Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 35 (36th Legislature, 3rd Session)

36-3-35

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

.... .. •: �. � ...... Third Session -Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker :'. �;::�.) .. � h!!!! �� ·' . . .. :�. Vol. XLVII No. 35 -1:30 p.m., Monday, April28, 1997

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

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

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

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

1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, April28, 1997 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): I must inform the House of the unavoidable absence of Madam Speaker and call upon the Deputy Speaker to take the Chair. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Point of Order Mr. Doug Martindale (Deputy Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like your ruling on whether or not one of the members here today is violating the federal elections act or perhaps even Rule 17 of the Manitoba Legislature. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The matter has already been taken under advisement, and at this time I would like to bring in the ruling from Friday, if the honourable member will give me the opportunity. Speaker's Ruling Mr. Deputy Speaker: On April 25, the Acting Speaker took under advisement a point of order raised by the honourable member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) concerning the eligibility of a member who has been nominated to be a federal candidate to speak in this Chamber and clarification of what that member can do after the federal election has been called.

The member to whom I believe the point of order refers has been nominated by his party to represent it in the federal election. However, this action combined with the calling of the federal election does not automatically make the member a nominated candidate in the federal election or render him ineligible to sit in this House. A person becomes a candidate at a federal election by filing nomination papers with the returning officer for the electoral district in which he or she is seeking election.

However, a returning officer cannot accept nomination papers from any person who is a member of a provincial Legislature. In

summary, it is my understanding that a member is entitled to continue as a member of this House until he or she resigns as an MLA in order to file nominations papers as a federal candidate, and I have not received a resignation. *** Mr. Brian Pallister (Portage Ia Prairie): Mr. Deputy Speaker, ifl may have leave, I would like to put a few words of thanks on the record. In a few moments, I will be travelling to the Speaker's office to- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Does the honourable member for Portage have leave to make a statement? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Deputy Speaker: No. Leave has been denied. *

(1335) Point of Order Mr. Pallister: If I may, I would like to say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that my understanding has been that other members preceding me in this House who have made the decision to leave have been allowed to put a few words of thanks on the record, and I would like to do that. First of all, I would like to thank the members opposite- Mr. Deputy Speaker: I have to interrupt the honourable member because he is now up on a point of

1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 order, and he is referring to the statement which the House has denied him the opportunity to bring forward. So the honourable member cannot be recognized at this time for his statement. He does not have a point of order. PRESENTING PETITIONS Mobile Screening Unit for Mammograms Ms. Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Tracy Yuri, Brenda Zachedniak, Pam Chetyrbus and others requesting that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request the Minister of Health (Mr.

Praznik) to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unit for mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mobile Screening Unit for Mammograms Mr. Deputy Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Dispense.

WHEREAS medical authorities have stated that breast cancer in Manitoba has reached almost epidemic proportions; and

WHEREAS yearly mammograms are recommended for women over 50, and perhaps younger if a woman feels she is at risk; and

WHEREAS while improved surgical procedures and better post-operative care do improve a woman's chances if she is diagnosed, early detection plays a vital role; and

WHEREAS Manitoba currently has only three centres where mammograms can be performed, those being Winnipeg, Brandon and Thompson; and

WHEREAS a trip to and from these centres for a mammogram can cost a woman upwards of$500 which is a prohibitive cost for some women; and

WHEREAS a number of other provinces have dealt with this problem by establishing mobile screening units; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has promised to take action on this serious issue. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unit for mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

An Honourable Member: Read. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Read. The Clerk will read. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba, humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS medical authorities have stated that breast cancer in Manitoba has reached almost epidemic proportions; and- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. If the members want this statement read, I would appreciate it if they listen. The honourable Clerk, to continue. Mr. Clerk:

WHEREAS yearly mammograms are recommended for women over 50, and perhaps younger if a woman feels she is at risk; and

WHEREAS while improved surgical procedures and better post-operative care do improve a woman's chances if she is diagnosed, early detection plays a vital role; and

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1997

WHEREAS Manitoba currently has only three centres where mammograms can be performed, those being Winnipeg, Brandon and Thompson; and

WHEREAS a trip to and from these centres for a mammogram can cost a woman upwards of$500 which is a prohibitive cost for some women; and

WHEREAS a number of other provinces have dealt with this problem by establishing mobile screening units; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has promised to take action on this serious issue. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to request the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to consider immediately establishing a mobile screening unit for mammograms to help women across the province detect breast cancer at the earliest possible opportunity. MINISTER IAL STATEMENTS Flooding Emergency Response Plans Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to provide an update on flood conditions.

With the leave of the House, I do not have printed materials to distribute. This will be similar to last week in order to provide the most up-to-date information that we were receiving over the noon hour. The levels of the Red River are continuing to rise but at a slower rate. This is due to the growing size of Lake Morris. Rises in the last 24 hours have ranged from over a foot near the floodway inlet to a third of a foot at Ste. Agathe and less than one quarter of a foot from Morris southward, and there has been little change at Emerson or at Selkirk.

Levels will continue to rise slowly until crest elevations are reached in late April or early May. There is no change in the forecasted crest stages and dates for the Red River except at St. Jean where the crest is expected to be about one foot lower than was earlier predicted. There is no change in predicted levels from Morris north. The levels of the Pembina River and the Assiniboine River continue to decline, and downtown Winnipeg levels are rising because of the levels of the Red River. The levels at Shellmouth Reservoir. are quite rapidly rising.

They are within 3 feet of summer target levels and we may expect some increased flows from that area later in the week, but they are not expected to cause any additional flooding problems. Flooding continues on many of the Red River tributaries, either due to water backup from the Red River or due to excessive flows. However, levels are declining slowly on stream locations not affected by the Red River. They are unusually high in the Seine River near Grande Pointe, where the river rose overnight due to strong winds.

The winds have caused PTH 59 to be overtopped near Grande Pointe, and overflows will end tonight, we believe, when the wind changes to a more westerly direction. *

(1340) On behalf of my colleague the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pitura), I would like to report on some of the issues that his department are responsible for. In relationship to the states of emergency, we have 17 communities, towns and cities, including the city of Winnipeg, that now have a local authority and date of declaration of emergency. Under evacuations, we now have I 0 communities and the city of Winnipeg where evacuation orders have been implemented and where evacuation plans are being exercised. They include Emerson, Letellier, St. Jean Baptiste, Dominion City, De Salaberry, St.

Pierre-Jolys, Rhineland, Morris, the R.M. of Morris, St. Adolphe, Ste. Agathe, Roseau River Reserve and the city of Winnipeg, where there is a limited and in some cases mandatory evacuation. We now have reached the trigger point in regard to the construction of the dike at Brunkild. We had indicated that when the water reached Highway 302, that would be considered a trigger point for the people who would be affected by that, protected by what is now known as the Z-dike, and they will be placed on 24-hour alert for evacuation. The water is reported crossing Highway 305 this morning due to high winds,

1998 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 and we are very concerned about the integrity of some of the personal dikes in the valley. All nonessential personnel as well in the evacuated areas of the valley-all those nonessential people are expected to be relieved today in accordance with Natural Resource officers and local authorities' direction. I emphasize that we are working in conjunction with the local authorities. I would like to indicate that there are about 2,500 armed forces personnel presently deployed within the area.

The Department of Agriculture reports that they, in conjunction with the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, are co-ordinating relocation of livestock that are at risk. Particularly today in the R.M. of Macdonald, that work is proceeding. I would report that the Department of Natural Resources has 168 personnel deployed in the threatened communities. Essential personnel in the ring-dike communities include Natural Resources in consultation with local authorities to deal with the evacuation requirements.

I would remind all of us that Highways and Transportation has been taking the lead and has accomplished a considerable feat in construction of the 16-mile dike north and east of Brunkild to keep the Morris River from flowing into the La Salle. I report that the levels at that site are just about complete to the predicted levels, but I want to remind everyone that the intention is to continue construction to provide some freeboard and some erosion protection. The Beausejour area has received some flooding from the Whitemud River due to ice jamming, but we are not able to report yet on the extent of that flooding.

The Seine River has peaked east of Lorette, and we have now been informed that there have been about 50,000 inquiries made on the net site that is established to provide information, so that is another source of information for the public, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Social services have opened their emergency offices in Altona, Steinbach, Winnipeg and St. Malo. We are also receiving the assistance of amateur radio emergency service that has been established, a network in communities within the flood area to provide backup and supplementary communications.

Emergency health services have now been established in I 0 communities, including St. Norbert within the city of Winnipeg. I want to thank all of the volunteers and all of the professionals out in the field who are working so hard to deal with the issues they are being presented with hourly. *

(1345) Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Since we last met here Friday, many things have happened over the weekend. I thank the minister for bringing us up to date on the activities as of today and the conditions. I also want to note that over the weekend many more examples of Manitobans coming together and helping out were evidenced in all the radio line phone calls that came in and all the reports through the media. I am sure we all heard of the instances as we went back to our constituencies and helped out in this time of need.

I think the people of Manitoba should be congratulated wholeheartedly for the way they are pulling together in the flood of 1997. Indeed, it is good news that the levels in the Pembina and Assiniboine rivers seem to be on their way down and the tributaries as well. We still have a time to go before the Red River itself crests, and we need to keep our eyes on the levels and the height of the water that we are eventually going to be dealing with through the next couple of weeks. I wish everyone well who is evacuating communities all along the Red River.

Of course our thoughts are with them as they move out of their homes and are placed elsewhere. Again, too, I think a great deal of credit and congratulations need to be sent to the volunteers and the people who are working on the Z dike at Brunkild. It is going to be very important that we keep the Morris River out of the La Salle, something that has a great impact not only on the city of Winnipeg but the area out in Brunkild and that whole area west of the Red River.

Just to wrap up, I want to point out a few examples that I came across on the weekend of people who are helping out in different communities in Roblin and Fork River, in Winnipegosis and Dauphin and I notice in Neepawa, just to name a few of Manitobans coming together, getting sleeping bags and clothing and helping

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1999 out with the consternations in different ways just from that area. I am very, very pleased and heartened to see the way that people of Manitoba who are a fair distance away from the actual evacuation sites are taking it upon themselves to help out in this time of crisis, and they deserve our congratulations. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. TABLI NG OF REPORTS Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): I have two reports to table. The first one is revised

Schedule 5 and Chart 4 of pages 15 and 17 of the Supplementary Information for the Legislative Review for the Department of Finance. The second is the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review, Departmental Expenditures for Canada Manitoba Infrastructure Works for 1997-98. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 27-The Public Schools Amendment Act Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews), that leave be given to introduce Bill 27, The Public Schools Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion agreed to. *

(1350) Bill201-The Workplace Safety and Health Amendment Act Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): I move, seconded by the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen), that leave be given to introduce Bill 201, The Workplace Safety and Health Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia securite et l'hygiene du travail, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Reid: I am pleased to be able to introduce this bill for first reading. For some time the wrong message has been sent to those who break The Workplace Safety and Health Act. The message sent said that if you break the law, the penalties were minor and could be considered just a part of the cost of doing business. The maximum fine for a first offence, even a loss of life, is currently a minuscule $15,000. The maximum was rarely � if ever, applied. Why?

Largely because the Crown attorney's office looked at the fine structure and recognized that the lawmakers did not place importance on such tragedies. One example is the Power Vac prosecution wherein the Crown did not even ask for the $15,000 fine on each offence and then did not appeal the low fine imposed. Given the number of deaths in workplace accidents, 67 in the last three years including some 27 in 1996 alone, including several miners, and the annual high levels of workplace accidents, the time has come for a stronger message to be sent.

We are proposing that fines for accidents causing or likely to cause death or serious injury be set at a maximum of one-half million dollars. Where life-threatening injury or death occurs, or through a workplace accident, those found guilty would also be subject to further sanctions including time in jail. To encourage working people to identify and report unsafe workplaces without fear of retribution, such protection also forms a part of this bill. The message must be clear for those who break The Workplace Safety and Health Act and for the judicial system charged with enforcing the legislation.

We think this bill will address the serious weaknesses in the current legislation, and we all must do our part to ensure workplace deaths and injuries are prevented. Motion agreed to. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Flooding Z-dike Status Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have a copy of the map that we received last Monday, and, of course, the map that has been updated and circulated over this last weekend with some dramatic changes obviously due to the water flow and some dramatic changes in terms of the potential

2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 overflow area that has been dealt with with the construction of the so-called Z-dike or Brunkild dike. I would like to know from the government, first of all, what is the status of that very, very important dike; and secondly, how could we have a situation where heaven and earth and all machinery in Manitoba must be moved to build this dike, because a week ago we did not know that the water would go ahead northeast into that area and create this very, very tremendous challenge for all of us. Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, first of all, I believe the first update that the Leader of the Opposition is referring to is the area of inundation within the valley. He will note that most of the predicted elevations are very much within the predictions of the Department of Natural Resources and the Water Resources branch. What we have seen, however, is at these levels the waters begin to spread and form Lake Morris, which is very wide and which has some very unpredictable landscape in terms of the volumes that are in place as it comes across the border.

In fact, the predictions of the elevations have remained stable, but there are other influences-timing and, of course, the sheer volume from the entire region where that last storm event went through-that have given some volumes of water that have reached the outside edge of the predictions. *

(1355) Floodway Capacity Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): First of all, I hear from media reports that Emerson is doing very, very well, and of course we applaud the people in that community and hope that they continue to do well against the crest and wind conditions of today. On April 26, the media release from the Department of Natural Resources and EMO stated that the flood way will be operated to keep the remainder of the city at 24.5 feet at James Street. Over the weekend, again we heard that the flow could be as high as 25 feet at the James Street pumping station.

Will it be the policy or does the government have the flexibility and capability of operating the floodway beyond the 60 percent capacity to keep the commitment to the 24.5 feet at James Street as articulated in the press release of April 26 at 3 p.m.? Hon. Glen Cumm ings (Minister of Natural Resources): Yes, that is the intention. The elevation was raised slightly in order to provide some additional flexibility in operation of the gate, but of course that assumes that we do not get a backwash in the La Salle, but everything going according to predictions, the 25 feet at James Street is in fact achievable. Mr.

Doer: My question was dealing with if the flood way will be operated to keep the remainder of the city at 24.5 pursuant to the press release of April 26. Water Levels-Selkirk Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I have a further question to the minister. Last week, on Wednesday I believe, we asked the question to the government about the predictions in Selkirk, and we were hearing from people in the local community-in fact, the member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) raised the question to the minister that in fact Selkirk would be two feet over last year's flood heights at the crest.

That information was taken from the minister, and then again the minister confirmed that it would be at the same levels as last year. The media is now reporting that Selkirk will be two feet higher than last year. Can the minister, because it is not in any of the press releases over the weekend, clarify the situation at Selkirk? Is it going to be two feet over last year's projected now, and what are the impacts on the Selkirk community? Hon. Glen Cum mings (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, when the question was originally asked, recall that the water had dropped about a foot and a half at Selkirk at that time. I did not incorpor ate that into my answer, and I think that accounts for the fact that we still intend to see it two feet higher than it was at that juncture easily. The predictions that the department is still making for the water levels at Selkirk is that forecasted peak of 727 to 728. Last year's high level was 727.5, so it is still very

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2001 close to last year's maximum levels. In fact, and perhaps I should be very cautious about putting this information on the record, and I will couch it in that context, some of the ice-jam elevations that were created last year probably exceeded that, but they were not recorded for the purposes of forecasting. I believe that these numbers are correct. Flooding-Institutions Communication Flow Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Deputy Speaker, we are quite aware that the Department of Health is working at full tilt in order to deal with this emergency situation.

We are pleased to see that there have been 10 emergency medical units established to deal with the crisis. There are numerous rumours and concerns that are emanating in the community that range from particular institutions that may be at risk, the degree they may be at risk and the extent that certain procedures are being cancelled or not cancelled. I am sure the information is being communicated directly to those affected.

I am wondering if there is a procedure that the minister can provide us with in order to provide us and the public generally with an update on a regular basis as to what is happening at the major institutions in terms of informing the public as to what the developments are. Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): I appreciate very much the concern and question from the member for Kildonan. With respect to flow of information, any updates from Manitoba Health are being included in the regular EMO briefing material that comes out from the province.

With respect to city facilities, some of them have issued press releases. St. Boniface, I believe, issued one today to ensure that its community has the detailed information on a first-hand basis. To date, I am pleased to say in all of the steps that have been taken by facilities throughout the upper Red River Valley and in Winnipeg, where we have evacuated the St. Norbert personal care home, we have done so well in advance of any risk, and all has gone well and successfully for the care of those people. The communication we appreciate, and the vehicle is that regular EMO report. *

(1400) Health Care Facilities Emergency Services Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have heard reports that emergencies have been diverted from Health Sciences Centre because of the backflow in terms of diversions from St. Boniface Hospital.

I am wondering if the Department of Health is considering something similar to that which occurred during the emergency room crisis of a year and a half ago, if perhaps alerting the public in general on an ongoing basis as to which emergency rooms are open and which are not, because while we recognize that the transporters, the ambulance services are aware of that, the general public may not be aware of that. It may assist the public in terms of access in particular institutions. Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Mr. Deputy Speaker, absolutely.

I think currently the only emergency room in the city that has been reducing its operation, and I believe that is quoted in the press release from St. Boniface today, where they are only taking-they are not diverting any ambulance that arrives, but they are not functioning on their emergency system. If, as this develops-we are in regular contact with the CEOs of the facilities. My deputy minister, Mr.

DeCock, spoke with them this morning in a conference call, and should the need arise to have a greater control mechanism for directing use of emergency facilities, we will look at an alternative communication vehicle to ensure that the citizens of Winnipeg are aware of those changes. I appreciate his advice on this matter. Flooding-Evacuees Vacant Housing Authority Property Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Deputy Speaker, one month to four weeks will be a long time for many Manitobans to be evacuated from their homes and communities, especially if they are staying in arenas or other mass accommodation.

We realize there is a wide variety of different accommodations being

2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 made available, including many Manitobans opening their homes to evacuees. My question is for the Minister of Housing or the Minister responsible for the Emergency Measures Organization. I want to ask how many of the vacant Manitoba Housing Authority properties are being made available for flood evacuees and if this is part of Manitoba's response to the flood crisis. Hon.

Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Yes, indeed, we have made instructions to our department to make every effort to try to accommodate any people that are looking for resettlement because of the flooding. We have moved people out of some of our places in areas that have been affected, as has been mentioned before, in Emerson, Dominion City, La Broquerie, Letellier, Morris, St. Jean Baptiste, Ste. Agathe, St. Adolphe. We are in the process of moving people out of Niverville, lie des Chenes and La Salle.

We have moved people to Winkler, Altona, Morden, and we have also indicated that units here in Winnipeg, if they are wanting to be utilized, we can make those units available also. Ms. Cerilli: I am wanting the minister to clarify then if there are approximately 13,000 Manitoba Housing Authority properties in the province. The minister himself has often said there is approximately a 12 percent vacancy. That would leave approximately I ,500 units available.

I realize we would want to use the ones that are closer to southern Manitoba, so I am wanting to see if the minister has any more detailed information of the numbers of units that are being made available to evacuated Manitobans. Mr. Reimer: As needs are dictated and as the water is moving north, naturally it is forcing people to relocate. We are filling up or trying to fill the units as the need arises and as the requirements come in.

As to the exact numbers of people that have been relocated into our units, I would have to get a hold of the department to get a definitive number, but I can only say the number that I could give today may be different tomorrow because of the fact that we are trying to utilize these as the need arises. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Radisson, with her final supplementary question. Ms. Cerilli: I would ask the minister to clarify his previous answer.

He left the impression that it is only residents who are being evacuated from public housing in those communities that he mentioned that are being relocated in Manitoba Housing Authority properties, or are Manitoba Housing Authority properties being made available to any Manitobans who are evacuees, particularly if they have larger families so that they may stay together in a private unit. Mr. Reimer: Our primary function in moving people out of our Manitoba Housing units is to try to relocate them back into our public housing units.

The vacancies that would come available would be above and beyond that, but our primary function is to try to serve the people that are being forced to relocate because of the flood out of public housing. We would try to move them into vacancies first into our public housing in other areas hopefully close to where they are living. School Divisions Student User Fees Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Mr. Deputy Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.

The minister knows that last year the NDP caucus raised the issue of parents and students being charged user fees for registration in junior, senior high schools, costs of materials, busing, lunch supervision, summer school and field trips. Now we have reports from Assiniboine South School Division which is charging students to cover teachers' salaries. Will the minister tell Manitobans whether her department has approved the practice of charging students for the costs of substitute teachers? Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, there always have been, throughout time, fees charged to students for student fees in high schools, for field trip fees, for a number of other fees, for gym fees, for band fees, et cetera. We have noticed in the last decade or so changes coming about in the system. Collective agreements are changing. There are opportunities now for teachers in many divisions to get lunch hours free from supervision, for example, because of the collective agreement. That then involves a cost the school division has to pick up. Many divisions now,

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2005 introduced here, and the public will have an opportunity to participate and advise us through legislative committee, which is a long-established practice in the province of Manitoba. Ms. McGifford: Mr. Deputy Speaker, to the same minister. I would like to ask the minister, particularly in view of the Children's Advocate's strong statements, why he will not take the good advice of his own Premier (Mr. Filmon), who promised us cutting-edge legislation which surely means a commissioner who can, in the words of the Children's Advocate, enforce compliance. Mr.

Praznik: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think the Premier was right. This is very much cutting-edge, leading-edge legislation. The question with respect to the supervising authority is whatever title one gives that individual, the question is to ensure that they have the tools that they will be comfortable with in order to do the job, that there is proper public accountability. There is a host of views as to how that should happen. In Ottawa, they chose to appoint a privacy commissioner, but that privacy commissioner's roles and powers are very similar to those of an ombudsman.

So one should not get caught up in the debate of nomenclature but look around the rules or powers that will be there and, in a practical sense, how those rules and powers have worked in the past in other situations, in similar situations, to resolve issues and ensure protection of the public, and that is in fact what we are examining. Health Care Records Confidentiality Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Osborne, with her final supplementary question. Ms.

Diane McGifford (Osborne): To the same minister: Is it not time to admit that the real reasons that this legislation lacks clout are that his corporate partner, the Royal Bank, prefers the room for maneuvering recommendations, variety of legislation, and this government wants to keep the power to contain damage, and for these reasons the government is willing to risk the confidentiality of our health care records? *

(1420) Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Mr. Deputy Speaker, only a New Democrat who likes to put her head in the sand and not look at realities with which one deals would come up with that kind of very silly accusation. This government is not about to risk the privacy of health records. She belongs to a party that has had the privilege of governing this province for many years, and I do not recall her party ever bringing in the kind of protection of paper records which is also important. So she stands before us in a party which is being somewhat hypocritical.

The second point that I make is that the legislation, the work that is going on, the discussions I had with the group, I think we are on track for very solid legislation. The public of Manitoba will be well protected, and one thing we do not need is this kind of statement. The member seems-because you use the term "bank" that it is somehow bad, but let her remember that the greatest protection of financial security of records has been developed by Canadian banks. There is a wealth of expertise there in developments which she would ignore for ideological reasons. Man Globe Salary Ranges Mr.

Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to ask the Deputy Premier- this minister now has had some time to review the details of the agreement he made with ManGlobe, and I am hoping that his memory now is a little better than in the past-could the Deputy Premier now explain why he agreed to a proposal that the project director would receive $240,000 salary and the project manager would receive $120,000 salary? Does he agree that these salaries are excessive? Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier): Mr. Deputy Speaker, the numbers that the member has put forward I cannot confirm as being accurate. Mr.

Maloway: Well, I would ask the minister to check his figures and confirm these figures. We would like to know. Did the president of ManGlobe receive $240,000 for Phase 1(

a) of the ManGlobe project as

2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 indicated in the ManGlobe submission to his department? He has that submission. Yes or no? Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Speaker, as I said, I cannot confirm the salary ranges that the member is bringing to the table. The salary ranges are considerably lower for the individual that he has talked about. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Elmwood, with his final supplementary question. Mr. Maloway: Then will the Deputy Premier tell us what were the salary figures for these two individuals? Mr. Downey: Again, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I hope the member would appreciate the fact that this information is within a company that is not fully open for public-because of its competitive nature. However, during the Estimates process, I will be more than prepared to provide as much information as is possible without in any way damaging the operations of the company. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Kildonan, with a new question. An Honourable Member: Elmwood. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Elmwood, with a new question. Mr.

Maloway: On a new question to the same minister, I would like to ask the minister: Given that these figures come from the submissions that this company gave to his department, why can he not confirm that these were the figures that were the exact salaries for these people? He has their submission. He has had it for two years. He approved it. Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Speaker, it seems strange that the member is coming to the House and asking the questions if he has all the answers that relate to the submission.

I mean, I am more than prepared-as I have said previously, the numbers that he has referred to as it relates to salary, I cannot confirm them. The information that I have from the department, they are substantially lower than what he has brought to the House. He also made reference to the fact that there would be 175 people employed. He is the only one that has ever put that number on the table, but it in fact was something like 10 to 20 people, and they are still employing probably I 0 to 15 people. Again, I have a hard time finding any accuracy to what the member is bringing to the Legislature at all.

Contract Release Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): My supplementary to the same minister is this: I would like to know when he will publicly release the contract so that we can confirm what the actual figures are. This minister has been hiding this contract for months and months and months. We have asked him many times to release it and he refuses. When will he release it? Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier): I do not know. Maybe he would give me a little more idea as to what actual contract he is referring to. When he brings his questions to the House, if he would be a little more precise, it would be helpful.

I am trying to co-operate, to help. Again, as I have made reference, the company is carrying out R & D, which the province has participated in. It is a company that does not provide or is not able to provide all the information, because it is somewhat of a competitive nature, but again we will try to comply with the member and give as much information as possible. Michael Bessey Role Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Elmwood, with his final supplementary question. Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, my final supplementary to the same minister is this: Rather than taking more questions as notice, could the minister today tell the House what role Mike Bessey played with Tracey Deleeuw in getting the ManGlobe project through the Economic Development Board and cabinet? Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier): The activities of anyone dealing with this particular project were carried out on a normal basis. Linnet Graphics Contract Status Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Mr. Deputy Speaker, for about five years plus another year, Linnet Graphics

April 28, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2007 has had a particular understanding and agreement with * (14 30) the Province of Manitoba. My information is that Bone Density Scans Waiting List agreement ended on March 31, 19 97. I wonder if the Minister of Natural Resources could confirm whether the Linnet agreement has now ended, and what arrangements are in place to supersede that agreement. Hon. Glen Cumm ings (Minister of Natural Resources): I learned a long time ago not to entirely trust my memory, but I believe it is correct that the arrangements have ended, and we are looking to tender services. Mr.

Sale: The Province of Manitoba still owns 24 percent of Linnet, unless there has been an agreement for sale which has not been released. Could the minister describe for the House the current state of the relationship between Linnet and the province and whether the province is maintaining that stake or not? Mr. Cummings: I do not have that information right at my fingertips, but I will be glad to provide it. Land-Related Information System Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood, with his final supplementary question. Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, it is difficult to understand the minister would not have that information. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I would like to remind the honourable member that there is no need for a

preamble to his question. I would ask the member to place his question now, please. Mr. Sale: Would the minister tell the House the current state of the Manitoba land-related information system which was the primary responsibility of the Linnet contract? Has that system now been put in abeyance? If it has not, who is in charge of it? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): I hope the member would appreciate that I have been focusing on a number of other issues in the last short while, and I will be glad to provide him with that information. Mr.

Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I have a question for the Minister of Health. I have been informed by a Brandon woman who is suffering from osteoporosis that she was advised that she had to wait for two years to have a bone density scan in Winnipeg. As a result, her doctor strongly suggested that she go to Minot, North Dakota, which she did, and paid $90 plus travel expenses. Obviously, this is an unacceptable situation and a serious gap in our health care system.

I ask the minister: Inasmuch as this could be a very important preventative program, why will you not provide more resources to eliminate this two-year waiting list for bone density scans? Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): I would concur with the member for Brandon East that that is an unacceptable waiting period. In fact, upon coming into this office, the previous minister-! know the Premier (Mr. Filmon) has had an interest in this issue, and we have discussed ways of improving that. We are working on some of those plans within the department now because it is an unacceptable waiting list.

I hope we are going to have some announcements a little later in the year to overcome that waiting Jist. [interjection] Mr. Leonard Evans: I think we have the greatest system. We just need the resources to make it work. A supplementary: Will the minister advise how many hundreds of women, not only in my constituency but across Manitoba, are on the waiting Jist and are being deprived of a major service that would assist in coping with this particular health problem? How many hundreds of people are waiting? Mr.

Praznik: I do not have, as the member may appreciate, those numbers with me today, but I know when we get into our discussions of Estimates, or at other times, I would be more than pleased to share that with him. I would indicate to him that, yes, we in Canada and certainly in Manitoba do have a wonderful health care system, and one of the great advantages of that system is the ability to direct and make best use of our resources. One of the reasons, in fact, we are in the

2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 19 97 process of moving into regional health authorities is because that gives us better ability to better utilize resources. I know I could share with him many examples brought to my attention where current resources available within the city of Winnipeg could be better utilized to a greater maximum if we were able to organize those better, so I appreciate his advice and his comments. It is certainly what we are endeavouring to do. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The time for Oral Question Period has expired. NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS Flooding-Teamwork and Spirit Mr.

Brian Pallister (Portage Ia Prairie): Leave for a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Portage have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Pallister: The Red River flood of 1997 gives us all cause to reflect and perhaps to reflect on blessings that we have taken for granted.

The work of families in this province to support one another, the heartfelt despair that has been experienced by too many in this province that has served not only to bring us together but to bring us together in deeds as opposed to just words and the sustaining love that those families exhibit for one another is something that I think all of us take for granted all too often. I certainly, on reflection, do appreciate the support of my own family very much over the number of years I have been able to serve in this Chamber.

I also believe this flood serves to illustrate the tremendous integrity of our constituents. All of us are honoured to be in this Chamber and to .serve the constituents who have elected us, who have chosen to have us as their representatives here. When I see the conduct of the constituents whom we represent in this province through the course of this flood, I am even more honoured than I have ever been in the past. The sacred trust that they have given to us is something that should give us all cause to reflect and to feel honoured.

The work and the commitment that members of this House do for the people of this province is something that deserves to be valued, too. I personally believe that the members of this House deserve the credit. All of us, regardless of partisan persuasion, deserve the credit and respect of the people of this province for the work they have done. I am very impressed and I appreciate very much the work of all members in representing their constituents.

I am very impressed by the work that we have done within this House when we are able to step beyond the narrow bounds of partisanship and strive together to work for Manitobans as we are doing in the flood crisis that faces this province today. Most of all, I guess, I do not want to ever take for granted the support of my friends and my colleagues.

As I see the work and the friendship that has gone on in this province, that has been displayed by the people of this province in the last few weeks and that will continue to be displayed in the days and months ahead, I am deeply honoured to have had the opportunity to serve the people of my constituency and of Manitoba for the past five years. I thank you for the chance to get to serve the people of my constituency, and I thank you for the chance to work with people in this Chamber, all of whom I have great respect for.

I want to say in closing that I appreciate, having worked with community and business and sports organizations for many years, what a good team is, and, I must say that the best team I have ever been privileged to be part of is this government. I deeply feel appreciative of the chance to get to know so many of these fine people, and I will always value their friendship. I thank you for the opportunity to speak. Early Childhood Educator Week Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Do I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Burrows have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]

April 28, 19 97 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2009 Mr. Martindale: The week of April 27 to May 3, 1997, has been proclaimed by the mayor of Winnipeg and the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson) as Early Childhood Educator Week. I want to thank the honourable Minis ter of Family Services for this proclamation, because it gives me the opportunity to acknowledge and thank all early childhood educators for their professionalism, their dedication and their love for children in their care. They do a tremendous job, and they need to be recognized and thanked by all of us.

If MLAs have not visited every child care centre in their constituency, I would encourage them to do so. I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the warm reception you will receive. The Manitoba Child Care Association and the Family Day Care Association of Manitoba are to be commended for their joint conference in Winnipeg last week and for the wide variety of workshops they offered their members, which I am sure will make all their members better early chi ldhood educators. Thank you. Day of Mourning Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Do I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Pembina have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Dyck: Each year in Canada, April 28 is desig nated as the national Day of Mourning for those who have been injured or who have died in workplace accidents in Canada. We are all in agreement that too many workers still become ill or are injured, sometimes fatally, at their place of work. All life is precious. Any workplace injury or fatality is a serious matter and of great concern to us all.

All of us are touched by these tragedies, whether the person is in jured, is a fellow worker old or young, male or female, who may be working as a farmer, a logger, a construction worker, miner, as a worker on an assembly line or in some other line of work. All in juries are preventable from each incid ent. Whether it results in a serious injury or not, we must learn what happened so that we can prevent simi lar occurrences and ensure that such tragedies do not happen in the future. In Manitoba, recent years have seen signi ficant reductions and improvement in accident rates and traumatic fatality rates.

Employers and workers have been working as partners to ensure the workplaces become safer, and this must continue. As long as a single worker continues to be injured or killed in a workplace accident, there remains room for improvement. We must remain diligent in continuing to make Manitoba's workplaces even safer and healthier. Injury and death at work brings pain and suf fering to co-workers, families and friends.

The Day of Mourning on April 28 gives all of us a chance to consider this serious nature of work and to set aside a few moments to think about those persons injured or killed and to think how we can all work towards the goal of elim inating all workplace accidents. Thank you. * (1 440) Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Do I have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Transcona have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. Reid: Today, April 28, is a Day of Mourning for those who were killed or injured on the job.

This day is made possible through the efforts of the former Churchill M.P. Mr. Rod Murphy whose private member's bill in Parliament gave recognition to this day. Not only is today important as the one day of the year where we recognize that we need to work more safely in our workplaces, but every day should be used to educate for workplace safety and health and to work safely. I ask the minis ter himself and all members of this Legislative Assembly to join us, not only for those who are working in the flood situation in our province, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in workplaces that can in many places be dangerous but for the other workplaces of our province to continue to work safely and to educate others to prevent the loss of life and serious injury and more minor injuries as a result of workplace accidents .

20 10 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 So I ask all members to join together to educate each other and the public to work safely. Thank you. Flooding-Volunteers Mr. Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): Do I have leave for a nonpolitical statement? Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed] Mr. McAlpine: I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to all the volunteers in our city and throughout the province who have been helping in the sandbagging effort.

In particular, I would like to extend my thanks to Sturgeon Creek United Church for their efforts this weekend. They sent two truckloads and two vanloads of food and drinks to be distributed to volunteers and workers who have been helping with the flood effort. I had the opportunity to go out sandbagging with many other volunteers from the Sturgeon Creek United Church, and I have to say that I was impressed by the tremendous effort put forth in order to help our friends to the south end of the city.

I would like to pay particular thanks to Reverend Allan Saunders and Debra Schwyer, in particulr.r, for their efforts in helping to organize this weekend's effort by Sturgeon Creek United Church. I would also like to mention the Courts IGA for their generous contribution of food and drinks for the volunteers. Finally, I would like to commend you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), in organizing the sandbagging effort for us to participate in your constituency in the sandbagging.

The volunteers from Sturgeon Creek went out to your constituency office and were directed to homes that needed help building dikes. With about 200 volunteers involved on Turnbull Drive, our efforts were very successful and very much appreciated by the residents, in particular the Gregorys. Fin ally, I would like to thank everyone who has contributed in helping their friends and neighbours. Indeed, it makes me feel proud to be a Manitoban, and I appreciate the opportunity to help those residents who are in need during the 1997 flood. Thank you. House Business Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, prior to entering upon Orders of the Day, I would like to ensure that certain of the arrangements made last week concerning deferral of votes in the House and in committees, the waiving of the quorum requirement in the House and in committees and the altering of the rule regarding the number of members who may request a recorded vote are in place for this week as well. We have honourable members in all parties who have very important responsibili ties, not only here but outside of the Legislature as well.

I think these arrangements, while we have not resolved all matters, we certainly, I think, all see eye to eye on the point that members do need to be absent from this House for obvious reasons these days, and I think it is an appropriate matter that we continue this agreement that we had last week. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): On a matter of House busin ess, the agreement last week included a number of components-one, the votes; two, the private members' hour and, three, the Estimates.

What we were doing is, obviously, not trying to shortchange the government's timetable on Estimates by cancelling private members' hour and incorporating that time that would normally take place on a Monday evening, cancelling Monday evening so all of us can go out and sandbag. If there are two people sitting here in the House. even in Estimates, they should be sandbagging in our commumtJes and our constituencies. So what the min ister described as the agreement last week and what he proposed today is different. We want to be sandbag ging.

We can do our Estimates, we can do our sandbagging and we can come to an agreement on the votes. So the agreement last week was, one, that we would not call votes; two, that we would cancel private members' hour; three, we would have Estimates in their place; and, four, we would not sit on Monday evening. We would be where we should be, and that is out in our communities. So if the minis ter wants to come back with that agreement, we are certainly willin g to incorporate that

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 20 11 in our plans this week and we even think if things are cresting all the way along the Red River, we should look at Friday-I mean, all of us love being in the House including all of us who like asking questions, but the priorities should be in our constituencies right now. Thank you very much. Mr. McCrae: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I heard what the Leader of the Opposition said, and I think what I heard come through is that there is a need to do a number of things and certainly it is the flood ef forts engaged in by honourable members in all of the parties.

I think I heard the honourable member say there is no difficulty from his standpoint with respect to votes in the House and in its committees, including Committee of Supply. I also heard him say there was not a problem with issues related to quorums and altering the rule regarding the number of members who may request a recorded vote. I do not see it as being appropriate that the honourable Leader of the Opposition and I, on our feet in the Chamber, negotiate issues around private members' hour.

I did not think I heard the honourable member suggest that, for example, we could reduce the number of hours required to complete the Estimates, a long contentious item amongst honourable members on all sides. I did not hear the honourable member say that. I rose simply, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to place on the record what I felt was agreed upon. I did not talk about private members' hour because that was not something that was the subject of agreement at this point, and it may well be later today or some such thing.

I was only rising to address those matters upon which I felt there was agreement, those being matters related to votes and quorums. Mr. Doer: On a matter of House business, I think with the greatest of respect, the government House leader did talk about, as we agreed to last week and then only talked about the one part of the agreement of last week. So if he will check the record, he will see that is what his words were.

If there is no agreement on private members' hour and this evening's session, if it is the government's intent to have a sitting in the evening tonight rather than having sandbagging, then we certainly will deal with this day by day and agree on the votes today, only today, and we obviously have to have another discussion. We thought what we did last week made common sense, and we are not proposing to reduce the hours in Estimates pursuant to the rules right now and all these other-I do not think we should add up, put all these items on the table.

I think we should go back to where we should be with our constituents. What we did last week, we are willing to do this week, and if the government is not, then we are willing to go day by day on the votes. *

(1450) Mr. McCrae: For clarification, did I hear the Leader of the Opposition say that what I have put on the record might refer only to today and not to other days this week, i.e., issues related to votes and quorums relate only to today and that should the government be wanting to proceed with the day's sitting as it is set out in the standing rules of this House that all the other parts of the arrangement are off? I ask this simply for clarification. Is he talking only about today, or is he saying that there may be a vote tomorrow or that this arrangement, this understanding, would no longer apply? Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Order, please. We have gone far enough with this matter. At this time, I would ask the honourable government House leader to arrange this meeting with the government House leader or the Leader of the official opposition, and we can deal with this matter at a later time when you do have an agreement. I do not think this is an opportunity for debate. I understand from what I have heard that at this time, for today, votes in the House and committees will be deferred.

Is that agreed? [agreed] I also understand that today, for today only, waiving of the quorum requirements in the House and the committees is also in agreement. Agreed? [agreed] Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DA Y Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the

20 12 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 19 97 honourable Minis ter of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Vodrey), that Mr. Deputy Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Agreed? Some Honourable Members: No. (Mr. Gerry McAlpine, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) MATTERS OF GRIEVANCE Minister's Comments Gun Control Legislation Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Acting Speaker, under our rules, we are allowed to have a grievance during this point in time, and I would request that I be given that time now.

I wanted to take this opportunity to express some concerns that I had that really came out of an

article in Friday's Winnipeg Free Press, which causes me a great deal of concern as a representative of Manitobans, like all of us are inside the Chamber. There was an

article written by Alice Krueger, a Free Press staff reporter, in which inside that

article she is interviewing what appears to be the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews). The Minister of Justice is talking about the gun control law that was passed in Ottawa. In it, the Justice minister indicates that the provincial government is not going to be enforcing this particula r law. It is a very controversial issue. There is absolutely no doubt about that. I think that if we go into the background of the politics of this particular issue, it causes a great deal of concern with respect to what this government has done. We have a federal election that is going on.

It has been rumoured that it was going to be starting, that it was going to be kicked off, that it would, in fact, be June 2. It has been that rumour now for well over two weeks. I expected and, quite frankly, to a certain degree there would be a lot of disappointment, in fact, if there was not some political rhetoric that was being espoused by all sides of the House. I anticipate that members of all three political parties inside this Chamber will get involved in the federal election itself. I expect that to occur.

I also respect the fact that there is an administration that passed a law, and that law has to be followed, that this provincial government has a responsibility, and it is not living up to that responsibility. I was greatly offended when I read this particular article, and had I had the opportunity to grieve on Friday, I would have grieved on Friday on this particular point, because I believe that the government has crossed the line here. Political partisanship is expected when we enter inside this Chamber, and I, for one, participate no doubt just as much as most members inside the Chamber.

What I do not care for is when the government itself decides that it wants to cherry pick in terms of what laws it wants to enforce and what laws it does not want to enforce. I do not believe the government has the right to do that. I believe that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) is wrong in the statements that he has made, and an apology is owed to Manitobans, to Canadians. What sort of a precedent is this government trying to set? This current Premier (Mr. Filmon) has more seniority than every other premier across Canada.

We have a government that appears to be saying, even though the federal government has passed a law, we are not going to respect that law. We are not going to enforce it. We are giving specific direction to our administration to ignore and to show a complete lack of respect for that piece of legislation. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I find that disrespectful as a Canadian, not as a Liberal, not as a politician but as a Canadian, that this government has a responsibil ity and if it disagrees with a policy, with something that is being done in Ottawa, it has the right to appeal it in the court as it has done with the government of Alberta. There are many other mechanisms. If it wants to spend $5 million on a bill board campaign, if it wants to mobilize the forces, to oppose, to lobby, to do whatever necessary, it has the right to be able to do that. Mr.

Acting Speaker, that is in fact what the government has the right to do and that is in fact what the government should have done, but to ignore the law and to say that it is not going to respect this aspect of the law, I find is a complete insult to all Manitobans, in fact to all Canadians because this government is saying: We have the right to cherry pick in terms of support the laws which we believe are good, and those laws that we

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 20 13 do not believe are good, we have also the right to say: We are not going to respect them and not accept it. Mr.

Acting Speaker, does that then mean that, through our federation, all other provinces across Canada can follow the lead that this government is trying to demonstrate and can opt to follow a federal law that passes in the Legislature in Ottawa, that if it feels this is a bad law-maybe this antigang legislation that is brought forward, maybe there are some provinces that do not necessarily respect some of the aspects that it is talking about, they too can opt out. Mr. Acting Speaker, one has to question in terms of the division that this administration has in terms of a federation.

Is the government suggesting that the only way we can actually have federal co-operation is through a unitary system, where you have one government system and you dissolve the others or you break it up? You cannot, as a federation, decide here is a piece of law that we are going to support that is passed in Ottawa, because we believe it is good, but this one we do not believe in, so we are not going to support it. * (1 500) Mr. Acting Speaker, the sad part of this is the reason why that government has taken the position that it has taken on this piece of legislation or this law, is strictly politics.

I would have absolutely no objection if the Premier (Mr. Filmon) is in a photo op and he is hammering in a stake that says: Vote for the Tories because of the gun registration. I have no problems with that at all. Some might argue that it might be poor ju dgment, but it is entirely up to the Premier and the government of the day. That sort of action, Mr.

Acting Speaker, would be in fact acceptable, but what is not acceptable is when this government headed by this Premier decides that a law that passes in the House of Commons does not deserve the respect and is not going to be accepted by a provincial administration. Mr. Acting Speaker, I believe this government owes an apology, and then we are not talking an apology to the Liberal Party of Canada, we are talking about an apology to Canadians because this is in fact precedent setting.

I hope that at some point in time we will get an explanation from this government in terms of further expanding what its actual intent was as I in particular read the article. I hope that I in fact misread it and that some sort of explanation is being given. As many members of this Chamber, I went through the Meech Lake crisis and the Charlottetown Accord. I am very familiar with the pros and the cons of those two pieces that were before this Chamber and Manitobans and in fact Canadians as a whole. I know that Canadians, Manitobans, the constituents that I represent want governments to co-operate.

They want to see that co-operation. In fact, a while back, back in '95, I asked a question in essence that dealt with some co-operation, dealt with things such as labour training, immigration, forestry, housing, education, health care, environment, culture and heritage, where I tried to gauge in terms of what they felt which level of government should be playing a leading role. With issues like immigration, health care and environment, for example, it was felt that the federal government should be playing a leading role, and, Mr.

Acting Speaker, other areas that I ju st listed off, the other ones, those were the areas in which it was indicated that a majority felt that the province should be playing a leading role. But let there be no doubt, Mr. Acting Speaker, that Manitobans who elected this government want this government to co-operate. They want them to be able to respect the laws of this land because both governments were given a mandate, both governments, and the national government which sets down aspects ofthe criminal law, those are expected to be followed. Imagine this, Mr. Acting Speaker.

The government has said, look, we are not going to enforce gun registration, so if there is a criminal act that occurs in which an unregistered firearm is involved, and there are a number of charges that are being laid by a provincial Crown attorney, the Crown attorney has now been instructed, even though the law is there saying that you had to have it registered, is now being instructed not to use that charge. So if the federal government wanted that charge done, then what? Are we talking about two courts, two

20 14 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 19 97 court cases? Are we talking about two Crowns getting involved? Mr. Acting Speaker, you will have to excuse me for not necessarily knowing the inner depths of our legal system and having the understanding that no doubt other members of this Chamber will have, but it seems to me that there is something seriously wrong with the statement that has been made by this government, and there needs to be clarification on this issue. I was pleased to read the remarks from the member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers), and I look right at it in the

article where the member stated that although the NDP federally and provincially does not like gun registration much either, when it is the law of the land the province is obliged to enforce it. The member for Dauphin is right. Mr. Chairperson, the member for Dauphin is not a big supporter of gun registration. He opposed it. So does the federal New Democratic Party, from what I understand, and so does the provincial New Democratic Party, from what I understand. Does that mean that the member for Dauphin is not going to go out to a gun rally and speak against gun registration? No.

Chances are when he knocks on the door, he will even cite that the gun registration from his perspective or from their party's perspective was a bad idea. Mr. Acting Speaker, to a certain degree, I would expect that that would, in fact, be happening, and I would expect that to be happening with the Conservative Party-the Conservative Party, underline party, not the Conservative government. This government has a much higher responsibility than to the party membership or the organization that got it elected. It has a responsibility to all Manitobans, to each and every one of them.

It has a responsibil ity to our Constitution. This is dangerous, it is precedent setting, and the government needs to respond to what has been said. When I raised the issue, Mr. Acting Speaker, with some of my own colleagues because it is a highly political issue, it was suggested, well, maybe I should just leave it, because it is the gun registration issue. Well, Mr. Acting Speaker, I cannot do that for the simple reason that I have gone through Charlottetown and Meech Lake. I am a very strong nationalist.

I believe in a strong federal government because I ultimately believe that a federal government that has a vision can guaran tee things so that no matter where you live in this wonderful country, you are going to be able to live in the same sort of a lifestyle whether it is in the province of Manitoba or P.E. I. or whatever other jurisdiction it mi ght be. But, Mr. Acting Speaker, it is absolutely critical that we respect what it is that a national government sets in terms of laws even though we might disagree with them. What are we saying to other levels of government within Manitoba?

If we pass a law, like we did with the school divisions in terms of lim iting their ability to tax the property tax ratepayers, if they do not like it, they could just completely disregard it? Is that what we are saying, because they are a junior level of government? We did that . I wonder what the government would have said if , in fact, a school division would have decided, no, I am going to exceed that cap. I have the right to do it, and I do not like what you are doing. Can you imagine the roars and the legislation, if necessary, that would be brought down by this particular government? Mr.

Acting Speaker, the purpose was not to consume 40 mi nutes. The purpose of this particular grievance was to express a concern which I believe is very important to me, that this government has crossed the line and that, in fact, I look forward to having some sort of response, whether it is in writing or whether it is through the Chamber, whether it is through the Estimates or whatever other vehicle of communication the government might decide to take at responding to the issue that is not only important to me but to all Manitobans.

The issue of gun registration is secondary to the issue which I have raised, I believe, and, as I indi cate, as we get more and more into the election, I look forward to the different sorts of political debates that will occur as individuals of all political parties, no doubt, will try to put their spin on whatever sort of a message that they are getting out, and I am anticipating that all members of this Chamber from all political parties to a certain degree will, in fact, participate in that. * (1510 )

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 20 15 I would trust and hope that as legislators, first and foremost, as opposed to party people, that we will recognize that a line has been crossed, and those actions do have to be addressed. Whether it is now or after the election, whatever the actual timing, I know it is something which I am not going to forget about and, in fact, will pursue in terms of just to what degree the government believes that it has the right to cherry pick as to what laws in the House of Commons it is going to respect and what laws in the House of Commons it is not going to respect.

To that end, Mr. Acting Speaker, if the government really believes it has that ability, I would suggest that the government table the legislation or table a legal opinion that indicates that they do have the ability to do just that. Then I would also be interested in receiving a tabled document to show us exactly what laws that Manitobans do not have to follow. I say that particular one tongue in cheek, hoping that, in fact, the government recognizes the importance of the issue that I have just raised. Thank you. Flooding-South Transcona Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Acting Speaker, I rise on a grievance.

On my grievance, I rise today to draw attention to a situation that I have brought to this House a number of times, and it is important, now that all of us have our attention turned to this spring's flooding that is facing such a large number of Manitobans, that I have an opportunity to raise a priority in my consistency, and that is the south Transcona area and the flooding that it continues to face not only every spring but in the summer if we have a large downpour of rain.

Also, they do not have an adequate drainage system to handle the large amount of water that flows into that small community from the outlying areas, the number of fields both in the city of Winnipeg and outlying into the rural municipal ity of Springfield. As I said, I have raised this a number of times in the House. Not only am I raising it now because the situation in south Transcona seems to be getting worse each year in terms of the amount of water, but it also seems each year that this issue is stalled and is not handled adequately between the city and the provincial government.

I feel that I should use the opportunity to draw attention to what is occurring at this time. The situation in south Transcona at this time last week was very urgent. Last week, or a week ago the past weekend, I and a number of other residents spent the entire weekend sandbagging homes in an effort to protect as many homes as possible from having the water that was overflowing the ditches flow right up to their house and, indeed, into their basements or around their homes and through their foundation.

Now, in south Transcona, the water is receding, even though we know in other parts of the province that is not the case. The sandbagging is over for another year, but now we must turn our attention to having a long-term solution to this problem.

It is interesting when we look at the attention that is being paid now to sandbagging in many parts of Winnipeg along the river and other areas of the province to realize that many homes in south Transcona which are located along the ditches around Dugald Road on an annual basis, oftentimes more than once a year, face this threat of water coming into their homes and are surrounded by, at times, ditches which have more than six feet of water in them. The city, in the past, merely brings sandbags to the Esso station on Dugald Road, and it is up to the residents of south Transcona to fend for themselves.

I was very concerned this year when the same thing was going to happen. After some phone calling and lobbying or pressure, I was happy to see that the city did agree to dispatch volunteers and sandbags directly to the homes, particularly to senior citizens in south Transcona. But it is somewhat an indication of the attitude, I think, that somehow the water affecting south Transcona is different than in other parts of the province.

I would think that if this was occurring in a constituency of one of the members opposite, that the solution would not be stalled and stalled as we are seeing now between the province and city. It has indeed become very much of a political tennis match or a political football game where the province simply tries to do something to make it appear that they are now putting the ball back into the city's court, and then the city council lors and City Hall will try to do something to make it look that it is now up to the

20 16 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 19 97 province to make a decision that is going to see this go forward. This year was no different. We know that if they both really had set a priority for this flooding problem to have a solution, that it would indeed. We have seen mil lions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars, expended in this province under a number of infrastructure programs, and every time, it seems that somehow for some technicality or some problem that occurs, south Transcona is not on the priority list and does not get allocated the funds.

If we put all of the money that had over the years gone into the sandbagging in south Transcona, all the money that had gone to pay for staff-this year the city had to pay a staffperson more than 12 hours a day to sit, watch that the residents who were leaving town and going down Dugald Road did not take the sandbags that had been left for south Transcona-if all that money and all the insurance claims had gone into a long-term solution to this problem, it would have been paid for long ago. I think that says something about the way that this is being dealt with.

This year, we have yet another proposal from City Hall, where they are now proposing a retention pond, instead of inside the hamlet or the housed area, that it is going to be outside at the southeast corner of the city's land. It will catch the water before it flows into the area that has the majority of the housing. This seems logical. It seems to make sense. There are a number of concerns being expressed by a lot of the long-time residents, particularly in that area, some of them who have lived there for more than 75 years and have seen a lot of water pass in front of their house.

They claim that this proposal may not work because the point where they plan on putting this retention pond is the highest point in the south Transcona area. A lot of those people are recommending that the provincial government and the city would fund to take the water, reversing it, rather than having all of that water from the R.M. of Springfield flow through the city of Winnipeg sewer system and contribute to the threat of sewer backup which, again, it did this year.

Rather than having that situation which does not make any sense, to flow water from the R.M. of Springfield through the Winnipeg sewer system, have that reversed and send this water to the floodway. That also makes sense. The city engineers having been saying for a number of years that does not work. It is going against the grade of the land, even though we know that is the very thing that happens with the city sewer system, which is just north ofthere under Kildare Avenue. But the city engineers say it is not feasible.

They were also up until this year claiming that it was going to be far more expensive than previous proposals to deal with this problem. Now we find, though, the current proposal is more than $3 million which is what last year and the year before the engineers were telling us it would cost to funnel this water into the floodway. So this proposal this year, it is not going to supposedly cost the local residents there an addition in their local levy in their property taxes, which makes sense to me. Those people pay the same amount of taxes as any other resident in south Transcona. They have no roads.

They have no surface water drainage sewer system. It is all ditches. They have very poor services in terms of transit, in terms of even their mailboxes now are removed from their homes, and they have to travel to pick up their mail. The amount of taxes that are returned to that community is very minimal as compared to the amount that they are paying. But there was a problem this year.

When the city passed a resolution on February 12, '97, when they agreed on this proposal for a retention pond in the southeast corner of the area and proposed that the provincial government cost share it by 50 percent, they put a requirement on there that the province would make this new money over and above the amount that is already budgeted to the Department of Urban Affairs.

This is where the back and forth between the province and the city is caught up now and is continuing. * (1 520) Some have suggested that many of the city council lors or members of the administration over at City Hall would have known full well that the province would say no to that request, that that resolution was bound to fail, that the requirement for the province to

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 20 17 budget over and above the Urban Capital Project Allocation, which was specified in that resolution, would not be acceptable to the Min ister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer) and to the cabinet. That is indeed what has happened. The province has now used this as an opportunity to bat the ball back to City Hall, and City Hall is saying, well, we will have to go back now and figure out perhaps if we can get the Department of Rural Development to fund this flood abatement project. I have raised this in the House. The Minister of Rural Development (Mr.

Derkach) was shaking his head, and the Premier (Mr. Filmon), whom I asked if he would have this considered, basically said, no, that they had already told the city that they would have to apply for the Urban Capital Project Allocation. The Minister of Urban Affairs has said that this is the appropriate type of project for that capital fund and, indeed, if the city wants to make it a priority on their list of priorities, that is fine, but he has also said that he would make it a provincial priority.

I would suggest that if this is truly going to be a priority, then the province and the city would not be going through this back-and-forth game on this issue, and they would show some leadership and ensure that the residents of south Transcona do not have to face this problem time and time again. Even since 1990, since I have been elected, I have seen a number of proposals for this problem of flooding in south Transcona. One of them even included a golf course for night golfing with condominiums. The retention pond, of course, would be in the golf course, and it would be fed by all the run-off water.

It would be allowed for night golfing, with time- and motion sensitive lights that would only go on when you were there to golf and then, of course, would not be on to ill uminate the area and bother the residents in the surrounding area when the golf course was not in use. That is the extent that some owners of property in and around that area have gone to, to make proposals. I do not think that one is being considered any longer. There was also a proposal, I guess, a couple of years ago. It is interesting when we see what happened with that proposal.

That one was to begin the first of a series of three retention ponds, which the first one would have been right in the backyards of many of the residents. There was going to be the need to expropriate land from residents, and some felt that they were going to tum the small community of south Transcona into a bathtub. What happened in this situation, though, is very interesting. Again, there was all this game playing back and forth with infrastructure money. That is one time when because of the way this project was handled south Transcona did not qualify for any infrastructure money.

I am concerned that is what is happening again here as we see more infrastructure money being spent in Manitoba, and once again south Transcona is left off. Here is what happened in the case of this other proposal. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) had said it was up to the city to set the priorities under the infrastructure allocation. The city on the other hand said, well, we are not going to make south Transcona a priority for infrastructure money, because they had already allocated approximately $1. 5 million out of their capital fund, so south Transcona was not on the list.

Because it was going to be a local improvement for that particular project, a retention pond, back in 19 94, the residents of south Transcona had to vote on it. Again, it was almost like a situation where they were making a proposal that was bound to fail. Under that proposal, some of the residents in that part of the city who own five-acre lots would have had to pay $40,000 on their tax bill. In some cases that would have gone to a flood protection project that would not even affect their land. It would not have protected them from flooding at all.

So, needless to say, that proposal ended up being very divisive in the community, and it was indeed voted down, which meant that it did not qualify for the city money. Then, as it turned out, the project was not prioritized for infrastructure money, so it simply died. The residents of south Transcona since then have had two more springs and summers of flooding. But that goes to illustrate the type of back and forth between the different governmental jurisd ictions that this flood abatement project has had to face, and it is completely unacceptable.

We are wanting to see some more leadership from both this government and from

20 18 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 19 97 City Hall to truly prioritize this project to make sure that it is done. The members opposite have said it is a priority but, indeed, I would suggest that if it really is a priority, it would happen. Things are only a true priority when they actually occur. One of the other things that I wanted to talk a little bit about in my grievance related to this whole area in terms of the flood problem for south Transcona is the comment by some people that, why do people live there is what you will often say.

On this again, I would also come back and tum both to the provincial government and the city government, because it is the city that zones land for housing development and it is the province that approves that zoning. So there is actually the responsibili ty for the City of Winnipeg, once they have zoned areas for housing and once they have allowed homes to be constructed there, to ensure that those areas are safe for habitation, for people to live there.

One of the ongoing problems with this area that is making things worse is related, I believe, to the way that both the province and the city have allowed urban development and the zoning of land to proceed in our city, which has basically been to encourage urban sprawl, to have no real vision or foresight as to how we should develop our city in order to look at the existing areas where there is urbanization.

I know that as the city tries to leverage more money out of the province to cover this particular project, in some ways I can sympathize, because I agree that this provincial government has starved the city in a number of areas. There have been a number of cuts, not just through Urban Aff airs, but in a number of other departments and programs that have had drastic costs for the city, increased costs, everything from social allowance and lotteries to cuts in education, health care.

Across the board, the City of Winnipeg has been damaged and has suffered under this provincial government. * (1 530) The way that the urban area of Winnipeg has been allowed to deteriorate under this provincial government is going to be a stone around their necks and indeed until all of us are suffering. This government has passed huge costs on to the City of Winnipeg because of the way they have allowed the city to sprawl out and grow and have both exurban sprawl and urban sprawl without any real plan for the Capital Region.

So there have been huge costs that have been brought to bear on the population of Winnipeg, which is not growing to meet this larger land mass and area that is having to be serviced with both hard services and soft services.

So, in saying that, in some ways I can understand why the City of Winnipeg is coming to the province and trying to leverage additional funds, but at the same time, I cannot accept them trying to claim that the south Transcona flood abatement project is a priority if indeed they are not going to be willi ng to access the Urban Capital Projects Allocation and ensure that this project goes ahead.

The city has also had a number of problems, and this is where it could be interesting for ministers such as Rural Development and Urban Affairs to take some special consideration, especially as we are seeing the problems in other areas of Winnipeg where we have actually also had some deaths occur by young people falling into ditches and into culverts and that has led to their deaths. These are very serious situations that continue to face south Transcona every year.

Two weeks ago, when I was sandbagging in south Transcona, a small boy, a toddler, he could not have been more than three years old, also fell into one of the ditches, and there must have been easily four or five feet of water. He definitely would have perished. He was already being sucked under the wood sidewalk, and he definitely would have perished if all the adults who were standing around did not scoop him out of the water immediately.

The seriousness of the situation then for this provincial government and the city to ensure that the appropriate funds are in place to protect the safety of Manitobans in our urbanized areas is utmost. I believe that the situation in south Transcona and many other areas in the province and the city of Winnipeg that have ditches and culverts that are in excess, as I have said, of

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 20 19 six feet would not pass the building development codes as they stand right now. What ends up happening is these culverts and ditches are not maintained.

This in turn is leading to a lot more problems and is more expensive in the long run when the city has to spend a lot more money in terms of trying to prevent sewer backup, trying to do sandbagging, trying to run emergency operations, than if they would just expend the funds from the provincial government to the city to properly maintain those ditches and culverts in the first place, if they would ensure that the ditches are cleared in the fall of any grass growth, cattails and other garbage that gets collected there, so that in the spring the water could flow more freely, if they would ensure that the requirements for installation of culverts are met.

What is happening in many areas of the city as the urban development expands is areas that previously had one or two culverts in a ditch, now have all the whole way along declining size of smaller and smaller culverts, so it is no surprise when spring comes and the snow starts to melt, that the water cannot pass through. What ends up happening is, in a haphazard way, when the city does go in to clean the ditches, what ends up happening is, some of those culver ts are crushed.

There is never any attention paid to replacing them or repairing it, and we end up having water backups and the kind of flooding that we have seen.

So I am suggesting that the provincial government does have a role to play here in ensuring that they are adequately funding-and perhaps there should be, after this spring, some special fund that is created to do some serious upgrading of the culverts and ditches in and around not only Winnipeg but other parts of the province, to ensure that they are going to be properly maintained so we can avoid the kind of sewer backups, water backups, and very unsafe situations that have faced so many of our communities this spring, and I realize that though south Transcona is unique, south Transcona is not the only area of the city that faces this situation.

It just does not make sense, Mr. Acting Speaker, to continue the kind of situation that we have. I was driving to work this morning through St. Boniface, and it was like an obstacle course, coming down Goulet and Marion, to go around the piles of sandbags that are over all of the manholes covering in the access to the main sewer line.

I would suggest that the problem of sewer backup that so many of us are now worried about could be reduced if the province and the city would deal with this issue of having tons and tons of water from the R.M. of Springfield flow through the Winnipeg sewer system, down the Dugald ditch and into the Seine River and ultimately through our sewer system.

We were having to deal with the same situation in south Transcona where they had to put sandbags over the manhole covers, so you had the double problem or the dilemma of, on the one hand, trying to prevent water from overflowing the ditches into people's homes, so it was pooling into the middle of the road, often more than a foot deep in the middle of the road, and then swirling down through the manhole covers into the main sewer line. The main sewer line could have assisted in reducing the amount of water that was threatening people's homes over ground.

Too much water going into the main sewer line in that way could then back up into their basements through the drains in their basement floor. It ju st does not make sense then to continue to have such a large amount of water flowing from outside the city of Winnipeg into our Winnipeg sewer system, which, as I said, is more and more overtaxed. As we allow the city to continue to sprawl out and try to deal with more and more housing, we still have, in the centre areas of Winnipeg, the same size of sewer system. I do not think we have taken that into consideration.

I do not think we have taken into consideration the more and more area in the city of Winnipeg that we pave with concrete, the less that water can soak into the ground, and the more and more we are putting stress on the existing sewer lines and sewer system. All of this requires attention by the provincial government. They cannot simply say, as they do so often, it is a city responsibili ty.

Even when we have asked them questions, even when we have asked this government and cabinet ministers questions about the operations of the City of Winnipeg during this emergency, they continue to try and take the attitude, well, that is their responsibility; it is not ours. So it

2020 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 seems like they do not have any interest in bringing information forward and having some responsibility. *( 1540) The City ofWinnipeg Act retains in the hands of this provincial government very large powers and authority over the City of Winnipeg.

With particularly the situation in Manitoba where such a large percentage of the population of our province lives in the city of Winnipeg, we can no longer have this government ignore as they have the problems facing urban Winnipeg, the problems of urban decay, the problems of urban sprawl, the problems that are all related to the flooding that has gone on in so many areas that we are experiencing right now. With that in mind, I think they have some serious issues to consider now that we see the disaster that is before us.

There are all sorts of questions about the adequacy of the preparations that they have made in terms of the floodway, in terms of the scrambling that is going on for them to prepare the dikes on the southwest end of what is urban Winnipeg, around the St. Norbert area. I was visi ting friends there the other night, trying desperately to remove-they were deciding at that point if they should bring the furniture and belongings from the basement upstairs, and that night they said, no, let us wait. Within less than 12 hours, they were given a notice that they may have to evacuate.

It ju st boggles my mind to think that this government, through the Ministry of Natural Resources and their Emergency Measures could not have foreseen these problems of the drainage from outlying areas ending up coming into the city of Winnipeg from the Morris, and then the La Salle River.

One of the main messages of my grievance is not only to draw the attention of this government to the place of priority in south Transcona, but to look generally at this problem of land drainage around the city of Winnipeg into the Red and Assin iboine River Basin, and how it is affecting many Manitobans, and how I think that they have to take seriously now the ongoing questions that we have been asking, the serious questions about urban sprawl, and the way that this government seems to refuse to acknowledge and recognize this.

It is like there is this massive state of denial across the way when it comes to this whole issue of urban sprawl. I asked many questions in Estimates, in Urban Affairs as well as in Housing with respect to this issue, and it is like they do not want to put two and two together. They do not want to put the problems of urban sprawl in relation and connected with the problems of the decline in the urban core of Winnipeg and realize that we just cannot continue to go on this way and that they do have a responsibil ity.

Since they approve where housing is built in this city, they have a responsibil ity to ensure that those areas are safe, those areas are going to be habitable, that they are going to be indeed able to have people live there without fear and constant flooding and the health problems, the financial cost, the stress and the losses, even the loss of life that goes along with that.

I would then just want to urge the government to work co-operatively with the city to end this political tennis match that has been going on with so many of these issues related to infrastructure, and to ensure that the priority is placed on making our city safe for all Manitobans, and deal with the ongoing problem in south Transcona and not simply wait for the city to respond but indeed to continue meeting. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) had said he had broken one of his rules, which is to generally not meet with city councillors, and he had met with them. I would encourage that to continue.

We cannot have this problem on an ongoing basis. At least, if there is not an agreement this year, as I hope that there will be, to fund the solution to this flood problem in south Transcona, then at least there have to be additional funds to ensure that this year the ditches and cul verts are going to be maintained and replaced and cared for properly so that we do not have the problem of sewer backup.

Because a lot ofthe people that have lived there for many, many years believe that that is all it would take, that if the ditches were brought up to standard and they were properly maintained and if culver ts were put in of the proper size, that there would be no problem there, and that may very well be a much less expensive solution than what is being proposed. If there is not the more intensive solution in terms of constructing this retention pond, then at least they must

April 28, 1997 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 2021 ensure that those ditches and culverts are upgraded and the sewer system there or the drainage system there is going to be upgraded for this summer and next spring. Because I want to remind you, Mr. Acting Speaker, that this is a problem not only in the spring, but also in the summer, and we are heading into summer.

I, for one, believe that we are experiencing a fairly dramatic climate change across the planet, not just here in Canada, and we may see again this summer the heavy rains that we have had last summer, and we may again experience more flooding this summer. So there is going to be lots of work to be done to ensure that the water that we have now accumulating in and around Winnipeg can flow expeditiously because we may have saturated ground and a very limited ability to handle heavy rainfall this summer.

You know, this government just does not seem to really want to look ahead, and so many of the governments, it just does not seem that there is a lot of creativity and planning into dealing with these situations. I know the member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) had been asking a number of questions about efforts to clear ice earlier from the Red River and into Lake Winnipeg, and it just does not make sense to me why we do not take those kinds of precautions and that kind of preventative measure. It just always seems that this government does not act until there is a crisis upon us, and we are seeing that now.

So where there have perhaps been a few cost savings the last couple of budget years, whether it is cuts in the Department of Nat ural Resources or other departments, now we are paying the price for that big-time. We are seeing that if money was invested at the outset into infrastructure to properly maintain the system that has been constructed here in Manitoba or that needs to be constructed, then we probably would not have the kind of situation that particularly residents of south Transcona face every year.

So I am urging, as it is my right through a grievance, that the government would indeed give its attention to the situation for south Transcona, and I would be happy and I am willing to work with them in whatever way that I can. I know that the residents down there are once again anxious and motivated again to organize themselves, and this government will be hearing from them. They have some very legitimate grievances as well as do I, Mr. Acting Speaker. Thank you. Minister's Comments Gun Control Legislation Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): I also rise on a matter of grievance.

I would like to follow the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) on the theme that he had started. I was also thinking about this, that if the Attorney General (Mr. Toews) ofthis province's solemn duty is to enforce the law, how can it be that he can refuse to enforce the law? I know for a fact that the President of the United States has an oath of office which says, to uphold and enforce the law of the United States.

I have no specific knowledge as to what the oath of office of the cabinet minister, particu larly the Attorney General, has sworn himself into, but I suppose implicit, whatever the terminology of the oath of office may be, is the fact that he is there to be the chief enforcer of the law of the land. By law we mean statutes in whatever form and whatever level of government there is. A by-law ofthe City Council is ju st as law as any other.

A statute passed by this Legislature is also law and mostly also all the laws passed by the federal Parliament in Ottawa. * (155 0) If it is a solemn duty of the Attorney General as the chief enf orcer of the law to uphold and enforce the law and he blatantly refused it, is that not a denial of his own oath of office and negation of his basic responsibi lity?

I know that in the United States under the Constitution, if the President of the United States refuses to enforce any law passed by Congress, regardless of whether he likes the law or not, I know that he is subject to impeachment because one of the grounds for impeaching a President of the United States is his refusal to uphold and enforce the law of the land.

How can this be done even in our own system here called parliamentary system if the Attorney General's main and basic duty is to be the chief enforcer, the first law enforcer in this province, how can he publicly and openly say that he is not willing to enforce the law that he disagrees with? I submit that it is a ground for him to either resign because he cannot enforce the law that he is duty-bound to uphold and enforce or he will be subject to the pressure of this Legislature to enforce the law.

2022 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 1997 It is not always a reason to say that I do not agree with the law and therefore I will not enforce it, because if that were the system, there would be anarchy in our society. There would be no order whatsoever. Any citizen who disagrees with any kind of tax will say, I will not pay the tax because I disagree with it. Where will order be in our society? As Lincoln stated, whoever resists the final decision of the highest tribunal deals a deadly blow on our system of government, and that is the highest tribunal of the land, that is the Supreme Court.

We are higher than the Supreme Court, I submit. We represent the people of this society, of this country. The Supreme Court is not accountable to any but themselves and the Constitution. We are accountable to the people, and if the people so selected the members of Parliament and the members of Parliament, by due process of legislation, had passed a law and it becomes the Jaw of the land then everybody is subject to the Jaw of the land and every Attorney General of every province is under a solemn duty to enforce that law.

Any Attorney General who refuses to enforce the law, in my own way of thinking, should resign his position because he cannot prove himself equal to the duty that is incumbent upon the office that he has assumed. We are a government of law, not of man. That is a general principle that everybody knows. We are governed not by people's bias or decisions, we are governed by duly passed legislation and any idea, any system that had gone through the process of three readings of bills and then the signing by the Lieutenant Governor of the province, had duly passed that law.

In this process of legislation, all opinions are heard. It is a process of reconciling all interest and usually it is the majority of the legislators in the proper forum that decide what shall be law. That majority is, of course, the majority that had been elected by the people themselves and although some segments of the population, like many in western Canada, they do not believe in gun legislation. It is the will of Parliament, it is the will of this country that there be some form of gun control. You cannot selectively enforce which law you like and which law you dislike.

Your duty as Attorney General is to enforce every law and all laws and any refusal to do it, in my own mind, is grounds for removal of the Attorney General if he refuses to enforce the law or if he does not want to be removed from office, to have the honour to resign. This is a bad example being set before us, before the eyes of our young people, before the eyes of every other voter of this province.

If you are the chief legis lator and a chief enforcer of the law and you, by example, refuse to uphold and enforce the very law that you are sworn to enforce, what kind of example would that leave in the minds of our children, of our people, of our constituents? That is an example that we do not want to be established in any province, not even in Manitoba. Of course, there is a division of jurisdiction in a federal system of government. There are certain areas of activities of this society that are primarily allotted to be the dominant area of the federal government.

For example, banks. monetary systems and foreign relations, they are entrusted upon the federal government. There are other areas of activities which are entrusted primarily within the jurisdiction of the province such as civil rights, such as property rights. These are entrusted in the provincial jurisdiction. There are areas where there is overlapping ju risdiction, such as in the matter of criminal law and administration of criminal law. While the substantive law will be made by Parliament, the administration of the law, in terms of criminal justice, is entrusted to the provinces.

There are overlapping jurisdictions in other areas like agriculture, like commerce and trade but, in every case, if the Jaw has evolved in the process of lawmaking, that law reigns supreme and the Jaw has to be enforced. Whether you are in agreement with the law or opposed to the Jaw or had been fighting the law, you are duty bound to obey, otherwise there will be no order in a society. If there is no order in a society, there will be anarchy. If there is anarchy in our society, how can we maintain and advance our civili zation, our orderly way of life? Then everybody will do according to what he desires.

If everybody has a right to do what he desires and there is no order in society, there will be a breakdown in our system. If there is a breakdown in our system, that is the end of all civil ization.

April 28, 19 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2023 Every law of course is subject to other higher law. Even Edmund Burke had said that all legislation is subject to the law of the Creator, to the law of nature, to the law ofhumanity, to the law of justice and equity. There are some certain schemes and certain procedures that are instituted by the lawmaker as if they were passed by statute, but some people will agree that those are immoral laws. They have no basis in justice and no basis in equity at all.

There are instances of statutes that are oppressive, but as long as they stay in the books then it is the obligation of the law enforcer, like policemen and courts, to uphold that law and then the duty of legislators like us is to amend and repeal the unjust law or the oppressive law, but as soon as it is passed, as long as it is in the statute book, it is a statute and it should be enforced. Of course, there will be deeper discretion that enters into the enforcement of the law.

There are people who, if they disagree with the law that they are solemnly bound to enforce, will use their dis cretion and will not push it to the limit, because in the ultimate analysis it is the system of justice that should prevail, the system of fairness and not oppressiveness, because when the law becomes too oppressive then the people themselves will rise against those who are in charge of society. There will be rebellion. There will be sedition. There will be revolution.

So it is to the interests of the lawmaker that the law be reasonable, be fair and be just. * (1 600) In matters where it is very controversial like matters of abortion, matters of death penalty, matters of gun control, where they say freedom will be restricted, there are, of course, differences of opinion, but all these differences of opinion are already taken into account when the law is debated in Parliament, when the law is debated in public forum, when the law is being debated during an election campaign. Those are already in process.

All these opinions are then consolidated, and there will in the process emerge a system of governance in the form of a statute. If that statute had duly been done according to the procedure, what we call the legal processes of lawmaking, the procedural aspect of lawmaking, then it becomes legitimate. It becomes legitimate, it has authority and if it has authority it has to be enforced. The lawmakers should not be the lawbreakers. If we are the very lawmaker in this province and we are the first ones to break our own law, how can we expect the citizens to be obedient to the law?

It is inconceivable to me that the highest officer who is duty bound to enforce the law will say: I am not going to enforce the law. That is not only a bad example, he is being a lawbreaker himself. He should be put in prison because we are not, as I said, a government of men but a government of law. When a law has been proclaimed and duly passed and has been promulgated and published in the official gazettes, then it is part of the legal system, and it is not the option of any government in power to enforce or not to enforce the law. It is their duty-bound obligation.

They are bound to duty and obligation to enforce it. It includes not only the law that they themselves have passed because there are other laws broader than the provincial laws. Indeed, there are certain procedures in the court system when there is a conflict of legislation to settle all those but, if we resort to the court process, then the nonelected judges become the rule makers, and they will declare what the law is, and when the nonelected nonaccountable people become the lawmakers, that is the beginning of tyranny. Tyranny by definition is the rule of man, not the rule of law.

The rule of law says that whatever is in the statute book, if it is duly promulgated according to the procedures of Parliament, that is the will of the people, and the will of the people has to be observed. What if the law that is passed is not acceptable to the majority of the people? This is not an unusual thing that happens in democratic and parliamentary governments. I remember when there was debate in the past about capital punishment. If you surveyed and held a nationwide opinion all across the country, the people say, yes, we want capital punishment.

But then the Parliament itself, in its wisdom, has passed no capital punishment, and so that is the law that is being enforced. No matter how grievous the crime that has been committed, no matter how many victims, the criminal will not be put to death as he would be across the border in the United States where there is capital punishment. So we see that the law is being obeyed, whether it is reflective or not of the population which is supposed to be represented by the people in Parliament.

2024 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 28, 19 97 That is not an ideal situation, of course. The ideal situation is when the majority of people want it, then the majority of Parliament should want it, and when the majority of Parliament should want it, that should be the system that should be in place. It happens occasionally because there are two kinds of theories about lawmakers, about representative democracy. One theory which apparently is in operation in this country is that they are the stewards of the people. A steward is one who is given discretion.

After they are given the authority, then it is up to them to look after the welfare of those who are in his stewardship. Apparently, the people are under the stewardship of Parliament, because once you elect those people in Parliament, then they are given all kinds of authority that they can, in the name of the people, do even if it is in actual fact against the wishes of the majority of the people. I do not know why the election is being called when it is not yet time for the election.

But, as you see, there are other considerations when you call the election, whether it is provincial, federal or local, and in a parliamentary system, usually the call comes from those who are in government. It is not set by constitution or by legislation as in the United States. In the United States it should be every four years no matter what, and that is what the Reform Party said we should be doing. But we are not a republican system of government. We are a parliamentary system of government. In a parliamentary system the executive is the majority party in government.

The majority party is running the government. They are the ones who will call the shots. They are the ones who call the election. Peterson, when he was Premier of Ontario, called an election earlier than the four years, and you know what happened. There was a sudden change of government a message here for our present Prime Minister. I know that he came here into this province to look at the flood. But at the same time, if he is really sensitive enough to it, why should he call the election? How can the people who are flooded go to the polls and express themselves?

On the other hand, I think if I were the Prime Mini ster-there are only 14 M.P.s in Manitoba, but there are so many M.P.s in Ontario and so many M.P.s in Quebec. Which one would I take into account? As a pragmatist I of course will do what the expectations of the greater majority of the members of Parliament are. Justice has been defined as the constant and perpetual will to give to every person his due.

No matter what our situation in life is, whether we are high, in the middle or low on the totem pole of social hierarchy and social ranking, whether we are rich, or whether we belong to the middle class or whether we are poor, we are all governed by the same legislation, the same set of legislation. Only those laws that are duly passed according to the procedures of the law-making bodies-and if they

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-3-35
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 3rd hansardpdf 35.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	4a88dd50b141863898184a11a79abe45481387c8

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