Manitoba Hansard — 96 ISSN 542 (Sitting 11, 36th Legislature, 2nd Session)

36-2-11

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLVI No. 11- 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, April3, 1996 ISSN 0542-5492

Name ASHTON, Steve BARRETI, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Ron. DACQUA Y, Louise, Ron. DERKACH, Leonard, Ron. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Ron. DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Ron. ERNST, Jim, Ron. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HEL WER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWA Y, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. McGIFFORD, Diane MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon.

MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEWMAN, David PALLISTER, Brian, Hon. PENNER, Jack PITURA, Frank PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RADCLIFFE, Mike REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack, Ron. RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROC AN, Denis SALE, Tim SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STRUTHERS, Stan SVEINSON, Ben TOEWS, Vic, Hon. TWEED, Mervin VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosann MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Members, Constituen cies and Political Aff"diation Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

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

N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. Lib. Lib. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

463 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, April3, 1996 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Licensed Practical Nurses Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of R. Allingham, Vanessa Farrow, J. Bilawka and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to recognize the value of LPNs and to consider reversing the decision to cut LPNs in Manitoba. Retention of Hogs Single-Desk Selling Ms.

Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Ron Rempel, Marg Rempel, William Rolsky and others requesting that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) consider reversing his decision and retain a system for orderly marketing of hogs in Manitoba under Manitoba Pork. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report under The Trade Practices Inquiry Act. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Eye Examinations Deinsurance Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.

During the election campaign, the Premier had a number of ads on health care in the province of Manitoba, and he stated in the election campaign on those ads that he would not allow anyone to take away health care services here in the province of Manitoba. He would not allow this to happen. Since that time we have had a number of reductions in health care services here in the province of Manitoba, contrary to the word of the Premier, and just yesterday, again, we learned that a preventative health care program with eye examinations was now going to be taken away from many Manitobans and be de insured.

I would like to ask the Premier, will he keep his word and not allow the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to take away those eye examinations and reinstate it, as he promised in his ads during the election campaign? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, indeed the services continue to be available for Manitobans. Manitobans in this respect are, because of the federal reductions in transfers for health and post secondary education, having to re-examine, we are having to re-examine how we fund so many of the different matters that are a part of this system.

Quite honestly, these are not easy choices and we have to examine how we fare versus the rest of the country. In the change that was brought in in the budget yesterday, in response to that $116-million reduction in transfer payment cuts from Ottawa, Manitoba joins seven other provinces that provide this kind of service coverage to their people with respect to eye examinations. In fact, I believe four of those provinces do not even provide insured services for those under 19 and those over 64.

These are difficult choices, but in making these choices we obviously join provinces like Saskatchewan which, under the New Democrats, provide this same level of service. *

(1335) Pharmacare Reductions Mr. Gary Doer (Leader ofthe Opposition): Madam Speaker, the Premier will know that his promises were made after the federal budget was presented. I would

464 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, I996 also quote that these ads and the policy or platform or the alleged platform of the Film on government or the Conservative government stated that they would maintain spending at $4.465 billion-and this is on page IO of the Premier's promises-he would maintain spending right through the years '98 and '99 and that they would make different decisions on cutting red tape and bureaucracy, not cutting on vital health care services.

I want to table a letter today from the Manitoba Society of Seniors, which the Premier has received, wherein the letter states that this government has acted, and I quote and I want to get the quotes properly, in a very, very radical way in cutting the Pharmacare services. These leaner and meaner changes that have been made by the government have raised concerns with thousands of seniors of Manitoba, and the seniors are in shock. They are outraged, they feel betrayed by this Premier and this government and they have deep fear about the changes.

I would like to ask the Premier, will he keep his word to the seniors of this province and reinstate the Pharmacare program that he had promised to maintain? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I want to point out to the Leader of the Opposition that this province spends a greater proportion of its budget on health care than any other province in Canada, almost 34 percent of the budget.

He need only read coverage in today's paper of the fact that this province has increased its commitment to health care under a Conservative administration versus that which was provided under the Pawley-Doer administration of the I980s, 33.8 percent of our budget on health care versus 3I.4 percent on health care throughout the years of the Paw ley-Doer New Democratic administration.. In fact, our commitment to spending on health care is a half billion dollars a year more than it was when we took office. That is the kind of commitment we make to health care and we make no apologies for it. Mr.

Doer: Madam Speaker, of course the Premier also had ads, I believe at the Children's Museum, talking about seniors, about what a nice and kind government this would be. It is too bad he did not tell them the truth that he was going to radically cut Pharmacare in Manitoba They may have voted a different way then by knowing the truth of what this government was going to do. Madam Speaker, the Manitoba seniors association further goes on to say that many seniors may not be able to participate in this program or may buy cheaper or less effective drugs.

They further say and ask the Premier to rethink the radical changes that his government has made, contrary to their election promises on page I 0 of their election campaign platform book, to rethink their radical changes. I would like to ask the Premier, will he keep his word that he made in those ads and in his platform, or is he going to continue to break his word and break his promise to the people of Manitoba? *

(1340) Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, first and foremost, this party and this government ran on a balanced budget as being the cornerstone to all of our future programming in Manitoba That was the basis on which people voted for us. We even took the unprecedented step of having the balanced budget as part of our lawn signs. It was the cornerstone. It was the fundamental No. I issue upon which we ran in that campaign. I say, Madam Speaker, that the seniors, like everyone else in this province, know the value of a balanced budget The only people who are out of step with that are New Democrats and their friends.

They are the people who will not acknowledge that every province in Canada is moving towards the balanced budget. Every area, including New Democrats in this country, are committed to trying to keep our finances in order and to keeping taxes down. The only people who are out of step with all of society are of course the New Democrats who would tax more, spend more and run up deficits indiscriminately as they did when they were in office. They share an ideology that has been discredited and failed in every area of this country.

Yet, they cling to it ideologically and they cling to it without the responsibility of being in government, and Manitobans leave them there in opposition because they know that their ideas would not work.

April 3, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 465 Health Care System Service Reductions Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my question to the Premier, and the Premier knows this, that this government is forcing individuals to pay millions of dollars more in drug costs. It is charging nursing home residents more money to stay in nursing homes. They are charging individuals to pay for eye examinations and probably physical examinations.

Will the Premier not admit that his tax grab, his tax on the sick, his tax on medicare, is offloading the cost of medicare and is a tax on the sick and is the largest tax grab on the sick and elderly in Manitoba history? Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): If the honourable member would review the budgets brought down between 1981 and 1988 he would know what real tax grabs are all about, Madam Speaker. Those are the tax grabs that were brought to us by the government of which his colleagues were members and that is the opposite direction that we have been going in since that time.

There have been increase-free budgets for eight years and Manitobans have moved from a position of being amongst the highest taxed people in Canada to being amongst the lowest taxed people of Canada, all the while keeping spending for health, social services and education at levels that reflect appropriate priorities of Manitobans. That is what the budgets have been doing for the last eight years.

I remind the honourable member, as the First Minister has already done, that at 33.8 percent of all of our spending being on health care in Manitoba, that provides services to Manitobans at levels that are unparalleled anywhere else in the country, so that the commitment to the health care system is certainly clear. Sometimes we differ on how we should achieve those ends. Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, how can this First Minister (Mr. Filmon), this Minister of Finance (Mr.

Stefanson) or this Minister of Health give millions of dollars in this budget to private nursing companies that are friends of the government, give a $26-million line of credit to the Royal Bank of Canada and charge the sick, the elderly, user fees for Pharmacare, increased fees for nursing homes, have to pay for their own eye exams and probably have to pay for their own physical examinations? How can they do that? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, the honourable member referred to nursing homes. The changes that are in the budget will be of benefit to some 80 percent of the nursing home population in our province.

It is true that some 20 percent will face adjustments but about 80 percent will face downward adjustments in their per diem rates. That was one matter that was incorrectly reported in today's news, but they got the 80 percent and the 20 percent turned around. The honourable member knows, like I know-he has been around to many, many meetings just like I have-that we in Canada face very challenging times. We face some great opportunities as well.

These are times when we are forced, whether we want to or not, I think we should want to, but it is a time for us to ad just our systems so that we can sustain them for the future. If I listened to everything that the honourable member told me to do, we would offer nothing to generations of the future, which would be a terrible legacy. *

(1345) Mr. Chomiak: We are only asking the minister to listen to the people of Manitoba- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Kildonan, with a final supplementary question. Mr.

Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the minister explain how they are giving money to home care that is going to go to private nursing home companies, having the minister's salary increased by 11 percent, giving $26 million to the Royal Bank of Canada, and then going to the seniors of Manitoba and the sick and saying, oh, but you are going to have to pay $20 million more for your drugs, you are going to have to pay more money for your nursing homes, you are going to have to pay for your eye examinations and you are probably going to have to pay for your physical

466 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 1996 examinations? How can the minister say that and state that they are actually working on behalf of the citizens of Manitoba? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, we have been working for the people of Manitoba for eight years on this side of the House. Up until yesterday, we were proud to be able to say that we have increased home care spending by 93 percent. As a result of the announcement in yesterday's budget, we are now over a 100 percent increase in home care expenditures since 1988 when this government took office.

There is $8 million more going into home care this coming year. That reflects the need that is going to be there, reflects the shift that is going to be taking place from institutional care to the community. We are going to need that $8 million to provide for the increased pressure that is going to result from changes in our hospitals and from an aging population. Madam Speaker, the honourable member would rather we not make any allowances for those kinds of changes which would leave us with nothing but chaos in the future in terms of looking after the elderly people of our province.

That is not good enough for us. It might be good enough for honourable members opposite, but it is not good enough for us and it is not good enough for Manitobans. Home Care Program Privatization Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, my questions are also for the Minister of Health. Why is this minister bent on privatizing home care to American-style multinational corporations, temporary help corporations like Drake Medox, when every affected group is telling you and telling us that this will hurt their care, their quality of care, the consistency and continuity of that care?

Why are you so hellbent on doing it so fast? Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, if the honourable member had listened to my last answer he might remember that I said that there is going to be increasing pressure on our home care system. I think the funding for home care of the past demonstrates we have responded to the pressures that have been there. [interjection] Madam Speaker, does the honourable member want to listen to the answer or does he want to interrupt from his seat? We have made very significant increases to appropriations for home care in the past.

This budget demonstrates that trend is continuing because we have been talking about a shift from institutional care to community care. The proof of that is in the budgets of the last eight years and certainly in this last budget. The honourable member has a philosophical problem about who it is that delivers the service. My problem is to make sure that the clients get service. Madam Speaker, that is the bottom line here. The honourable member would sacrifice services to clients so that he and his union boss friends can have it their way. I will not sacrifice client services.

We will offer clients services at levels that are equal to or surpassing those of the past, and we will not charge user fees, as honourable members opposite would have people believe. Role ofVONs Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Why is this minister destroying a hundred-year-old nonprofit agency, VON Winnipeg, by taking away the VON's role in providing nursing services to sick, homebound Manitobans? Why are you doing that? Bon.

James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, for a long, long time the Victorian Order of Nurses has provided good services, excellent services to the people of Manitoba We think that the Victorian Order of Nurses is prepared to enter into a competitive environment and improve services if that is what is going to result from that, which is what we fully expect. We expect that the Victorian Order of Nurses-not unlike what it did recently when we contracted for home intravenous therapy at the St.

Boniface Hospital, the Victorian Order of Nurses lined up with the other private vendors of services and won that contract. So I fully expect the Victorian Order of Nurses' contribution to the people of Manitoba to continue for many, many more years.

April 3, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 467 * (135 0) Privatization Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, why is this minister prepared to give away millions in profits, including the new $8 million in funding, to a few owners like the McMasters while you confiscate even more millions in wages from already low-paid workers who face wage cuts of 40 percent and more, making it virtually impossible to recruit, train and keep dedicated and qualified staff? Why are you doing that? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, we have a lot of clients in our home care system and we are going to have a lot more. We are going to have to be able to provide them with quality services in greater volumes than we have in the past, and we have to do it in a cost-effective manner. We have to do it with quality always in mind to ensure that the clients are not left the way they have been in the past where we were not able to guarantee services to them. We were not able to provide the services, if needed, on a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week basis; we are able to do that now. Peter Olfert said so.

It is quoted in the newspaper saying that he is delighted with that kind of service. The honourable member opposite knows how we got that service. We got it by letting tenders and taking bids for the service and a private company in that situation got the contract, but now we are able to provide those services in a more improved manner. Pharmacare Reductions Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, the actions of this government on Pharmacare show a number of things. It shows the incompetence of this minister and government, the way they bungled the handling of the changes.

It shows very clearly that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and this government ran a fraudulent election campaign and their word means very little in terms of health care. Point of Order Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, from time to time the use of words in this House create some difficulties. Some are included on both unparliamentary and parliamentary sides. So the member for Thompson using the word "fraudulence," I think borders on unparliamentary, if not unparliamentary, and I would ask him to consider his words carefully. Mr.

Ashton: On the same point of order, Madam Speaker, I chose my words very carefully. I did not use unparli amentary terms such as "lie" or "dishonest"; I used "fraudulent," which is listed in Beauchesne, page 147, as having been ruled as being parliamentary. Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order, the honourable government House leader does not have a point of order. Indeed the word "fraudulent" has appeared as being parliamentary. If there is direct reference to a member, such as character, then indeed the word is unparliamentary. Mr.

Ernst: Madam Speaker, while the member for Thompson is correct, I might also point out Beauchesne Citation 489, which rules unparliamentary the use of the word "fraud." Mr. Ashton: I want to make it very clear, Madam Speaker, that I said that this government ran a fraudulent election campaign. That is a parliamentary word and it is also true. Madam Speaker: Order, please. I had previously ruled on the point of order, but I would caution all honourable members that they should exercise discretion in the choice of their words.

Quite often just the choice of the words constitutes a lot of disturbance in this Chamber, and I was hopeful that all members were going to attempt not to provoke debate and cause unnecessary disturbances. *** Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, to quickly pose his question. Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, as I was indicating, the worst fact is the fact this government has no idea how much pain it is inflicting on many Manitoba families.

468 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April3, 1996 I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon) if he could indicate how many Manitoba families will be cut off Pharmacare and how many others will be faced with huge increases in drug costs because of the hear tless decision of this government to slash Pharmacare. Mr. McCrae: Contrary to what the honourable member has said, Madam Speaker, we approached this difficult task very, very carefully and every step of the way reminded ourselves that there are people in Manitoba who are in very vulnerable circumstances.

They are either very poor or they are very much in need of prescription drugs-in some cases, large amounts of prescription drugs which cost a lot of money. We also had to be aware that we are facing, as has been pointed out on one or two occasions, the reality that the federal government's funding for health, social services and higher education is declining very, very significantly. We could not just wish that fact away. Would it not be nice if we could, and would it not be nice if our friends here with the Liberal Party had done more to help us in that regard?

But that all being a reality, we had to deal with some difficult realities. So one of the things we did in order to ensure that we could protect those who needed protection most was to say that anyone who had an income over $15,000 should not have to pay more than 3 percent of their income for prescription drugs; anybody with an income under $15,000 should not have to pay more than 2 percent of their income for prescription drugs. Those are the kinds of considerations that went into it, Madam Speaker. *

(1355) Reductions-Consultations Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): If the minister cannot or will not indicate how many Manitoba families will be impacted by the changes, will he then indicate to this House who was consulted, Madam Speaker? Since the government did not raise this in the election, who was consulted about this drastic change to the Pharmacare program? Bon. James McCrae (Minister ofBealth): Madam Speaker, no one on this side of the House or anywhere else would try to get away from the idea that changes like this are not going to have an impact on people. We know they will.

All we try to do is to ensure that those who are able to absorb the impact of these kinds of changes are going to be in a position to absorb them. Those who are not so able to do so are given appropriate protection. The income-based Pharmacare program is not unlike the health care program, which honourable members opposite support, which is based on ability to pay through the tax system. There is really not much difference in principle in those things. We have people in the New Democratic Party, lots of them, who want to have two kinds of systems at work at the same time.

We are trying very hard to protect those people who need the protection through programs like this and still have a program, which, I remind honourable members opposite, is still amongst the richest of Pharmacare programs anywhere in this country. Reductions Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): My final supplementary is to the Premier (Mr. Filmon). Since we are getting absolutely no answers from this minister, who is proving again the incompetence of this government in handling health care, will the Premier do the right thing and withdraw the Pharmacare changes now? Bon.

James McCrae (Minister ofBealth): I did not hear the last part of the honourable member's question, which contained the question, but I assume it was a general condemnation of the policies of the government. We are going to have an opportunity to debate that during the Budget Debate. Eye Examinations Deinsurance Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. We, in the Liberal Party, have found it most unfortunate that the government has decided to deinsure eye examinations.

April 3, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 469 The question that I have for the minister is: If an individual has a referral from a doctor to get an eye exam, is the government prepared to cover that sort of a cost? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): I just missed the last part of the honourable member's question. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster, to quickly rephrase the question. Mr. Lamoureux: Will this government pay for the cost if there is a deferral or a referral from a doctor to get your eyes checked? Mr.

McCrae: Madam Speaker, the reduction here has to do with the routine eye examination where a patient is not known to be symptomatic, and so it would depend. It seems to me that the way the policy works is that if there is a change in your vision of .5 or more, then that is covered under the program. If, by referral for medical reasons, one is referred for an eye examination, that too is covered. Optometrist Charges Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the Minister of Health can give clarification to the Chamber.

I have a document, and I will table a copy for the minister, and it comes from the Association of Optometrists, which has suggested a retail, if you like, price for the routine eye examination of$46. So now Manitobans who want to get their eyes examined can anticipate receiving a bill in the nature of $4 6,

whereas with the province, formerly it cost $2 8 for that same routine procedure. Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the examination that was under the insured program covered the fee charged to the government by the optometrist. The fee has now been deinsured for those between the ages of 19 and 64 years of age. Optometrists will charge fees to those not covered under the program, and I am sure that any fees that are exorbitant will be dealt with appropriately. *

(1400) Physical Examinations De insurance Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my final supplementary question is to the Premier, and that is to ask the Premier to give Manitobans the assurance when it comes to physical exams that he is not going to allow the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) to do what he has done with the deindexing of eye examinations, to assure Manitobans that the physical exam will in fact be at no cost to our patients. Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, you know, when it comes to protecting the healtl:) care system I find it difficult to accept the kind of criticism that is implied by the Liberal member for Inkster when just about 15 months ago his own Prime Minister said that medicare now was only available for catastrophic illness and hospital coverage. So he has little to instruct us about protecting the health care system in this province. Health Care Facilities Funding Reductions Ms.

Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, one of the biggest cuts that we saw in the budget yesterday was $5 3 million that was cut from hospitals. This is a devastating cut that will have ramifications right across the province. Can the Minister of Health tell this House what the impact of this will be on Manitoba hospitals? For example, does it now mean that Seven Oaks and Misericordia will no longer be operating as full-service hospitals? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I know the honourable member and her colleagues have been watching with interest the work of the design teams and the urban planning partnership. The honourable member knows-I think agrees-that an integrated approach to health service delivery in the city of Winnipeg is the way to go. They will continue, however, to tell other people something else which is a little disturbing and troubling. However, the reduction in the hospital line in the budget is offset by a $3 8-

470 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 1996 million transitional fund that will assist in making an orderly change to the new system. The honourable member is specific about a couple of hospitals, and as I said yesterday, those decisions have not been made, decisions about recommendations that have come forward about, for example, Seven Oaks Hospital or Misericordia Hospital. Those recommendations are still being looked at for cost benefit analysis. It was incorrectly reported recently in the newspaper, Madam Speaker, that those analyses were completed and they are not. Ms.

Wowchuk: Since the minister has not told us what is going to be happening in the city, can he tell rural Manitobans how much of that $5 3 million is going to be coming out of rural hospitals? How many hospitals can we expect to be closed? Will Winnipegosis be closed? Will Grandview be closed? Will Shoal Lake be closed? Which hospitals in rural Manitoba are going to be closed because of this cut? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I remind the honourable member that this is the Filmon Manitoba, not the NDP Saskatchewan where they shut down 52 hospitals.

I remind the honourable member that this is not Bob Rae's Ontario where Bob Rae shut down 10,000 acute care hospital beds. This is Manitoba where we take an approach that has more to do with making decisions that are evidence based, and it has more to do with consultation than we have seen anywhere else in this country. The honourable member names three rural hospitals, none of which have been targeted, as suggested by the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) in his mischievous way of working with the so-called informing the public. Point of Order Mr.

Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, Beauchesne Citation 417 is very clear that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate. Madam Speaker, all throughout today we have been asking questions to this same minister about health care. We have not received one answer yet. This latest non-answer is a clear indication of that. I would ask, Madam Speaker, that you ask the Minister of Health to answer the questions, or do the right thing and resign. Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, it may save you the trouble of having to do any research.

I would say I am sorry to the honourable member for Brandon East for my comment. He has put out information, and only he knows what his motivations are. I should not speculate on what they might have been. The honourable member has named three hospitals. Are they slated for closure? No, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable Minister of Health. *** Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Swan River, with a final supplementary question. Ms. Wowchuk: Will the minister tell us then, does he have a plan or does he not have a plan?

There is a cut of $3 8 million, there is money for transition for $5 8 million-$ 30 million for transition, and yet he is saying there are not going to be any hospitals closed. Mr. McCrae: Rather than doing it like the honourable member's counterparts in other NDP jurisdictions, that I should go around and just sort of pick out a hospital here and a hospital there and shut it down, we have chosen to ask the regional health associations to get involved in needs assessments. So the honourable member thinks that we do things the way New Democrats do. We do not. That is why we are here, and they are over there.

Social Assistance Funding Reductions Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) in his budget

April 3, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 471 stated that his budget protects priority social programs. This statement is a bold-faced lie, because the largest cut is to social assistance- Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would ask the honourable member for Burrows to withdraw his comment "bold-faced lie." Mr. Martindale: I withdraw the word "lie." Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable member for Burrows. *** Madam Speaker: Does the honourable member for Burrows have a question? Mr.

Martindale: I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services how she can be a participant in this budget and statements that prove that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) and his government are strangers to the truth, because the largest cut of any program was to social assistance, $23 million. How can she and her government justify this when there is a $120-million surplus? What is she going to tell to those people today? *

(1410) Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I do thank my honourable friend for the question. The tone of the question I do not appreciate, but I do thank him for the question, because it does allow me the opportunity to tell Manitobans that we have taken a very balanced approach to our welfare reform in the province of Manitoba, where in fact we have protected those that are most in need in our province: those single parents with children under six years of age, those women that are in abuse shelters and their children, seniors in Manitoba.

And those with mental disabilities, with disabilities right throughout the province, have been protected and the rates have been maintained. We have said as a government the best form of social security is a job, and we have taken a very proactive approach, along with the Department of Education and Training, to develop new initiatives that will help find work opportunities for people in Manitoba, Madam Speaker, and ensure that they have the opportunity to move up into a meaningful job that will take them off the dependent system of welfare that they presently see today. Food Allowance Mr.

Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, I would like to table articles from the Scientific American of February 1996, entitled Malnutrition, Poverty and Intellectual Development, which show that malnutrition affects brain development from birth to two years and many other harmful effects of poverty, and I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services if she can tell parents what they should cut out of their greatly reduced budget? Should they cut out breads and cereals or vegetables or fruits or meats or poultry or fish- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon.

Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I again thank my honourable friend for the question, although the information that he provided obviously was wrong. I indicated very clearly that the support for single parents with children under the age of six, the children that he was referring to in the document that he tabled, was maintained. So we did not reduce the rates for families, for single parents with children under the age of six.

I think he should maybe go back and look at the announcement in some detail again and gain a clear understanding of the people that we protected in Manitoba as a result of our welfare reform and welfare changes. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Burrows, with a final supplementary question. Mr. Martindale: I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services why she is reducing the food allowance for children on city welfare as a result of her

472 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April3, 1996 policy of standardization which took effect on April 1 when the health of Manitoba's children report recommends that there be an increase in social allowance to provide for adequate nutrition. Why is she not listening to the Department of Health's own recommendation and reducing the food- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, again, my honourable friend is bending the truth considerably when he indicates that children that are on the City of Winnipeg's caseloads have been reduced by the provincial government.

He only needs to look to his cousins sitting in opposition, members of the Liberal Party and the federal government-[intetjection] Well, his cousins in opposition in Manitoba, Madam Speaker, and the federal Liberal government who has said that it will no longer contribute to the City of Winnipeg's higher rates.- We made no reductions; it was a decision of the City Council of the City of Winnipeg, and they have to accept responsibility for their decisions. Sarah KeUy Inquest Report Recommendations Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St Johns): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Acting Minister of Justice.

Yesterday the report of the inquest into the tragic murder of Sarah Kelly was released, citing among other things, and I quote: Within the provincial sphere a patchwork of services, fragmented and poorly co ordinated, leaving substantial gaps. Indeed, the recommend ations as a whole, Madam Speaker, say that sex offenders are not being treated seriously by this government.

My question to the minister: Explain please why it had to take an inquest to tell Manitobans how abysmally this government, in particular the Justice department and Community Mental Services, is failing to protect the safety of Manitoba's women and children, in particular, contrary to this government's talk. Bon. Darren Praznik (Acting Minister of Justice): Madam Speaker, first of all, I think the member for St. Johns has probably misrepresented to some degree that information, as is usually the case in what is brought to this Chamber. I know that the Minister of Justice (Mr.

McCrae) would be more than pleased, upon return, to provide a full answer, a complete answer to the member for St. Johns. Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister, rather than reading Covey, read this report? Would the minister commit to ensuring that the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey) take all steps to ensure that each and every recommendation in this report is implemented and not thrown on the trash heap with the All report, the summ it on youth crime and violence, the War on Drugs Report? That was a lulu. Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the member for St.

Johns does a great disservice to a very serious and important issue. Our Minister of Justice in this province is very much deeply committed to working on solid answers to many of those issues that are faced by our society. She is deeply committed to that, and when he comes to this House to talk about a very complex and difficult issue, he does it a great disservice to try to simplify it in such a way. He mentioned the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry.

I can tell the member that this government has done more than any government in the history of this province to settle many of the long-outstanding grievances of our aboriginal community, and this was not the case when his party was in government, Madam Speaker. Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister at least do this: Would he at least straighten out the Minister of Justice who yesterday was up to her old tricks blaming the federal government and saying it was the federal government's responsibility to make change when 22 of the 25 recommendations in this report are directed at this government to implement? Mr.

Praznik: Madam Speaker, I think it is very clear that the only member who needs straightening out is

April 3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 473 the member for St. Johns, and I think a certain reporter of the Winnipeg Sun did that some time ago. *

(1420) Social Assistance Funding Reduction Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. This budget cut $7.7 million from the poorest people in this province by eliminating property and cost of living tax credits. At the same time, this minister and this government is prepared to give millions of dollars in tax credits to corporations. How can this minister, in all conscience, reduce the welfare assistance to the poorest people in Manitoba while at the same time maintaining corporation welfare assistance? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, it is an interesting approach that the member for Brandon East brings with that question. Firstly, the issue of the tax credits for welfare recipients, I think we have to acknowledge that their occupancy costs are paid for by the taxpayer, unlike individuals who pay for their own rent or pay for their own property taxes in terms of entitlement to a property tax credit. As well, as the Minister of Family Services (Mrs.

Mitchelson) has outlined, we have also looked at our total package of rates in a relative basis across Canada The other link he makes is the whole link to economic development. I would suggest that if you talk to anybody in the business community they will speak very positively about initiatives like, if he is referring to, the manufacturing investment credit. That is one of the reasons that we are seeing 10,000 more jobs in Manitoba. That is one of the reasons we are seeing record levels of investment in our province. That is one reason we are seeing a 58 percent increase in manufacturing shipments and so on.

That is important for individual Manitobans in terms of job opportunities and obviously that also adds to our treasury here in Manitoba. Madam Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us this afternoon sixteen Grades 5 to 10 students from Oakbank, Transcona and North Kildonan Home Schoolers under the direction of Mrs. Gwen Neufeld. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Findlay).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Senior Curling Championship Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Do I have leave to make a member's statement? [interjection] I don't need leave? Madam Speaker, Gimli Branch No. 182 of the Royal Canadian Legion is currently hosting the Senior Curling Championship in Gimli. The championship started on March 30 and will wind up on April 6. As most members in this House know, curling has a long history and tradition in this province.

Many a cold harsh winter has been made shorter and brighter by the companionship of others whose involvement was motivated only by the love of the game. However, curlers are no longer as bound by the weather as they used to be. Instead of having their games on frozen ponds, rivers and streams, curling has moved indoors. This, however, has not lessened the appeal of the game or the thrill of a perfect draw to the button. It is this spirit which is evident in Gimli today as curling enthusiasts from across the country come together in order to share their love of the sport.

The game of curling is well known for its camaraderie and hospit ality, and I know that all the curlers competing today will find the same qualities evident in the town of Gimli and in our wonderful province. Our province and the community of Gimli have a variety of interesting tourist attractions, great restaurants and dining establishments and the most spectacular scenery to be found anywhere in Canada. I hope all

474 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 participants will have the opportunity to enjoy and experience the many wonderful features of this province which make Manitoba such a great place to live. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the volunteers and organizers who have worked so hard to make this event a reality. Legion Branch No. 182 also deserves the recognition for their efforts. They have worked many long hours planning and organizing this event. The success of events such as this is due in large part to the dedicated and committed community members. I know that all members of this House join me in welcoming all curlers taking

part in the legion's Senior Curling Championship in our province and wishing them good luck. Thank you. *

(1430) Misericordia General Hospital Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, I would like to make a statement in the House about the role of the Misericordia Hospital in my community. This government has put the place of that Misericordia Hospital in jeopardy. It has led to serious concerns and very difficult times for patients and staff in that hospital, and I want to draw the attention of both the government and all of this House to the situation that is occurring there. Madam Speaker, for nearly a century the Misericordia has been the hospital that Wolseley and west Broadway residents have depended upon.

It is where we have gone in emergencies. It is the hospital that local doctors use. It is where many of our children were born. This community serves patients from many disadvantaged circumstances. They have more severe illnesses. The local community service is essential for those without cars, and there are many in my constituency who do not have cars and who do not have phones, people who may be new to Canada or who have very serious issues that need dealing with both during the day and in the evening and nighttime.

Madam Speaker, compared with other Winnipeg hospitals, the Misericordia Hospital's emergency department deals with more serious emergencies. It sees more elderly patients. It has a much higher admittance rate than many other hospitals and indeed that admittance rate is increasing. It is clearly serving a growing need in this community, and as poverty increases-and this government through its last budget is doing what it can to see that poverty increases in Manitoba-indeed, I found today that one of my constituents is being asked to live on $7 a day. Those are the people who are using the Misericordia Hospital.

Madam Speaker, this hospital does not know whether its future is going to be in the community. It does not know whether it can play the dynamic preventative role that it has played in the past.

It has tried as a community to strengthen its links with the community, to create a mobile clinic, to develop other centres such as the eye care centre, the Easy Street program, the breast disease clinic, and so I want to urge the government again-1 have done it many times in this House-o n behalf of my constituents, some of whom are the poorest in the society, to tell us what the role of that community hospital will be and to maintain for the use of my constituents that community hospital. Budget-Rural Manitoba Mr.

Jack Penner (Emerson): Madam Speaker, first of all, before I make a statement I want to say one thing to the House today. Today I was not proud to be a member of this House. The language that I heard coming from two members opposite, both men of the cloth, did not make me proud to sit here. Secondly, I would like to congratulate our Minister of Finance (Mr.

Stefanson) for the budget that he presented, recognizing the needs of many communities in rural Manitoba, especially after two of my colleagues and I had the opportunity for almost two months of straight meetings across the province to hear literally thousands of people and talk to thousands of people about what the needs of those communities are and how to reflect on value-added initiatives. I want to recognize one couple today. They operate the RCS Greenhouses in W askada and their names are Roy and Candice Consi. These people developed and built, as

April 3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 475 our initiative states, a greenhouse that covers an acre of land. They are currently employing a dozen or more people to work this greenhouse, providing those kinds of jobs to those kinds of communities, and it is in recognition of the adjustments that have been made through MACC to allow for the funding and financing of those kinds of operations. It also recognizes that there are a tremendous number of initiatives that rural Manitobans want to get involved in.

They have asked for program changes which have been recognized in part today by this Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) in the budget that he presented yesterday and it will allow those communities and individuals in communities such as Waskada and others to move towards the diversification that is badly needed.

There is another couple, the Marc Summersfields at Stuartburn, that are currently initiating the establishment of an organic vegetable processing plant in the Stuartburn area that is very similar, and the irrigation initiative that was identified through this budget yesterday is the kind of thing that Manitobans and rural Manitobans especially have been asking for. We should congratulate the Minister of Finance for a fine budget. Seven Oaks Hospital Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, Seven Oaks Hospital is too good to lose.

Residents of north Winnipeg waited many years to have their own full-service hospital and we will not give it up without a fight. We want the same access to emergency services, psychiatric services and all the other services that people in other parts of Winnipeg receive in our own community. No one has said we deserve more and we certainly will not accept less. We hope that the Filmon government has been listening to the phone calls and reading the letters, petitions and news coverage of rallies whereby thousands of outraged ordinary citizens are trying to convey a simple message.

Do not convert Seven Oaks to a geriatric centre, not now, not ever. Seven Oaks is too good to lose as a full-service community hospital. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, as a political party we have great concern in terms of the general direction this government is taking towards hospitals and their roles well into the future. Madam Speaker, what I would like to comment on very briefly is the Seven Oaks Hospital. This is a hospital in which both I and the member for The Maples (Mr.

Kowalski) have invested a great deal of time and energy in terms of trying to do what we can to bring to light to the constituents that we represent our feelings and thoughts of how important this institution, our hospital, our community centre really and truly is. Having said that, we want to acknowledge jointly the efforts that so many people, in particular the grassroots members, have put in a phenomenal amount of effort at trying to bring this issue to the government's attention.

The staff, the grassroots members have gathered 30,000-some signatures on petitions; they have gathered thousands of letters of protest. The efforts have been overwhelming. We have seen three very successful rallies: one in the community of Kildonan, another one at the steps of the Legislature, yet another one at the hospital itself. And we have heard, Madam Speaker, from the community itself in terms of how important this hospital is, again from a wide spectrum of individuals. The other day, for example, we heard of an individual who attributed to the Seven Oaks Hospital saving of her life.

We heard of another that had a child there at the Seven Oaks Hospital. We have heard the passion for the need to keep this hospital from the grassroots, from the community, and we-when I am referring to we, not only the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) and I, but those individuals in the north end community and outside the community appeal to this government to do the right thing and keep the Seven Oaks Hospital open. * (1 440) ORDERS OF THE DAY BUDGET DEBATE (Second Day of Debate) Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) that

476 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 1996 this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government, standing in the name of the honourable leader of the official opposition. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, I rise today really with a sense of regret about comments I am going to be making on the provincial budget today. I have had the opportunity and honour to speak on the budget and have some feisty debates about what we agree with and disagree with.

I have had the honour of rising in this House and supporting a budget in 1989 when the promises in the budget on family tax credits were exactly the same as what we had campaigned on in '88, or what I had campaigned on in '88, and today regrettably I do not find this a very happy occasion. I cannot understand how people and human beings in a government can participate in a cut of some 33 percent for babies under the age of one year of age and stand up and give their Minister of Finance a standing ovation.

I cannot understand any political party that has as its philosophy that somebody under a year of age would be the hardest hit in a budget, and I cannot understand people that cheer about it. I did not have anything to cheer about yesterday, and I do not think any of us did.

I do not care, as I say, what your political belief system is, but to have babies under one year of age get cut by 33 percent by a government in a budget by having people that are the most vulnerable, and through their own circumstances in life are born to families that unfortunately receive social assistance, have their food cut by 33 percent. I do not believe that is the tradition of premiers and governments in this province. I do not believe that is the tradition of people I have followed through my years of watching legislative debate. I do not believe it is the tradition of Duff Roblin.

I do not believe it is the tradition of Walter Weir. I do not believe it is the tradition of Ed Schreyer. I do not believe it was the tradition of Sterling Lyon. I do not believe it was the tradition of Howard Pawley. I cannot understand how it has become the tradition and values of the member for Tuxedo (Mr. Film on) and his group of individuals who are in his cabinet. Who is standing up for babies? I mean, it is not as if they chose to be born in a family that unfortunately is on social assistance. It is not as if they refuse to go to work. It is not as if they refuse to go to school.

It is not as if they made choices in their lives. They are under one year of age. And the Tories were cheering. The Tories were clapping. They were guffawing and thinking that, of course, this was a very, very good budget yesterday.

Madam Speaker, many members opposite, many members on this side, are fortunate enough to have been born in families that, yes, may be poor, may be wealthy, may be in between, but I think there is a social obligation, as all of us as members of a community beyond political parties, that we do not have a situation where people who are born to wealth or individuals across the way or all of us who may be married to wealth or inherited wealth have chosen to hit the most vulnerable in our society with this massive cut.

It defies any health care policy of any government, because we all know-and the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) quoted today, the Scientific American study of February 1996-that your first year is your formative year. We all know that nutrition can make a difference in the whole life of that human being if they get a decent start. With food, they may have a chance in school, they may have a chance at work, they may have a chance in society. I bel ieve that this cut says more about the kind of capricious, mean-spirited values of this Premier (Mr.

Filmon) and this government than anything I have seen and witnessed and experienced in the last eight years in this Chamber. How can you increase corporate welfare, corporate assistance, and decrease the assistance to babies? How can you make these kind of decisions in your budget, because a budget is after all a question of choices? How do you sleep at night making those kind of cuts? I mean this, and I have never said that before. There are decisions I have not supported in the past, but how do you basically live with yourself with taking babies at, I say, one year of age, and cutting them so dramatically?

April 3, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 477 Madam Speaker, David Northcott yesterday was quoted as saying there is a 19 percent increase in the utilization of food banks by children. Now that is not some esoteric debate, some intellectual disagreement between us-a 19 percent increase in one year. I heard members earlier talk about the cloth.

Well, our values of community, our values of sharing, our values of co-operation, our values as a society that have been rooted in the Christian-Judeo values and have latterly been influenced by other cultures that have come to our great North America, and our first cultures, First Nations, which were societies of co-operation and sharing, there is nothing in that cut of 33 percent for babies that is consistent with the spiritual and cultural values of anybody in this Chamber, I would suggest. They tell us to examine our conscience if there are things that go not according to what we believe.

They tell us to stand up and be counted when there are things in a budget that you do not spiritually believe in or culturally or community-wise believe in, and if ever there was a time for members across this Chamber to stand up, it is to vote against this budget, as we will with sorrow, in the next eight days. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) Of course, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have been seeing this trend, this sort of Darwinian trend developing with the previous governments of the so-called Filmon team, the member for Tuxedo's values slowly creeping into our societal values in these budgets.

We have seen cuts in work, not welfare: We have seen cuts in Student Social Allowances. We have seen cuts in previous budgets in Access programs and New Careers programs and apprenticeship programs. Any program that allows people to get a hand up to get out of dependancy and become independent has been cut by the Conservatives. All the rungs of the ladder that allows people to climb out of a situation of dependancy are being cut off by the government opposite. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, we believe, and I believe Manitobans believe, that we should be establishing bridges for people to get out of dependency to independence, not bombing those bridges with policies that do not make sense in the long term for our province and for our economy. I cannot see how anybody on this weekend, which may have a religious meaning to a lot of us, can really square those cuts to children and babies that the government has announced.

That is why we said yesterday and we are saying it right now that we do not believe you care about people anymore and you do not care about Manitobans who are most vulnerable. You may care about your own political fortunes, getting your spin out, getting your ads out, getting your sort of promises out. You may care about how the media plays the budget and you may analyse all the press coverage, et cetera, but you have lost your rudder.

You have lost your steerage, you have lost your sense of purpose, you have lost your sense of values, you have lost your sense of community, and unfortunately Manitobans have lost a government that cares about them anymore. They only care about themselves. So beyond all the political anticipation of the session, I am not very happy today, and I do not think anybody should be. I really do not believe anybody should be. Maybe we have been watching this come for some time.

I actually sense that this government during its minority years tried to keep in touch with people, was not too arrogant, had some energy, had some purpose. I saw slippages of that, in my opinion-their concern-midway through the '9 0 to '9 5 regime, but I think since this election this government-and it is not just my words-has become very, very arrogant, starting with the person who runs this government. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) is becoming and, in my opinion, has become extremely arrogant.

We know in the past when political leaders become arrogant-members should harken back to the Mulroney years when they received also a second majority government-even if it is just after an election campaign will be treated by the public properly. They do not forget arrogance; they do not forget contempt to themselves and the public will never ever forget, I believe, the sharp right ideological tum of this government and the arrogance they are displaying. They are almost like a country-club government now, run by a country-club Premier if he is in town. If he is

478 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 in town, it is a very, very arrogant group of individuals. [inteijection] Well, if you can defend cutt ing kids back by 33 percent, you are not the person I thought you were. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have been reading and meeting with people across the province. Let me read an editorial that was just in the Interlake Spectator, the last paragraph of the Interlake Spectator. The Filmon government? It is not a government at all.

It is rather an aging men's club, the roomy-eyed members of which are bereft of passion and devoid of vision, a collection of tired, calloused, veteran politicians, many of whom are likely to retire before the next election campaign. I can only say, for the sake of many Manitobans, I hope many of you do retire because you have lost your compass and you have lost your compassion for Manitobans that are most vulnerable in our society. I also believe that this is a government that cannot keep its promises.

It is a government that said repeatedly throughout the budget that they have a "mandate" to proceed with certain changes. They have a mandate to proceed with this. They have a mandate to proceed with that. Mr. Deputy Speaker, if you read back to your election promises and the commitments you have made, you do not have a mandate to break your word and break your pr omises because this Premier (Mr. Filmon), in his ads and in his election campaign, promised a totally different set of prioriti es than we are seeing right now in the budget that they have released. Harken back to the election campaign.

Harken back to the budget presented before the election campaign. We ask the government how would they deal with the federal cutbacks in their thre e-year projections because they promised that they would not decrease spending in spite of the federal cutba cks. They had in their budget, weeks after the federal budget, that they would spend $4.465 billion in '96-97; $4.465 billion in '9 7-9 8; and $4.465 billion in '9 8-99.

Not only did you have that in your budget document that was tabled in this Legislature, but on page 10 of your own election document, the document that all of you walked around the province with. You also said, we will not cut the spending in Manitoba We will cut red tape, we will cut duplication, but we are not going to cut the vital health and education services here in this province. No wonder people are so cynical about members opposite and the Premier. You gave your word to people, and you broke it.

You said something in a budget and in an election document and in ads, and this budget confirms now that you did not mean what you said in the election campaign. You did not mean what you said last year in your budget, and I think that is a total disgrace, an absolute total disgrace. This budget does contain spending cuts, and in spite of the fact that the federal government's reduction in revenue, which we have joined with members opposite to condemn, is less than what you had in your budget last year.

The federal government budget reductions are less than what was in your Speech from the Throne last November, where you quoted $14 7 million because equalization went up last year after the election campaign. We knew and you knew, when you wrote that Speech from the Throne, that it was not $14 7 milli on. We had the equalization numbers. You had the equalization numbers. The Premier (Mr.

Filmon) put something in the Speech from the Throne that he knew was not true because, when you subtract the increase in equalization from the decrease in the Speech from the Throne, it is unfortunately-and fortunately I am glad it is less cuts, and I would hope that members opposite are too. You know you cannot deal with people-the Premier apparently is reading this Seven Features of Good Managers. One of the first features is being honest. Now, I read the book four or five years ago or maybe three years ago-[int eijection] The only person not practi sing it is the Minister of Education (Mrs.

Mcintosh), the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) and the Premier because it is a tell- the-truth . [inteijection] Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Could I ask the honourable members to keep it down just a little bit. I would like to hear the honourable member's presentation at this time.

April 3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 479 Mr. Doer: The spending reductions are $52 million minimum this year. We do not know how the so-called transition fund will operate. It may be even greater in funding decreases. For all we know, the transition fund could be used for another Barbara Biggar public relations campaign. It was obvious today in Question Period; they do not have a plan. They do not know what is going to be open, what is going to be closed and how we are going to get there.

The only plan they have is to pluck $52 milli on out of hospitals without being able to tell anybody why they got $52 million or $53 million and where it is going to come from and how they are going to do it and how this fits with the transition plan. This is the only government I know that has been in office for eight years and needs a transition plan because they do not have a plan after eight years. They bumble along from one minister to another, and the only thing that is constant is the Premier (Mr. Filmon) who cannot plan from one moment to the other.

The only thing he can plan to do is, which way is he going to point his fmger to blame somebody? He whines and he blames and he points fingers, but he never ever take s responsibility for the fact that he does not know today where they are going tomorrow in the most vital services here in Manitoba, and that is health care. It is a good thing this Premier inherited his businesses because he does not know where to go in terms of the future of this province. Madam Speaker, $56-million cut in this budget and $150 million next year, with no plan. This is not in your budget. This is not in your election document.

I would refer-[interj ection] Do you not care about the truth, the member for Steinbach (Mr. Driedger)? Is that not a value? Page 10, read it and apologize for not telling people the truth in the last campaign. We do not know where this government is going to get $366 million over the next three years that it has promised to cut when they promised in the election campaign they would not cut one dollar. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) knows that . Maybe the Minister of Finance has spent too much time at City Hall. Maybe that is what happens. The Premier (Mr.

Film on) and the Minister of Finance come from City Hall. That is that great budgeting place that was trying to find $7 million for four or five weeks; then, presto, they can find $57 million in seven minutes. It is amazing. It is magic. [interj ection] Well, not quite . So maybe this is what the Minister of Finance does, you know, money here, money there, hidden agenda, hidden agenda. Mr. Deputy Speaker, $366 million, can the Minister of Finance tell us today what those cuts are going to be? What does it mean for health care? What is the plan? What are the changes?

Why do you need a transition plan eight years after being in government? Usually you have a trans ition plan a couple of weeks after you form government, not eight years later. This last election is broken promise after broken promise after broken promise, and we see that in the budget. * (1 450) Now, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) last year said, oh, we are going to go back and talk to Paul Martin, and we are going to go get that money back. That was his line in the election. Did he really believe that? Did the Pre mier (Mr. Fi lmon) really believe him when he said that?

Then how are we to believe the Minister of Finance and the Premier, those City Hall trained financiers? How are we supposed to believe the Minister of Finance and the Premier when they do not even show up for the bill that cuts the money out of Manitoba? They had three ministers led by the Deputy Premier out on the gun control legislation. Why did they not send one minister to the gun control registra tion legislation and two ministers to protect health care and education here in the province of Manitoba? Then we would have started to believe what you were actually saying.

You had no ministers to do the job, no ministers. We would have been satisfied with one minister. You had no ministers. You surrendered with a little white flag. Here in Manitoba you put up absolutely no fight because you did not care about health and post secondary education, and I am surprised tha t the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) would be so

480 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 critical of his Minister of Finance, his Premier, his Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh) and his Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae). I know he has been going out there taking the flak for the Minister of Health, trying to ingratiate himself with the Premier, and I am disappointed he would make such a slip, to criticize the Premier here today . So you do not have a mandate. You do not have a mandate to proceed with these cuts. If you are going to keep your word, you have to maintain spending at $4.465 billion. That is your prom ise.

You did not promise to cut programs here in the province of Manitoba. Of course, we have already heard what this ideological switch has meant to the seniors of this province. How does the Premier (Mr. Filmon) go and do an ad in a railway car at the Manitoba Children 's Museum, a program, of course, established by the NDP? He does an ad at the Manitoba Children 's Museum in a railway car with seniors, saying, oh, you can trust us. We are really good for seniors. We are not going to hurt seniors who have built this pro vince.

Why did you not tell them that the truth that was sitting underneath your brief case and your briefing book was a 37 percent cut to seniors and Pharmacare? Why did you not tell those seniors in your little puppy ad that you planned on reducing their programs and Pharmacare by $20 million to $25 million? Why do you not have any integrity? Does this Premier not have any integrity at all?

I mean, at least you could have had the courtesy of not having an ad with seniors if he intended to shaft them after the election but, instead, you have taken this money out of Pharmacare, you have a minister who has botched it from Day One. Pharmacists have said it, seniors have said it, health care prof essionals have said it. People who are recipie nts have said it and, of course, this Premier does not care. He wants accountab ility for teachers but no accountability for his own Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), who should have been fired after the debacle on emergency wards of hospitals last fall. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, this is not NDP wor ds. The Manitoba seniors have called this a radical change. They have said today it is scaring seniors, that it is going to hurt seniors. They have said today it is meanspirited. An Honourable Member: The only people who are scaring seniors are the NDP. Mr. Doer: Perhaps the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) should wait unt il he has a good comment to make instead of a dumb comment, because the member for River Heights should not be insulting the seniors organization.

The co-chair and the vice-president of seniors are the ones that signed the letter, and I do not think you should insult them that way. I think you should apologize to the seniors of Manitoba. Members phone us daily to express shock, outrage , betrayal and deep fear about how the greatly increased burden of prescription drugs will affect their budget and lives. They believe some seniors will decide not to buy prescribed drugs or will seek cheaper and perhaps less effective substitu tes. It goes on to say that they want this rad ical change put on hold.

This is a democratic system that provides for us to wait for the election. They do not feel that they can wait for the election campaign. They want you to keep your word that you made during the last election campaign. On behalf of the seniors, I would ask this Premier to get rid of his bumbling, fumbling, incompetent Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) and also reverse the decisions that have been made on Pharmacare. The Premier, also during the election campaign, had an ad with him and his wife.

He was walking along the riverbank in this ad and said, our health care is great and I will let no one take those health care services away from the people of Manitoba. What kind of words were those? Is it not a takeaway when you take an insured service and make it a deinsured service? Is that not breaking your word and your election campaign, a campaign promise made with your own spouse? You cannot keep the word with that ad? Cannot keep your word on an ad campaign that you made with your own family member?

April 3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 48 1 What about the word to hospitals? In July of 19 94, you promised not to cut the emergency wards in our acute care hospitals. In October of 19 95, after the election, there go the emergency wards of five hospitals. In December, we finally find from the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), that brilliant planner that he is, that Christmas is coming. It is the holiday season. He is the only one in Manitoba that did not know in October that Christmas was coming in December, and then he opened four of the five emergency wards again. Oh, that is real planning.

We have real confidence that he can make intelligent decisions about the next $55 million he has to cut. A Minister of Health that does not know that Christmas is coming. A Minister of Health that is in this sort of-how should I describe it?-kind of a lifestyle funk in term s of what is going on here in the decisions in this pro vince, and that is just not good enough for the largest department in government. That is not good enough for Manitobans.

That is not good enough for the Premier who gave his commitment on ads that he would not cut health care services here in the province of Manitoba [interjection] What was that again? I could not hear the mumbling fr om the member for River Heights (Mr. Ra dcliffe). He seems to be the junior Senator Foghorn for the Conser vative Party , with the greatest of apologies to the senior member of same, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Of course, all members are honourab le members. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have a transition plan and no plan. We have $52 million in spending cuts , but we do not know where it is going to come from.

What does the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stef anson) do, just pluck a number out of the air? Does he say eeny, meeny, miny, mo, I will take $52 million out of this for health care and you people can figure it out later? I know that they did this at City Hall. I know they have got a lot of good training over there, but is this how they establish their budgets ? No offence on the Deputy Speaker, who was never a part of the inner junta of City Hall, never head of the gang of 18 as my honourable friend the Minister of Finance was formerly in his past life.

I still remember the cameras on that meeting in the Fort Garry Hot el, that the gang of 18 were meeting like the knights of the round table to decide the kind of spoils of the civic budget of that year. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we still do not know what the plan is for tra nsition. How much money from that transition plan is going to go to Barb Biggar's public relations campaign? You know, we hear there is a big ad campaign coming. We hear that Barb Biggar has been hired to run a big ad campaign.

In fact, we have been told that Barb Biggar now runs the Department of Health, and it would not surprise me, because you have got 10 2 committees over here, you got KPMG getting a million dollars over here, you have got the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae )-we do not know where the Minister of Health is-and you have got the Deputy Minister of Health. How can you get directions from a Minister of Health when he does not know what to do about emergency wards around Christmas season? So who is running the Department of Health?

It is Premier Filmon through Barb Biggar and the public relations campaign that inevitably will be thrust upon Manitobans. The good news is, you have got a great ad campaign coming. The bad news is, you cannot count on the Filmon government at all for a hospital bed down the road, because they do not care about hospital beds, they only care about their spin, their proverbial spin. So I guess Ed Connery was right. Barb Biggar is the co-Premier. She is running the largest department in government. Then she is the Premier, of cours e, and public relations plays much more of a

part in this campaign than anything else in terms of ser vice. * (1 500) This is the only government in Canada that does not have a plan one or two years after being elected on health care. It is the only government in Canada that did not take one year or two years or three years or four years to consult with Manitoba. They are now on their ninth year, fumbling and bumbling along, because the Premier (Mr. Filmon) says in '88 he is not going to cut any hospital beds. In 19 90 he says he is not going to cut spending. He cuts massive spending based on Connie Curran in '93. He gets in troub le with the by elections.

He puts everything on a pre-election pause. He again prom ises not to cut. He has got no plan. He has got no idea. He has got no transition. We are not

482 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 doing the Healthy Child program. We are not doing enhancement of role of nurses. We are not moving to deal with the private labs that are costing us money. We are not dealing with the kind of changes that are necessary in health care. Nobody disputes changes are necessary, but you have no idea what you are doing. Health Sciences Centre, $10 million; St. Boniface, $7 millio n-how much in rural Manitoba? How much in the city of Winnipeg and the rest of the facilities? What does it mean for Misericordia? What does it mean for Grace?

What does it mean for Seven Oaks? What does it mean for Concordia? What does it mean for all our hospital s? You do not know. When you talk about home care changes, and I will talk about those in a moment, the one area that you really could improve in is having a more integrated home care system with the hospita ls. You do not have it. You are going to go from one or two home care systems, one run by the province and one run by the city; you are going to go from two to four syste ms. You are going to have more overlap. You are going to have more duplicati on.

You are going to have more red tape because you want to have more profit for a few individuals. That is the problem with this government. It goes from one issue to another without any idea at all. Again the Premier (Mr. Filmon) broke his promise on eye exams. He promised not to reduce the service. He said he would not take health care services away from people. That was his promise: I will not let anybody take it away from you. Well, what are the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) doing? Does he not care about what he said in his own ads? Do they not mean anything to you?

Does your word not matter? I mean, we knew that you were not being straight with Manitobans about the Jets, but we thought you could be honest with them about health and education at least in terms of your integrity and your honesty and the honesty of the government of Manitoba. That should mean something to you. It should mean something to all of us. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we know that the change on eye examinations is a broken promise.

When you go from an insured service to a deinsured service, it is less of a service than we had before, clearly a broken promise, and we also know that this will create difficulty, according to Jane Thrall, an expert in this area This will cause more costs in terms of eye examinations from people going from a medical doctor to the eye examination be cause they need to go through a referral now.

They are going to end up paying more money, but you just see it in a different line, and you will have less prevention for people who really need those kinds of preventative services, again another poorly thought out idea and something that works total ly against the Literacy Task Force report that was presented by the Minister of Justice (Mrs. Vodrey) in her previous role as running Tory committees, then writing good reports that never get acted upon by the Conservative government. Personal care home rates are going to go up 20 percent.

Northern patient rates are going up because of the claw back on third party, again another user fee, another tax on northeners and, of course, as I have said before, the Pharmacare program again is a ma jor breach of their election campaigns. Now, of course, we do not just stop at health care when we talk about this government on its broken election promises. They also promised to maintain spending in all areas of government, including education.

On page 10 of the government's report about how they would maintain spending, they do not say that they are going to cut educat ion. [interjection] Well, that is the page that includes spending. I know you have not read the page, or maybe you have. The Filmon government will freeze overall spending at a level until '98-99. We will reduce red tap e. We will use innovative management tec hniques. I guess that is what they are using in health care. We will use information technology . I guess that is what they are using with Pharmacare. We have gone from computer cards to forms you have to sign.

We are going to reduce red tape. It does not say they are going to reduce spending in public educati on. It does not say you are going to reduce spending in health care and, of course, since the election campaign, we see another $15 million cut out of public education six months or four months after they raise independent school funding by II

April 3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 483 percent -1 1 percent for one level of schools and a $IS million reduction to another. Here this government again is picking a war with teachers and parents advisory councils. They put out a paper full of errors and misinformation, and I know it was not released by the Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh) .

It was probably released by the st aff relations branch, and the minister of Treasury Board, I would imagine, just reading the document and reading the material, but how does the government explain this all misinformation in that document, called Accounta bility? How do they explain it? That document says Manitoba's economy is in eighth place.

The Minister of Finance's own budget document says we are steamrolling ahead in the province of Manitoba in terms of our economic development and, of course, there are many other mistruths in that document, and rather than having a co-operative environment so that we can move our education system forward, rather than having an environment where teachers and parent advisory councils and trustees work together with the government to move us ahead to teach the basics of the 21s t Century, this government and this Premier (Mr.

Filmon) would rather break his pr omise on spending in the morning and pick a fight with teachers and parent advisory groups in the afternoon. A system that has worked for 40 years, to have binding arbitra tion- yes, there have been years where the arb itration sett lements have been higher than the private sector, but I dare say over 40 years in our study of it, there have been years when it has been behind the private sector sett lements.

It has been a system that means that we do not have a system which we saw at the university just recently when the prof essors proposed arbitration where students and parents are the ones who suf fer because we have a strike or lockout system that is being proposed by this government. We agree with the trustees and teachers that say in a joint press release : This is a system that we established over 40 years. For God 's sake, give us enough time to look at it and stop this fast track of getting legislation in in the next couple of weeks.

Let us have a system that, if it is going to change, changes through consensus and partn ership rath er than through a system of confrontation and conflict. That is what we would propose as an alternative in education instead of this kind of meanspirited fight that this government is picking in public education. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we also see that post-sec ondary education has been affected, apprenti ceship programs have been affected, Access programs have been affected, New Careers Program has been affected, and community colleges have been affected.

Again, people that are most vulnerable get the biggest hit from this government. A very consistent pattern of fairness. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we would suggest that the government read The Globe and Mail

section on business last summer that tied the new education programs in the universities to the changing technologies and economies in Canada. They talked about the University of Saskatchewan and the great advances they were making in biotechnology that were affecting the attra ction of biotechnological industries and agricultural industries to the community of Saskatoon, a community that is now booming rela tive to the province of Manitoba through the connection between smarter education, investment in post secondary education and the economy.

A connection this government does not see because their only economic vision is a race to the bottom and not a race to the top in terms of quality and investments. We see funding cuts for people that again are most vulnera ble in social assistance, and we have talked about that. We see reductions in adult literacy after the government prom ised to increase adult literacy program s. We see potentially user fees for libraries if the government follows through on the City of Winnipeg's request, which, I think, would be shameful in terms of prom ises on literacy. So it is broken pr omise after broken pro mise.

This is a government that has become quite arrogant and become quite ideologically extreme in their approach to the people of Manitoba. They kick the people that are down the most, and they give the people that have the most in our society the greatest benefits of government. This is also a time when people are most concerned about what they see in our society to be increasing greed in some parts of our economic community and

484 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 increasing pain in other parts. Day after day, we hear about CEOs of major corporations getting major increases in their pay while people are getting laid off and cut back. We saw just recently six or seven major corporations, some of which do business here in Canada, having massive hundreds of thousands of people being laid off, and the CEOs of those corporations were getting hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars more in stock options and personal wealth. * (15 10) Middle income people are very concerned about this.

They are very concerned about a mentality that has a few people getting more and more. The middle income group is getting less and less purchasing power, less and less job security, and less and less dignity in terms of the choices they can make in our society. You know, the government talks about the CFIB as a surveyor, but the biggest impediment to job creation, they say in their latest survey, is not what the government cited in their budget of course, but consumer confidence in our society. We have to stop the insanity of corporations and companies laying off each other's customers.

We have to have a mentality where good-paying jobs and job security will contribute to consumer confidence, which, in turn, will contribute to economic growth and economic quality of living. Does this government not worry about the fact that there were only a thousand new housing starts last year in 1995, which is a relatively good year in terms of the economy relative to the other few years, compared to 6,000 or 7,000 new housing starts across Manitoba when we were in office?

I have met with these building people and they are quite concerned about the fact that it is a 40-year low in housing starts in Manitoba in 1995. Of course, this government does not really care about it because, if it goes up 1 00 houses in this year or 200 houses or hopefully it will double, they will only care about putting out a press release saying, 10 percent increase in housing starts in Manitoba They do not want to talk about, there is a 500 percent housing decrease from the time they came in office in 19 88. You could check those figures; I would recommend strongly that all of you check those figures.

The member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) talked about, in his world. Let us talk about the world of people dealing with home care and how it illustrates the philosophy of this government. You know, this contributes to this whole insecurity that is out there. Look at this economic agenda from this government. Are they not right up there where the kind of low-wage policies that we see from some of the corporate heads and some of the people that I believe are contributing to the real insecurity of average wage earners here across North America?

What a policy: Take 1,400 people, give them a 40 percent wage decrease, make them beg for their own jobs so we can make four people, some of whom are close personal friends of the Minister of Health, to make four people millionaires. What kind of economic agenda is that? It is absolutely pitiful that this Premier would allow that to happen. This home care system was evaluated to be the best home care system in North America, providing the best quality of care.

One of the reasons it provides the best quality of care is that it is nonprofit and pays decent wages, and paying decent wages means the people have continuity of service.

If you have massive changes in the wage structures so you want to give a few people more money, you are going to have higher turnover, and higher turnover will lead to greater deficiencies and weaknesses in the quality of home care because, again, any study, and I know the government does not like to look at studies, but any studies on home care tell you that elderly people or disabled people need a continuity of care, need a continuity of trust, need a continuity of a person that comes into their home to share with them on their health care needs. You will not provide that continuity of care.

You are just going to decimate the best program in North America. Again, the Premier should overrule his Minister of Health, who is too captured unfortunately by the owners of these corporations and is not captured by the people that receive health care services and home care services in Manitoba. We do not want to see a home care system in Manitoba that eventually has the size of your purse or the size of the wallet dictate

Apr il 3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 485 the quality of your care. We are going to get rid of profit in health care when we are elected after the next election, and we are going to take that program back for Manitobans. I can guarantee you that. So we see, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that this government is now got in extreme-and the seniors have said radical, mean ideology. Those are not our words-ra dical, meanspirited. Those are not are our words.

Those are seniors that you try to appeal to in the first week of the campaign, because they are a little unsure of your priorities after having Minister Orchard cut back and have Connie Curran in our health care system . What a way to appeal to people's insecurities, giving them a promise you do not intend on keeping, some way to deal with insecurities of people that have built this province and built this province to be one of the greatest provinces in Canada, if not the greatest province in Canada, some way to handle those people with your changes.

The Filmon government is going to reduce the programs in social assistance for welfare work down 26 percent. You know, the Free Press today sai d- the government likes quoting the Free Press-the Free Press said today that social assistance is up under the Conservative government. Well, of course it is up. You have twice as many people on welfare rather than working under a Tory economic regime . I was surpri sed that the editorial bragged about this as an economic virtue . We thought having half as many people on social assistance is a positive thing.

This is the only government I know that can double the amount of people on welfare and call it a virtue in spending. Of course, that is what we see with this government in terms of the people, the property tax credit. The meinber for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) has already pointed out the hypocrisy of corporate welfare versus the cutback to the people that are most vulnera ble. Handi-Transit progr ams, we esta blished the 50-50 funding for Handi-Transit. The member for Charleswood (Mr. Ernst) was quite concerned about Handi-Transit program s.

In fact, I warned him one year when he cut out all the Handi- Transit programs with a motion he made in the Legislature that it was not such a good idea. Members opposite when they were at City Hall helped negotiate 50-50 Handi-Trans it, but I guess they forgot where they came from because we now see the investment in Handi-Transit down to 33 percent. Of course, we will see the privatization of that service and a few more Tories become millionaires on the people, again, that need that kind of transportation service and need it to be nonprofit. Immigrant support has been cut. We will have to see what that means.

Again, it belies the words of the government about immigration and the need for immigr ation here in this pro vince. Workplace Safety and Health, a 17 percent increase in the number of injuries reported in Manitoba How do you solve that? You cut back the preven tion. You cut back the inspectors . You increase the injury, the carnage at the workplace through the lack of backup and follow-up and inspection ser vices. Mining safety, cut back.

This is after, two years ago, having two injuries and deaths that took place after fo ur deaths before it because there was inadequate follow-up from the provincial government and the former Minister of Labour from one mine site to another mine site to help prevent injuries of a similar nature through enforcement and through tough, tough measures to protect working people.

In the middle of the Westray mining incident where we have horror story after horror story after horror story going on about the lack of backup for working people who had to make the choice of whether to potenti ally get killed in a mine shaft versus getting food for their children. Unfortuna tely, they had to make a decision to put their own life at risk, and some of them-for 26 or 28-unf ortunately lost their life because they needed the pay and needed the support. How can you do it? Where does it make sense? Well, you have not had the inquest yet, two years since the death in Flin Flon.

We do not know what will come out of the court case. We do not know what will come out of the inquest. We only know that the Tories would rather give money to their corporate friends rather than protect working people and their families from dying in the work place, and I say shame on you. Mr. Deputy Speaker, decreases to community living programs, and as a volunteer for Special Olympics I want to know what this means for St. Amant. I want to

486 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 know what it means to the real programs for community living people. We will check that out, we will follow that up because again we do not trust the Tory priorities of protecting those who need the greatest support from government. Reductions in daycare. One year they make it more impossible to get into daycare and the next year they take the money out of daycare programs because of the reduction in investments.

We will have a lot more to say about that later, but we know the policies of this government have been aimed at eroding universal daycare and, according to our studies, decreasing the enrollment in daycare programs here in the province of Manitoba. * (1 520) The Justice department has a decrease in spending, and after the Kelly inquiry yesterday and the comments made by the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh), we will want to know what crime prevention programs have been affected, what prosecution programs have been aff ected, what programs of Legal Aid will affect the backlog in our courts.

Our courts are too backlogged, people take too long, particularly young offenders, to get to court and we see more cuts and reductions. We will have to pursue that later. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we will be dealing with the whole issue of the credibility in this budget of your numbers. Now, again, this Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) unfortunately, and I say this, unfortunately, has not been straight with this House before on the numbers.

I would bring the Minister of Finance back to November of 19 94 when the NDP raised the issue of $1 45 million in a lottery account fund that we discovered in the third statement from the Provincial Auditor, and, of course, the Minister of Finance will recall that when we said this would be used as a pre election slush fund, the Minister of Finance in bold faced terms said, oh, no, that will not be used for a pre election campaign. Let me wring my hands with sincerity. We will use that fund for long-term needs of health and education.

We will not use it three months hence to deal with a pre-election slush fund. I heard him on the radio saying the same thing so he cannot say it was a misquote. Well, fast forward four months later, what did the Minister of Finance do? He used it as a pre-election slush fund. An Honourable Member: You should have been in the movies. Mr. Doer: I cannot play the part of sincerity better than the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) when he said he would not use that money.

When we are handing out Academy Awards for breaking one's promise within a four-month period, the Academy A ward, the Oscar goes to the Minister of Finance across the way, and he also gets the award for the best supporting actor when he said, we will cancel the Jets operating-loss agreement May I, 199 5.

He also gets another Oscar for best set design; he gets it for the best set design when he says he is not going to put any more than $1 0 million into a new arena Of course, the next day he gets another Oscar for saying that there is no money in the Kenaston underpass infrastructure program for the NDP to reallocate after the election campaign. That is another Oscar for the Minister of Finance.

His lines are even better when he says that there is going to be no money in the budget for SmartHealth, so he had to create a Crown corporation to give money to the Royal Bank when he is cutting money to hospitals so he can put it off the books-off the books because he cannot keep the numbers straight on the books, because if he had the $35 million for SmartHealth on the books this year, you might not have a balanced budget and you would have to take a pay cut under your so-called legislation.

This Minister of Finance has no credibility with us with the numbers, and we therefore will challenge every number he presents to us because once burned is twice aware of what the numbers mean for this Minister of Finance in terms of the province of Manitoba Now what numbers do we use with the Minister of Finance? Do we use the numbers that he produced in his teachers accountability document? Do we use the numbers in the teachers accountability document that was released in January of 19 96? Now, this even shortens his commitment from the lottery slush fund. It is down to three months now.

In January '96 he said, oh, we are in eighth place. Manitoba's economy is producing eighth place results. We cannot have our teachers get fourth or fifth place salaries. We are in eighth place. Yesterday, I thought we were living in British Columbia when I heard the budget from the

April 3, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 487 Minister of Finance, you know, growth was here and we were steamrolling ahead and everything was rosy from the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Finance will excuse us if we put all his commitments alongside his Jets pr omise to cancel the loss agreement, if we put his commitment to this great volunteer organization, Mr. Sweatman and Cam Osler, those great pillars of civility, those great pillars of the community that got so much from the Minister of Finance.

You will excuse us if we use a little cynicism when we get numbers from the Minister of Finance, because when you said before that you would not use it as a slush fund and you did it three months later and the Dominion Bond Rating agency of course pointed that out, said you did not have a surp lus, you are really running a deficit. Ironically, the Dominion Bond Rating agency said there was a surplus in '8 8-89 and there was not one in '95-96. Now, you are still not out of the woods.

Maybe it is good that we have to hire a Provin cial Auditor now because the other Auditor had to leave, but I wonder what the Provin cial Auditor is going to say. [interjection] Well, the Dominion Bond Rating agency is a liar now, according to the Minister of Education. Point of Order Bon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe the Leader of the Opposition just attr ibuted words to me and had them put in Hansard by saying them in the House, that he has no idea of what I was saying or whom I was talking to or about.

I wish he would withdraw that because I do not know what he was talking about because, quite frankly, I was not listening but I was doing something here. If he wishes to take anything I said here on another topic about another issue that had nothing to do with him and put it in Hansard as if I am reacting to something he might have said, then I ask him to withdraw it, because I was not listening to what he said and I do not know what I was supposed to be reacting to here. Mr. Doer: Yes, on the same point of order, I apologize if I att ributed the word "liar" to Dominion Bond or members opposite .

If she was saying it about her members, I certainly am disappointe d. We did hear her say that, but I withdraw my comments about what the minister had said. We only heard the one word. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I would like to thank the member for that withdra wal. *** Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourab le Minister of Education, that other matter is concluded. Does the honourab le minister want to have another point of order? Point of Order Mrs. Mcintosh: I do not believe the member has gone far enough in withdrawing his objectionable comments because, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, he has left on the record the implication that in my saying a word here at my desk that I was ref erring to a specific issue or people when he has no idea to whom I was ref erring or to what I was referr ing. He should just simply withdraw his comment without the qualifications that he put upon it. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourab le minister does not have a second point of order. The honourab le member did withdraw his state ment. *** Mr. Doer: Now, of course, every year we hear how great Manitoba is doing and I believe in 19 95 we did have a better year than in previous years.

We certainly needed to because we had followed a number of years where we were in last place in Canada When you look at the accumulated growth figures from Stats Canada from the last eight years when this Premier has been in charge of this government, Manitoba is second last to Newfoundland in terms of GDP growth in Canada. Now, if your policies are so great, why are they not working? Why is our growth not higher than other provinces in Canada? Mr. Deputy Speaker, '95 was not a bad year.

Of course, we had a lot of the money, the pre-election spending from the government and we had the infrastructure program, because it seems to us with this government, it is not like the old biblical term where you get seven years of feast and seven years of

488 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 famine with this government. With this government you get three years of famine and one year of pre election feast. We saw that in the economic results last year. They were better, and I am happy that they were. But what excuses the fact that we were in last place two of the last four years that you had a majority government. Why are we just slightly and marginally ahead of Newfoundland in terms of GOP growth? How does that square with the Minister of Finance's (Mr.

Stefanson) hallelujah chorus on the economic growth of this province? * (1 530) I hope the minister is right; I hope that the economy is booming; I hope we are doing great. I hope that all the things that they say in their budget are true. In which case, if it is true, then your income tax numbers are way off and the surplus will be much higher. You cannot have it both ways. You have very low-and I know why the Minister of Finance is worried.

He is cutting, he is making all these ideological cuts in health, education, to welfare recipients, to babies under the age of one year and they do not want to show a big surplus next year. So what do they do? They depress the income tax numbers. Now either you are going to be right on your growth numbers and you are going to have increased revenue on your income tax side, or you are going to be wrong on your growth side and be right on your surplus of$22 million.

I hope that your error, or the numbers you have presented us yesterday are right on growth and wrong on revenue, as I suspect they are, rather than the growth is going to be much lower than what you are predicting and Manitobans are going to go through much more economic misery because of your documents. Now there are some good news announcements, reannounced and reannounced and reannounced. The Simplot plant and Schneider's, I think those are good announcements. We want to say those are good announcements.

Of course, we have said that when the announcement for Schneider's was said here, we said that when the announcement for Simplot was made here, and we will continue to say that-[interjection] You know, the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) may not remember, but just recently Labatt Brewery promised to close the plant here in Manitoba; North American Lif e just moved 300 jobs out of this province; Safeway just moved a number of people out of this province so there is some misery going around with plant closures and relocations, along with decisions that are positive in nature.

How do we explain Western Canada Lottery moving jobs? We are paying Western Canada Lottery to move jobs to Toronto. This is the economic vision of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson). I guess it goes along with his vision of moving hockey teams to Phoenix after he promises to keep them here in Manitoba, but what a disgraceful performance in terms of the Western Canada Lottery program. No wonder Manitobans are holding on to their wallets and are worried about economic future. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, this government-[interjection] The Jets came to Manitoba under the NDP, and they are leaving under the Conservatives. We did not make promises we could not keep. '91 was when we made the big mistake. But again it was only going to cost us $5 million in losses in '91. Mr. Deputy Speaker, of course, this balanced budget legislation will lead to interesting questions about how you treat Crown corporations. How is the Auditor going to treat the revenue you have shown in the numbers in the so-called surplus of last year?

How are they going to show the one-time only payment for the purposes of the lottery fund? How are they going to deal with these things that some other rating agencies have said you cannot have as a one-time only payment? How are they going to deal the way you have established a credit corporation, a new Crown corporation for the Royal Bank, because you want to have the borrowing off the books for the so-called balanced budget legislation? We know you are not in favour of Crown corporations. We know this is not a conversion on the road to Damascus in terms of your belief in Crown corporations.

I mean, you are creating a Crown corporation for health care and the banks, and you are getting rid of a Crown corporation in our utilities. It just does not make any sense at all. It is just part of the sneaky way in which we see the finances of this province. And I am disappointed.

April 3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 489 You do not think we know what you are doing to put that borrowing authority in a Crown? Why did you not put in on the books? Why do you not have it on the books? Why do you not have it right out of the Department of Finance? Why are you hiding it in a Crown corporation? You are doing it because you are hiding the borrowing authority for this organization. That is what you are doing. You do not think we know that?

Do you think you are fooling people establishing a Crown corporation? [interjection] I was not going to take a shot at my honourable friend the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) in that debate, but I was absolutely shocked last week on CBC when he said, we support the government on the Royal Bank but we do not support the government on home care privatization. That is the problem with the Liberals. I had asked the member for The Maples (Mr.

Kowalski) to talk to his friend from Inkster, because it does not make any sense to close down the emergency ward and change the acute care status of Seven Oaks Hospital while the public purse is shovelling out money, $13 0 million over the next four years, to the so-called smart health system. So I would ask you to recaucus that issue, with the greatest respect, because I think the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has made a mistake. I know he kind of wants to look like he is sort of a balance, but it is not a good idea. Sometimes in this province you really cannot have it both ways.

You cannot support the spending on the Royal Bank and then condemn the government on the cutback of Seven Oaks Hospital. There only is so much money, and we would ask the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) to join with us. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Doer: I have always had the greatest respect for the police union and all the other unions. I guess this is a little contagious in here. I will move along. I guess my attempt to get the Liberals-[interjection] The rhetoric from the member for Tuxedo (Mr. Filmon). Mr. Deputy Speaker, of course, the government is again hiding those numbers off the books.

These decisions will have real impact on real people here in Manitoba. The government broke its promise on capital spending. This is a job creation issue. This is one of the first promises the government made in the election campaign. In fact, they even borrowed the term that the NDP put in the alternative Speech from the Throne. Manitoba Works was something we put in our alternative Speech from the Throne. Were we ever flattered to see the Filmon government was so bankrupt of ideas that they had to xerox our term and put it in their ad campaign in the election campaign.

Of course they promised $1. 5 billion in infrastructure program spending. And they promised again, after 19 90, after they broke their promise on capital spending and health care in 19 90 they had the gall-[interjection] Perhaps the Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh) would like to look at the $8 19-million deficit in 1992-93 when she was the minister around the cabinet table, the largest deficit in the history of the province. Why is the government breaking their word to many people that require that capital investment, which creates jobs and decent health care services?

How do you justify the cynical announcement on March 17 to the cancer institute of Manitoba that you will proceed with the capital spending, and then the Premier, of course, cancels it after he went on a telethon and promised that money again in the election campaign in 19 95? Does not your word mean anything? Does it not mean anything to you and the people of this province, promise after promise after promise that is made that of course have resulted in hardship for Manitobans? And there are many other budget contradictions.

They talk about building confidence, but we have private investment down 7.2 percent The budget talks about social services and we cut spending. They talk about no property tax increases, we are keeping taxes down, of course property tax increases have increased all over the province, and municipalities of course know where that money is coming from. Contradiction after contradiction-tourism down 1 percent in Manitoba.

This government has broken its mandate with the people on the Telephone System, which they promised not to privatize during the election campaign, another broken promise as they proceed with their brokerage friends to privatize a Crown corporation that has the second lowest rates in North America.

490 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 3, 19 96 The government has broken their promise on hog marketing. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) and the Premier went to many halls in rural Manitoba in the Interlake region and said they would not change the marketing system for hogs . We have heard from hog marketers that have said that you have broken your word and we believe the producers here in Manitoba. We do not believe the Conservatives; we believe the producers here in the province of Manitoba.

They continue to not deal in partnership with aboriginal people to settle the treaty land entitlements which would have an economic advantage as well as an advantage of dignity here in the province of Manitoba. We had a settlement in 19 85 and 19 86. The government just walks away from its obligations and just does what it does best. It points fingers instead of solves problems and solves responsibility. * (1 540) The government of course has rejected some of the alternatives that we have proposed.

We have sugg ested that we reinvest in our communities through health care and education, that we have a long-term plan like Healthy Child to put preventative programs in our communities, that we enhance the role of nurses throughout our province, that we deal with the profit private labs that the government has four reports on rather than cutting back on acute care hospital beds and a cutting back on the emergency wards in our community hospitals, that we change home care, we get greater co-ordination with our hospitals and our home care system and we change it to be more responsive in our communities not to put more money into a few profiteers, that we have an education system that does not have educators fighti ng the government but has a spirit of co-operation where we can move to the basics ofthe 21s t Century with all of our people in the province of Manitoba, not having a petty little fight which of course the Premier enjoys but does not move our kids forward, does not move our parents forward and does not move our province forward.

We have suggested long-term economic growth and investment and we have also suggested that we have a co-operative relationship with business, labour and government rather than always fighti ng, rather than trying to deal the cards from the bottom of the deck by changes in legisla tion which invariably will come into this Chamber, that we try to deal in partnership with all our stakeholders here in the province rather than just dealing with a few. This government has broken its election promises. It has done so general ly by the breach of their election promise on spending.

It has done so through ads that they maliciously placed on Manitobans last year that they had no intent of keeping. They have broken their promises on health care. They have broken their promises on education, they have broken their promises on capital spending, and it is with a great deal of sorrow I say that this province has broken its promises on the most vulnerable people here in the province of Manitoba The arrogance and ideology of the Tory government and of this Premier (Mr. Filmon), the country-club attitude that he is now approaching his duties with, are taking over.

Regrettably and sorrowfully, I will move that this government be defeated and that the budget be defeated and that the motion be amended by deleting all the words after "House." I move, seconded by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), THAT the motion be amended by deleting all the words after "House" and substituting the following: Therefore regrets this budget breaks key election promises by: (

a) reducing progr am spending by tens of millions of dollars despite the Premier's Plan Manitoba commitment to maintain overall spending of $4.465 billion until 1998-99; and (

b) as a result, this g overnment is cutting vital funds for public education, reducing support for the poorest children and families, reducing advanced trammg, education and job opportunities, reducing support to rural and agricultural communities, and making a

April3, 19 96 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 49 1 mockery of the Premier's solemn election oath that he would not cut health care services; and As a consequence, the government has thereby lost the confidence of the House and the people of Manitoba. I so move. Thank you. Motion presented. (Madam Speaker in the Chair) Madam Speaker: Order, please. The amendment is in order. Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Madam Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure for me to rise this afternoon and to respond and support our government's budget presented by my colleague the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Stef ans

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-2-11
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 2nd hansardpdf 11.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	478d945e27379d9a67946328b48500b3893a6bba

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