Manitoba Hansard — 10 June 2004 (Sitting 53B, 38th Legislature, 2nd Session)

38-2-53b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Eighth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LV No. 53B - 1:30 p.m., Thursday, June 10, 2004

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Eighth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation AGLUGUB, Cris The Maples N.D.P. ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thom pson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CUMMINGS, Glen Ste. Rose P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P. DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C.

FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. LOEWEN, John Fort Whyte P.C. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon.

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

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

3347 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, June 10, 2004 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Speaker: For the information of the House, Tuesday's Hansard should be arriving any minute. Wednesday's Hansard will not be available due to the extra sitting hours we have been sitting, but Tuesday's should be here any time now. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Highway 227 Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition.

It is unacceptable for the residents of Manitoba to travel the unsafe gravel roads of Highway 227 in the constituencies of Lakeside and Portage la Prairie. Inclement weather can make Highway 227 treacherous to all drivers. Allowing better access to Highway 227 would ease the flow of traffic on the Trans-Canada Highway. Residences along Highway 227 are not as accessible to emergency services due to the nature of the current condition of the roadway. The condition of these gravel roads can cause serious damage to all vehicles, which is unacceptable.

Residents of Manitoba deserve a better rural highway infrastructure. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services consider having Highway 227 paved from the junction of highways 248 and 227 all the way to Highway 16, the Yellowhead route. To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider supporting said initiatives to ensure the safety of all Manitobans and all Canadians who travel along Manitoba highways. Submitted on behalf of Eric Thiessen, Archie McRae, Helen Liebrecht and others, hundreds of others. Mr.

Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Alzheimer's Disease Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. Alzheimer's is a debilitating disease. Cholinesterase inhibitors are known to slow or even prevent the progression of Alzheimer's. The provincial government asked for the development of an Alzheimer's strategy in 2000 and was presented with nine recommendations in 2002, none of which has yet been implemented.

In the absence of a provincial Alzheimer's strategy, the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority put in place a policy in November 2003 whereby Alzheimer's patients entering personal care homes are being weaned from certain Alzheimer medications in a move that the WRHA's vice- president of long-term care has referred to as a financial necessity. The administrative costs of the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority have more than tripled since 1999, to a total of more than $16 million a year. In a move that amounts to two-tier medicine, the families of Alzheimer's sufferers in personal care

3348 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 homes may request that the drugs continue to be delivered at the family's expense. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) to ensure that his attempts to balance his department's finances are not at the expense of the health and well-being of seniors and other vulnerable Manitobans suffering from this debilitating disease. To urge the Minister of Health to consider reversing his decision to deny Alzheimer's patients in personal care homes access to certain medications.

To request the Minister of Health to consider implementing a provincial Alzheimer's strategy. Signed by Tammy Lynn Blahy, Jacqueline Peterson, Terence Wiebe and others. Minimum Sitting Days for Legislative Assembly Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: The Manitoba Legislature sat for only 37 days in 2003. Manitobans expect their government to be accountable, and the number of sitting days has a direct impact on the issue of public accountability.

Manitobans expect their elected officials to be provided the opportunity to be able to hold the government accountable. The Legislative Assembly provides the best forum for all MLAs to debate and ask questions of the government, and it is critical that all MLAs be provided the time needed in order for them to cover constituent and party duties.

Establishing a minimum number of sitting days could prevent the government of the day from limiting the rights of opposition members from being able to ask questions. * (13:35) We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba to consider recognizing the need to sit for a minimum of 80 days in any given calendar year. Signed by Teresita Reyes, Homer Lee and Tanta Ruiz Pharmacare Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for the petition.

Pharmacare is a drug benefit program for any Manitoban, regardless of age, whose income is seriously affected by high prescription drug costs. Under the Doer government, Pharmacare deductibles have been in creased by 5 percent each year for the past three year s. As a result of the 15% hike in Pharmacare deductibles, individuals are facing increased costs ranging from $36 to $660 a year. Seniors, fixed- and low-income-earning Manitobans are the most negatively impacted by these increases.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier of Manitoba to consider reversing his decision to increase Pharmacare deductibles by 5 percent in Budget 2004. To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider reducing health care bureaucracy, as previously promised, and direct those savings into sustaining Pharmacare. To encourage the Premier of Manitoba to consider re-evaluating his government's priorities and to consider suspending his government's plans to spend $100 million on new VLTs at a time when seniors and fixed-income Manitobans cannot afford medication. It is signed by L.

Cran, J. Kennedy, E. Neumann and others. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3349 These are the reasons for the petition. Pharmacare is a drug benefit program for any Manitoban, regardless of age, whose income is seriously affected by high prescription drug costs. Under the Doer government, Pharmacare deductibles have been in creased by 5 percent each year for the past three year s. As a result of the 15% hike in Pharmacare deductibles, individuals are facing increased costs ranging from $36 to $660 a year. Seniors, fixed- and low-income-earning Manitobans are the most negatively impacted by these increases.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier of Manitoba to consider reversing his decision to increase Pharmacare deductibles by 5 percent in Budget 2004. To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider reducing health care bureaucracy, as previously promised, and direct those savings into sustaining Pharmacare. To urge the Premier of Manitoba to consider re- evaluating his government's priorities and to consider suspending his governmen t's plans to spend $100 million on new VLTs at a time when seniors and fixed-income Manitobans cannot afford medication.

It is signed by Vera Ca ssie, Bob Cassie, Bonnie Gordon and others. Mr. David Faurschou (P ortage la Prairie): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition. Pharmacare is a drug benefit program for any Manitoban, regardless of age, whose income is seriously affected by high prescription drug costs. Under the Doer government, Pharmacare deductibles have been in creased by 5 percent each year for the past three year s.

As a result of the 15% hike in Pharmacare deductibles, individuals are facing increased costs ranging from $36 to $660 a year. Seniors, fixed- and low-income-earning Manitobans are the most negatively impacted by these increases. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier of Manitoba to consider reversing his decision to increase Pharmacare deductibles by 5 percent in Budget 2004, To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider reducing health care bureaucracy, as previously promised, and direct those savings into sustaining Pharmacare.

To urge the Premier of Manitoba to consider re- evaluating his government's priorities and to consider suspending his governmen t's plans to spend $100 million on new VLTs at a time when seniors and fixed-income Manitobans cannot afford medication. Respectfully submitted by Fay Jordan, Elaine Graham, Debbie Patsack and many, many others. Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. * (13:40) These are the reasons for the petition.

Pharmacare is a drug benefit program for any Manitoban, regardless of age, whose income is seriously affected by high prescription drug costs. Under the Doer government, Pharmacare deductibles have been in creased by 5 percent each year for the past three year s. As a result of the 15% hike in Pharmacare deductibles, individuals are facing increased costs ranging from $36 to $660 a year. Seniors, fixed- and low-income-earning Manitobans are the most negatively impacted by these increases.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier of Manitoba to consider reversing his decision to increase Pharmacare deductibles by 5 percent in Budget 2004, To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider reducing health care bureaucracy, as previously

3350 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 promised, and direct those savings into sustaining Pharmacare. To urge the Premier of Manitoba to consider re- evaluating his government's priorities and to consider suspending his governmen t's plans to spend $100 million on new VLTs at a time when seniors and fixed-income Manitobans cannot afford medication. This is signed by Rita Gate, Anne Gosselin, L. Hartwell and many, many others. COMMITTEE REPORTS Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs Sixth Report Mr. Daryl Reid (Chairperson): Mr.

Speaker, I wish to present the Sixth Report of the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs– Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs presents the following as its Sixth Report. Meetings: Your committee met on Wednesday, June 9 at 6:30 p.m., in Room 254 of the Legislative Building. Matters under Consideration: Bill 42–The Mines and Minerals Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les mines et les minéraux Bill 44–The Colleges Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les colleges Bill 46–The Teachers' Pensions Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la pension de retraite des enseignants Bill 49–The Municipal Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les municipalités Bill 50–The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'évaluation municipale Bill 53–The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2004/Loi corrective de 2004 Committee Membership: Substitutions received prior to commencement of meeting: Mr. Eichler for Mr. Maguire Mr. Hawranik for Mr. Schuler Mrs. Stefanson for Mrs. Taillieu Hon. Ms. McGifford for Hon. Mr. Lemieux Hon. Mr. Smith for Hon. Mr. Robinson Mr. Goertzen for Mr. Hawranik Hon. Ms. Wowchuk for Hon. Ms. Allan Substitutions made, by leave, during committee proceedings: Mr. Nevakshonoff for Hon. Ms. Wowchuk Public Presentations: Your committee heard one presentation on Bill 42– The Mines and Minerals Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les mi nes et les minéraux, from the following organization: Chris Lorenc, Manitoba Heavy Construction Associ- ation Your committee heard nine presentations on Bill 46– The Teachers' Pensions Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la pension de retraite des enseignants, from the following individuals and/or organizations: Denis Fontaine, Private Citizen Laurena Leskiw, Private Citizen Pat Bowslaugh, Private Citizen Ray Sitter, Private Citizen Brian Patterson, Private Citizen Don Berry, Westman Retired Teachers' Association Terence Clifford, Retired Teacher’s Association Yvette Spence, Private Citizen Brian Ardern, Manitoba Teachers Society Your committee heard one presentation on Bill 49– The Municipal Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les municipalités, from the following organization: Debbie Penner, Manitoba Park Owners Association

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3351 Your committee heard one presentation on Bill 50– The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'évaluation municipale, from the following organization: John Petrinka, Veteran’s Association Written Submissions: Your committee received three written submissions on Bill 46–The Teachers' Pensions Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la pension de retraite des enseignants, from the following individuals: Gordon Henderson, Private Citizen Richard McIntyre, Private Citizen Terence Clifford, Private Citizen Bills Considered and Reported: Bill 42–The Mines and Minerals Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les mines et les minéraux Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment. Bill 44–The Colleges Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les colleges Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment. Bill 46–The Teachers' Pensions Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la pension de retraite des enseignants Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment: THAT the proposed clause 52(1.2)(b), as set out in Clause 3(1) of the Bill be amended by striking out “the employer agree, used to provide” and substituting “ his or her employer agree, used to provide, at no cost to the government,”. Bill 49–The Municipal Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les municipalities Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment: THAT Clause 4 of the Bill be amended by striking out the proposed subsection 309.1(3). Bill 50–The Municipal Assessment Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'évaluation municipale Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment. Bill 53–The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2004/Loi corrective de 2004 Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment. Mr. Reid: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Fort Garry (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development Fifth Report Ms. Marilyn Brick (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the Fifth Report of the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development– Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development presents the following as its Fifth Report. Meetings: Your committee met on Wednesday, June 9 at 6:30 p.m., in Room 255 of the Legislative Building. Matters under Consideration: Bill 39–The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la location à usage d'habitation Bill 43–The Personal Health Information Amendment Act (Spiritual Health)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les renseignements médicaux personnels (santé spirituelle) Bill 45–The Engineering and Geoscientific Professions Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les ingénieurs et les géoscientifiques

3352 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 Bill 48 –The Human Tissue Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les tissus humains Committee Membership: Substitutions received prior to commencement of meeting: Hon. Ms. Allan for Hon. Mr. Ashton Ms. Oswald for Mr. Dewar Hon. Mr. Chomiak for Hon. Ms. McGifford Mrs. Driedger for Mr. Goertzen Mr. Schuler for Mr. Rocan Public Presentations: Your committee heard 1 presentation on Bill 39–The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la location à usage d'habitation, from the following organization: Debbie Penner, Manitoba Park Owners Association Your committee heard 3 presentations on Bill 43– The Personal Health Information Amendment Act (Spiritual Health)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les renseignements médicaux personnels (santé spirituelle), from the following organizations: Susan Skinner and Val Coward, Association of Health Care Philanthropy and St. Boniface Foundation Andrew Ogaranko, Faith Coalition Kathleen Rempel Boschman, Concordia Hospital Your committee heard 15 presentations on Bill 45– The Engineering and Geoscientific Professions Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les ingénieurs et les géoscientifiques, from the following individuals and/or organizations: Dave Ennis, Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Manitoba Veronica Jackson, Manitoba Association of Architects Terry Danelley, Private Citizen Don Oliver, Private Citizen Guy Prefontaine, Gaboury, Prefontaine and Perry Architects Andrew Bickford, ABG Architecture David Penner, Private Citizen Arnold Permut, Private Citizen John Woods, Private Citizen Steve Cohlmeyer, Private Citizen Brian Stimpson, Faculty of Engineering, University of Manitoba Ray Wan, Raymond S.C.

Wan Architect Kelly Baumgarter, Private Citizen Francis Pineda, Private Citizen Judy Pestrak, Private Citizen Your committee heard 1 presentation on Bill 48– The Human Tissue Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les tissus humains, from the following organization: Christopher Snow, Tissue Bank of Manitoba Bills Considered and Reported: Bill 39– The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la location à usage d'habitation Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment: THAT Clause 26 of the Bill be amended by striking out "Subsection 161(2) is" and substituting "Subsection 161(2) and (2.1) are". Bill 43 –The Personal Health Information Amendment Act (Spiritual Health)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les renseignements médicaux personnels (santé spirituelle) Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment. Bill 45– The Engineering and Geoscientific Professions Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les ingénieurs et les géoscientifiques Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendments: THAT the proposed

section 3, as set out in Clause 2 of the Bill, be amended by replacing everything after clause (

a) with the following: (

b) promote and increase, by all lawful means and in the public interest, the knowledge, skill and competency of its members and students in all things relating to the professions of engineering and geoscience; and (

c) advocate where the public interest is at risk.

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3353 THAT the proposed Clause 4 of the Bill be amended (

a) by replacing Clause 4(1) with the following: 4(1) The following is added after clause 12(1)(z): (z.1) establishing and governing bursaries, loans, awards and other educational incentives or programs related to engineering and geoscience; (z.2) respecting providing financial or other assistance to persons for the purpose of furthering the public interest; (z.3) respecting public risk advocacy by the association; (z.4) regulating the association's participation with others having purposes consistent with those of the association; (

b) in Clause 4(2), by striking out ", operation and well-being" and substituting "and operation". Bill 48– The Human Tissue Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les tissus humains Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment. Ms. Brick: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Radisson (Mr. Jha), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Stan Struthers (Minister of Conservation): It is my pleasure to introduce to the House the Annual Report of the Clean Environment Commission for the years 2002-03. Also it is my pleasure to introduce the 2003 Annual Report of the Manitoba Association for Resource Recovery Corporation entitled: Making Every D rop Count.

I would also like to introduce the 16th Annual Report of the Manitoba Hazardous Waste Management Corporation for the years 2002-03. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table Volume 4 of the Public Accounts for 2002 and 2003. Summer reading for the members opposite. Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister responsible for Healthy Living): I would like to table a Report on the Public Consultation Review of the Personal Health Information Act for the Department of Health, copies of which have been previously distributed. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us today Francine Mulaire and Mrs. Marguerite Mulaire and Eugene and Francine Monin. These visitors are the parents and grandparents of our legislative page, Stephanie Mulaire. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Russell, on a point of order. Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Yes, Mr.

Speaker, yesterday in this House, in response to a question by the member from Minnedosa, the Minister of Health in his response indicated that he attended a conference, or awards luncheon, by the Manitoba Schizophrenia Society. At that luncheon he indicated there were remarks made by an individual with respect to comments that have been made by the critic for Family Services, the Member for Minnedosa (Mrs. Rowat). * (13:45) Mr.

Speaker, he said that the individual criticized members opposite for statements that have been made here and he indicated he was provided transcripts of that statement that had been signed and the reason he was making mention of this was that the purpose of the signing of this transcript was to provide it to members opposite. I am wondering whether the minister would be so kind as to table that document at this time. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I was going to deal with that issue during

3354 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 the course of Question Period, but I want to advise the member that it is my intention to put the speech on the Web site. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Russell, to continue the same point of order. Mr. Derkach: Yes, if I might, just on that same point of order. I want to quote directly from the minister's response. He said, and I quote, "he directly criticized members opposite for attacking individuals who have mental illness, Mr.

Speaker, who wish and choose to try to succeed in society on their own." He said, "I will provide transcripts of the member's speech because he signed it for me to provide to members opposite, Mr. Speaker." Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister today to live up to his word and to table this for our benefit this afternoon. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I will do that. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, this is a very important issue. This member, the Minister of Health, has impugned motives to the Member for Minnedosa (Ms. Rowat).

We ask that this document be tabled now because we are just going into Question Period and there may be questions that need to be asked as a result of what this minister has said and the document he is referring to. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Minister of Health, would you wish to table it now or– Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr. Speaker, even though it is not required of us to do that, I indicated I would, and I will table copies of that speech for members opposite. Mr. Speaker: That should take care of the matter. The honourable member said he will provide copies for the members. Mr.

Derkach: I am going to ask for this House to recess for five minutes to allow this minister to table this document because this is extremely important. I have not risen on a matter of privilege. This is a commitment that the minister made and, Mr. Speaker, if he had not made the statements he did in his response this would not be an issue, but we need that document now. I am asking the minister to table it now. He said he has it. I think it is only incumbent upon him to table it now for the benefit of the Member for Minnedosa (Ms.

Rowat), so that if, in fact, there are questions, that needs to be cleared up now, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, even though it is not required and very unusual, and I know what parliamentary tactics the member opposite is attempting to employ, I will endeavour to make, I will make– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. * (13:50) Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, they will not even a l l o w m e t o f i n i s h m y s tatements even though they demand it. Does that not suggest something? I will get copies of this made so that I can provide it to the member opposite.

I do not have sufficient copies for tabling right now at this very moment. In fact, I was planning to deal with it. I was planning to read it into the record for members opposite on follow-up questions so I can inform the entire House of the content of that particular speech. Mr. Speaker: The honourable member said he will table it later. Mr. Derkach: I find that unacceptable. We cannot accept that. He has the document in his hand. He made a commitment to table it. We require that document. There is a process.

We have table officers here who could take copies of that and that can be made available to the member opposite immediately. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to call for a recess of this House and ask you to recess the House for five minutes so the member can get his statement here and hand it in to the table. Mr. Chomiak: As the member was going on and on and on, people made additional copies that allow me to table copies in the House, which I had intended to not only provide but read into the record for the course of this debate.

In fact, why do I not just read into the record the speech right now so members can have it instantly? Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen, the honour bestowed upon–

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3355 Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. We have not gotten into Question Period yet. Is that the document that was asked to be tabled, and honourable minister, you have tabled it? Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr. Speaker, it is the document I said I would table, now that I have copies and tabled it, but I am happy to read it entirely into the record because I think it would be very useful for members opposite. Is there leave perhaps for– Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for the member to read it into the record? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: No.

There is no leave. Okay. Order. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The document that was asked to be tabled has been tabled so that should take care of the matter. * * * Mr. Speaker: Now we will go into Question Period. ORAL QUESTIONS Red River Floodway Expansion Master Labour Agreement Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Yesterday in the House, the Premier said, and I quote, "The member obviously believes he knows into the future who is going to win all of the tenders.

I do not believe many of the tenders have been let yet." Unless this Premier has other union kickback schemes in the works we have not yet uncovered, Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the Premier more than 95 percent of the construction industries in Manitoba are non-unionized. Mr.

Speaker, unless this Premier is just going to give the contracts to the le ss than 5 percent who are unionized or unless he is planning on giving the contracts to companies and workers outside of Manitoba, I would suggest it is easy enough to project that, yes, Manitoba's non-unionized construction companies will do the majority of the work on the floodway expansion project. That being the case, will the Premier do the right thing and commit today to having these employers at the negotiating table as a fully participating partner? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): There are so many inaccuracies in the

preamble it is hard to know where to begin, but, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite chooses not to implement the Wally Fox-Decent report. We choose to implement it. That is the simple issue here. Members opposite have been extremist in their views. They have been extremist in their language. They have been inaccurate in their

preamble and we will continue to work. I would point out, today, for the second time since we were elected, the floodway is in operation, I believe, to protect the sewer system in the city of Winnipeg. I would point out, Mr. Speaker, that we utilized it in 2002 as well because of the pressure. I will say to the people of Manitoba, some $300,000 worth of damages that were created south of the floodway will be fully compensated for those people impacted by making a decision for the benefit of the public good. Tendering Process Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think all Manitobans would want to pay respects to former Premier Duff Roblin for what he did on the floodway. We all know what he has done. What we have been hearing from this Premier, he has been saying his goal is to ensure there is no strike, no lockout. Well, that is not the fact. If that was what his real concern was he simply would have written it into the agreement. It is just that simple. His goal is to flow taxpayers' dollars to his union buddies. That is the essence of what this Premier is about and that is why the people of Manitoba are not with him.

Manitobans do not want this Premier to force non-unionized workers to pay union dues. Manitobans do not want this Premier to exclude the employer group from the negotiating table, and they certainly do not want this Premier to have a $66- million kickback to his union friends through an untendered contract to REACT, Inc., Mr. Speaker. * (13:55)

3356 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 Mr. Speaker, I would just ask the simple question the minister and the Premier have been suspiciously avoiding: Will he agree to having all work on the floodway, including all training contracts, tendered and awarded to the lowest bidder? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): We will follow proper tendering processes that will be comprehensive in terms of cost-effectiveness for the taxpayers. There is no question about that. Mr.

Speaker, the members opposite should recall that with a more strenuous condition for labour-management agreements in Limestone, the construction which of course was opposed by members opposite, came in half a billion dollars under budget. The members opposite are not in favour of a no-strike or lockout situation. The people of Manitoba we believe are. In terms of all the other outlandish rhetoric, Mr. Speaker, there is nobody on this side of the House going to sell a Crown corporation and end up on a board of directors later getting stock options. I guarantee that. Mr.

Murray: I find the incredible rambling of this Premier and then the response from the chicaners is quite interesting over on the other side. This Premier likes to stand in this House and he likes to mislead the public saying we are against a no-strike, no lockout. That is false. We have said very clearly we support that. All you had to do, Mr. Speaker, was write it into the agreement. What we are opposed to, Mr. Speaker, very clearly, and unfortunately this Premier is in favour of it, but we on this side are opposed to forcing non- unionized workers to pay union dues.

We are opposed to excluding the employer group from the bargaining table and we are opposed to a $65-million kickback to his union friends. That is what we are opposed to. Get on with building the floodway and do the right thing. Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is part of a political party that voted against the banning of union and corporate donations to political parties. We have banned the practice of having contracts given to companies or unions and then received as a donation to the political party. This party is in favour of kickbacks. This party has banned it.

Child and Family Services Accommodations–Hotels Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): In 1998, when the Premier was Leader of the Opposition, he is on record as saying an average of 36 children in hotels, and I quote, "is an absolute scandal." Today, the Minister of Family Services provided information that under her watch there is an average of 55 children in hotels this last May. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Family Services this: If 36 children is an absolute scandal according to her Premier, how does she justify an average of 55 children in hotels? * (14:00) Hon.

Christine Melnick (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, to truly understand what is happening in hotel placements, one must look beyond one day, one week, one month. One must look at larger trends. We look at the trend of 12 months. Mr. Speaker: Order. I need to be able to hear the questions and the answers in case there is a breach of a rule. I ask the co-operation of all honourable members. Ms. Melnick: If we look at the trend for 1997-1998, we see that on average there were 36 children in hotels.

If we look at the average per month over 1996-1997, we see there were 46 children on average in hotels. If we look at the average over 2003-2004, we see the monthly average was 19, Mr. Speaker. If we look at the average to date for this year, we see it is 27. We agree that children who are coming into the shelter system are better placed in a home setting than in hotels. Mrs. Rowat: Mr. Speaker, for the year ended March 31, 1999, there was an average of 15 children placed in hotels. On June 3, the minister said that under her watch the numbers were vastly, vastly reduced.

The minister contradicted her own statement when, today, she provided the information to this House showing that on the very same day, June 3, there were 54 children in hotels. When is this minister going to stop misleading this House? Ms. Melnick: Mr. Speaker, we can certainly look at longer trends. If we look at '96 to 99, we see the average number of children in hotels was 37. If we

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3357 look at '99 to 2004, we see the average number of children in hotels is 15. That is less than half. We agree children are better placed in home settings, which is why we have recently opened one shelter dedicated to sibling groups. We are opening a second one this fall also dedicated to sibling groups and we have put out a request for proposal for 50 foster care homes, foster care beds for children under the age of eight. Orthopedic Surgery Waiting Lists Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, Dr.

Brock Wright of the WRHA says there is no plan to increase the volume of joint replacement surgeries and these numbers have not grown since the NDP formed government. A leaked document from the WRHA shows there are less orthopedic surgeries being done today than four years ago. I would like to ask the Minister of Health if he can explain to Ken Kronson, who has to wait 22 months for urgent hip surgery, how he can say he is doing more orthopedic surgeries when the leaked WRHA document shows that the numbers are decreasing. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, for the fourth time this session the member is talking about a leaked WRHA document which is in fact a WRHA planning document, internal planning document, one of many that were circulated about surgery reconfiguration last year. November 2003 is this timely leak, fourth time the member has raised this so-called leak in the Legislature. Mr. Speaker, it was a planning document in a corporation that has $1.2 billion of services and 20 000 plus employees. There is lots of planning. The reconfiguration of cardiac surgery at St. Boniface Hospital has prompted changes around the system. I might add, Mr.

Speaker, the Honourable Pierre Pettigrew just recently visited Concordia Hospital where we have centralized orthopedic surgery and said, "This is the way to go. This is the innovation in the future." When we tried to move surgeries from St. Boniface to Concordia I think members opposite opposed it. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I would like to remind all honourable members if th e Speaker is standing all members should be seated and the Speaker should be heard in silence. Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for River East, on a point of order. Mrs.

Bonnie Mitche lson (River East): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Heal th has just stooped to a new low in this House and he should be ashamed of himself. Mr. Speaker, he can stand up and lie and say that we oppose changing orthopedics to Concordia Hospital and get away with it. That is a new low in this House. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I would like to remind all honourable members and like to caution the honourable Member for River Heights that the words "lie," "liars"– An Honourable Member: River East. Mr. Speaker: River East I mean.

"Lie," "liars," are unparliamentary so I would kindly ask the honourable member to withdraw that word. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, the kinds of comments the Minister of Health makes tend to get people to say things they should not say. I will withdraw the word. I will indicate, again, this Minister of Health has stooped to a new low in this Legislature and he should be ashamed of himself. Mr. Chomiak: Yes. To finish my answer I said I think the members opposite opposed it. If they did not they certainly voted against it in the budget. S ome Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order.

On the point of order raised by the honourable Member for River East, it is not a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. I thank the honourable member for the withdrawal and that should take care of the matter. * * *

3358 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I want to also indicate Manitoba now has 40 orthopedic surgeons which is five more than 35 who were practising here in 1999 when we came to office. Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, the arrogance of this Minister of Health is quite disconcerting when you consider the responsibility of his job. Mr.

Speaker, a WRHA orthopedic feasibility study says that 1000 more joint replacement surgeries will need to be done in 2005 to relieve the pain and suffering of all of those orthopedic patients on waiting lists, yet the leaked document shows there is absolutely no planned increase for these orthopedic surgeries. Can the Minister of Health explain how he can be the biggest health care spender in Canada, yet people like Ken Kronson have to wait on an absurdly long waiting list for urgent hip surgery? Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, Manitoba has seven orthopedic surgeons in training right now who have accepted grants, conditional on practising in Manitoba. We currently have 40 orthopedic surgeons, five more than the thirty-five we had in 1999. We have doubled the number of surgeries at Pan Am. * (14:10) In its last ranking of the provinces, the Canadian Orthopedic Association said Manitoba had the second-shortest wait times in Canada for orthopedic surgery.

Let me quote again, in the last ranking of provinces the Canadian Orthopedic Association, not a bastion of NDP partisanship, said, "Manitoba has the shortest waiting times in Canada for orthopedic surgery." We have begun centralizing the orthopedic surgery wait list to ensure that patients are prioritized appropriately. The orthopedic wait list co-ordinator is one of the administrative costs we have put in place to deal with waiting lists. Nelson House Band Elections Mrs.

Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Elders and band members of Nelson House are concerned about the integrity of the election process that will need to take place before Wuskwatim can proceed. They have asked for an impartial, third party like Elections Manitoba to oversee all aspects of the project development agreement vote. Will the Minister responsible for Hydro, Mr. Speaker, guarantee a fair and impartial vote as requested by elders and band members at Nelson House? Hon. Tim Sale (Minister charged with the administration of Th e Manitoba Hydro Act): Mr.

Speaker, the government of the First Nation of Nelson House, Nisichawayasihk First Nation, is a government that was elected by the people of Nisichawayasihk and they have been negotiating for a number of years now with Manitoba Hydro. They have carried out those negotiations with great skill and with great integrity. I have every reason to believe the government of the First Nation will, as all governments do, oversee any band election in a fair and impartial way, and I have great confidence in Chief Primrose and his council. Mrs.

Mitchelson: The minister is well aware of the concerns that have been raised by respective elders in the Nelson House community and justice seekers who had significant concerns about the last band election for chief and council. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister responsible for Hydro ensure there is a third-party impartial process that monitors and oversees the vote on the Wuskwatim project? Mr. Sale: Mr.

Speaker, what I would ask the honourable member to do is to carefully consider the paternalism and arrogance of her words which, before an event takes place with a First Nation with its own government, one of the most progressive First Nations in Manitoba with a record of economic development, of health development, of a number of very strong measures they have taken including the ownership of assets off reserve, those people– An Honourable Member: Turn your cell phone off. Mr. Sale: – have the competence to carry out any kind of election. I apologize to the House for this little problem. Mr.

Speaker, the member opposite should reflect carefully on her desire to interfere in a First Nations government process. An Honourable Member: Turn your own cell phone off.

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3359 Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I want to take this opportunity to remind all honourable members all electronic devices and cell phones should be turned off during Question Period. Gaming Policy Public Review Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I am sure the minister was taking that urgent call to fix another keno machine in the province. On Monday night at committee, the Provincial Council of Women of Manitoba made a presentation to members of the Legislature.

In the presentation they echoed the calls of Conservative members of this House and of Manitobans across the province by asking for an independent, public review of gambling in Manitoba to determine the real social and economic costs of gaming. Will the minister of lotteries today take the recommendation of the Council of Women and commission that study? Hon. Scott Smith (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act): Mr.

Speaker, as the member opposite holds his hand on the horn and quite frankly brings this issue forward, what he does not realize, I guess it was before his time, is there was no responsible gaming policy in the province of Manitoba throughout the entire 1990s. We have introduced the first responsible gaming policy in Canada, working with the AFM in the province of Manitoba, with professional advice, something the members opposite never did, never looked at and never considered. Working with those professionals, we have taken their advice.

We are moving ahead and we are making headway where the members opposite never did. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, we will let the Council of Women know they are not taking the advice of them. The minister is ignoring their concerns. Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre has commissioned two University of Manitoba professors to study the problem of gambling in Aboriginal communities in Ontario. The expertise clearly exists in Manitoba to study the socio-economic problems of gambling among Aboriginals in particular and Manitobans as a whole.

Why is the Minister of Lotteries so determined to expand gambling and so reluctant to determine the social costs of gambling in the province? Mr. Smith: Members opposite, when we go back in history a little bit and for a lesson for the member opposite, had introduced VLTs into the province of Manitoba in 1991. When they introduced that, they had mentioned and members opposite had mentioned it was for the economic viability and support of rural Manitoba and tourism in Manitoba. I know the member opposite was a little excited by the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) awhile earlier.

The member from River East was on record as saying at that time that in fact the introduction of gaming into Manitoba was a positive for rural Manitoba. The same members opposite had mentioned in statements that certainly people in Manitoba had the right to choose. Suddenly the member from the back bench on the opposite side is contradicting what the members on the front of their parties seem to say. Mr. Speaker, we have introduced responsible gaming policies. Rancher's Choice Beef Co-op Investors Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Just yesterday I was talking with David Reykdal, president of Rancher's Choice.

He and auctioneer Buddy Bergner have a number of ranchers committed to shipping cattle to a Rancher's Choice slaughterhouse but again they have no money. This Doer government demanded $3.5 million from our debt-ridden farmers and set them up for failure. Can the Minister of Industry tell the people of this province what outside investors this government has consulted in order to allow investors other than ranchers and government to get involved in a Rancher's Choice slaughterhouse? Hon.

Scott Smith (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Working in partnership with the producers in Manitoba, with Rancher's Choice, as the member opp osite, ever since the BSE came in over a year ago, has been a positive process. The producers in Manitoba had no capacity here in the province since 1980 and the early eighties when the capacity in the province of Manitoba was reduced nearly to a third of what it was in the early

3360 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 eighties. BSE has highlighted a problem right across Canada, and certainly in Manitoba and western Canada, of what the slaughter capacity should be in Manitoba. We have been and have had considerable dollars on the table working with Rancher's Choice. The federal government chose not to identify it. They have let the producers and this province down. The federal government should be certainly held accountable for their actions. We are continuing to work with the plan, with Rancher's Choice and with the producers. Mr.

Eichler: It is not a matter of blame, it is a matter of taking responsibility. Mr. Speaker, the Doer government has failed the ranchers of this province. We have three business days left before the Rancher's Choice's deadline expires. Ranchers are struggling, not only with the uncertainty of the CAIS program but cash, $3.5 million to be exact, is something they do not have to invest in a packing plant. * (14:20) Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines tell the ranchers of this province their plan to move forward on the ranchers' co-op slaughterhouse? Mr. Smith: Mr.

Speaker, we have been working very closely with Ranchers' Choice and certainly the meetings they have held throughout southwestern Manitoba with the many producers we have had out there. We have been together with Ranchers' Choice, with our money on the table, right from day one. We have supported Ranchers' Choice in their drive to look at an operational facility, an abattoir, here in the province of Manitoba. One of the possibilities was an abattoir in Winnipeg for a lot of reasons, specifically with the federal licensing that it does have, to look at an expedient way to bring the capacity up.

There are a number of other options we are considering looking at with Ranchers' Choice and with other producers in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, our money, the huge percent of the money, and the backing and the support of the province of Manitoba are well known by Ranchers' Choice, the producers. It has continued to be there and increased since day one and will continue to be there. Federal Equalization Payments Conservative Party Proposal Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, I understand the Stephen Harper federal Conservative plan for equalization would eliminate natural gas and oil revenue from calculations involved in determining equalization transfers. I understand the result of this might be a huge windfall for Alberta and a very big loss for Manitoba. I ask the Minister of Finance whether he has done an assessment on the impact of the Harper Conservative plan on the finances of the Manitoba government if it were to be fully implemented. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, this is a hypoth etical question about a federal election which is going on right now. There have been a number of policy statements made. Our objective as a provincial government along with other provinces is to have a meeting of First Ministers and Finance ministers when the new government comes into power to resolve all matters related to equalization. We are on the record, as are all provinces, supporting a 10-province average to make sure everybody is treated equitably.

We look forward to that First Ministers' meeting and the ministers of Finance meeting once the new government is in place to resolve all the ambiguities among the proposals that are out there in the federal election context. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, I understand the Minister of Finance was on CBC's "Reality Check" last night saying this would be very bad for Manitoba. I ask the Minister of Finance to come clean with the Legislature and be honest with members of the Legislature in terms of what would happen. Would it require the Minister of Finance to raise taxes or to reduce expenditures and by how much? Mr.

Selinger: Mr. Speaker, probably all the federal political parties have made statements with respect to equalization. The provinces have also put their position on the table. As a matter of fact, just a few weeks ago ministers of Health and ministers of Finance met in Toronto to put together a set of principles related to future discussions on health care funding as well as the issues of fiscal imbalance in this country.

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3361 We look forward to meeting with whomever the next government is to resolve the matter in a way that meets the spirit of the equalization component of the federal charter, Constitution,

section 36, "provinces should be able to offer comparable levels of service at comparable levels of taxation." That is our objective. We expect, with whomever the federal government is, to live up to that. Teachers' Pensions Amendment Act Board Appointments Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My question is for the Premier (Mr. Doe r). His government has turned its back on retired teachers. In fact, Bill 46 creates a Teachers' Retirement Allowance Fund board. There are seven people that are going to sit on that board.

Three of them are going to be Manitoba Teachers' Society reps and the government has chosen to appoint four members. We had appeals from retired teachers from across this province asking for the government to listen to what they have to say. It is only fair to ensure there is indeed a retired teacher on this board. Why has this Premier, why has this government turned its back on retired teachers, 5000-plus are represented by one organization, thousands of families? Why have you turned your back and not acknowledged and at least put them in the legislation that would have them sit on the board? Thank you. Hon.

Peter Bjornson (M inister of Education, Citizenship and Youth): We do, indeed, take the teachers' pension issues very seriously as, very early in our mandate, we committed to fund the unfunded liability which had been left unfunded for several years and left unaddressed for 11 years by members opposite. We have a teachers' pension task force which was responsible for bringing recommendations to the government, and that is a vehicle for discussion around changes to teachers' pensions.

We have opened The Teachers' Pension Act three times and addressed many of the concerns that have been raised by the teachers' pension task force. With respect to the Retired Teachers' Association of Manitoba, I have met with them on a regular basis. I will continue to meet with them. We are very aware of their concerns. The decisions that were made around Bill 46 will not prejudice any future decisions around management structures and any changes, future and pending, to The Teachers' Pension Act. Thank you. Biotechnology Industries Developments Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St.

James): Manitoba's biotech sector is a major sector of our economy. Can the Minister of Energy, Science and Technology inform the House of recent developments in this sector? Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): This sector of our economy now comprises about 10 percent of Canada's biotech. We have less than 4 percent of the population, so we are doing very well. I want to share with members the Ernst & Young report on biotechnology for 2004, talking as they do on the issue of the growth most recently.

Most growth, in terms of biotech in Canada, was in Ontario which grew by 22 companies, followed by Manitoba which grew by 7 companies. Manitoba recorded an 80% increase, Mr. Speaker. They go on to say: "Manitoba's boom is partially explained by the provincial government's effort to grow the biotechnology sector within the province. Government officials have worked with universities and hospitals to help the scientific community identify products with commercial potential. They have helped scientists develop business models. Incubators have been set up. Seed capital is made available to companies.

In addition, established companies have provided advice to help new companies." Family Violence Intervention Program Funding Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): The Family Violence Intervention Program will be terminated at the end of this month if the Province does not financially support the program. The Justice Minister's former colleague and mayoral candidate, MaryAnn Mihychuk, stated in the Free Press that the end of the program shows a lack of communication between the City and the Province, and the Province should have been involved with the family intervention team when they started three years ago.

3362 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 Does the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh) agree with his former colleague's statements and will he agree to commit to fund this program? Hon. Christine Melnick (Minister of Family Services and Housing): I would like to table a letter. Mr. Hawranik: There are millions of dollars to fund the defence costs of the five Hells Angels associates. He has up to $2.7 million of our money to pay his lawyers to defend the Hells Angels, a multimillion dollar crime organization, but he has no money to fund families in crisis.

What are this minister's priorities, to fund the defence of the members of the Hells Angels or to fund a program which prevents family violence? Ms. Melnick: The letter that I tabled for the previous question openly states we had met with the members from City Council. We have encouraged them to continue the program. We have provided new monies this year of $1.45 million, $900,000 of which will flow from photo radar enforcement. The program is currently costing $600,000. We have encouraged the City to put these monies towards the program, to choose if they wish to expand the program.

We encourage them to do this today. We encourage this program to continue under the City of Winnipeg. Department of Transportation Under Spending Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transportation and Government Services, over the two years ending March '03, allowed his department to lapse $28 million. Will the minister confirm that his Premier (Mr. Doer) or the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) forced him to return this $28 million to general revenue because their NDP spending is out of control? Hon.

Ron Lemieux (Minister of Transportation and Government Services): I would ask the Member for Arthur-Virden to move his birdbath over a little bit, because the twinning of No. 1 heading to Saskatchewan is taking place this summer, going right by his front doorstep. * (14:30) Also, Mr. Speaker, we have put close to $60 million more into transportation in the last five years than they did in the last five years of government. Mr. Maguire: Well, Mr.

Speaker, while the Minister of Transportation and Government Services alludes to spending millions of dollars more in his budget, Manitobans are not fooled by this shell game. This minister has lapsed $28 million in two years ending '03 and more millions to come. Adding $10 million, as he said many times in the budget, to a $28-million lapse is still an $18-million shortfall. When will the minister get his priorities straight and use his budgeted funds for the safety of the travelling citizens? Mr. Lemieux: Well, I know, Mr.

Speaker, despite the protest of the member from Arthur-Virden, he does not want the twinning to take place to Saskatchewan. He is against it. Again, eight out of ten years when they were government they lapsed money, but having said that, we have approximately $60 million more in the budget in the last five years than they did in the last five years of their government. Not only that, we are putting $65 million into the northeast Perimeter, $21 million into twinning Highway 59 and X amount of millions of dollars going into twinning of No. 1 highway west. Fish Hatcheries Funding Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, it is alarming when the government of the day underspends its highways budget by $28 million and they all stand up and applaud. Perhaps the Minister responsible for Conservation would be prepared to tell the people of this province whether or not he expects to have enough money in his budget to run the hatcheries this year. Hon. Stan Struthers (Min ister of Conservation): Mr.

Speaker, I am very pleased with the numbers that my department was able to put forward in terms of spending on behalf of the people of Manitoba, but what I am totally amazed with is how members opposite, our friends across the way, could on the one hand tell us we are spending too much, and then get up in this House over and over and get after some

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3363 of my colleagues for not spending enough. Make up your minds. Mr. Cummings: What is wrong, Mr. Speaker, is that they announce wonderful budgetary expenditures and bamboozle the public into thinking the money is being spent on highways. This minister has cut the funding for the fish hatcheries in this province by 25 percent over the recent budgets, and now th ere may not be enough money to put fingerlings in the lakes that attract the anglers for tourism into this province.

He is about to have a collapse of his fish hatcheries if he does not provide sufficient funding. Will he undertake to fund them this fall? Mr. Struthers: Let me, in a very non-partisan and co-operative way, invite the Member for Ste. Rose up into our area where the fishing on Lake Dauphin has never been better, Mr. Speaker. Let me also invite the Member for Ste. Rose to join the Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach) an d I on a fishing tour of Lake of the Prairies, where again the fishing has never been better. Let me say, Mr.

Speaker , that is because this government has been very, very proactive in its approach to fish enhancement, to providing money for fisheries, to working wi th local sport and fishing enhancement groups to make sure the fish in our lakes are strong from one end of this province to the next. Crop Insurance Deadline Extension Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): I have received, over the last number of days, numerous phone calls from farmers asking whether the Province of Manitoba would consider extending the crop insurance deadline. I raised this issue yesterday with the minister and I did not get a straight answer.

I think it is time the minister gives the farmers of the province of Manito ba some leeway and recognizes this has been an abnormally cold spring, germination is very slow and there is a lot of drown- out and there might have to be a whole bunch of reseeding done, at least in the Red River Valley where I come from. I would ask only that the minister strongly reconsider her position and extend the crop insurance deadlines because of the coldness of the spring and the wetness that has not allowed farmers to seed their crops. Will the minister extend those crop insurance deadlines and will she announce it today?

Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Given the situation that producers in southern Manitoba were facing, particularly in southern Manitoba, we did make an extension on the seeding deadlines for pulses. I want to remind the member this is a joint federal-provincial program and to make any changes we have to have the support of the federal government, Mr. Speaker. We have had those discussions with the federal government. At this point, there is no decision to further extend the seeding deadlines, but we will continue those discussions. Mr.

Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. Speaker's Statement Mr. Speaker: I just want to make a quick statement. As the House will be adjourning today, I encourage all honourable members to remove the contents of their desks here in the Chamber. The blue bins here in the Chamber are designated for recycling of Hansard only. [interjection] Order. Any other material you would like to recycle may be placed in the larger recycling contai ners in the message rooms located just outside of the Chamber. Thank you. MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Mr.

Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a matter of privilege. Mr. Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon on a matter of privilege as it relates to comments that were made yesterday in Question Period by the Minister of Health. I kn ow that there are two conditions that have to be met to qualify for a matter of privilege, and I intend to put those before the House right now. Mr.

Speaker, first of a ll, the prima facie case here is one where, indeed, we are doing this to ensure that what is put on the record is not representative of fact, that the minister indeed misled

3364 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 this House deliberately in having put remarks on the record that in no way resembled a document that he said he was referring to. Mr. Speaker, this is a deliberate misleading– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, this is a deliberate attempt to mislead the members of the public and this House and to tarnish the reputation of a member in this House. This is the first occasion for me to be able to raise this matter as we have just received this document that was tabled, after our insistence that this document be tabled.

I understand now why the minister was reluctant to table it, because this document does not in any way reflect the statements that he made in this House. Mr. Speaker, I want to quote what the minister said in this House. Yesterday, in response to a question from the member from Minnedosa, the minister said that a member of the Manitoba Schizophrenia Society who received an award at the award luncheon, and I quote, "directly criticized members opposite for attacking individuals who have mental illnesses." Mr. Speaker, I have the document that the minister tabled.

Unless he has another document, this document does not in any way criticize members opposite on this side of the House or anyone in this Chamber. It simply states what the member from Minnedosa correctly did in this House. I am going to quote the relevant section. I will not quote the whole letter, because the whole letter does not pertain to anything else that was referred to in this House. But I will quote what is the third paragraph in this statement and I will quote it word for word. "The

article I referred to reported MLA Leanne Rowat's challenge to Mr. Chomiak regarding why a woman with a mental disorder living in Brandon was allowed to live on her own. For those of you unfamiliar with the story, she wandered away from her home on January 3 of this year and froze to death. Her sister, understandably distraught, was quoted as saying: 'Her sister should have never been allowed to make the decision to live by herself on her own. She really did not know how to take care of herself.' " Mr. Speaker, that is what was said in the letter. That is a fact, a statement of fact.

The member from Minnedosa quite correctly questioned the Minister of Health with respect to policy, with respect to procedure, with respect to attitude of the department, with respect to an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of this individual. She also questioned whether or not the minister was prepared to ca ll for an investigation, an inquiry, an inquest as to the death of this woman, and why this woman was allowed to freeze to death because of the fact that she was not being monitored as she should have been. * (14:40) And, Mr.

Speaker, there was no criticism of people who have mental illness in any way, shape or form. There is no criticism here in this letter, nor is there any criticism by the speaker of members opposite with respect to how our attitude, perhaps, has been displayed toward people with mental illness. I know this is a sensitive issue. Not a single member in this House, and I do not care what side of the House you are on, would ever stoop to criticize people who are less fortunate in society than some of the rest of us, people who are challenged, people who have mental illnesses.

Surely this member from Minnedosa did not even come close to criticizing anybody who had a mental illness. She was taking the side of this poor individual who froze to death. She said that this person who had frozen to death, who died, had, at least, to have the dignity of knowing that somebody cared enough for her that there would be an investigation launched into the circumstances surrounding her death. Her family was owed that respect by the government, by the department, by the people who were responsible. That is what the issue was.

Yesterday in this House, this minister completely, completely, and I say he did it intentionally, he did it knowing that it was false, he did it deliberately to misrepresent the facts. He did it deliberately to tarnish the reputation of the Member for Minnedosa (Ms. Rowat). This is this minister's style. If he cannot defend his dismal record in health care, he attacks individuals. Mr. Speaker, I hate to say this, but this is almost a sexist approach , because this minister

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3365 continues to attack a female on this side of the House who is the critic for Family Services, a female on this side. That is a very chauvinistic and unwarranted attitude by this minister. I hate to make these allegations. I stand in this place with regret, because this is not the way that we should conduct ourselves in this House. I may disagree with the Minister of Health on policy. I may disagree with him on approaches, but I do not take issue with him as an individual, because I think inside he is a caring individual. He is a person who cares about people.

But for him to do this because he cannot defend his record has to be the lowest level of performance that I have seen in this Legislature. Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of privilege. This is a matter which needs to be raised today. This is a matter where the minister owes the Member for Minnedosa an apology. And if he is man enough to get up in his place today and apologize for the attitude and for his malignment of this Member for Minnedosa, this matter may go away.

But if he continues to insist that so mehow this document that he tabled today, this speech that was made by the member at the Schizophrenia Awards Dinner, is a reflection of what the Member for Minnedosa says about people with mental illness, then he is completely out of line. His statements are completely out of line. There is no room for that kind of response in this House. I do not know what else to say about a situation like this, except that we respect each other in this House to tell the truth. We respect each other in this House to be honourable. That is what this House is all about.

When I stand in my place in this House, what I do and what I say is put on record, and that record remains forever. What the member put on record yesterday did not in any way come close to resembling what was either in the document or what was the truth. I do not care how shallow I may be at being able to interpret documents, but one can read it with the most elementary style of education and understand that that is not what the speaker was talking about. He was simply relating to the public then what the issue was, the issue that the member from Minnedosa raised that a person had frozen to death.

A person who had a mental illness was allowed to live on her own, froze to death, and she was asking, "What were the circumstances surrounding her death?" We have now learned from the Medical Examiner's office that, indeed, there are questions about this individual's death, that there are questions that have to be answered. The Medical Examiner's office has put two specific recommendations in place, and he is talking about the need for more research and more investigation to be done into the circumstances surrounding this individual's death.

Because, as a matter of fact, it is alleged in that letter that there may be a suicide note that was referred to by members of the family as it surrounds the circumstances of this death. That puts a whole number of questions out there about what happened in the case of this individual freezing to death. Why was this person found in the middle of a field? Is that not even a question that should be asked? Why was this person away from her residence? Why was this person not clothed for the conditions of the Canadian climate, if you like, for the conditions of the day? Surely those questions are legitimate.

Surely those questions need answers. The family deserves the right to know the answers. That is what we were asking about, Mr. Speaker. But for this minister to then extrapolate from that, that we are criticizing people with mental illnesses, is really abominable. I am just asking the minister if he has the decency in his soul to stand in this House and apologize for those statements because they do not reflect anything similar to what was in that letter, anything close to the truth in that letter, Mr. Speaker.

I think that maybe this matter can be resolved, but that would certainly be up to the Member for Minnedosa (Ms. Rowat), whether or not she accepts that kind of an apology. Mr. Speaker, I am not twisting fact here, I am not in any way twisting fact because all I did was read the script and I read the minister's response and it is objectionable to us. It is certainly objectionable to the member from Minnedosa, and she should take umbrage with this and she has. I am asking the Minister of Health, because I do respect him as an individual, to do the right thing and to stand in this House and to apologize.

3366 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 If that is not the case, if we cannot achieve that, I then will have to move a motion, but I will give the opportunity before I go into that and with your indulgence, Mr. Speaker, to allow the Minister of Health to stand in his place and correct the record and apologize to the member from Minnedosa. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, firstly, I want to indicate I do not believe the member has a matter of privilege, nor do I believe that the member even has a point of order.

Let me just do a few opening comments and then get to the nub of the issue. Mr. Speaker, that was not the first time that this issue had been raised in the House on that particular instant. It had been raised day after day, following a week of issues raised concerning deaths in the system. It was not I who wrote this

article in the Winnipeg Free Press , May 3. It says, and I am just quoting, "but reporters covering the latest untimely death have begun to wonder out loud: Is it really a crisis or are we much better exposing the daily struggle for life and death in health care?" The reporter goes on to say, "so we know more about how the health care system works and when it fails, but knowledge can be dangerous, especially when it is wielded by politicians who care more for headlines than they do about health care." Now, Mr. Speaker, that

article came out, that is not what I wrote, but during the course of this session and pre-sitting sessions more deaths have been raised, and the member knows over the last period of time than in any other time of the history of the Legislature. We are recording deaths, we are trying to deal with deaths, we are trying to go to a system where we recognize and learn from mistakes. We are trying to change the system. Changing the system means that informati on is exposed.

That is a reality that we are prepared to face, and I think we are all mature enough to do that and we should do that. * (14:50) With regard to the particular comments that I raised from the speech, I as ked for a copy of this speech after it had been delivered because I wanted to put it on the Web site. I thought it captured it very importantly when we went to the schizophrenia dinner and several hundred people attended and this gentleman got an award. Just let me quote from the speech, "the

article I refer to reported MLA, and I will not say the name because I cannot, challenged Mr. Chomiak regarding why a woman with a mental disorder living in Brandon was allowed to live on her own. "This strikes me very close to home. Seven and a half years ago, I was living in a group home and I regularly heard people suggest to me that it was the best place for me. I should stay on social assistance because I could not manage the stress of being on my own and working. Even the directors of the group home told me this. I was very fortunate.

I had many people in my life who believed in my potential to live an independent, meaningful life. People saw abilities in me that I did not believe I had. I was encouraged to"– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, if the members wish to deal with this issue, I would appreciate it if they give me the courtesy of allowing me to express without having to raise my voice. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: "I was encouraged to pursue my dreams of work, my home and make a meaningful contribution to my community.

Ladies and gentlemen, I stand here today, not because the system," there is recognition of weakness in the system, "recognized my struggles as a medical condition, but because people had hope for me, communicated that hope to me, encouraged me, supported me, provided me with opportunities to move forward, take on risks and new challenges and assisted me to develop the skills I needed to succeed. "I was taught to use my medication as a tool to manage my emotional distress. I was given the opportunity and freedom to make decisions on what treatment I would use and how and when to use it.

I was invited to participate on various community committees and boards and was assisted in developing the skills and knowledge I require to participate in a meaningful way. I was urged and at times harassed by friends who believed in my potential to go after opportunities for work. The anti- stigma cannot be found in the system in a society accepting mental illness as a medical condition. It

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3367 will only be found when all of us look for the potential in every person, regardless of diagnosis, progress, nourish and encourage that potential and assist the person in developing the skills, knowledge, supports and resource base to live successfully in our community and society. If we can do this, we will provide the opportunity for anyone living with a mental disorder to strive for an honour such as this.

I want to thank the Manitoba Schizophrenia Society, his doctor, New Careers, Seneca House, Canadian Mental Health Association, Manitoba Schizophrenia Society, the Mental Health branch of Manitoba Health, as well as various RHAs around the province for their encouragement and support." Mr. Speaker, my point in putting this on the record and the context was, when I delivered the– [interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I actually spoke at that fair and I have attended it every year, I think since inception, with respect to that.

The context was why do mental health issues only become an issue of this kind and why can we not work on it every day. Mr. Speaker, I not only will withdraw my remarks but I will apologize to the member for my comments if it was meant as an– [interjection]. In fact, I have respect for the member opposite. I did not intend to impinge her integrity or her motivation. If that was what my comments indicated then I withdraw, I withdraw completely those comments and I am prepared to indicate that. I will stop at that point because if I continue talking I might end up getting myself in trouble. Thank you. Mr.

Derkach: Mr. Speaker, I do want to say thank you to the Minister of Health for withdrawing that and correcting the record. I will not be putting forward a motion at this time, but I think that it is only fair to understand that these are issues that are near and dear to many of us.

We do not want to get into personalizing these issues except that I think it is our right as legislators to be able to ask questions in this House that are not going to reflect on an individual's character but ra ther present the facts and I guess pursue what perhaps are the policies or perhaps the actions taken by any individual minister or her department. So, with that, I think this matter has now been resolved. Mr. Speaker: That should conclude the matter. Now we will move on to Members' Statements. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Winnipeg International Children's Festival Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): Mr.

Speaker, the Winnipeg International Children's Festival, one of our province's best summer festivals, is now taking place for the next four days. For many years the festival has provided our community with diverse and world-class performing arts and activities which are educational, entertaining and accessible to young people from all social, economic and ethnic backgrounds. The festival began in 1983 at Assiniboine Park with about 1700 people in the audience. Over the years, the festival has grown by leaps and bounds.

It is now a four-day, thirty act extravaganza of the best musicians, singers, dancers, storytellers and clowns in the world. Also there are activities and co- operative games, face painting, roving performers, concessions and a general store. The Children's Festival has been active throughout the year with their Circus and Magic Partnership program, or CAMP, which sends professional artists to northern communities. Youth in these communities are offered training in circus and magic arts, performance opportunities and the chance to continue their skill development.

CAMP has received awards from the provincial Department of Justice, the City of Winnipeg and the Premier's Volunteer Service Awards. The program was developed in conjunction with the Manitoba Department of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs. I am proud to say that our government is a strong supporter of the Children's Festival through the province's major arts festival operating support program. This program is designed to support major arts festivals in developing skills and audiences and in providing showcasing opportunities for Manitoba artists. Mr.

Speaker, the Children's Festival would not happen without the hard work and dedication of over a thousand volunteers each year. I would like to thank them for their hard work and wish them a great festival. Thank you.

3368 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 Theresa Ducharme Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, on June 7, at the age of 59, Theresa Ducharme, a long time activist for people with disabilities, passed away. At the age of eight, Ducharme was confined to a wheelchair because of po lio. Although there were many complications of her illness, her strong will, determination to serve others and a passion for a full and equal participation for all people with disabilities did not slow her down. Twenty-five years ago, Theresa Ducharme met her husband, Cliff, and th ey were married in 1978.

Soon after, Ducharme began to fight for her rights to home care so that Cliff would not be forced to give up his job to care for her. Ducharme also took on many other issues throughout her lifetime. Locally, she advocated for access to Handi-Transit services, lowering the floors of buses to ensure easier use of public transit for persons with disabilities and wheelchair access from the mayor's office to the council floor at City Hall.

Although Ducharme had hoped to make a difference through serving in public office, running for City Council, mayor and Parliament, she did not serve in these capacities, and it is unfortunate. Ducharme was successful, though, in raising the awareness of many local politicians and familiarizing them with the disabilities rights and issues of health, access and equality for all Manitobans.

As the chairperson of People for Equal Participation, she unapologetically addressed many controversial issues such as the 1990s Tracy Latimer case and speaking out about disability rights, the value of human life and the inherent dignity of each person regardless of ability. Theresa Ducharme earned the respect of everyone she encountered, and I had the privilege of meeting her and was very much impressed with her ability to communicate her interest and her passion. Mr.

Speaker, I would just like to conclude by saying that Theresa Ducharme was a wonderful lady who made numerous contributions to the lives of others through her commitment to advocating for people with disabilities. Her stick-to-it attitude has been an inspiration to many. Her motto, "I love to live and I live to love," was most evident in her life. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this Assembly, I extend my deepest sympathies to her husband, Cliff, during this difficult time and to all of those who knew and loved Theresa Ducharme. Thank you. * (15:00) National Aboriginal Day Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr.

Speaker, on June 23, which is the summer solstice, Canadians across the country will celebrate National Aboriginal Day, which is a special day to celebrate the unique heritage, cultures, contributions of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples in Canada. This year's celebration will once again be held at The Forks site in Winnipeg which, of course, as we know, was an important historical meeting place for Aboriginal people. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to be part of a government that supports First Nations, Inuit and Métis people.

We have within our caucus, within our Cabinet, two First Nations Cabinet ministers, yourself, of course, I believe the first Inuit Speaker in this country. As a Métis person myself, I am very pleased that one of the first things this government did was to restore funding to the Manitoba Métis Federation, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, MKO, and the Indian and Métis friendship centres across this province. Mr. Speaker, our government moved to address many of the recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry.

One of their major recommendations, of course, was to allow Aboriginal people to attend to the needs of Aboriginal children, the child welfare agency, which has led to the creation of the Aboriginal-run child welfare authorities, and just last week, the Métis Child and Family Services agency opened here in Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker, there are many other success stories of how our government has worked with Aboriginal organizations and people over the past four years on developing the North and the province in general, from education to employment partnerships to transportation and infrastructure improvements. Mr.

Speaker, as well, our government recently formed an Aboriginal Issues Committee of Cabinet. I

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3369 was very pleased recently to bring forward a resolution to honour Tommy Prince and I want to thank all my colleagues for unanimous support of that resolution. I encourage all members of the Legislature to attend Aboriginal Day in this province. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler). An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: No. The honourable Member for Morris (Mrs. Taillieu). An Honourable Member: No. Serge Radchuk Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a successful and distinguished man, Dr.

Serge Radchuk. Doctor Radchuk is an active contributing member of Winnipeg's Ukrainian community who was recently honoured at the Ukrainian Professional and Business Club of Winnipeg annual general meeting. I, along with my honourable colleague the Member for Russell (M r. Derkach), had the opportunity of attending this wonderful event and showing our support for the fine organization and for such an outstanding Manitoban. Serge Radchuk was born in western Ukraine in the 1920s and, after facing many hardships in war- torn Europe, immigrated to Canada in 1948.

Initially h e w o r k e d o n a f a r m i n S a s k a t c h e w a n b u t s o o n decided to attend high school in Benito in order to learn English and further his understanding of Canada. Following his high school experiences, Radchuk successfully completed law school at the University of Manitoba and was called to the bar in 1955. A few of his fellow law students include Izzy Asper, Sterling Lyon, Bill Norrie and Art Mauro. Also interesting to note is that Serge Radchuk was the first European immigrant to graduate from the U of M law school.

Also proud of his heritage, Radchuk established a Ukrainian university student union while completing his studies. Furthering his education in law, Serge Radchuk received his Masters of Law degree from the U of M in 1958 and his doctorate degree from the Ukrainian Free University located in Munich, Germany, in 1975. Dr. Radchuk had not only been successful in his academic pursuits but had involved himself in numerous professional Ukrainian and other organizations both within and outside of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, Doctor Radchuk has demonstrated his commitment to excellence in serving the Ukrainian community, practising law and setting a fine example for recent immigrants to Canada and to young people pursuing studies in law. Doctor Radchuk has been recognized in many forms for his achievements, receiving awards for community leadership, the Order of Canada, an honorary doctorate, to mention a few.

I would like to take this opportunity to also recognize in this Chambe r the many contributions Doctor Radchuk has made to our province and invite all honourable members to join me in wishing Doctor Radchuk unending success as he continues practising law in five different languages at his own law firm. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Dr. Jose Rizal Mr. Conrad Santos (Wellington): Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, June 19, the Philippine community in Manitoba will celebrate the 143rd anniversary of the birthday of its national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal.

A motorcade will begin at 10 a.m. from 84 Isabel Street to 4477 Main Street, Gl en Eden Cemetery, for a floral offering and conclude at 11 a.m. by a luncheon at Riverbend Restaurant und er the auspices of the Order of the Knights of Rizal. Dr. Jose Rizal is universally known like Kung- fu-tse of the Chinese community and Mohandas K. Ghandi of the Indian community. Doctor Rizal was educated as a medical doctor, an ethnologist, a linguist. He propagated the ideal of love of God, country and people. He taught and practised human integrity and social justice.

He advocated human freedom, self-reliance and honesty in thoughts and in deed. Love of God, country and people, Doctor Rizal must have known the great commandment: Tu aimeras le Seigneur, ton Dieu, de tout ton cœur, de

3370 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 toute ton âme, de toute ta pensée. Tu aimeras ton prochain comme toi-même. Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul and with all thy mind. Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself. Justice and human dignity, Doctor Rizal did uphold by writing two political novels: Noli me Tangere, Touch Me Not, and El Filibusterismo , The Political Opposition. Love of country Doctor Rizal expressed in the poem, Mi ultimo adios.

Mi patria adorada, / dolor de mis dolores / Querida philipinas, oye mis postrer adios / Aje te dijo todos / Mis padres, mis amores / Voy donde, no hay esclaves, verdugos ni oppressores / Donde de la fe no mata / Donde que el reina es Dios. My Fatherland adored / that sadness to my sorrow lends / Beloved Filipinos, hear now my last good-bye / I give thee all: parents, kindred and friends / Now I go where no slave to the oppressor bend / Where faith never kills, and God reigns ever on high. GRIEVANCES Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I rise today to speak on a grievance.

To put it in context, we stand here June 10, 2004. When you talk about the floodway expansion project, as we know it today, we know that the Doer government is in favour of forcing non-unionized workers to pay union dues. That is a fact. Number two, we know that the Doer government is excluding the employer construction group, of which 95 percent are non-unionized, from the bargaining table. That we know as today. We are opposed to that.

We hope that there are opportunities that the Doer government will do the right thing and eliminate this issue of forcing non-unionized workers to pay union dues and allow the employer, the construction employer group, the non-unionized group, a seat at the bargaining table with the union and the Premier's (Mr. Doer'

s) friends. That is what we hope will ultimately come. So how did we get here? How is it that we have got to this position where this Doer government and this Premier is forcing non-unionized workers to pay union dues on the floodway and excluding the employer group, 95 percent of which is non-union, from the bargaining table? How did we get there? Well, it is interesting. The Floodway Authority said at some point months ago that there was going to be a master labour agreement involved in the floodway.

What was interesting about that is that that could only have come from the Doer government's direction, because they appointed the floodway head, Mr. Ernie Gilroy. That is what was out in the public. It was interesting that the construction companies in Manitoba got wind of this and they said, "Well, wait a minute. What are you talking about a project labour agreement? A project labour agreement ensures that all companies are unionized, ensures all people pay union dues, and we are not unionized. The first we ever heard of a project labour agreement was on the radio.

We have had no discussion with it whatsoever." * (15:10) So this side of the House, the Progressive Conservative caucus, decided to start asking some questions of the Doer government. What we found was very, very interesting. We found that the Minister of Water Stewardship stood up and said that, absolutely, there would be a project labour agreement. That means that all companies that work on this that are fortunate to get bidding are going to have to be unionized. That was what the Minister of Water Stewardship said. It is what the Floodway Authority head had also indicated.

The Premier tried to come to the defence of the Minister of Water Stewardship, and said, "Well, just a minute, hold on for a second. There is not any plan in place. There is no plan, so I do not know why it is that everybody is getting excited." Well, let us follow and connect the dots. If there was no plan in place according to what the Premier said, then how is it that the 50-50 funding, 50 percent by the taxpayers of Manitoba, was going into the provincial funding, and 50 percent of the taxpayers of Manitoba was being directed by the federal government.

So you have 50-50 funding on this project, Province and federal government. The Premier says, "There is no plan in place so I do not know why everybody should be excited." Well, the head of the Floodway Authority was down

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3371 talking to the other funding partner, the federal government, about the plan for the floodway. So you get this sense that the Doer government is looking at one of the single biggest opportunities of construction in Manitoba, the expansion of the floodway. I might remind all members of this Chamber, the original floodway built by the honourable Duff Roblin, a proud member of our party, was the original floodway project. Now we see that the NDP government, the Doer government, the Leader of the NDP party is now looking at expanding the floodway.

It is so fascinating that this Doer government has bungled this issue so badly. You have the employer groups being left out of the negotiating table. You have the Premier and his staff saying one thing about forced unionization. You have the Minister of Water Stewardship contradicting the Premier. You have the head of the Floodway Authority saying a third thing.

So what ultimately had to happen, unfortunately, the Doer government had to bring in somebody to try to save this Doer government's face, try to give them a sense that, "Okay, we have sort of bungled this thing so badly we cannot get out of it," is what they are saying. That is what they are telling the people of Manitoba. We cannot handle this big project properly, so we are going to have to bring in Mr. Wally Fox-Decent. Mr. Wally Fox-Decent did come into this project.

I thought it was very interesting that during concurrence the member from River East and myself had a chance to ask the Minister of Water Stewardship the very, very simple question: Have you met at all with Mr. Wally Fox-Decent prior to releasing the report? Was there any meeting between yourself, that being the Minister of Water Stewardship, and Wally Fox-Decent? The fact of life is because the Minister of Water Stewardship skirted the issue, talked about all sorts of other things other than a simple, yes, we met, or, no, we did not, it can only lead to one thing.

That must be that the Minister of Water Stewardship did in fact meet with Wally Fox-Decent. That was confirmed when the report ultimately came forward, because in the report we understand that there was a potential issue about a single contract. Well, a single contract would exclude every Manitoba company from working. They just cannot abide by a single contract. That would have meant that money would have flowed to companies outside of Manitoba.

I know members opposite on the government side really do not give a hoot about that, but we on this side care very deeply, because those companies that were involved in expanding the floodway and in the 1997 flood, ensuring that the Z- dike was built on budget, on time, they did it without any kind of project labour agreement, any direction at all from any government. They did it because they know how to run their businesses. They are the best at what they do when they have the opportunity to prove it, and they did.

So we now find ourselves in a position where this Doer government has come up with a recom- mendation and we have said all along, no strike, no lockout, all you have to do is write it into an agreement. It is no big deal. The non-unionized companies will do that. As I asked the Premier of Manitoba (Mr. Doer), I wa s quite surprised that he did not seem to understand that non-unionized companies–95 percent of the heavy construction industry of Manitoba that would be working on this project are non-unionized–do not go on strike.

I know that was, maybe, somewhat news to the Premier but, regardless, it is a fact of life. So now we have the Doer government in a position where they have brought in Wally Fox- Decent who has brought in a report and in that report it says that there will be no forced unionization. Well, we, on this side, feel that that is a victory in some respects, because we were against forced unionization. We said, very clearly, no strike, no lockout. If it is something that is important to you as the government of the day you simply write it into a project agreement. You just write it in. There is no big deal.

You do not have to have a big process and make a big deal about it because, again, 95 percent of the construction companies that will be working on it are non-unionized. So, if you are concerned about no strike, no lockout, you write it into the agreement. That is not a problem. Instead, what we see, we see the Doer government making such a big issue about: "Well, Mr. Fox-Decent came up and his report says no strike, no lockout, and, boy, is that not a great thing?" Well, hallelujah, all we had to do before Mr.

Fox-Decent got involved was simply ask the non- unionized construction company, "Are you prepared to have a no-strike, no-lockout agreement?"

3372 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 They would have said, "Absolutely." They have said it consistently all along, but what we are finding it out through this process is that there is more to this than meets the eye. I cannot imagine and I would be surprised if any members opposite went back into their constitu- encies and said to the average Manitoban who is out there working hard, "What do you think if we were to force non-unionized workers to pay union dues? Do you think that that is fair?" I think that is the question. Is that a fair question?

"Do you think it is unfair to charge non-unionized workers union dues?" Well, I think the answer to the majority of Manitobans–I have confidence they would look and say, "Are you crazy? Why would you do that? What reason would give you the right to force a non- unionized worker to pay union dues?" That is No. 1. The second thing is, knowing that 95 percent of the construction industries, the employer group is excluded from the table but the unions have a position, the Premier's (M r.

Doer) staff have a position, but those who are doing the work, the employer groups, the construction companies that are doing the work, they are not represented at the bargaining table. Mr. Speaker in the Chair Again, I do not understand why it is that we hear political rhetoric from this Premier, from this NDP government. They accuse us of taking an extremist position because we do not agree with non-unionized workers paying union dues.

We agree that the employer groups, that is the construction companies that are going to be responsible for the training, for the workplace and safety of all of their workers, they should have full participation at the bargaining table with the unions and the Floodway Authority. So what we are getting back is that, somehow, that is an extremist position. Well, I have heard many times this Premier talk about that if the members opposite wanted to have a campaign and they wanted to campaign on XYZ, whatever XYZ, whatever sort of suits the flavour of the day for the Premier, he would be happy to do that.

I would say that I would be delighted to campaign in Manitoba against the leader of the New Democratic Party on the basis of whether it is fair to charge non-unionized workers to pay union dues. Is it fair to exclude the employers' groups, those that are responsible for their employees on this construc- tion site, the expansion of the floodway? Is it fair to exclude them from the bargaining table and put them on the sidelines, while the unions and the Floodway Authority are the only people, along with the Premier's staff, that can be at the bargaining table?

I would say that, if the members opposite of the New Democratic Party and the Doer government believe that that is an extreme position, well, then, heaven help the taxpayer of Manitoba what other schemes they might be dreaming up. * (15:20) It was interesting that we were given information that the Trades Council, the union, basically, has already made a proposal to the Doer government saying, "Look, we will provide all the training on this project, and for that service we will charge you 10 percent of the project." Well, this project, as we know it today, is a $660-million expansion project.

That is $660 million that is being paid on behalf of the taxpayers of Manitoba. They are saying, "Well, we will charge you 10 percent." So what they are prepared to do is they are prepared, without any tendering, without any process, basically to flow $66 million of taxpayers' money, $66 million basically to the Trades Council union, without any kind of tendering. The members opposite think that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. What is the problem? I mean, they shrug their shoulders. What is the problem? Well, I think I know what the problem is.

It was absolutely put forward by a member of one of the construction employers groups. I know that members opposite do not want to hear this, but one of the construction companies, when they heard about this, they looked at it and said, "That reminds me a whole lot about what the Liberals are going through with their Adscam issue." They are trying to flow money surreptitiously through the backdoor to their union boss friends. Well, I can tell you that that scheme has got the federal Liberal government into a whole lot of trouble.

I can tell you that if this Doer government insists on trying to exclude the employers' groups from the table, from the negotiating table, and if it tries to force non-unionized workers to pay union dues, and ultimately if it tries to flow $66 million of

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3373 taxpayers money through the backdoor to their union bosses, this Doer government is going to be into a whole lot of trouble. I hope that they do the right thing. We have been asking them on behalf of the employer groups to ensure that they do not force non-unionized workers to pay union dues. Give the employers group a seat, a full-participating seat at the bargaining table and ensure no untendered contracts like the one that they are talking about, flowing $66 million. Put a stop to it. Be open and transparent on behalf of all of the taxpayers of Manitoba.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. * * * Mr. Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify something for the House regarding the list of ministers for concurrence that I tabled in the House earlier today. With regard to the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Melnick), the committee had agreed to set her aside and come back to questioning of her later on. It is our intention that she be placed on the list to follow the minister of highways to continue with questioning. Mr. Speaker: Okay. That is information for the House. We are on grievances.

The honourable Member for Southdale (Mr. Reimer), on a grievance. * * * Mr. Jack Reimer (Southdale): Mr. Speaker, I must say that, you know, rising on a grievance is something that I have not done very often since my time here in the House, but I think that it is very important at this time to bring forth a situation that we have been debating. There has been a lot of discussion in the House in regard to the floodway agreement, because, as an urban member, naturally the floodway is of great concern to the city of Winnipeg.

We have always been in favour and always been supportive of the expansion of the floodway to protect not only Winnipeg, but Manitoba in general into a proper management of the Red River. So to begin on my speech, we are in favour of this expansion. It is the process that we are questioning right now. I guess it goes back to when it was first announced. The government, the Premier came out with one position, the Minister of Water Stewardship (Mr. Ashton) came out with another position. We could see there was a conflict there, but what did they do?

They thought, "Well, we will bring in a mediator and we will bring in Mr. Wally Fox-Decent to give us his opinion and his direction as to how it should be resolved." It is true that Mr. Fox-Decent has been used when we were in government. We used him in various situations. There is a respect and admiration for this gentleman. He does an admirable job in what he is tasked to do, and we have no problem with this individual.

The report itself, I think, did have a fair amount of government influence, because the gentleman reported after the positions of the government were outlined and he was, in a sense, exposed to which way the government was looking and trying to bring forth the Winnipeg floodway project labour agreement. It has pointed out by our leader the fact that we are looking at a very, very large contract to be awarded here in Manitoba, a contract of between $600 and $700 million over the next few years. It is a huge amount of money and a great expenditure of taxpayers' dollars.

And that is the thing: it is taxpayers' dollars that are going to pay for it. This is where the accountability factor has to be brought into the equation. The fact that the contract is so big and the fact that this government is saying that the workers in this project have to be unionized, or if they are not unionized, they have to pay union dues. Now, the words "union du es" are not particularly spelled out in that way, but it is called "service fees," equivalent to union dues that union members have to pay working on the floodway. This, in essence, is what you might call a kickback.

This is a kickback that is going to go back into the union coffers and the union bosses, because of an IOU as an outstanding relationship that this government has with the unions. It is wrong in the sense that it is something that is going to cost the taxpayers of Manitoba extra dollars. I want to read into the record an e-mail that I got from an individual, a constituent of mine that was

3374 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 involved very much and very heavily with the floodway when it was first built back in 1960. This Premier stands on record, lauding the efforts of former Premier Duff Roblin in getting it done, the way that he did it and the tremendous impact that it has had on the city of Winnipeg, and the billions, literally billions, of dollars that have been saved because of the vision of Premier Duff Roblin at that time. He often goes back to using Duff Roblin. Duff Roblin built a ditch and he is going to expand it. Why are you criticizing what he did?

I want to read into the record an e-mail that I got recently. It was sent to my leader and to the president of the heavy construction industry, and to myself. "Gentlemen, I am one of the first three employ- ees involved in the cons truction of the floodway from 1960 to 1968, as well as one of the only two superintendents during that construction. I personally supervised all construction from St. Mary's Road to Highway 15 and numerous contracts from Highway 15 to Lockport.

I can advise you that no contractors were operating under union regulations and there were no labour problems during the period of construction that came to my attention." This is from one of the superintendents that worked that whole project from 1960 to 1968. The Premier stands up here and he says he wants labour peace and he wants harmony, and he does not want any lockouts. He does not want any strikes during this construction period. He just has to look back to the expansion of the floodway from '60 to '68, and there was no such thing, and there was no union- exclusive contract at that time.

This, what the Premier is bringing forth now, is a sweetheart deal. It is a kickback, in a sense, to the union bosses and that. It smacks a lot of what we have gone through in the last little while when we look at the federal scheme and we see the ad scam problems that the present Liberal government or Liberal Party went through with their handling of public dollars. The people of Manitoba are going to see and they are going to recognize this is of the same nature. It is something that has been brought forth in huge dollars. In the federal ad scam situation, we are talking about $100 million.

That is for all of Canada, where you have 30 million people. Here in Manitoba, where we have just over a million people, we are talking almost $60 million to $70 million possibly that is going to be used in this, that is going to cost the taxpayers extra money because of the exclusiveness in this contract. In the agreement that was adopted by the government, to the Minister of Water Stewardship (Mr.

Ashton) and to this government, there is the exact, as I was mentioning, one of the clauses is that non-union workers will pay an equivalent service fee in a fund managed by independent third party within the Floodway Authority. Well, we do not know who this third party is. We do not know who this individual party or individual is that is going to be managing this fund.

You have to ask the question: If you are negotiating a contract, the contract is negotiated at the beginning of the project. * (15:30) Once that negotiation is finished and the contract begins, there is no need for any more consultation or fee to be paid, but during the rest of that contract of the building of the floodway, the fees will continue to be rolling in and rolling in and rolling in. You have to ask for what purpose. Why would all that extra money have to keep coming into this third-party slush fund, if you want to call it? We do not know where that money is really going.

We do not know who is going to be managing this money. But it is upwards of $60 million to 70 million that we are talking that is going in. No labour agreement is going to have service fees or service charges of $60 million to administer. This just does not sound reasonable, but the government is going to go ahead with this because we know where that money is going to end up. That money is going to end up somewhere back into the system for kickbacks asso ciated between the party and the NDP, I mean, the NDP and the union bosses.

So this smacks of a lot of questions that have not been answered, and this is one of the reasons why we are opposed to this agreement. You have 95 percent of the workers in this project that are non-unionized. They have made a choice. They made a choice that they do not want to be unionized. I know that this government took away the choice, the vote to join unions. Now they are giving the opportunity or the exposure for the possible union recruitment during this six years for members on this project.

June 10, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3375 What you are going to see happening with these companies is they are going to set up two different companies. They are going to set up a company that is going to operate here in Manitoba and they are going to have another company operating some- where else under the same, you know, because of the restrictive nature that this government is going to put on for the formation of this project. They are going to look at ways to get around it. This is not good for the economy of Manitoba.

It does not help the people of Manitoba in job security or for job growth because there is that type of uncertainty within business, and the one thing that business operates best in is a certain stability, a climate where they can do their business. If there is disruption, if there is the ability that they are going to not be working in a cohesive manner, they are going to move somewhere else, and they will.

So we have to be very, very careful when we say that, you know, when you are looking at industry that is 95 percent non-union that is going to be all of a sudden having to pay these so-called service fees, equivalent to union dues, it is going to be managed by a third party where we do not know who is going to be looking after this money. We do not know what the composition of this third party is, even who, whether it is one person or a committee that is going to be looking after this money.

But it is a tremendous amount of money that is going to be just flowing in there, just like the casinos and the kenos that this government over on the other side loves to expand on. So it is a money- making machine, in a sense, for certain individuals with this contract. The other thing is, Mr. Speaker, the principals in this contract, the people th at represent the non-union workers, the people that are the employers of these individuals do not even have a place at the table. They do not even have a place at the negotiation table to be part of the decision-making. They have been totally left out of the loop.

It is inconceivable where you have an industry that is 95 percent non-unionized not having the ability to even be part of the negotiation table or a negotiation package that has been put forth between this government and the principals in regard to the floodway. It is handled willy-nilly. The Premier (Mr. Doer) stands up and says, "Let us go ahead; let us build this floodway." We agree. We are not saying that we do not want the floodway expanded, but at the same time there has to be an accountability. It is a huge amount of money, a huge amount of money that is going to be on the table.

The concern and the direction of that flow of money is what we are very, very concerned about. I refe rred back to that letter, that e-mail that I got from one of my constituents, that said it was built without labour disruption. There were no labour regulation agreements at that time under the first floodway agreement. It went very well. It was recognized that it was a tremendous achievement. It can happen again. It can build up a lot of harmony within the construction industry here in Manitoba. This is something that we should be heralding as a good initiative by industry and by the government to go.

So this is something that I think that we all have to be in favour of, but not the way it has been outlined here and not the way it has been proceeded with by this government. They got caught between two ministers in statements that were made between the First Minister and the Minister of Water Stewardship (Mr. Ashton). They brought in an indi- vidual to make recommendations that they have now brought forth. It sets in motion a system that is going to generate a huge amount of money that is going to flow through the public coffers by the extra costs of memberships and dues.

The involvement of a third party to manage this money, who it is, we do not know. What the composition is, we do not know. How it will be disbursed, we do not know. What kind of benefits will come about, we do not know. There are too many questions that still remain unanswered. That is one of the reasons why I agree with today and with those comments I will sit down. Thank you very much. ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): In Room 254, if we would continue concurrence. Sorry, 255. We will continue

3376 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 10, 2004 concurrence there and in th e House. Mr. Speaker, if you would call the third reading in concurrence of the following bills: 39, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 50 and 53. I understand that the Committees Branch has issued a list of the bills coming from committee last night for the convenience of members along with the number and the title. Mr. Speaker: First of all, I want to enforce Rule 23.5. The Committee of Supply will meet in Room 255. Mr. Deputy Speaker, would you take the Chair in Room 255.

CONCURRENCE AND THIRD READINGS * (15:40) Bill 39–The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Deputy Premier (Ms. Wowchuk), that Bill 39, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Government House Leader, seconded by the honourable Minister for Agriculture and Food (Ms.

Wowchuk), that Bill 39, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Mr. Leonard Derkach (Officia

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	38-2-53b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	38th 2nd hansardpdf 53b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	479a76171a02dd997db4cb156c991090a5681119

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