Manitoba Hansard — 27 January 1992 (Sitting 10A, 35th Legislature, 3rd Session)

35-3-10a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Third Session -Thirty-Fifth Leg islature otthe Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 39-40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis c. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLI No.10A -1:30 p.m., MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17,1992 Printed by the Office of the 0.-.s Printer, Province of M""ltoba ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thlrty·Fifth Leg islature Members, Constit uencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Ciif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayt on, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage Ia Prairie Ste .

Rose Seine River Roblin- Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthu r- Virden Ste inbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Asslnlboia River East Rossmere Pembina Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Flin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River PARTY.

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

396 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, Fe bruary 17,1992 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDING S Point of Order Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I rise to advise you and members of the House that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) will be absent from the House today. As you know, the Premier puts the highest priority on the atte ndance in this House, particularly on this day as we resume this session of the Legislat ure. He has asked me to convey that it was only the most extraordinary circumstances that prevented his attendance today.

Unfortunate ly, the Premier underwent surgery on Saturday, February 15 , 1992, at the Vancouver General Hospital to repair a broken ankle sustained in an accidental fall. Because of the seriousness of the injury, the Premier is being detained at the Vancouver General Hospital , where he is resting comfortably. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the honourable acting Premier. The honourable member does not have a point of order. I would like to thank the honourable acting First Minister for bringing that to the atte ntion of the House.

I am sure I speak on behalf of all honourable members when we wish the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon) a speedy recovery. PRESENTING PETITIONS Mr. Oscar Lathlln (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of The Pas Health Complex Incorporated praying for the passing of

an act to amend The Pas Health Complex Incorporation Act . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Mr. Leonard Evans (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Second Report of the Committee on Public Accounts. Mr. Clerk {William Remnant): Your Standing Comm ittee on Public Accounts presents the following as its Second Report.

Your committee met on Tuesday, December 17 , 1991 , at 10 a.m. in Room 254 of the Legislative Building and Monday, January 27, 1992, at 2 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider the Provincial Auditor's Report and Volumes 1 and 2 of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ended March 31 , 19 91 . At the December 17 , 19 91 , meeting, your committee also considered the Special Audit of the Provincial Auditor on the Taxation Division of the Department of Finance. On January 27, 19 92, your committee accepted the resignations of Mrs. Render and Messrs. Rose and Carr, and el ected Messrs.

Connery, Laurendeau and Lamoureux to replace th em. Your committee received all information desired by any member from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Man ness), staff from the Department of Finance, Mr. Fred Jackson, Provincial Auditor, Ms. Carol Bellringer, Assistant Provincial Auditor, Mr. Stan Puchniak, Assistant Deputy Minister, Taxation Division, and from Mr. Eric Rosenhek, Provincial Comptroller. lnformation was provided with respect to the receipts, expenditures and other matters pertaining to the business of the province.

The fullest opportunity was accorded to all members of the comm ittee to examine vouchers or any documents called for, and no restricti on was placed upon the line of examination. Your committee finds that the receipts and expenditures of the monies have been carefully set forth and all monies accounted for. Your committee has considered the Provincial Auditor's Report and Volumes 1 and 2 of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1991 , and has adopted the same as presented.

Your committee also reports that it has considered matters relating to the Special Audit of the Taxation Division of the Department of Finance. * (1 335)

397 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 Mr. Leonard Evans: I move, seconded by the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman), that the report of the comm ittee be received. Motion agreed to. TABUNG OF REPORTS Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister responsible for and charged with the administration of The Civil Service Act) : I would like to table the Annual Report of the Civil Service Commission for 1990-91 . Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for the year 1990-91 of The Clean Environment Commission. Mr.

Speaker: I am pleased to table the Annual Report on the Elections Finances Act covering the period January 1, 1990, to December 31 , 19 90. Announcement Mr. Speaker: I must inform the House that James Gordon Carr, the honourabl e member for Crescentwood, resigned his seat in the House effective January 27, 1992 . I am therefore tab ling his resignation and my letter to the Lieutenant-Gov ernor-in-Council advising th e vacancy thus created in the membership of the House. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 24-- The Post-Adoption Registry Act Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs {Leader of the Second Opposition): I move, seconded by the honourable member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema), that Bill 24, The Post-Adoption Registry Act;

Loi sur le Bureau d'enregistr ement postadoption , be introduced and that the same be now received and be read a first ti me. Motion presented . Mrs. Carstalrs: The purpose of this bill is really quite simple . The Post-Adoption Act that we presently have in the province of Manitoba has legislative limitation s. One of those limita tions is tha t it does not permit those who have been adopted to make contact with siblings who have also been adopted.

They can be given access to records of siblings who are still with their birth parents; however, they cannot be given access at the present moment to those siblings who have also been adopted. This would give them the opportunity to also be in touch with those of the same birt h parents but who, in fact, have been adopted. Motion agreed to. Bill 32- The Immigration Consultants Registry Act Mr. Kevin Lamoureux {Inkster) : I move, seconded by the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), that Bill 32, The Immigration Consultants Registry Act;

Loi sur !'inscription des conseillers en immigrati on, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, it was just under a year ago where we had seen an excellent example of how immigrants or would-be immigrants are exploited, and we believe that this bill is a positive step that, if the government chose to adopt it, would go a long way in sending a very strong message to would-be immigration consultants that Manitoba will not tole rate the explo itation of imm igrants, something that is long overdue. Motion agreed to.

BIII31-The Municipal Amendment Act Mr. Nell Gaudry {St. BonHace): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. James (Mr. Edwards), that Bill 31 , The Municipal Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les municipalites, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Gaudry: Mr. Speaker, this bill corrects a serious flaw which was inserted into The Municipal Act in the last session. This bill will delete the word "consecutive," making the residence requirement for eligibilit y for elected office in summer resort municipalities two months in any year.

As a result of the government's addition, which brought the residency requirement to two cons ecutive months , only 8 percent of the population of Vict oria Beach are eligible to run for municipal office, while most taxes are collected from those disqualified. In the interest of basic democratic principle, this flaw must be corrected, as this bill will do.

February 17, 1992 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 398 Motion agreed to • • (1 340) B11116- The Health Care Directives Act Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for River Heights (Mrs. Carstairs), that Bill 16 , The Health Care Directives Act (loi sur les directives en matiere de soins de sant e), be introduced and that the same be now received and read for the first time. Motion presented. Mr. Cheema: Mr.

Speaker, this bill, so-called living will, will legalize the wishes of a dying person made while competent and will give effect to the pati ent's right to self-det ermination and right to refuse care. This bill is based on the recommendation from the Manitoba law Reform Commission, and it will provide a mechanism to enforce the rights of pati ents when they are no longer competent to speak for themselves. Thank you. Motion agreed to. Bill 30-The City of Winnipeg Amendment Act Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Osborne (Mr.

Alcock) , that Bill 30 , The City of Winn ipeg Amendment Act; loi modifiant Ia

loi sur Ia Ville de Winnipeg, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Edwards : This bill will re-establish the Winn ipeg Police Comm ission, whi ch was dismantled by City Council in 1986 because of reduced responsibilities or perceived reduced responsibilities of that commission. It will help the Winnipeg police force, reaffirm its integrity in its crucial mission in the community after a very difficult period in its history. This bill, as I have said, will re-est ablish the police commission.

By establishing it in statute , the commission will be mandatory and, it is our hope and our submission, will help secure the respect of the police force, not just for the community but for the police force itself. This is a commission whose day has come again, Mr. Speaker. I recommend it to all members of the House for speedy passage. Motion agreed to. • (1 345) Bill 23-The Private Training Accountability Act Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), that Bill 23, The Private Trainin g Accountability Act;

loi sur · !'obligation redditionnelle en matiere de formation privee, be introduced and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mrs. Carstalrs: I think we are all, in this House, in agreement that training opportunities must be made more and more available to not only our young people but people who fin d themselves unemployed. Unfortunate ly, we are putting more and more money into training programs, but there is no adequate mechanism for adjudicating those programs.

We do not have criteria which is clearly enunciated for funding, we do not have standards for curriculum, and we do not have a system for reporting the expenditures, nor do we have a follow-u p. This bill will provide the wherewithal by which young people who are trained will know that they are adequately trai ned, and the government will know that their money has been spent to a good endeavour. Motion agreed to. BIII17-The Patient Records Access and Confidentiality Act Mr. Guizar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. James (Mr.

Edwards), that Bill 17 , The Patient Records Access and Confidentiality Act;

loi sur l'acces aux dossiers des malades et leur confidentialite, be introduced and that the same be now received and read for the first time. Motion presented. Mr. Cheema: This bill will entrench the right of all patients to access their medical records, a matter which is st ill in dispute in Manitoba's health care system, and which is one of the sources of great tension for many health care consumers. This bill will also guarantee confidentiality of medical records prohibiting disclosure that would identify the patient

399 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 except with his or her permission. We must ensure that Manitobans are empowered and informed so that they are able to make a decision about their own health care. This bill will help to accomplish that. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Gue sts Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questi ons, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afte rnoon from the Roseau Valley School, thirty-five Grades 9 and 11 students. They are under the direction of Mr. Richard Maslanka.

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member fo r Emerson (Mr. Penner). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afte rnoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Go ods and Services Tax Harmonization Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, we on this side would like to pass on our comments to the Premier (Mr. Filmon), pass on our regards for a healthy recovery and successful operation that is taking place today in Vancouver. Mr.

Speaker, in the last provincial election, we were told very clearly that there would not be a harmonization of the GST and the PST in the province of Manitoba. In fact, the Premier stated in an all-party debate that we do not believe in taxing children's clothing, we do not believe in taxing music lessons.

In the last budget, the government stated it was going to study the issue of harmonization with the GST and PST, then it promised us it was going to release the results of that study, but then after the Saskatchewan election, the Premier announced again he was not open to having the harmonizatio n of the GST and the PST. Well, lo and behold again, Mr. Speaker, we have anot hersituati onwiththe First Ministers' Conference last week. The Premier again has announced that the Province of Manitoba is considering the option of the harmonization of the GST and the PST.

I would ask the Minister of Finance very directly: Are they considering the harmonization of the GST with the PST in the province of Manitoba, yes or no? Hon. Clayton Man ness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Opposition has his chronology fairly accurate. let me say that certainly the full report was not provided of what it was the Premier (Mr. Film on) was responding to in question . let me indicate very specifically to the question. The government at this point in time is not reviewing harmonization.

It has not since the Premier announced, I believe, almost a year ago now that-not a year ago, let us say, eight months ago, tha t we were no t actively considerin g harmonization. That was restated before we rose last session; it was restated agai n last fall. The government, at this point in time, is not acti vely considering harmonization. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, during the last budget, after the government said in the last election that it was not considering harmonizing the GST and the PST at this particular time, in the last budget that the Minister of Finance tabled, he stated that he is having his officials caref ully study the full implications of harmonizing the sales tax. Surely the government agrees that it is the public's right to know what is in those stu dies that of course have been paid for by taxpayers' money, in the studies that have been implemented by the Minister of Finance in his own budget.

Given the government has the results of the implications ofthe study on the harmonization of the GSTwith the PST, will the Minis ter of Finance agree today to table that study in the legisla ture so that the debate in the province can be full and accurate with all the facts that the government has produced before us for this debate? * (1 350) Mr. Manness Mr. Speaker, we said we would study the issue. We did not say that there would be a study as such prepared. Oh, the re is a big difference, and I can say in all honesty th at we studied the issue in great detail.

Again, what was reflected was this, and I have spelled this out for the Member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) on several occasions. Again I will recite for the record, namely, this:

Whereas the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) seems to think there is hundreds of millions of dollars available, if indeed we are to harmonize, I am here standing, saying that, if the government were to harmonize, if the government were to now apply the provincial sales tax to services and were to adopt the tax credit

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 400 system in place by the federal government, there would be basically a net wash to the province. There would be no additional revenues whatsoever, Mr. Speaker. That is what I have said over and over again. That is what I stand here and say today, but more import antly, to answer the question for the member, harmonization is not under active consideration today, and indeed I would expect it will not be under consideration tomorrow either. Mr. Doer: I guess that begs the question: What about the day after ?

We have had four different positions from the government to date, and that is only over the last 18 months. Impact Manufacturing Industry Mr. Gary Doer (Leader ofthe OpposHion): Finally, the government has stated, the Premier (Mr. Film on) stated in this Chamber last year, that the federal Conservative GST would have a positive impact on the manufacturing sector in this province.

Many of us who have talked to people working the manufacturing sector think that the Premier is all wrong on this issue, and given the fact that the Minister of Finance has these studies and has these reports, and giv en that the Manufac turing Association of Canada has produced numbers to show the decline of manufacturing shipments is 13 percent in Manitoba, the largest decline of any province, will the Mi nister of Finance agree today to table all these st udies that he has of the various sectors that he has on the GST and PST, the various studies he has on the effect of the GST period in Manitoba, and all these other issues such as changes in the credits, et cetera, that he obviously has at his fingertips but is not available to the people of Manitoba?

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, let me make it plain for anybody who wants to hear. The GST is not a provincial tax. It is a federal tax . The studies associated with the Impact on the provincial economy with the implementation of the GST in January of 1991 , indeed the expectation of negative impact, was in the realm of one and a half percent. Those were not our numbers; those were the federal government's. There were only two models to try and predict those . Those were the Conference Board of Canada and the internal model of the Department of Finance. That was their est imate.

Nobody, there is not a province in Canada that has the modelling capacity, on their behalf at least, to estimate the im pact of the GST. Mr. Speaker, I fully believe that was the negative impact on our province. It represented several hundreds of millions of dollars, and indeed that is one of the reasons that the Province of Manitoba chose not to harmonize with the federal GST. Mr. Doer: A little reminiscent of the comments of the Minister of Finance without the studies of Michael Wilson when he said that the GSTwould be revenue neutral. Economic Gr owth Employment Creation Strategy Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the OpposHion): I have a new question to the Minister of Finance. We have had the largest increase in the unemployment rate of any province In Canada in the last statistics that were released by Statistics Canada. There are now 57,000 people on the unemployment lines of Manitoba, the highest number since we have been maintaining statistics in this province- the highest number of people. Mr. Speaker, last year the Premier said and the government said very boldly that they would step aside and let the priv ate sector be the engine of the Manitoba economy.

They would step aside and let the real creators of jobs do their work. Unfortunate ly, that single-engine strate gy has been a failure in the province of Manitoba, and this Minister of Finance's predictions on unemployment rates have not been accurate for one month on any given month since he has tabled his budget last year in this Chamber. My question to the Minister of Finance is: What action is his government going to take to get people working again and get people off the welfare lines of Manitoba? * (1 355) Hon.

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): I find it interesting that the Leader of the NDP in Manitoba would ask that question. Mr. Speaker, first of all, and I remind him that Ontario lost a quarter of a million jobs in 1991 in the space of two quarters, but more important, I listened very caref ully -no doubt the Leader of the Opposition did too-to First Ministers last week at the First Ministers' Conference.

401 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA February 17, 1992 What I could not help but detect was that every NDP provincial Premier said in essence that they did not believe in mindless make-work projects that could destroy the confidence if badly placed. At least Premier Rae, Premier Harcourt, and also Premier Romanow-a ll of them said that. Also, they said that every NDP government said the fight on deficit control and reduction must be maintained.

I am interested to know whether or not the Leader of the NDP party in Manitoba subscribes to those views of the NDP Premiers in Canada, because they were very forceful in their understanding that the deficit had to be contro lled, that throwing money at make-work projects in themselves was misspent money, indeed, similar to what the Jobs Fund did in this province years before. That was found wanting ; that was found a total waste of money. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, I also note that the Premier talked about keeping out the partisan rhetoric around the table, and we must work today, we must start today, Canadians had their fill of hopeful rhetoric. Well, Manitobans have had their fill of hopeful rhetoric from this government over the last 18 months. We have always called on the capital investment in the province of Manitoba and needed capital works projects to go ahead in the time of a recession. This government reduced capital expenditure from the pre-election period of time to last year's budget.

They put thousands of people out of work with their ideological cutbacks, and all they did was move those costs into welfare lines. That is what they did in last year's budget. I would ask the Minister of Finance: Is the government going to stick with its ideologically extreme policies of just st epping aside during the time of the recession, or is this government going to work in partnership with people to get people working again and get our economy moving again in the province of Manitoba? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, the member's facts are wrong; they are in error.

If he wants to compare capital spending in Manitoba vis-a-vis any ot her province in Canada over the last three or four years, budget over budget, he will see that there has only basically been one government that has maintained the level of capital spending. In Highways, last year, we increased capital spending from $1 02 million to $106 million; in Government Services, we maintained capital spending ; In Housing, we maintained capital spending; In Health we increased capital spending signi ficantly; in Education we also maintained capital spending. Mr.

Speaker, we, as one province in this nation , have done something that is most difficult to do during a time of restraint, and that is to maintain the level of capital expenditure. We are proud of that , because when one looks around at how the other provinces, particularly NDP provinces, will be addressing their deficit over the years to come, one will notice that the first attack, the first line to be attac ked, is the capital side. That has not happened in this province, and it will not happen in the next budget either. Mr.

Doer: I refer the Minister of Finance to the two budgets he has tabled over the last two years in the Chamb er. The facts speak very clearly for themselves. • {1400) Budget Employment Creation Strategy Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question again is to the Minister of Finance. Winnipeg, according to the Canadian Council on Social Development, has had the highest increase in social assistance of any other major city In Canada-a 51 percent increase in the last 12-month period, Mr. Speaker. That is higher than Toront o. That is higher than Ott awa. It is higher than Edmonton.

It is higher than Vancouver. It is higher than Halifax. It is higher than even places like Saskatoon and Montreal that are 13 percent and 14 percent. Mr. Speaker, this Minister of Finance had to find another $25 million for social assistance because of the abso l utely disastrous policies of the Conse rvative government in Ottawa and the Conservative government in Manitoba, where we have people going from work to welfare under Tory ideological economic policies. I would ask this Ministe r of Finance: Has he seen the wisdom of his ways to be failing?

Will he have a much better budget to keep people working rather than having the highest increase in welfare of anyplace In Canada as he had with his last year's budget in the province of Manitoba?

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 402 Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Well, Mr. Speaker, I am reminded that a significant reason for that incr ease, of course, was the increased benefits that we have provided as compared to other provinces. A significant reason and portion of that increase is the benefits. Certainly the volume increase is significant in it self. Let me point out that we have provided extr emely significant increases in benefits also through that period of time, Mr. Speaker. Let me also point out that our base was a little bit lower vis-a-vis ot her provinces.

I can indicate to the member that I had an opportunity to talk with my count erpart, the Minister of Finance from Saskatchewan, just last week. He was complaining, indeed, that the very same impact with respect to their social assistance roles was also occurring in Saskatchewan. He too did not know how he was going to deal with it from a funding point of view. Mr. Speaker, the matter that the member brings forward certainly is not isolated to Manitoba. It is something that is occurring in other parts of our country. Go ods and Services Tax Harmonization Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Deputy Premier. The position of this government on harmonization is about as clear as mud. It reminds me of the old song: first you say you will and then you won't. Mr. Speaker, we had the Premier of this province say on February 12 , we will have to consider it. We had the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism on the 14th of February say, well, Mr. Mazankowski asked us to look at it, so we have an obligation to do so. Well, when did they start their review and when did they finish their review, if he is in fact going to defend his Minister of Finance? Hon.

James Downey (Deputy Premier): Mr. Speaker, I think the Minister of Finance, in his comments, has answered the question which has been put by the member of the New Democratic Party. Our position has not changed, as has been indicated by the Minister of Finance. Goods and Services Tax Harmonization Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, would the Deputy Premier like to tell us if he has told the Premier of the province that the government backbenchers and cabinet ministers assembled have changed their minds? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, I will try and make it very clear for the Leader of the Liberal Party, who has great difficulty-very difficult. I received a request from the federal government, over the signature of the Deputy Prime Minister, asking our province-a nd I believe the letter went out to all other provinces- to consider a method of harmonization, not the traditional harmonization, where we were going to apply provincial sales tax in harmony across all goods and all services, but indeed one small element to try and deal with a very real problem in this country. It is called cross-border shopping.

It is impacting the constituents and indeed the businesses of each and every one of us in this House. lt would come as not a great revelation to you, Mr. Speaker, that this was an issue that was discussed at the First Ministers' Conference. The federal government sent to us a letter asking us to consider a proposal that might deal with this problem. It was on that wish of the federal government, indeed of the provinces, to try and deal with this that the Premier made a comment dealing with harmonization.

That should not be confused with the harmonization issue that was discussed in this House, in this province and all across Canada a year ago, not in the least-not in the least. We are talking about a very serious matter to our businesses and indeed our constituents, and that is cross-border shoppi ng. I think the members opposite , if they wanted to do justice on a public policy issue, with respect to that issue, could try and shed more light rat her than more darkness on that particular issue. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr.

Speaker, for fur th er clarification, has the Minister of Finance now written to the Deputy Prime Minister and to the Minister of Revenue, Mr. Jelinek, and informed them that there will not be under any circumstances harmonization of the PST and the GST in the province of Manitoba?

403 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I do not have to write that letter. I will be writing a lette r. I met with my officials this morning, but I do not need to write tha t lette r, because that was not what was requested by Mr. Mazankowski. He never did request that. Tota l harmonization, goods and services, was not requested by the federal government. They know that is a nonstarter. They were told by First Ministers that that was a nonstarter across this country. The request that came forward from Mr. Mazankowski did not even ask for that.

It asked to consider whether or not there was a willingness to take the good side of the goods and services tax and apply the provincial sales tax at the border. The members can try and muddy it up to make it appear like the provincial gove rnment is harmonizing, but I am here standing to tell you that is not the case. We will not be harmonizing the goods and services tax. Free Trade Agree ment Abrogation Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Deputy First Minister.

Manitobans lis tene d with in terest to the comments from the Finance minister about the need to control the deficit, about the concern for the 57,000 people who are unemployed. Manitobans want more than concern. They want a government that is prepared to act on their behalf. Since 1989, this government has supported the Free Trade Agreement, an agreement which has cost Canada some 435,000 jobs, which has reduced manufacturing jobs in every sector. Stati st ics Cana da repor ts that every sector-Pnter jection] Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Storl e: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Deputy Premier (Mr.

Downey) is: Will the government now take a stand which opposes the Free Trade Agreement, take a stand which would see Canada get out, abrogate the Free Trade Agreement so that we can re-esta blish a manufacturing base in the province, employ people and create wealth or revenues, so that we can have revenue for the government to conduct its programs? Hon. James Downey {Deputy Premier): I am not going to in any way accept the information which the member for Flin Aon (Mr. Storie) puts on the table or puts before this Legislature, Mr. Speaker.

There have been times when it has been less than accurate, where it has come from. Let me as well say that there are a number of things that one could point to that have caused difficulties in the economy. Number one, Mr. Speaker, we are facing an international and national recession which is impacting on everyone. If the member for Flin Ron does not see that, then I think he should come alive to the greater happenings that are taking place in all of Canada.

It should be pointed out as well that, within the manufacturing sector In Manitoba, we have basically maintained the level of employment at some 54,000 this January over last January, Mr. Speaker. The information we have is contrary to what the member is putting before the Legislature. North American F ree Trade Agree ment Manitoba Conditions Mr. Jerry Storie {FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, I think Canadians and Manitobans realize that the problems that we have created for our economy are going to be compounded if we join the North American free trade agreement.

My question is to the minister responsible for Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stef anson). Given that on July 16 , 1991 , the government tabled a set of conditions which would have to be met before we agreed to enter the negotiations with Mexico and the United Sta tes, can the minister indicate today which of these six conditions have been met, whether in fact he has had any meetings with the federal negotiators to show- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. * (14 10 ) Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): The honourable member is correct that we opposed a North American free trade agreement unless the six fundamental conditi ons are met. We have no clear indication on some of them. To date there is progress being made in two fundamental areas, the review of labour standards and the review of environmental standards, but the federal government clearly knows our position as a province. It has been made clear back in July of '91 and in federal-provincial ministerial meetings ever since, and we will conti nue to stand by that positi on, Mr. Speaker.

February 17, 1992 LE GISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 404 Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, will the minister do two things? Will the minister please indicate to this House which of the studies and reports from the federal government he is prepared to table today, and will he guarantee the people of Manitoba, if the six conditions are not met, Manitoba will not now, nor will it ever, support a free trade agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada? Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, I think we have made that position perfectly clear in this House back in July when we introduced it, and we have done it consiste ntly.

We have said we do not support a North American free trade agreement unless those six very important conditions are met. I have to indicate to you that, as a result of our posit ion, it certainly sti mulated some support and interest from other provinces across Canada in te rms of recognizing those very important concerns. That is our position . We have said it on many occasions, and our position has not changed. GATT Negotiations Supply Management Proposal Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): This Minister of Agricul ture 's agenda is gradually becoming increasingly clear, much to the alarm of many producers in Manitoba.

On Janu ary 26, M r. Speaker, he publicly proposed that the method of payment of the Crow be changed to appease other countries at GATT, and he did that on the Manitoba farm news on MTN. On February 6, at the ministerial meetings, he refused to unconditionally support the retention of supply management at GATT, along with his counterpart from Alberta. The only two Conservative Ministers of Agriculture refused to unconditionally support supply management.

I ask this minister: Will he now stand up for Manitoba farmers by saying that the tariffication proposal that in cludes our supply managed com modities and does no t in clude the str engthening of

Article 11 is unacceptable to Manitoba and should be rejected by the Mulroney Conservatives? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, the member put about six questions on the agenda for this afternoon. I would like to first off tell the member that he is categorically wrong when he says that I refused unconditionally to support supply management. I want the member to clearly understand the complexity of agriculture in Manitoba.

Wheat makes up 28 percent of cash receipts at the farm gate ; cattle 16 percent; hogs 12 percent; supply management 11 percent; oilseeds 9 percent; coarse grain 6 percent. Because of the international trade war, the grains, oilseeds and red meat sector have been severely hurt in the province of Manitoba.

As a result, about two years ago we as a Province of Manitoba took a position that at the GATT round of negotiations, which were clearly needed to help relieve the impact of the grain trade war on the grain and oilseed producers, that we would take a balanced position to the table that all trade distorting subsidies must be reduced, or elimi nated preferably, and that we must clarify and strengthen

Article 11. That is the position that Manitoba took two years ago. It was the position taken by the federal Trade minister to the GA TTt able.lt is the position we stand behind today, Mr. Speaker, as the Province of Manitoba, a balanced position supporting all producers of Manitoba and not throwing any producers out of the window in terms of supporting them at the GATT round of negotiatio ns. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, the minister is all over the map on this issue, trying to skate through.

I want to table a copy of the proposal and the agreement that was signed by all of the Ministers of Agriculture, with the exception of Alberta and this minister from Manitoba, that this minister refused to support. I want to ask this ministe r if he is saying by refusing to sign this document that in fact he is admitting that he wants to destroy the supply managed farms in this province, because that is exactly what will happen if the tariffication proposal is accepted. Is he for that tariffica tion proposal or against it as it is constituted now? Mr. Findlay: Mr.

Speaker, that member continually tries to misinterpret what is going on. That declaration that he refers to, as I said in my previous answer, did not relate to the balanced position that we take as a Province of Manitoba. The declaration was in support of Canadian supply management programs only, and I want to read for the member the statement from all Ministers of Agriculture in the country of Canada, ten provincial ministers and one federal minister, that the ministers are encouraged by the posit ive opportunities for Canada's grain and oilseed producers, the red meat

405 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 sector, agribusiness, but expressed the importance of protecting the supply management system which currently su pports the dairy, egg and poultry sectors. All ministers underlined the critical need to work together with industry in foste ring Canada's balanced position and received assurance from the federal government that every effort we undertake to achieve a successful conclusion to the GATT negotiations, Mr. Speaker. All ministers support the balanced position; all ministers supported this communique, which is a position that Manitoba put forward. Mr.

Plohman: Will this minister come clean and tell this House whether in fact this balanced approach that he talks about includes the clarificati on proposal that is currently on- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Hon. Clayton Manness {Government House Leader):Just because the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) got the hide beat off him in the response by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Rndlay), I would ask him to follow the rules of the House and as you said, Mr. Speaker, before Christm as, there was no need, indeed it is against the rules, for

preamble again on a supplementary. Mr. Steve Ashton {Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I realize it is our first day back and that there may be some extra give-and-take which is above and beyond the rules, but I do believe, if the Finance Minister had been listening, the state ments that were made by the member for Dauphin were in response to what perhaps I should have raised on parliamentary language a few moments ago when the minister attempted to suggest that the member was deliberately trying to mislead this House. ln fact, the member for Dauphin has been placing the facts in the House, and it is the minister who is trying to debate the indefensible act ions of this government. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised, I would ask the member for Dauphin to kindly put your question now please. *** Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, I know the minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) was troubled by their positi on- Mr. Speaker: Questi on, please. Mr. Plohman: Is this ministe r's so-called balanced position inclusive of the tariffication proposal that is currently at the GATT talks at this time, and in the absence of the strengt hening of

Article 11 , is that the balanced position tha t this min iste r is support ing? Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, what we have in front of us internationally is a Dunkel proposal, simply a proposal, a text for furth er discussion. We are not totally satisfied with the reduction in trade-distorting subsidies, but we think it is a better than no deal. In the interest of the other side of the issue with regard to

Article 11 - Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, if the member would let me finish, as we go to the table, we are saying the reduction in tr ade-distorti ng subsidies is barely adequate. On the other side of the question with regard to

Article 11 , although Dunkel did not mention

Article 11 , we believe that Arti cle 11 must be strengthened and clarified, and clarification would mean allowing us to continue to operate supply and management in the count ry because it does not create trade-distorting subsidies, so that is the argument we take to the table. It is two-pronged: stay with the trade-distorting subsidy reduction, and continue to work for clarification of st rengthening the

Article 11 because it is not trade distorted, and that is Canada's posit ion. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) and the honourable Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay), you have had ample opportunity to put your question and get your answers. Now there are other members here who are going to ask their questi on. Budget Employment Retraining Programs Mr. Reg Alcock (Osbor ne): Mr.

Speaker, watched the Rrst Ministers' Conference on the economy with some interest last week, and I was pleased to see the First Minister calling for an enhance ment of the training and retr ain ing programs in this country. I think it is a positive step and one that is long overdue. It is one that we should

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 406 have begun in this province a couple of years ago, but I am wondering how it squares with a provincial budget proposed by this Finance Minister that cut comm unity colleges by 6.6 percent, cut Post-secondary Career Development and Continuing Ed by 11.6 percent, and Special Skills Training by 13.7 percent. How does a $4-m illion cut in retraining square with the nice words that were stated earlier or last week, the Minister of Finance? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, one thing First Ministers did agree upon, if not publicly, certainly privately, was that every government program needed to be re-evaluated, that indeed for the best money spent, taxpayer dollars spent and indeed the return for it, every government program needed to be evaluated and certainly Education and Training did also. In last year's budget, we took a look at the programming being offered within our community colleges, and we sensed that there should be evaluations and reviews being done and changes made. That was done.

This year's budget will now reintroduce a new degree of funding in post -secondary education toward the aims and objectives. Mr. Speaker, some t imes, unfor tu nate ly, government has to make difficult decisions. Sometimes they have to undo the former activity to rebuild. That is what we have done over the course of last year's budget and the budget that we will be bringing down in March. * (1 420) Community Colleges Enrollment Mr. Reg Alcock {Osborne): Mr. Speaker, people are out of jobs today. This year is when they need those opportunities.

When they cannot find work, they need a chance to skill build, and they are being denied it. There has been a 7.9 percent decrease in enrollment at Red River Community College and at least 200 students less at Assiniboine Community College. Is the Minister of Finance committing today to see that those positions, those opportunities, are reinstat ed? Hon. Clayton Man ness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I hope the new found vigour of the member for Osborne continues throughout this session. I am glad to see him back. Mr.

Speaker, let me also say in response to the member's question, numbers in themselves, 7.9 and numbers in themselves do not address the quality of education, do not address the target as to whether or not training is occurring in those areas that are of the greatest potential economic impact. All of that now has been done over the course of the past year, and I can assure the member that the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodrey) will be making announcements in due course that respond to his question. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, I agree with the Minister of Finance. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Alcock: I was agreeing with his comment on my renewed vigour. Mr. Speaker, the problem is, people are unemployed today. People need opportunities today. I would ask the minister if he could tell the House today, how many new positions are we going to see at those facilities now? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, I will not answer that question other than to say several or many, but that will be announced by the Minister of Education and Training in due course at the appropriate time. Manufacturing Industry Employment Statistics Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr.

Speaker, I have a question either for the Minister of Finance or perhaps the Minister of Industry. The governmen t lik es to brag about new industries for Manitoba, but the facts show that our industrial base is seriously eroding. Manufacturing output last year declined by about 13 percent, according to Statistics Canada, ranking Manitoba as 10 out of 10. In other words, we had the worst performance of any Canadian province last year. Can this minister explain to the House why Manitoba is doing so poorly? Why are we 1 0 out of 10? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Once again, as happens far too oft en, members of the opposition are very selective

407 LE GISL ATIVE ASSEM BL Y OF MANIT OBA February 17, 1992 in terms of choosing economic indicators. I think we discussed in this House, there are some 13 economic indicators. Manitoba fares among the best in some, above the national average in some, and obviously in some cases we do fare poorer than the rest of Canada, but in the same sector that the honourable member refers to, it is interesting to note that, on the employment side of manufact uring, Manitoba has maintained the current level of 54,0000, the same job level as a year ago, at the time frame that the honourable member has referred to.

So while granted there has been some slippage on the shipment side in terms of jobs for Manitoba in that manufacturing sector, they have remained the same year to date. Mr. Leonard Evans: The fact is, most of the indi cators show Mani toba deteri orating progressively-by far, most of them. We are declining relative to the rest of this country. There is no question about that. Mr. Speaker, how can this mi nister be so complacent, even on this issue? He bandies about numbers of jobs. On that, my question is, how can the minister be so complacent when the number of jobs has declined?

If he looks at last month, in December, we had 56,000 people working. This month of January, there are only 54,000. We have lost 2,000 jobs. How can he be complacent about this? Mr. Stefanson: I have to take exception to that suggesti on. This minister is not complacent, and this government is not complacent at all when it comes to jobs or the economy of Manitoba. The Conference Board of Canada, which his party, the opposition party, often likes to refer to, is projecting the economy of Manitoba to grow among the fastest in all of Canada, to exceed the Canadian national average in 1992. I can assure you, Mr.

Speaker, this minister, this government is not complacent when it comes to our economy. Mr. Leonard Evans: Well then, will this minister be prepared to tell this House what he expects the manufactu ring sector to do in this province in 1992? I ask that because the Canadian Manufacturers' Association has issued a forecast that Manitoba will again decline and again be 10 out of 10. That is the Canadian Manufacturers' Association. Mr.

Stefanson: I have to indicate , and I am not so sure that members across the way have taken the opportunity to do this, but I have had the opportunity to meet with all sectors in our economy, all the various manufacturing groups, through various discussions over the last year, Mr. Speaker, when it came to issues such as North American free trade, and I can assure you that they support what this government is doing in terms of the economy of Manitoba, in terms of creating a positive economic climate. We hear nothing but talk about competitiveness.

This government is three years ahead of every other provincial government in Canada in creating the positive kind of economic climate that will allow businesses and Manitobans to prosper in the years ahead. Economic Gr owth Northern Programs Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, we talk a lot in the Chamber about statisti cs, but one thing we cannot measure is the hurt that is taking place in this province, the hurt that is taking place particularly in areas such as northe rn Manitoba, where statistics show 23 percent unemployment, the highest in the country.

There is despair in communities that have seen job creation and training and virtually every other type of program cut by this government. My question to the Minister of Finance is: What hope can he give to the people of northern Manitoba? What specific programs can he give, if anything, to help deal with the despair of major, major unemployment in northern Manitoba? Hon. James Downey {Minister of Northern Affairs): I think it is time that the members of the opposition came clean on what their position really is when it comes to economic development.

This government has proposed through the proper environmental process, through the Public Utility Board, the development of another major hydro project in the northern part of Manitoba which has tr emen dous emp loyment opp ortu nities for northerners and industrial people. I say that is a major initiative, after going through the proper environmen t process and the Public Utility Board-that is a major initiative. I ask the members, are they going to get onside to help the economic development as it relates to

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 408 the developmen t of nor thern Mani toba in employment or are they not? Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired. MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), that under Rule 27 the ordinary business of this House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely the imminent harmonization of the PST and the GST. Mr.

Speaker: Before determinin g whether the motion meets the requirements of our Rule 27, the honourable Leader of the second opposition party will have five minutes to state her case for urgency of debate on this matt er. A spokesperson for each of the other parties will also have five minutes to address the position of their party respecting the urgency of this matt er. *

(1430) Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr. Speaker, we submitted this matter for urgent public importance in the hopes that we would get some clarification today in Question Period. Unfortunate ly, all we did was to get more confusion as to exactly where this government sits on this issue-w e are not going to review, we are just going to study. I have to tell you that if my students told me they were going to study for an examination without reviewing the mat erial, then I would have said they were not going to be very prepared to write an examination. Mr.

Speaker, there are two reasons, as you well know, for introducing a matter for urgent public debate. One is that there is in fact not another opportunity in which to debate this matter. We are finished with the throne speech, we are dealing primarily and fundamentally with bills, and bills must address in their debate the subject matter of that particular piece of legislation . Therefore, we have no opportunity to debate this issue.

There is also an urgency because we are of the firm belief, particularly after listening to the mishmash of today, that some of these plans of the federal government are going to find their way into the provincial budget. This will be our only opportunity to debate that matter in order to give our input to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) as to the feelings not only of opposition members, but indeed of all Manitobans with respect to the harmonization of these two taxes. We believe that this subject matter is of grave importance for Manitobans. The Premier (Mr.

Filmon) himself has said they cannot bear any more tax. We all know that and yet estima tes in Saskatchewan, a province of similar size, indicated that harmonization would bring to them some $185 million of revenue. Mr. Speaker, if we do not debate this clearly, we have no opportunity to prevent the government from doing something which we believe to be truly in the worst interests of Manitoban citizens. We beg you today to give due consideration to this debate. Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I want to begin by saying that one of the first conditions that has to be met with any matter of urgent public importance is as to whether there is another oppo rtunity immediately available to members to discuss the matter that is being put forward as being of urgent importance. I would say that if we were doing the appropriate thing right now and hearing the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) bring in a budget that is badly needed to deal with the desperate state of the Manitoba economy, we would be able to discuss matters such as this, but the government has not brought in such a budget, and has no intention, I am sure, of bringing in any such budget.pnterjection) I realize the Minister of Finance is sensitiv e-a nd so he should be-with recor d levels of unemployment in this province, the highest increase in unemployment of any province in the country.

One of the reasons we should be dealing with the budget now rather than in whatever length of time the minister is going to sit back and deal with this matte r. But we are denied that opportunity and I must saythat this, I feel, is an urgent matter. lt is not that it is the most urgent matter, but you cannot deal with other potential matters.

In fact, we may have a motion in regard to the more general need for debate on the economy, which we feel is important, but I think whenever you are dealing with something that could be as destructive to the Manitoba economy as an increase, a change here, to many goods, which will be brought in by potential harmonizati on, I believe that is indeed urgent. I believe that it is important for this House to be debating now the true policy of this

409 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 17, 1992 government-a Premier who on a daily basis has been flip-flopping on this particular matte r. We know the only thing that has been stopping this government from bringing in the harmonization has been opinion polls saying that people do not want it.

We want to be able to say in this House-a nd for that reason support the motion before us-to the Premier, to the government ministers assembled, to the government caucus, that we want them to say unequivocally, no flip-flopping, no harmonization, no provincial version of the GST, no further devastations to the Manitoba economy brought in by these kind of Tory policies. That is why I would think that it would be in everbody's interest, and perhaps even for the government members, to support this matter.

Because it might be a little bit easier since, I hope you will indulge me, that I can refer to the fact that the Premier (Mr. Almon) is not present today. I know that is not our normal practice, but we have somewhat diverted from that, but since the Premier is not here, they could get up on their feet with a little less concern perhaps about their positions in Cabinet or hopeful pote ntial positions and say clearly on the public record, no harmonization of the provincial sales tax with the GST. No, Mr.

Premier, no, no, no, as indeed every member of the opposition will be saying, if this government gives us the opportunity to debate it, as they should, as an urgent matter today. Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I am hoping that you will see fit to rule this request for emergency debate out of order so it does not proceed. If I ever heard of somebody putting an argument that defeats their own argument, it was parti cularly the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs). She talks about "imminent." I said clearly in Question Period, the government is not contemplating harmonization.

Let me make it even clearer. I said there are no government plans, immin ent or ot herwise, to harmonize. I think that what is so trag ic here is that you have desperate politics at play. You have a situation where opposition parties sense that the only one issue that they can hit a government with today is taxation issues. We are all aware of the unpopularity of the goods and services tax.

We are all aware of the unpopularity that the federal government, in particular, is suffering as a result of bringing in that tax, so of course they, meaning the opposit ion, are trying to piggyback on that attack and trying to paint this government as if we were supporters. Mr. Speaker, harmonization is a taxation matter not, and I will say it again, not under active consideration within our government, but let me say, cross-border shopping is and remains a great concern to many of our constituents and to many of the businesses, and indeed public dialogue, I would say, must proceed on this issue.

It has to occur. However, these are matters, in my view, that should be part of a budget debate and, as our budget will be forthcom ing in March, let me say, particularly to the House leader of the New Democratic Party, we will be bringing down the first provincial budget in the country. We are probably the only province that will be bringing down a March budget. My only fear is that we may even bring it down before the federal budget.

There is not another province that is so far along their decision making as this government, so let him not stand and rail against this government for not being prepared or ready, because it is-it Is. Nevertheless, taxation issues are budgetary matt ers, so if at that time the government addresses cross-border shopping, Mr. Speaker, that is the time when the debate should ensue, not today, because harmonization is not at issue, because the provincial government is not conte mplating and indeed is not studying harmonization. Mr.

Speaker, there will be many opportunities over the course of the next few weeks, even before the budget, to address this and all other issues, but let us be very candd. The opposition of course is desperate, and they are trying to deal with the taxation. Well, they are desperate because of NDP taxes. That is why they are desperate. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank all honourable members for their advice on this matt er. As honourable members are aware, there are two conditions that must be met. I did receive the notice on this matter as required by our Rule 27.

Our rules and practices and Beauchesne's set out the two conditions required in order for a matter of urgent public importance to proceed. They are that the subject matte r must be so pressing that the ordinary opportunity for debate will not allow it to be brought on early enough, and it must be shown that the public interest will suffer if the matter is not given immediate attention.

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 410 There are no relevant it ems on the Order Paper, and the next known opportunity for a general financial discussion is the Budget Debate, which may not be held for some time. Therefore, it is my opinion tha t ther e are no other ordin ary opportunities in the near future to debate the issue of harmonization of the provincial and federal sales tax. However, I do not believe that this matter is so pressing that it must be debated today. I am therefore ruling it out of order. • (1 440) Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, with respect, I have to challenge your ruling. Mr. Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been challenged. Shall the ruling of the Chair be sust ained? All those in favour, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. Mr. Lamoureux: Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Call in the members.

A STANDING VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: Yeas Connery, Cumm ings, Dacquay, Derkach , Downey, Ducharm e, Enns, Ernst, Findlay, Gilleshammer, Helwer, Laurendeau, Manness, McAlpine, McCrae, Mcintosh, Mitchelson, Neufeld, Orchard, Penner, Praznik, Reimer, Render, Rose, Stefanson, Sveinson, Vodrey. Nays Alcock, Ashton, Barrett, Carstairs, Cerilli, Cheema, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Edwards, Evans (Brandon East) , Evans (Interlake), Friesen, Gaudry, Hickes, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Maloway, Martindale, Plohman, Reid, Santos, Sto rie, Wasylycia-Leis, Wowchuk. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Yeas 27, Nays 25. Mr.

Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been sustained. •

(1510) MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a matte r of urgent public importa nce. I move, seconded by the member for The Pas (Mr. Lath lin), that under Rule 27 the ordinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely the economic crisis facing our province and the 57,000 unemployed people in the province of Manitoba, the highest number of people ever recorded in our province. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Flin Flon (Mr.

Sto rie), obviously, because he does not have the original text in front of him, has handwritten a motion-(interjection] Order, please-has handwritten a text which is not exactly the same as the motion which was tabled in my chamber this morning. Because I did see this, I am asking the honourable member for Ain Ron if he would like to ask the House to rescind the motion that you just proposed to the House and to move forward with the one that you did not. Mr. Stori e: I apprec iate being gi ven that opportunity. I will acknowledge adding a postamble onto the original motion, and If that was out of order, Mr.

Speaker, I would ask leave of the House to support the original motion, given that it is essentially the same as the one that I verbally provided to the House. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Rin Flon have leave to rescind the motion which he has already proposed to the House? Is there leave of the House? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave. It is agreed. Mr. Stori e: Thank you , Mr. Speaker -an inauspicious start to what I hope members opposite will consider a serious topic. When I introduced the motion before the House, I added the words, Mr.

Speaker, because of the concern of the 57,000 Manitobans who are unemployed. If adding 57,000 people's concern to my motion made it out of order, then I regret that I added those words, but the fact of the matter is that the challenge before you is to decide whether in fact the motion is consistent with our rules that are required before we can consider an emergency debate. Clearly, notice was provided.

411 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 Mr. Speaker, the other two questions which we have to address are the questions of whether the issue before us is pressing and whether there are other opportunities for sufficient debate. You ruled earlier that on a similar motion concerning the harmonization of the GST that there were no opportunities before the House for debating motions like this. As we know, if we look at the Order Paper, there is nothing on the Order Paper which would allow us to debate the serious economic crisis facing the province of Manitoba.

I add that the interest of the public will suffer. That is another condition which is attac hed to the question of whether in fact an emergency debate should proceed. The fact is that in January of this year, 14,000 individual Manitobans lost their jobs. So to the question of whether this is pressing, whether this is urgent and whether the public will suffer if this debate does not proceed, I think the answer is clearly yes. We cannot wait till March 6 to find out tha t anot her 14 ,000 people have been left unemployed by a government who has no economic agenda whatsoever. Mr.

Speaker, the economic circumstances in our province are dismal, to say the least. We heard this afternoon the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) suggesting that this was the same in all provinces. Well, the 57,000 unemployed, the tens of thousands of people who are currently on social assistance in this province do not live in other provinces. They want this government to react. Mr. Spel!lker, we need this debate. We must debate the crisis that the Manitoba economy is facing.

It is not just a crisis, and I say "just,n not wanting to undermine the importance of the lack of work, the lack of opportunity for the 57,000 people and numerous oth ers who have given up looking for work, but to highlight the lack of opportunity in every sector of our economy. *

(1520) There are things the government can do. An emergency debate, a debate of this kind, may force this government to live up to its responsibility to the people of Manitoba and take on the challenge of attempting to come to grips with the crisis. Mr. Speaker, there are policies in place in the province at the federal level which need to be changed. The Free Trade Agreement is a good example.

The 57,000 people who we will be talking about today in this Chamb er, if this de bate proceeds, are unemployed in part because of the Free Trade Agreement, an agreement which is affecting every single sector of our economy. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that the plight which faces the manufacturing sector is creating a significant and, I guess, deteriorating situation .

The fact is that the Province of Manitoba can no longer sustain those kinds of losses, whether it is in the agricultural sector, or the manufact uring sector, the forestry sector, or the goods-producing sector, or leather, texti les, you name it. We need some additional incentives, we need some additional acti on, we need some additional options to be put forward to the peopl e of Manitoba. It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that this debate will proceed.

Therefore, I move that under Rule 27 the ordinary business of the House be set aside to consider a matter of urgent public importance, namely, the declining of the Manitoba economy. Mr. Speaker: Before determining whether the motion meets the requirements of our Rule 27, I would like to advise all honourable members of Rule 27(2): A member making a motion under sub-rule (1) may explain his arguments in favour of his motion in not more than five minutes, and one member from each of the other parti es in the House may state the position of his party with respect to the motion In not more than five minutes. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, we support any type of emergency debate that would allow us, as an opposition party, to relay a very strong message to the government of the day in the crisis that Manitoba Is currently facing. The actions that they have taken have put us in the situation that we are now in today and that what we need to do is to have legitimate debate in an emergency debate in which members of the opposition, government backbenchers will have the opportunity to express to the government prior to the introduction of the budget. After all, Mr.

Speaker, in the next couple of weeks, what is on the agenda is 12 or 14 bills that were introduced at fi rst reading six weeks ago. We have an opportunity here to provide each and every member of this Chamber an opportunity to stand up and to put forward good ideas in terms of how we can get the Manitoba economy working. I think that it would be an oversight of this government to decide that the debate is not warranted, because the

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 412 budget is two or three or four weeks down the road . We have an opportunity here to allow all members of this Chamber to put some words on the record. I would argue that the public interest demands that discussion take place immediately. I cite that from Beauchesne's and would encourage you to take into consider ation the importance of this Chamber debating the issue prior to the budget itself being presented. Once the budget has been presented, far too often it is too hard to reverse any decisions.

This is an opportu nity, which we can have, to have genuine input, and I know the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) would like to hear every member of this Chamber stand up, and I hope the Minister of Health will vote on the right side on this particular MUPI. I look forward to what the Minister of Health and ot her ministers have to say about the economy, and what they have to say to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and the Premier (Mr.

Filmon), in terms of the direction of our economy, that we have to start putting party politics to the side and start contributing in a much more positive unpolitical, apolitical fashion in terms of how we can get Manitoba out of this rut and that includes things like job creation that will see capital infrastructures expanded upon and so forth. To conclude, I would like to say that we would like to see this particular MUPI proceed for toda y, even though, in accor dance with the rules, we had to give it leave. I do encourage you, Mr.

Speaker, to give it serious consideration and to come back and allow the debate to conti nue. Thank you. Hon. Clayton Manness {Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the economy is not robust , that goes without saying, but neither is it dismal. As a matter of fact, the only thing dismal I have seen today is the entry of the emergency debate by the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), a veteran of 1 0-plus years in this House introducing an emergency debate in that fashion.

The gove rnmen t acknowledges that there probably is some opportunity over the course of the next three weeks, before the budget comes down, when there may be some certain issues that are debated. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, this may or may not be one of them, and I will give you my view shortly, but other than to tell you the budget is coming down soon. It is coming down, as I said earlier, as the first province in Canada-it is coming out before any other province-in March, and for the members opposite to say that the gove rnment does not have any other business before it is unfair.

In deed , member s opposite made cer tain commitments, extracted certain comm itments out of the gove rnment that we would come back in session in the proper time. We thought that would be the middle of February. We knew there might be some difficult times, and I have asked as recently as today, House leaders opposite , to try and put our best efforts forward to deal in a productive way with the bills that are coming forward, and I believe that will occ ur.

I can indicate to the Liberal House leader, as I did earlier on, because I take some offe nce to his remarks, that indeed over the course of this week the gover nment will introduce yet anoth er 12 to 18 bills. Hopefully, with the leave of members opposite , we will be able to read them for second reading and they will be debated as soon as next week. Mr. Speaker, the government is prepared to accept a debate on the economy indeed if you so allow it. In my view, it is certainly outside ofthe rules.

Indeed, I would think that you would want to make sure that indeed if we do engage in debate on the present state of the economy of the province of Manitoba, you will want to make sure that It is not precedent setting, that indeed any further requests that come either in this session or in time to come will fall strictly within your

interpretation of the rules. Never before, to my understanding, has the economy been debated before a budget, a budget which is going to come down in such short fashion. .. (1 530) Mr. Speaker, I would just like to quote something that one Premier said last week, Premier Rae. He said this, and I am paraphrasing, so it is not an exact quote, but he said words to the effect, there is consensus among governments that there must be control ling of expenses.

He says there is consensus that we should have lower interest rates, real interest rates, and consensus that there should be a lower Canadian dollar, but he said something more important than that. He sat in front of all assembled, indeed the nation. He said, we come here looki ng for no conspiracies, no miracles. Mr. Speaker, ! am hoping that will be the essence of what I hear from the oppo sition benches, because alii have heard to date is that the official opposition is against GATT. They are against exports with the Un ited States. They are agai nst northern

413 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 development in the form of Repap, Conawapa. I am hoping members opposite will tell us what they are for. I am hoping what they are not for is just a significant increase in the deficit, because every provincial Premier of every political stripe has said that that is not the solution to our problems, that so far kick-starting the econo my-Mr. Speaker, I hardly heard the term when I met with the Premiers, because they know that there is no such thing as the quick fix.

Anybody who loves this country and believes in the future of its econom y knows that there is no such thing as the quick fix. Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and say that our party looks forward to the debate. Hopefully, you will allow it, because there are stories to tell. There are messages to provi de. I am hoping the members opposite will not use the conspiracy theory and will not look for the miracle theory but indeed will be prepared to offer solutions that are workable. Speaker 's Ruling Mr.

Speaker: I would like to thank all honourable members for their advice on this matter that notice required under our subrule 27(1 ) was received. As me mbers are aware, the two conditions required for a matter of urgent public importance to proceed are: the subject matter must be so pressing that the opportunity for debate would not allow it to be brought on early enough; and it must be shown that the public interest will suffer if the matter is not given immediate attention.

In my judgment there will not be any opportunity to have a general debate on the state of the Manitoba economy until the budget is brought down, and that may not happen for some time. I have not been persuaded that the matter is so pressing that it should be debated today. I am therefore ruling that the matter does not meet the procedural requirements. In spite of all this, it appears there is a willingness on the part of members to debate this matter toda y. Manitoba precedents and Beauchesne's Citation 387 take this into account. I will then put the question to the House. Shall the debate proce ed?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: It is agreed. Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) for at least ackno wledging in this House that debating this issue, the economic crisis-certainly a term that I am prepared to use-is worthy of debate and that it is a serious issue for the people of Manitoba. We can no longer wait for some magical recovery to occur. We cannot sit idly by as the manufacturing base and our agricultural base are torn from under the people of Manitoba.

The gove rnment elected this group of people, this Executive Council, to act on behalf of Manitobans to preserve what is good and wort hwhile in our economy and in our provi nce. They were not elected to act as apologists for the federal gov ernment. They were not elected to act as doorm ats for American politicians looking to increase their market. They were not elected to ignore the real poverty, the real trauma that is being inflicted on Manitobans from every part, from every region of this province. Mr.

Speaker, they have an obligation to at least attempt to deal with some of the outst anding problems which confront our economy. I want to start by talking about the Free Trade Agreement. This government could take a position . They could demand from the federal gov ernment some sort of objective analysis of what the implications of the first two years and a little bit of the Free Trade Agreement have been on this provi nce. I see the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson) listening.

I hope he will conti nue to listen, because the statistics which are being generated by the Conference Board of Canada, by Statistics Canada, by other independent groups assessing the impact of the Free Trade Agreement are staggering. Since June of 19 89, the manufacturing sector in Canada has been decimated in virtually every sector. I want to read into the record, before we get too far into this debate, the facts.

The facts are that in terms of percentage change in manufacturing jobs the following percentages apply: in food, 22.8 percent of the manufacturing food processing jobs have disappeared from Canada; 26.9 percent of the rubber and plastic jobs have disappeared from Canada; 38.5 percent of the leather jobs; 28.2 percent of the textiles; 29.5 percent of the apparel; 34.2 percent of the wood product jobs; 32 percent of the jobs in furniture and

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 414 fixtures have disappeared across the country; machinery 31 percent; electrical and electronic 26 percent. Mr. Speaker, I have a list of some two dozen different sectors. Not one of them shows a growth in manufacturing, shipment, or a growth in jobs because of the Free Trade Agreement. We are losing because of the Free Trade Agreement. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson) and the gove rnment have suggested that somehow the free trade agreement with Mexico and the United States is going to be a salvation.

They have laid out some conditions which we are not sure the government is intent on enfor cing. We are getting closer day by day to a time when the negotiators on behalf of the Canadian gov ernment, the U.S. gove rnment and the Mexico gov ernment may sign an agreement. We have no facts yet. The Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism has not presented this House with one single fact on the implications of that potential agreement. I want to read for the minister's edification a report from the Ottawa Citizen which says, secret papers show Canada to get less than it bargains for.

This is the lead in to that report. It will cost jobs, offe r slim benefits to only a few businesses, undermine cultural industries, and most Canadians do not like it. That sounds like a line from critics of the proposed Canada-U .S.-Mex ico trade deal, but it is the overwhe lming picture that emerges from recently declassified federal government documents. We are getting another snow job, and all I am asking the gov ernment to do, and I think all we can realistically expect the gov ernment to do, is to be open and above board with the people of Manitoba about the facts.

To date, the Manitoba people have had no information about the repercussions, the implications, the ramifications of the free trade agreement. All we know, Mr. Speaker, is that 57,000 people are unemployed in the province of Manitoba, the highest number of unemployed people ever in the province of Manitoba . All we know is that there are tens of thousands of people on social assistance. All we know is that people are leaving the province of Manitoba, young people, highly educated people, highly motivated people. They are leaving the province of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, it is not good enough for the gov ernment of Manitoba to sit on its hands day after day and say there is nothing we can do. Look what is happening elsewhere. The people of Manitoba want to know that there is some kind of agenda, that we at least understand the parameters of the problem and that we are prepared to propose solutions. There is no evidence of that. When you ask the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanso n), when you ask the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) , for that matter when you ask any of the Executive Council, all they can say is, well, things are bad everywhere else.

There is no apparent attempt to deal with the problems that confront us, the real probl ems. In the last year and a half, Mr. Speaker, the full-time employment In Manitoba has dropped from 41 3,000 to 369,000. That is a drop of 44,000 jobs, full-time jobs lost. What does that mean to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness)? What does that mean to the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodrey) or the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard)?

There is no way to control the deficit and control government spending without cutting back on services to the point where Manitobans cry out In pain unless we get people working, unless we salvage what is left of the manufacturing sector, unless we salvage what is left of our agricultural sector. We need some concrete proposals from the gov ernment. * (1 540) It is difficult for opposition members to be particularly helpful when the gove rnment refuses to divulge any informati on.

Either it does not have it, or it will not get it, or it is not prepared to share that kind of information with members of the opposition and the people of Manitoba. Yes, there have to be some interim solutions. There has to be something that we can do collectively. Mr. Speaker, we do not have to watch daily or monthly as our unemploymen t rate con tinues to rise. We should not have to subject the people of the city of Winnipeg to higher levels of unemp loym en t or greater in creases in unemployment than in Saint John, Newfoundland.

In northern Manitoba the unemplo yment rate in that region is the highest in the country . Twenty-five percent of the people in northern Manitoba are unemployed . Mr. Speaker, where are the proposed solutions? What is the gov ernment going to do to get people back to work, to make sure that our small business sector, particularly our manufacturing

415 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 sector, remains in Manitoba? I was going to say remains vibrant, Mr. Speaker, but the only vibrancy there is in the manufacturing sector right now is the death battle. Mr. Speaker, it does not seem to faze on the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) or the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) or the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson) that we have the highest record of bankruptcies in the history of the province, the highest record of bankruptcies. (Mrs.

Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) Madam Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism is going to stand up and give us some fictitious num ber about the number of bankruptcies versus something else. We have the highest number of bankruptcies ever, end of quote. The record number of people who are moving from the unemployed, the lines of the unemployed, to the lines of those seeking social assistance and supporting our food banks, continues to grow. This is truly the subject of an emergency debate.

If we wait another month, as the Minister of Finance was suggesting, to see the Estimates of spending for departments, or wait for a provi ncial budget, it will be too late for thousands and thousands and thousands of other Manitob ans, other Manitobans who are going to lose their jobs, other Manitobans whose businesses are going to be out of business, other Manitobans who have lost their life savings and their homes and their businesses. It will be too late. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.

Stefanson) may not know the meaning of the word crisis, but if you ask any of the 57,000 people who are unemployed, they will tell you what a crisis is. If you ask any of the previously employed people who are on the social assistance lines or at the food banks, they will tell you what a crisis is. This is a crisis, and we cannot have the gov ernment apparently walking around blindfolded sitting on its hands, saying there is no problem and even if there was we could not do anything about it. Madam Deputy Speaker, it is just not good enough. It is just not good enough.

It is not good enough for the people in north ern Manitoba. It is not good enough for the people in rural Manitoba and it is not good enough for the people in the city of Winnipeg. There are things that can be done. Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired. Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Deputy Speaker, I too welcome the opportunity to discuss Manitoba's economy and I welcome what I hope will be constructive suggestions from members across the way during the course of this debate.

When we first took office in 19 88 our No. 1 priority was to work towards improving what we called the economic climate for existing and potential businesses here in our province to create jobs here in Manitoba. Economic climate is a very important issue, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to very briefly give some history before I talk about the direction that we are heading as a government. I want to give a little bit of background. I am watching the clock already, because 10 minutes is not enough time to do justice to this very important issue, but I will give as much information as I can.

In 19 88, we inherited a situation: extremely high taxes; high deficits; in my opinion, gov ernment out of control , whether it was Autopac, MTX, Workers Compensation, as well as some unfair legislation that was being propos ed. In fact, very briefly I want to give you the record of tax increases under the NDP administration from 19 82 to 19 87.

This makes very interesting reading, Madam Deputy Speaker: increased retail sales tax from 5 percent to 7 percent; introduced and increased payroll tax to 2.25 percent of payroll; introduced personal net income tax and surtax; increased corporation income tax from 15 percent to 17 percent; increased corporation capital tax from .2 percent to .3 percent; increased gasoline tax; increased diesel fuel tax; increased railway fuel tax; introduced a land transfer tax; increased tobacco tax-to tal tax increases to the taxpayers of Manitoba of some $820 million. What did we do when we took po wer, Madam Deputy Speaker?

We not only held the line on personal income taxes, but we reduced personal income taxes. We increased the threshold on the payroll tax so that now some 70 percent of businesses in our province no longer pay that particular tax. Recently we have reduced workers compensation rates. We dealt with an important piece of labour legislation, the final offer selection, which was repealed by our gove rnment.

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 416 On the expenditure side, we did not only talk; we led by example. We controlled our expenditures. The four budgets that have been brought down by our Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) have had the lowest or the second lowest expenditure increases of any government in all of Canada. We led on that front.

That sets the stage for the kind of backgrou nd, the kind of policies and situations we inherited and what we have done, as a government, towards improving the economic climate, because you get out and you talk to any Manitoban, to any Manitoban trying to do business in this province. The single biggest impediment has been taxes. We have addressed that issue, and we will continue to do so along with the kinds of pledges our Premier gave during the Throne Speech Debate that we do not support any increases in personal income taxes.

Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have mov ed on to Phase 2 to becoming much more aggressive on the economic front. We have done that in many ways. One, we have done it structurally, by setting up a new structure in government, an economic development board , by setting up an Econo mic Innovation and Technology Council with the private sector, and creating a common secretariat so for the first time gov ernment can pull together all of the policies and programs of all of the departments that affect economic development here in our province . That forum will allow the opportunity to do just that.

I want to talk about Manitoba. I want to talk about the strengths that Manitoba has and what Manitoba can build on, given the proper economic climate and the proper situation, creating a level playing field for Manitoban s. I have the confidence in Manitobans that they can compete not only anywhere within Canada but anywhere within the world. We have many strengths to build on. We have competitive wages and a quality labour for ce. We have com petitive occupancy costs . We have high-quality, reaso nably priced hydro. We have among the lowest employee turnover rates in all of Canada.

We have among the lowest absenteeism rates in all of Canada. We have a solid research and dev elopmen t com mu nity, particularly at our universities. We have a 24-hour airport. We have a quality of life, in my opinion, that is absolutely second to none. We have com munity spirit, as indicated in the last year through events like the Grey Cup, the World Curling and World Baseball, where Manitobans did the best job ever done for those events.

Madam Deputy Speaker, those are just some of the stre ngths and some of the things that Manitobans can build on if gove rnments create the proper kind of playing field and proper climate for them to work within. We do have some weaknesses and we do have some impediments that we have to address. Some of them are within our control and some are tota lly outside of our contr ol. It is no secret to anybody we are coming through a recession, a recession that has affected not only all of Canada, but most of North America and other parts of the world. It has been very difficult for individuals across this country.

That is one of the reasons I think it is important, if you want to do justice to this issue and if you want to be fair on the issue, that you recognize that it is not a situation that is unique to Manitoba. It is something that faces all of Canada, and certainly while it is little comfort for us in Manitoba or the people without jobs, some provinces are faring even worse than the province of Manitoba. We have been affected by othe r issues outside of our control when you talk about exports in the manufacturing.

The high value of the Canadian dollar has certainly been an impediment in terms of the exports for Manitoba businesses. Another issue that affects Manitoba opportunities is the whole issue of, in my opinion, the lack of awareness and the image of Manitoba that was created during much of the '80s in terms of Manitoba not being a place to do business. We are changing that image, Madam Deputy Speaker. I can assure you that when we travel across Canada and to ot her parts of the world, Manitoba is becoming recognized as a place to come and do business, to locate and to expand.

That is certainly an impediment, and it is even an impediment within our own province through the excessive and erroneous doom and gloom that is often painted by some individuals. * (1 550) I now want to talk about moving off the structural changes that we have made within gov ernment to some of the programs. Members across the way like to say we are a hands-off gove rnment, that we do not get involved in some aspects of developing business here in our provi nce. Certainly, when we took gov ernment we had some of the traditional financial programs to provide assistance to

417 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 Manitoba businesses. We had the manufacturing industrial opportunity program, and we had some other programs in place. In our time we brought in new program s, and we conti nue to bring in new programs, in terms of division capital equity fund and, more recently, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Grow Bonds that would allow rural Manitoba and all communi ties throughout rural Manitoba to finance and fund investments right there in their home community.

The people who live there, who have the vested interest in their community will have the tools to work with to develop economic opportunities in their own region. We set up the Crocus fund, which I know we have the support from across the way, an employee ownership fund that will allow employees the opportunity to buy into businesses. When those businesses are being shut down or looking to be relocated for various reasons, employees here in our provi nce, through the Crocus fund that we set up last year, will have the opportunity to buy right into those companies.

We have set up another program in terms of dealing with rural infrastructure in terms of the funds that will be coming from the Vl Ts throughout rural Manitoba. We have a new telecommuni cations and informational processing program . We are provid ing the kinds of program s that will assist and enhance Manit oba busin esses to allow them to be competitive and to create jobs right here in our province, not shor t-term false economy jobs generated by previous governments, long-term quality jobs that will be here today, tomorrow and 1 0 years from now.

I want to touch on some success stories instead of the doom and gloom. Whenever there is the slightest bit of bad news, we hear about it from across the way, Madam Deputy Speaker. The good news they never like to talk about , whether it is Royal Trust and the 200 jobs, whether it is UPS and the 500 jobs, whether it is Trimei out in Steinbach, whether it is Western Glove, whether it is lnco and their expansion, whether it is HBM&S, whether it is Canadair at Portage Ia Prairie or Medix coming from England, or 3M expansion in Morden, or Apotex development here in our provi nce.

Those are some of the developments, and as our Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) pointed out earlier today , in terms of our spending on capital projects and infrastructure, we have maintained the levels in our Highways department and in our Government Services and in our Housing. Very recently our Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst) announced a joint initiative with the City of Winnipeg, a $1 0 million program to improve the infrastructure of Winnipeg and, at the same time, provide jobs. I realize time is running short, but what I want to conclude with is two points.

Many mo der n economists suggest that one of the single most important economic attributes today is attitude. Attitude about yourself, your family, your comm unity, whateve r it mi ght be, can be cont agious. I think certainly, as a Manitob an, I am proud of the opportunities that lie ahead for this provi nce. The Conference Board of Canada is predicting higher than average growth for the province of Manitoba. I think, with the kinds of initiatives that our gov ernment has taken over the last few years, we will be well positioned to come out of this recession.

We are just now seeing the province of Ontario and the province of B.C. and other provinces starting to do the things that this govern ment has been doing for three years, so that when this recession is over, Manitoba will be ready to be on the move and to be on the move aggressively. We will see that growth in the '90s here in our provi nce. I have confidence.

Madam Deputy Speaker, Manitobans are the generators of wealth, not gov ernments, as some other people believe, and if we provide the proper climate, the level playing field, I have the confidence in Manitobans that they can com pete with anybody, anyplace in the world, and our government is comm itted to creating that kind of level playing field. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): An in teresting opportunity-in fact, I wonder-or not, I have not had an opportunity to check, but if indeed, as the Finance minister (Mr.

Manness) has said, this is the first opportunity for the first time that this House has ever debated a budget before it came do wn, or debated the economy of the province before it came down, I would have to say that it is long ov erdue. I think it is exactly the kind of opportunity we want in this House, is to spend some time looking at where the strength is, where the opportunities are in the provi nce, where we can build and help people get out of the terrible mess that they are facing right now.

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 418 I want to just step back from the specifics for a moment and talk a little bit about some of the concerns that bring me to some of the concl usions that I have. I started shortly after I became Finance minister to spend a lot of time reviewing- Finance critic, that is right. Excuse me. As was pointed out, I imagine a number of people have breathed a sigh of relief.

I wanted to try to understand for myself what was going on in this province. ! am not an econom ist, but I do have some economics in my backgrou nd, and I had an opportunity to draw upon the resources of a large number of very skilled people in looking at what is the position of this prov ince. How does it fare in this country?

I have built huge data bases that pull on the Stats Canada information just to try to understand , before I launch into the political debate, before we decide whether or not the NDP strategy or the Liberal strategy or the Conservative strategy is the best one, to try to clear away some of that and look at what is the real information.

What I find is that-1 go back to 19 61 , because that is the period that Stats Canada goes back to with consistent GOP information-from that time to this, the province of Manitoba has been in decline relative to the rest of Canada, that our share of the national wealth has been gro wing steadily smaller, relative to the rest of this country, despite the fact that we have a well-trained labour force , despite the fact that I support many of the statistics that the Min ister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson) put on the record.

All of those things are true, but nonetheless we have been slow ly, year over year, falling further and further behind. There have been some bright spots: In the mid-60s, in the early to mid-70s and in the early to mid-80s. Those are three times since 19 61 where this province began to recover a bit and this province began to gain a bit, when it began to grow relative to the rest of this country . It is interesting how in those three periods the major events that were taking place were heavy, heavy capital investment in the northern part of this provi nce.

Each time it presented us with an opportunity, and I think each time we let go of that opportu nity. Heavy, heavy investment in the northern part of this province built an economic activity into the southern part of this province that brought people back, that built the basic jobs, that built the acquisition of wealth in this prov ince, but each time when that heavy investment tailed off, when those dams were built and those mines were sunk, the overall basic jobs began to drop again, the overall acquisition of wealth began to drop again.

Once one steps outside of this province, one quickly becomes aware of the fact that this is a very, very small provi nce in a very, very large world. We are impacted daily by decisions that are made in other countries, in othe r parts of the globe, and our ability to sort of wall ourselves in and pretend that the rest of the world does not exist has been gone for some time. We are fool ish to pretend that it has not. The problem is what do we do in this little tiny economy, some $23 billion in GNP, some $5 billion in government expenditure?

What do we do to better position the people who live her e for that competition with the rest of the world ? I think we can learn something from some of the work that has been done around this country and frankly throughout the industrialized world. There are three things that come up over and over and over again when you look at trying to prepare yourself for improving your com petitive position. You have to push capital. You have to push investment. You have to push investment in your province if you are going to build the kind of infrastructure that allows you to compete.

You have to push the training of your labour force . You have to give people the kind of skills and retraining that allows them to be com petitive in today's world, and you have to be active in the creation of competitive products . Manitoba may not be a world leader in the major heavy industries. It may never be, but there are certainly a great many competitive issues that we can fit into and that we can fill and certainly that businesses in this province have demonstrated an ability to compete in, but they have to have because of our relatively small base greater support than they are presently receiving.

Now the thing that I worry about, I look at the nature of the structure of this economy, and I note that in 19 75 agriculture accounted for nearly 9 percent of the economic wealth in this province. Today it is down to 4. 7 percent. If you add in the heavy industry spinoffs to agriculture, it only gets up to 6 percent. I am reminded of something that was discussed in this House before Christmas, and that is that as the situation in the Ukraine changes and as they get the Ukraine on-stream and producing

419 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 the kind of grains and wheat and support for the world that it did back in the 18 90s, that many of our markets that have been traditional in this last 20 years may simply dry up. Manufacturing in this provi nce was 13 .6 percent of the economy in 19 75. It is 10 .8 to day . Transportati on, one of the things that Manitoba was built on, was 8.5 percent of the economy in 75 and it is down to 6.1 percent. Finance industries, and here is a bright spot.

The existence of Great-West Life and Royal Trust and the Investors Syndicate and the banking centres and the data centres and all of those kind of things have produced a basis that has grown in the finance industries in this province from 12 .4 percent to 21 .9 percent. I think there are some lessons there. There is some Indication for what we might want to think about doing with things like corporate capital tax. I think we need to consider how we can support those industries that have shown some strength in this economy. * (1 600) Goods production overal l in this province has gone down.

Not only has it gone down in relative size in the economy, but there have been big changes in the nature of mining and agriculture that have meant that it has been able to support a smaller and smaller labour force . I think one piece of advice that I would have for this government is to broaden your view, to begin to look at the cities in this provi nce, because one of the things that this administration has been marked with is a lack of attention to the city of Winnipeg which is a very considerable part of the economic engine in this province and one that is showing grow th.

I think a great many of the policies of this gove rnment to date have not facilitated the kind of growth in this city that we could otherwise see. I think that in that regard, I am saddened in a sense when we stand up today and we say, well, you did not do this, but you did not do that, and there is this huge sort of ongoing debate that never really takes us any place. In 19 88, you know, we stood up and said, there is a problem co mi ng, we are going to be in a depression. That was repeated around this House.

In 19 88 we said things like, we have got to start paying attention to the people who live and work in this province if we are going into a slowdown , if people are going to be unemployed . I do not fault this government entirely for the economic conditions in this provi nce. There is a worldwide recession, although not completely worldwide. There are countri es, industrialized countries in this world that are doing just fine. I do agree with some of the commen ts of the member for Flin Flon (Mr.

Storie ), that there are great questions to be raised about how closely we have tied ourselves to the economy directly with the south of us and what their agendas are for this particular country. An Honourable Member: They are there. That is where our trade is. Mr. Alcock: Madam Deputy Speaker, that is where our trade was, but our manufacturing base is not built on that alone. The problem that arose when we looked at the way in which the economy in this province was falling back, was sliding, was that we said, what happens to all of those people?

You know, there is an interesting thing that is taking place throughout the industrialized world. Twenty per cen t of the popula tion of the industrialized world is doing very well, thank you very much. They have had a net increase of nearly 18 percent in their individual wealth. The bottom 50 percent are doing very badly. They have fallen off. They have had a net loss in real wealth in this last 10 years. The single unifying thing, the single thing that contributes to that is the economies begin to fracture between skills. People who have got high education, a high skill level, are doing very well.

People that do not, are not. There is an opportunity. When the economy slows down, when people go onto unemployment, when people go onto welfare, we have an opportunity to provide some direct support for them, and we have not done that. We have failed that.

The federal government failed us when they talked about doing it under the Free Trade Agreement with the labour adjustment strategy, and, frankly, this gov ernment has failed us in not provid ing that at a time in advance of this slowdo wn, that would have built a cushion, that would have allowed people when they could not work here to build their skill level so that they would be more employable. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that one of the things that this gov ernment has to consider- Madam Dep uty Speak er: The hono ur able member's time has expired. Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Deputy Speaker, indeed I want to first of all thank members of all political parties for agreeing to this debate in the Chamber. It obviously makes sense, Madam Deputy Speaker, but sense does not

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 420 always play a part of some of the decisions we collectively make in this Chamber. There is absolutely no question that anywhere we go in this provi nce, any comm unity, any kitchen table, any plant, any farm, the economy and our situation in that economy is the No. 1 conc ern, and I think it was useful today to agree to a debate to have some input on the economic situation in the province and in the country.

Hopef ully, as the cabinet and the gove rnment of the day continues its debate internally on the decisions it has to make, these discussions today will be useful in terms of a reversal of the econom ic strategy and the extreme ideology of members opposite and to a more balanced approach on the economy where peoples' jobs and job opportunities will be the No. 1 priority and not the Conser vative ideological agenda that is clearly the hallmark of their last budget.

I noted that for the last year and a half members opposite, including today , have been using terms like "coming through the recession" or "will soon be over" or "that we are the best place to come out of the recession." I can cite you

chapter and verse in Nov ember of 1990 with the Premier (Mr. Film on) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) where they said: We are just around the corner from econ omic recovery, hallelujah, happy days are here again. That was the basis of their budget last year and all these false hopes that were raised for Manitobans have been devastated by the reality that we are facing in our province today. Madam Deputy Speaker, members opposite also like to use the term that this is a "world-wide recession." The member for Osborne (Mr.

Alcock) has pointed out that it is not a universally impacted recession in the industrial world. I would suggest to members opposite that if they look for a correlation of what countries are suffering the most in general terms from the recession and what countries are having the most economic decline and having the greatest difficulty maintaining jobs, they will find that they are countries and jurisdictions that are being run by conservative governments in the world . The highest increase in unemployment in the average industrial nations in the last month was in Great Britain-the Thatcher-Major agenda.

If you look at what is happening in the United States, again a conser vative party, a Republican Party in the United States, the soul mates and ideological mates of the members opposite, again they are suffering tremendous decline in their econom ic situation , and we may see some of the results in some of the primary results tomorrow of our friends to the south of us. We certainly saw some change with Pennsylvania, with the change in choice in the state of Pennsylvania in the senatorial by-election.

H we look in Canada, the provinces that are adopting extreme ideological positions as the members opposite , the step-aside philosophy, and the minister opposite said that we like to say that. Well, I will refer him chapter, verse and line to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) last year that said, quote : We believe that we just have to step aside and the economy will recov er. With a few corporate friends we will get the economy going again, and that is all we will do with the economy.

Again, a sort of laissez faire or Adam Smith or corporate agenda of members opposite , and they are not worki ng because people are not working. Look through the average industrial nations, the countries that are taking a more balanced approa ch, the more co-operative approa ch, a more consensus approach, are doing much better on economic growth , on private sector investment, on public sector investment, on debt and on jobs and maintaining jobs and job opportunities in the future.

You can look at those numbers because, yes, there is a bottom line and you will find the countries and jurisdictions that are working in a consensus way and not relying on only one engine of the economy but relying on a number of engines of the economy are doing much better in relative terms. Madam Deputy Speaker, the question was raised about trade, and some members opposite said that we were against this and were against that. I think it is a fair question: What are we in favour of? We have always been opposed to a corporate trade agenda that is a fortress North American agenda. The member for Pembina (Mr.

Orchard) laughs as he loses 200 jobs at a Tupper plant in his own communi ty under free trade with the United States. He laughs because he is embarrassed with the results of the trade agreement with the United States. * (1 610) We have been opposed to a policy that says resources and energy from Canada, labour and no environmen tal standards for Mexico and the

421 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA February 17, 1992 markets of the United States as a corporate agenda will be the fortress North American trading future of Canada. That is a total unmitigated disaster. We have been much more in favour of a multilateral trade approa ch. Yes, we support GATT and we support the negotiations that are going on in GATT. That means that during those Dunkel reports on GATT we do not say that because we believe in a balanced approach we are not going to push for changes on the orderly marketing boards.

If you surrender those issues before the negotiations are done, I suggest that is why Canada is having so many problems to begin with--because the Europeans are not surrendering on one issue at all. France, Germany, Great Britain, in the Dunkel report, they are not saying, we are giving up this, we are giving that before we go to the table. They are going with a balanced approach to the table, not dropping it before they get there as the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay). Look at the European trade agreement.

That is a model, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think, for the whole world, where they are looking at removing some of the tariffs but at the same time there is a balance between capital and the free flow of capital and goods and the standards for people. In the European trade agreement we are getting chapters and verses of a social charter that deals with employment and even deals with regional issues in Europe.

They are starting to adopt some of the ideas that used to be in vogue in Canada where equalization payments are being made to the less developed countries in Europe so that trade will go to the highest common denominator, not to the lowest common denomi nator that we see with Con servative ideological philosophies and the results with high unemployment in our country.

I suggest to members opposite there are two visions of trade in this world: a multilateral vision of trade that includes going to the highest common denomi nator and improving the standard and quality of life for everybody or going to the lowest common denomi nator because a few people of Wall Street and Bay Street and a few others want to have energy from Canada, cheap labour from Mexico and markets in the United States and that is the trap mem bers opposite are follo wing.

Tha t is, unfortunate ly, the lot that they are leaving Manitobans in their pursuit of this Conser vative ideological agenda and a corporate trade policy rather than a people's multilateral trade policy in this world. Madam De puty Speaker, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) in his stand-aside policy, takes a different sort of strategy to Ottawa. He says step aside and do nothing in Manitoba and cut back and cut back and cut back, and then when he goes to Ottawa, he talks about this sort of Franklin Delano Roosevelt vision of the country.

I have to look and see if it is the same person, because he says step aside here and he offl oads highways onto municipalities in Manitoba and then he goes to Ottawa and says build a national highway system as a capital project . What hypocrisy! He says let us have a research and development strategy and he cuts it back in our provi nce. He says let us have an education and training program and he cuts it back in our communi ty colleges. Everything he says that Ottawa should do in terms of putting investment into people, he does the opposite in his own budget here in Manitoba.

That is why the Conservatives now are not saving any money with their cutbacks and their radical ideological agenda both in capital going down and operating going down In terms of laying off thousands of people, it is showing up down in the welfare lines. The highest increase in any urban centre in Canada is in the city of Winnipeg, higher than any other prov ince, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is right here where these Conservatives are in power and these Conservatives are driving people out of work and into welfare.

Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, we reject totally the step-aside and stand-aside policy of the gov ernment. We believe in a balanced approach to the economy and I do make one suggestion to members opposi te: to reverse their policies on the economy, to throw out their ideology that is not work ing, and to have a balanced approach on every decision they make in the budget- Madam Deputy Speaker : Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired. Hon. Donald Orch ard (Mi nis ter of Health): Madam Deputy Speaker, it was indeed interesting to hear the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Doer) give us his ideas on how he would govern differently and, you know , I did not hear one single idea come from the member, the Leader of the New Democratic Party, who wants someday to be Premier of the provi nce. We never heard one changed policy.

February 17, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 422 We heard a bunch of phraseol ogy about abandoning an ideology but not one single idea on what a new trade arrangement with the United States would look like, not one single idea on what he meant by abandoning our economic philosophy. So therefore I can only conclude that my honourable friend is a typical New Democrat , wherein he believes that the solution to Manitoba's econom ic woes is going out and spending money you do not have and taxing people in Manitoba with ever higher and increasing rates of taxatio

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-3-10a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 3rd hansardpdf 10a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	48a479a7f045ea7dd02ac18be6496775e06dd75b

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