in our province, but they are putting in policies that are going to exacerbate those problems and those inequities and those injustices and continue to think that we are going to have some fairness come out of having further deregulation, fewer government services and more privatization, and that is just not going to happen. Those policies will continue to create greater inequities in our society.

I want to talk a little bit as well about a couple of other areas where we are seeing these inequities start to take place because of the cutbacks disguised as reform. Mr. Acting Speaker, this is happening clearly in education, in health care, in housing, and I also want to talk a little bit about transportation. In education we are seeing a policy of cutbacks and the creation of chaos in the system by three different ministers going in three different directions. I cannot believe the attack by this government on public education.

In my own constituency-! represent a constituency that has two school divisions in it. They have been forced to use the reserves that they have accumulated in the River East School Division, and they are reporting that with this budget they are using over $500,000 of their reserve. That is accounting for a .9 percent decrease in the revenue from the provincial government. So, while they chastised the federal Liberals for offloading, they do that themselves to the municipalities and the school boards which are struggling to provide decent public education.

In this River East School Division in Radisson, one of the most serious losses has been the loss of the learning centre. Now this is the kind of program that we need to be investing in, Mr. Acting Speaker, a program that for six weeks will take children who are having difficulties in reading and will give them a half a day of intensive, more individualized teaching and tutoring so that they can then re-enter their regular classroom and be caught up. It was a program that was shown to be tremendously -

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1037 successful, and it is the kind of program that is being eliminated because of the cutbacks to the tune last year of really almost $30 million from this provincial government. They have this attitude that education is like a factory, and they keep using words in their documents like uniformity and standards. They want, it seems, to have all these children entering the system and having exactly the same kind of program delivered to them and then coming out in the end with their assigned little position they will take up in our society and our economy. *

(1520) Parent after parent is telling me that they reject this. They do not want that kind of narrowing of education. They want their child to be treated as an individual learner. They do not want to see further loss of programs that are providing that kind of support. We have lost resource teachers; we have lost nurses; we have lost counsellors; we have lost ESL teachers. We have lost all those supports under this government in our schools that are keeping kids in schools, and then what do they do? They have also given teachers the opportunity to suspend students.

After putting all of these pressures on teachers in the classroom with increased class sizes and decreased supports in the schools, the answer by this government is to expel children who have problems. Mr. Acting Speaker, that is no solution. The loss of programs like New Careers, like Student Social Allowance, like the ACCESS program, like bursaries, are part of the attitude of this government in terms of creating this mean streets economy and not recognizing that governments can work to assist individuals to give them a hand to participating more fully in our community.

The increases in tuition fees as a result of cutbacks at the federal and provincial level are going to make post-secondary education inaccessible for the majority of Manitobans. This is a very serious threat at a time when we know that a greater and greater percentage of jobs-I have heard as much as 85 percent of jobs in this future, more technological economy-are going to require more than five years of post secondary education. We are going to have fewer and fewer people able to access those jobs. What is going to happen is, we are going to have more mobility in communities.

We are going to have more and more families who have their children move away to go to school and to go to work and that is another legacy of the kind of economic policies that we have had from Conservative and Liberal governments. We want to have children in schools exposed to a variety of subject matter so that they have some sense of what their choices are. We do not want to narrow choices for children. We want young people to see a broad world and have the opportunity to make informed choices about as many areas as possible.

We want them to make good choices based on having sound basic skills in reading, in writing, in science, in mathematics, in understanding the geography and the history of not only their home communities but the world. We want them to be able to make sense of an ever more complex world. Mr. Acting Speaker, this cannot be done when children are not healthy.

This cannot be done when children are not being attended to in terms of nutrition, when they are not getting adequate sleep, when they are exposed to high stress families or abuse in families, and I do not understand a government that would choose to eliminate mandatory health education from kindergarten to Grade 8. A government that abandons health education from kindergarten to Grade 8 is not recognizing that a child, to be a successful learner, must be a healthy child.

They have also, as the minister I think has admitted, not recognized the importance of some of the programs like physical education, like music and drama and art, which make children see another side of education to keep them interested, to allow them to express themselves

1038 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 and develop their creativity and to give them some added meaning to their lives. There are many young people who say they stay in school because of those programs. I do not think we can have a government say we simply cannot afford those things any longer when that is what is keeping students in school. We have had a government in education that has tried to do a number of things like the boundaries review.

They have introduced, I think, unrealistic time lines for changing curriculum and doing teacher reviews when what we need to see is a fair funding formula in education. We cannot just move around lines on a map without recognizing that fundamentally we have to ensure that funding formulas are fair. In Transcona, we have the lowest spending per child in the city of Winnipeg, I do believe. We also have the lowest value in houses for assessment, and this is an area that with some of the proposals by the government in terms of the boundaries review, will have some of the highest tax increases in the city.

That points to the fact that currently there are problems with the funding formula that is being used in education. In Transcona, the budget that was recently passed is going to continue to see the loss of important services. They are going to lose approximately five teachers. They are going to lose a career development centre, the elementary industrial arts program, the child guidance clinic learning centre. There will be no more funding for field trips. There will be fewer bus routes and a loss of other-division van couriers. I am concerned at decreased supports for those in the system that need it most.

There has to be recognition for the needs of students, and you cannot treat them all the same in terms of their educational needs. There are significant inequities in the current system of funding education. Mr. Acting Speaker, can you tell me how much time I have used? I have seven minutes left? This morning I visited a couple who live in Radisson who talked to me about their concerns about health care. This government has had no vision in health care.

We want to see health care reform that is going to mean community-based health care, more preventative health care, a greater variety of professionals involved in delivering our health care system with a definite increased expanded role for nurses. We want to see a recognition in our health care that-health care is also about safe food, safe water, a healthy workplace and the ability to have a safe home life. So there are relationships for health care like housing. I recently wrote an

article which listed the cutbacks from health education by this government, and we know, even though they talk about increases for personal care homes and for home care, the fact of the matter is they have eliminated supports in the community for people who need it. I want to give one example of how this government's policies are dramatically interfering and reducing the health of Manitobans. They are now sending women home after they have a baby after 24 hours in the hospital. This is really damaging the success rate of nursing mothers. The breast-feeding ratios for the province of Manitoba have plummeted.

This government has not supplied the resources into the communities so those women can have support to successfully nurse their babies at home. They have not had enough time to successfully begin nursing in the hospitals. That is going to have ramifications on these young children and these babies for the rest of their lives, because we know that babies are much more healthy when they are breast-fed for up to a year. We have proposed a healthy child program which will take into account that prenatal and postnatal care.

You cannot send women home from the hospital 24 hours after giving birth and expect them to successfully adapt to nursing a baby with no supports and perhaps going home

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1039 to other children that are going to make further demands on them. *

(1530) Mr. Acting Speaker, I have only recently become the Housing critic. It is clear to me that this government has a very unbalanced approach to dealing with residential tenancies issues. I have visited with people who have been through incredible grief and stress because of the way they have been treated by the Residential Tenancies Commission. That process has to change. We have to have a commitment to public housing as well.

We have to stop the threat to public housing by the federal Liberal government, which is going to turn public housing into slums, which is going to prevent further development of public housing as a secure and stable and safe alternative so that we can have people benefit from safe housing so they can have stable neighbourhoods and greater health for their families. It does not make any sense, Mr.

Acting Speaker, when we have had the kinds of policies that this government has put in place where they continue to supply welfare to slum housing, to absentee landlords, and we are keeping people in unsafe, unhealthy housing. I want to take a few minutes to wrap up with some comments about what is happening with our transportation sector. The selling of CN and the loss of the Crow rate is going to devastate many sectors of the economy in Manitoba. It is going to have huge impacts. The loss of the rail Traffic Control Centre is going to have a huge impact on Manitoba. We are the centre ofthe country.

It makes sense for us to be a transportation hub. We have to have some commitment from a government in Manitoba to fight for this industry. We have had silence from the government opposite as we have lost over 3,000 rail jobs in the last six to seven years under this government. Now we are losing the rail Traffic Control Centre, and again we have had no intervention or no position of working with those workers employed with the rail industry to ensure that we do not lose those jobs and we do not lose that important sector in Manitoba.

I will conclude by saying that this week I was at the CN shops and we were talking to people as they were coming into work, and something that happened this time has never happened before, where a fellow came up to us and asked for some material that we were handing out. He did not work for the railway, he worked for a steel company. He talked about the effects that the loss ofCN, the privatization ofCN, was going to have on their industry. Mr.

Acting Speaker, in conclusion I just want to say that this budget is a sham, that people are not going to accept the kind of fantasy Film on economics with gambling revenues to balance this budget at the same time when they are going to be studying gambling. I am going to go to the people of Radisson and make that very clear to them. I look forward to returning to this House and returning with a new government, with a New Democratic government that is going to be fair, that is going to deal more straightforward and honestly with the people of Manitoba. Thank you. Mr. Bob Rose (Turtle Mountain): Mr.

Acting Speaker, just a brief comment on the previous speech. I was disappointed not to hear the position of the honourable member for Radisson on the PMU industry in Manitoba. Mr. Acting Speaker, I dislike prolonged good-byes, and my thanks and appreciation and humble observations were made last December, so I am not going to do it again today. I do appreciate though the kind words that have been directed my way since my announcement not to seek re-election. Some of them have been so kind that ifl had known I was so good before, I might have had another crack at it. I guess it is a bit like a funeral.

They say the good things about you when they are sure you are gone.

1040 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 16, 1995 I am very conscious of the second opportunity, if you like, and the great honour that it is to have this opportunity. Sometimes familiarity with this Chamber causes us to lose the sense of the rare opportunity we have as a tiny group of elected Manitobans to debate and to make the laws of our province. Perhaps that is because, as the old saying goes, that when you are up to your ankles in alligators, you forget that your original aim was to drain the swamp. I am conscious, Mr.

Acting Speaker, of having the opportunity today to debate in this House at this historical moment, to debate the first budget in almost a quarter of a century which produces a surplus, and to have the opportunity to debate in this Chamber on the day after balanced-budget legislation received first reading-balanced-budget legislation, that will not only make deficit financing against the law but also provides financial penalties for elected people who cannot make it work.

This I think addresses one of the growing frustrations which the public have with politicians, and that is that they tend to be financially immune from their own decisions,

whereas most of us as ordinary citizens have our financial situation very much affected by our own decisions. The public is also frustrated with cavalier increases in major tax rates without an opportunity to pass judgment. You can argue that the public has a referendum every four or five years and a general election, but rarely does a political party run on a platform of tax increases. If they do, rarely are they successful.

Some say that the public will never agree to tax increases, but do not underestimate the capacity of the public to understand and accept tax increases provided that the need and disposition of the extra revenues is clearly defined. However, Mr. Acting Speaker, we are not debating that particular piece of courageous legislation at this moment but rather the 1995-96 budget for our province as presented by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson).

I think it is appropriate or understandable that on such an occasion as this, such a debate as this, such a momentous and historical debate as this that people should become very eloquent. I noticed that in his presentation the member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer) was busy quoting Shakespeare. It inspired me to also look for a Shakespearean quote that I believe is very fitting to the situation that we are in this week in the Manitoba Legislature.

Many of you will remember from Julius Caesar in your high school: There is a tide in the affairs of men-and I apologize to those few people who might be offended by the choice of words, and I point out to you that men in this case refers to species not gender-there is a tide in the affairs of men which taken at a flood leads on to fortune. Omitted, and I want the opposition members to pay particular attention to this: All the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat and we must take the current when it serves or lose our ventures.

I do not suppose that Shakespeare was thinking about Manitoba in 1995 when he penned those lines, but it is very, very fitting, I believe. The ventures he refers to of course are the ventures of the social programs that we have in Manitoba that we are certainly in danger of losing if we do balance our budget. *

(1540) Mr. Acting Speaker, it is easy to balance a budget. It is not a complicated process. You can do it like they have done in Alberta by slashing expenditures, or you can do it like they have done in Saskatchewan by increasing taxes to a punitive rate and closing a few hospitals besides, a few, of course, being 52, I believe, in rural Saskatchewan.

March 16, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1041 Or you can do it as we have done in Manitoba, working gradually and carefully towards a goal, close no hospitals and raise no major taxes, but rather reorganize, prioritize, work in a hundred different, relatively small ways towards the same goal until, finally, revenues exceed expenditures. It is like building a house, and I thank the Minister of Housing (Mrs. Mcintosh) for using this analogy in her presentation the other day, because it fits in, I believe.

It is like building a house, and I think we have all been part of that process from time to time, but in building this house in Manitoba, a good, solid, safe, secure house is not built overnight. A good, solid, safe, secure house with rooms for all the varied interests of Manitobans without a crippling mortgage payment-that takes time and planning; seven years, in fact, because this house was begun in 1988. Manitobans might want to pause and thank Jim Walding for digging the footings, and Manitobans will recognize that the foundation was poured when Premier Filmon and his team were elected in 1988. Mr.

Acting Speaker, it is just like building any other house. There are setbacks, frustrations, cost overruns, mistakes and very, very, very difficult decisions to be made; and, like building any house, there is the requirement and the frustration of bringing all the tradesmen together, because while government is the architect of this house, hundreds, thousands of Manitobans have been the builders-health, education, municipal officials looking for better ways to spend scarce tax dollars.

They and hundreds of other Manitobans have been part of building this house, and they have been part of watching the steady progress, progress that we can follow since the building began, a steady drop in the last few years in the number of business bankruptcies, a steady drop in the number of farm bankruptcies, a steady drop in the number of personal bankruptcies, a steady increase in personal income, but, more importantly, a steady increase in personal disposable income, accounted for by no major tax increases in a growing economy.

It is interesting to note that while opposition parties strive mightily to paint the Progressive Conservatives as a party of big business and special interests, in Manitoba, those on the lower-income scale fare better, much better, than those in most of the other provinces. Speaking of special interest groups, I note that this union publication has a new cover boy, a new pinup, but still an old champion of their special interests. Well, Mr.

Acting Speaker, there is cause for celebration this week because our house, seven years in the building, is completed, with the first budgeted surplus in about a quarter of a century. There is cause for celebration as well because this house that we have built will become a home with a very effectiv

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-6-20
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 6th hansardpdf 20.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	375850132b8eddda9b55b36a3edeee42a0054f88

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