Manitoba Hansard — 13 June 2006 (Sitting 89B, 38th Legislature, 4th Session)

38-4-89b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth Session - Thirty-Eighth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LVII No. 89B - 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, June 13, 2006

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

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

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

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

3311 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, June 13, 2006 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Removal of Agriculture Positions from Minnedosa Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for the petition: Nine positions with the Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives Crown Lands Branch are being moved out of Minnedosa. Removal of these positions will severely impact the local economy.

Removal of these positions will be detrimental to revitalizing this rural agriculture community. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the provincial government to consider stopping the removal of these positions from our community, and to consider utilizing current technology in order to maintain these positions in their existing location. This petition signed by Lisa Malugz, Clark McNabb, Lynn Moffat and many, many others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House.

Grandparents' Access to Grandchildren Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for the petition: It is important to recognize and respect the special relationship that exists between grandparents and grandchildren. Maintaining an existing, healthy relationship between a grandparent and a grandchild is in the best interest of the child. Grandparents play a critical role in the social and emotional development of their grandchildren.

This relationship is vital to promote the intergenerational exchange of culture and heritage, fostering a well-rounded self-identity for the child. In the event of divorce, death of a parent or other life-changing incident, a relationship can be severed without consent of the grandparent or grandchildren. It should be a priority of the provincial government to provide grandparents with the means to obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To urge the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Ms. Melnick) and the Premier (Mr.

Doer) to consider amending legislation to improve the process by which grandparents can obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren. Signed by Mindie Quesnel, Jen Sparrow, Joan Betteridge and many others. Removal of Agriculture Positions from Minnedosa Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition. These are the reasons for the petition: Nine positions with the Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives Crown Lands Branch are being moved out of Minnedosa. Removal of these positions will severely impact the local economy.

Removal of these positions will be detrimental to the revitalization of this rural agriculture community. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the provincial government to consider stopping the removal of these positions from our community, and to consider utilizing current technology in order to maintain these positions in their existing location. This petition is signed by Wayne Hopkins, Tom Ritchie, Pam Collen and many, many others.

3312 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the House to present a petition on behalf of the Member for Southdale (Mr. Reimer). Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been granted. Grandparents' Access to Grandchildren Mr. Faurschou: Mr. Speaker, the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: It is important to recognize and respect the special relationship that exists between grandparents and grandchildren.

Maintaining an existing, healthy relationship between a grandparent and a grandchild is in the best interest of the child. Grandparents play a critical role in the social and emotional development of their grandchildren. This relationship is vital to promote the intergenerational exchange of culture and heritage, fostering a well-rounded self-identity for the child. In the event of divorce, death of a parent or other life-changing incident, a relationship can be severed without consent of the grandparent or grandchildren.

It should be a priority of the provincial government to provide grandparents with the means to obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To urge the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Ms. Melnick) and the Premier (Mr. Doer) to consider amending legislation to improve the process by which grandparents can obtain reasonable access to their grandchildren. Signed by Arnie Procyshyn, Jessie Procyshyn, Maureen Bennet and many, many others. * (13:35) OlyWest Hog Processing Plant Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background for this petition is as follows: The Manitoba government, along with the OlyWest consortium, promoted the development of a mega hog factory within the city of Winnipeg without proper consideration of rural alternatives for the site. Concerns arising from the hog factory include noxious odours, traffic and road impact, water supply, waste water treatment, decline in property values, cost to taxpayers and proximity to the city's clean drinking water aqueduct.

Many Manitobans believe this decision represents poor judgment on behalf of the provincial government. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the provincial government to immediately cancel its plans to support the construction of the OlyWest hog plant and rendering factory near any urban residential area. Signed by Lindsay Turner, A. Ceru, and K. McIntosh. Crocus Investment Fund Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

The background to this petition is as follows: The government needs to uncover the whole truth as to what ultimately led to over 33,000 Crocus shareholders to lose tens of millions of dollars. The provincial auditor's report, the Manitoba Securities Commission's investigation, the RCMP investigation and the involvement of our courts, collectively, will not answer the questions that must be answered in regard to the Crocus Fund fiasco. Manitobans need to know why the government ignored the many warnings that could have saved the Crocus Investment Fund.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Premier (Mr. Doer) and his NDP government to co-operate in uncovering the truth in why the government did not act on what it knew and to consider calling a public inquiry on the Crocus Fund fiasco. That is signed, Mr. Speaker, by R. Lecomte, Gerald Lecomte, Gina Lecomte and many, many other fine Manitobans.

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3313 COMMITTEE REPORTS Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development Fourth Report Ms. Marilyn Brick (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development presents the following as its Fourth Report. Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development presents the following as its Fourth Report.

Meetings: Your committee met on the following occasions: Thursday, June 8, 2006, at 8:30 a.m. Thursday, June 8, 2006, at 12 p.m. Monday, June 12, 2006, at 9 a.m. All meetings were held in Room 255 of the Legislative Building. Matters under Consideration: Bill 25 – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Payday Loans)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la protection du consommateur (prêts de dépannage) Bill 29 – The Degree Granting Act/Loi sur l'attribution de grades Bill 32 – The Real Property Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens reels Bill 33 – The Northern Affairs Act/Loi sur les affaires du Nord Bill 34 – The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les divulgations faites dans l'intérêt public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes répréhensibles) Bill 41 – The Pharmaceutical Act/Loi sur les pharmacies Committee Membership: Committee membership for the meeting on June 8, 2006, at 8:30 a.m.: Ms. Brick (Chairperson) Mr. Caldwell Mr. Derkach Mr. Goertzen Mr. Hawranik Hon. Mr. Lathlin Mr. Martindale (Vice-Chairperson) Hon. Ms. McGifford Mr. Reimer Hon. Mr. Rondeau Hon. Mr.

Selinger Committee membership for the meeting on June 8, 2006, at 12 p.m.: Ms. Brick (Chairperson) Mr. Derkach Mr. Dewar Mr. Goertzen Mr. Hawranik Ms. Irvin-Ross Hon. Mr. Lathlin Mr. Martindale (Vice-Chairperson) Hon. Ms. McGifford Mr. Reimer Hon. Mr. Selinger Committee membership for the meeting on June 12, 2006, at 9 a.m.: Ms. Brick (Chairperson) Mr. Cummings Mr. Goertzen Mr. Hawranik Ms. Korzeniowski Hon. Mr. Lathlin Mr. Martindale (Vice-Chairperson) Hon. Ms. McGifford Hon. Mr. Sale Mr. Schuler Hon. Mr.

Selinger Substitutions received during committee proceedings for the meeting on June 12, 2006, at 9 a.m.: Mr. Dewar for Ms. Korzeniowski Mr. Jennissen for Hon. Mr. Lathlin Mr. Altemeyer for Hon. Mr. Selinger

3314 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 Mr. Aglugub for Hon. Ms. McGifford Public Presentations: Your committee heard five presentations on Bill 25 – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Payday Loans)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la protection du consommateur (prêts de dépannage), from the following individuals and organizations: Michael Thompson, President and CEO, Canadian Payday Loan Association Gloria Desorcy, Manitoba Branch of the Consumers Association Canada Catharine Johannson, Private Citizen Mary Lou Bourgeois, Private Citizen David Love, Private Citizen Your committee heard one presentation on Bill 29 – The Degree Granting Act/Loi sur l'attribution de grades, from the following individual: Catharine Johannson, Private Citizen Your committee heard two presentations on Bill 32 – The Real Property Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens réels, from the following organizations: Louis Harper, Manitoba Keewatinookinwew Okimowin (MKO) Carl Braun, Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba Inc.

Your committee heard one presentation on Bill 34 – The Public Interest Disc losure (Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les divulgations faites dans l'intérêt public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes répréhensibles), from the following individuals and organizations: Martin Boroditsky, Private Citizen Your committee heard four presentations on Bill 41 – The Pharmaceutical Act/Loi sur les pharmacies, from the following individuals and organizations: Penny Murray, Manitoba Pharmaceutical Association Scott Ransome, Manitoba Society of Pharmacists Troy Harwood-Jones, Manitoba International Pharmacists Association Dr.

Sheryl Zelenitsky, Private Citizen Written Submissions: Your committee received one written submission on Bill 34 – The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les divulgations faites dans l'intérêt public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes répréhensibles), from the following individual: Paul Thomas, Private Citizen Bills Considered and Reported: Bill 25 – The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Payday Loans)/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la protection du consommateur (prêts de dépannage) Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment: THAT the proposed subsection 164(13), as set out in Clause 3 of the Bill, be replaced with the following: Application of Public Utilities Board Act 164(13)

Part I of The Public Utilities Board Act applies, with necessary changes, to the making of an order under this

section as if the powers and duties of the board under this

section were assigned to the board under that Part, except for the following provisions: (

a) section 33 (power of board on complaints); (

b) section 34 (power to appoint counsel) as it relates to the fees and expenses of the person appointed; (c) subsection 51(2) (time for service of order); (

d) section 52 (enforcement of order); (

e) section 56 (order as to costs) as it relates to the costs of an intervener; (

f) section 57 (fees). Bill 29 – The Degree Granting Act/Loi sur l'attribution de grades Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment. Bill 32 – The Real Property Amendment Act/Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens réels Your committee agreed to report this bill without amendment.

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3315 Bill 33 – The Northern Affairs Act/Loi sur les affaires du Nord Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment: THAT Clauses 181(1) and (2) of the Bill be replaced with the following: Land acquired becomes Crown land 181(1) Land in northern Manitoba held by the government, including land acquired by the minister under

section 180, is Crown land within the meaning of The Crown Lands Act and is vested in the Crown. Dispositions: consultation and ministerial approval 181(2) Crown land in northern Manitoba may be disposed of as provided for in The Crown Lands Act, if (

a) in the case of a disposition of Crown land located in, or within eight kilometres of, a community, the minister has consulted the council of the community and approved the disposition; or (

b) in any other case, the minister has approved the disposition. Bill 34 – The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act/Loi sur les divulgations faites dans l'intérêt public (protection des divulgateurs d'actes répréhensibles) Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment: THAT Clause 30(3) be replaced with the following: Ombudsman may investigate 30(3) Upon receiving information under this section, the ombudsman may investigate wrongdoing. In that event,

Part 3 applies, other than subsection 21(3) (protection from reprisal). Bill 41 – The Pharmaceutical Act/Loi sur les pharmacies Your committee agreed to report this bill, with the following amendment: THAT the definition "practitioner" in the English version of Clause 1(1) of the Bill be amended by striking out "and" at the end of clause (

a) and substituting "or". Ms. Brick: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Bu rrows (Mr. Martindale), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the following reports: The Civil Service Superannuation Board 2005 Annual Report; the Crown Corporations Council Annual Report of 2005 and a Report to the Legislature Pursuant to

section 63(4) of The Financial Administration Act Relating to Supplementary Loan and Guarantee Authority for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us from John Brebeuf School 57 Grades 5 and 6 students under the direction of Ms. Jennifer Waroway. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard).

Also in the public gallery we have from the University of Manitoba Language Training Centre 33 English as a Second Language students under the direction of Ms. Loreena Thiessen. This group is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for St. Norbert (Ms. Brick). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. * (13:40) ORAL QUESTIONS FIPPA Requests Government Response Mr.

Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): At the same time as we see this government embarking on a program that will involve record spending of taxpayers' dollars on propaganda, we have new information on the government breaking new records for clamping down on real information requested by Manitobans. Yesterday, the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Tourism (Mr. Robinson) released the Annual Report of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act containing the statistics on how this government has responded to requests for information from the public. Manitobans desperately

3316 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 trying to cut through the empty rhetoric from this government have increased their requests to almost record levels, 1,316. The response from this government has been to provide less information, Mr. Speaker. In fact, the number of FIPPA requests granted or partly granted is down 11 percent from 2004, and the number of denials is up 5 percent. Why is the Premier refusing to give Manitobans real information?

Why is the Premier embarking on multi-million dollar propaganda campaigns at the same time as he is clamping down on access to real information for Manitobans? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, one of our first acts in government was to extend the freedom of information to health authorities, the educational authorities, the issue of municipalities including the City of Winnipeg and other municipalities. Last year, when the Association of Journalists did a random check of all provinces in Canada, we were second to Alberta in terms of freedom of information. Mr.

Speaker, I still have FIPPA requests dealing with people in the hallways and waiting lists for cardiac patients and waiting lists for cancer patients. When the member opposite was the chief of staff for the former Premier, all the requests went to him and the answer was no, no, no. We are much more open in our government. Mr. McFadyen: Once again, today the Premier's answers are absolutely dead wrong. He does not have his facts straight. He does not know what he is talking about when he makes reference to things that happened in the past. It is fine, Mr.

Speaker, for the Premier to talk about extending the application of the legislation to other governments. What we are talking about today is the application of this legislation to his government. The stats related to the response of his government for requests for information is that more requests are being turned down today than at any time in recent history. That is the record of his government, never mind what he is doing to expand the legislation to other governments. It is no wonder, given the record of this government, that Manitobans were in the dark about issues such as floodway spending.

In 2005, 15 out of 44 requests, 34 percent of requests for information sent to the Department of Water Stewardship, which is overseeing the floodway fiasco, had to be appealed to the Ombudsman. Mr. Speaker, when is the government going to be accountable to Manitobans? When is it going to stop its taxpayer-funded ad campaigns? When are they going to provide real information to Manitobans so that we know, so Manito bans can know that when they give their hard-earned tax dollars to this government they are not being misused and misspent? Mr. Doer: Okay, Mr.

Speaker, the member opposite was the chief of staff on June 28, 1999. He was the chief of staff of Premier Filmon. We know that all the matters went to him as chief of staff. He had full control of the information. This is the request in opposition: Please be advised that access to specific information concerning the number of people on surgical waiting lists cannot be granted as this information does not exist in the Department of Health. Well, I can tell you, it exists. In fact, the member opposite gets about 80 percent of her questions from information we give under FIPPA, under our government. Mr.

McFadyen: The fact is, Mr. Speaker, if the Premier wants to talk about history, maybe he will recall that it was his government that passed the legislation. It sat on the books, it was not proclaimed. It was not proclaimed under the Pawley/Doer administration, and it took our government, it took a Progressive Conservative government to proclaim it. It was our government that brought this legislation into force, and it is his government that has clamped down on requests for information. The stats do not lie. We have record numbers of denials under his government. So he can talk all he likes about history.

When you consider the record of his government, Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder that Manitobans are frustrated. It is no wonder that Manitobans are trying to learn more about the Crocus scandal, the 33,000 Manitobans who lost more than $60 million who cannot get information about how their hard-earne d retirement dollars were lost under this Premier's watch. They cannot get information because 27 percent of the requests that went to his Department of Industry, Economic Development and tourism had to be appealed because the department refused to provide the information. The number of appeals is up.

The amount of information is down. The amount of propaganda is up. Why will the Premier not come clean? Why will he not give Manitobans access to good information about what is going on under his watch?

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3317 * (13:45) Mr. Doer: Of course, there are issues dealing with commercial relationships under Crocus and members opposite will know that we gave the Auditor General the power to follow the money. Maybe we would have had the losses that took place under the former government: Isobord, Westsun, Winnport of some $40 million. Maybe we would have had much greater access if we had legislation that we had put in place in 2001.

I would point out further to the great record of the member opposite, when he talked about their great record, the number of people on surgical waiting lists cannot be granted. The second point was access to specific information concerning the number of people on diagnostic waiting lists was denied under the Freedom of Information Act. We have made all of that information available to the members opposite. In fact, it forms the majority of their questions. We have been evaluated by the Canadian Association of Journalists as second best in Canada. That means we have more work to do.

I do not know of one case, I do not know of one example where the Ombudsman has made a decision and we have not complied with it and a person has had to go to court, to Court of Queen's Bench, to appeal a decision of the government. We have always complied with the legislation. There have been a couple occasions where the Ombudsman has given us advice to release material. We have respected that.

We have never had a situation, I can remember four occasions where the Conservatives were overruled by the Ombudsman and a citizen had to go to the court, including information where the VLT revenues came from each individual community. No surgical information, no diagnostic information, that is what he did when he was in charge of the Premier's Office. We are open, not perfect, but we are open for the people of Manitoba. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. Rebranding Strategy Ad Campaign Mr.

Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, on a new question. We are aware, as are Manitobans, of the phoney hallway medicine numbers that they put out. They can call themselves an open, acco untable government with their phoney numbers all they like, but Manitobans know better. Again, on the theme of spin over substance, on June 5 in this House I asked the Premier about his plan to spend millions of dollars in taxpayers' money on a branding strategy.

He indicated in response to that question that the private sector did not want government to run this branding strategy, that it was a private sector run branding image campaign. This week, after this million dollar re-election campaign is launched, I want to point out that there is a conference that has been organized by the Marketing Research and In telligence Association. Central to their discussion next week, Mr. Speaker, is a discussion of the Premier's image project. Who did the association ask to sp eak to them about the Premier's image project? Was it a private sector company? Was it a business leader?

No, it was not. It was none other than Donne Flanagan, the Premier's spin doctor, whose background as chief spinner for the NDP is well known. So the conference next week features Donne Flanagan, the Premier's chief spinner, to walk the delegates from A to Z through the Premier's image campaign which is about to be launched tomorrow. So my question to the Premier is: Why did the Premier indicate to the House last week that this was a private sector led initiative when we now know better? We now know that his chief spinner is running the show. Why has he not been up front with Manitobans?

Why does he not come clean about the fact that this is a taxpayer-driven, politically-driven image campaign for the Premier of Manitoba? * (13:50) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Point No. 1, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite again proves his own inconsistency. He talks about the issue of hallway medicine numbers. The numbers were established when he was chief of st aff for former Premier Filmon.

We have it documented that the methodology for counting patients in the hallways, even though we could not find out how many there were because they would not release it, the methodology was established in January 1999, again, when he was running former Premier Filmon's office. I would like him to put the record straight and tell Manitobans that is when the system was set up. Mr. McFadyen: Well, Mr. Speaker, the methodology was changed and the Premier, if he was

3318 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 not happy with it, has had seven years to change the methodology. If he was not happy with it, he has had seven years to do something about it. He has done nothing. He has done nothing but spin. He has done nothing but mislead Manitobans about what is going on in the hallways of our province. My question to the Premier is, again, back on the topic of the image campaign, the multi-million dollar image campaign being launched tomorrow. The brochure for the association that Mr. Flanagan is speaking to next week says, and I quote: That Mr.

Flanagan will take us through the image project from beginning to end. I repeat my question: When will the Premier come clean? When will he admit that this is nothing more than a taxpayer-funded re-election campaign? Mr. Doer: Well, thank you very much. We finally have confirmation that the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba, with the direction of the former chief of staff, changed the methodology on counting patients in the hallway in January 1999. Thank you for admitting that because that is what we have been saying all along to Manitobans. Secondly, Mr.

Speaker, I do not believe that David Angus, Ash Modha, Mariette Mulaire and Bob Silver would do anything except support the ideas that have been coming forward from the business community for years that we need to do a better job of promoting Manitoba on the world stage and promoting Manitoba to our own citizens. The product and the proposals will come forward tomorrow. In fact, I was at a lunch with Mr. Silver just an hour ago dealing with the Negev banquet, the program tonight. They inform me– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr.

Doer: The four individuals are absolutely leading the design, the work, the efforts, the consultations. There is staff back-up, obviously, for their role. When they make decisions, you need somebody to carry them through but the decisions are being made by the private sector, the four individuals. Some of those individuals, I daresay, will not be part of any re-election campaign for any political party. They just care about Manitoba. They care about the future of Manitoba and so do I. Mr. McFadyen: Mr.

Speaker, it is noted that the Premier, in response to questions, has refused to indicate how much money going into this campaign is coming from taxpayers and ratepayers who have no choice in the matter and how much is coming from the private sector. It is more than interesting that the Premier will not disclose that number. It is well and good to have that involvement, and we do not have any issue with the individuals who are involved. They are fantastic Manitobans, we respect them.

We respect what they are doing for our province, but the fact is that the money, the co- ordination and the drive behind this initiative is coming out of this government, and the fact is that Manitoba taxpayers are on the hook for the campaign aimed at paving the way for an election campaign in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, we know we have concerns, and those concerns have been amplified time and again when we see political staff put in charge of public advertising campaigns. We see a member of the Premier's political staff moved into the bureaucracy to co-ordinate government advertising.

We know that the Gomery report indicated the dangers of mixing politics with government advertising. Why has the Premier not heeded the warnings of Justice Gomery? Why has he put political staff into the bureaucracy and put them in charge of public advertising? * (13:55) Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, all our advertising goes through Cindy Stevens. We have not, for example, given the tourism ad campaign to one Barb Biggar. We have been very, very careful on, in fact, even having the tourism advertising completely removed from government, which even goes farther than Justice Gomery.

Of course, members opposite cherry pick. When Justice Gomery says that a minister should not interfere with the board of director's right to deal with the CEO on Workers Compensation, they reject Gomery's recommendation, so he just cherry picks the recommendations. I think he is insulting the four or five members of the private sector. In my view, Mr. Speaker, these individuals are leaders. They are leaders in the business community. They have been leaders, they are used to leading and they are leading this debate. Yes, they have people to support the implementation of their decisions.

They are going to be making recommendations to the public tomorrow, I understand. I certainly do not have all of the details and nor should I. They have also been working with

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3319 members of the private sector to what they are going to provide in terms of support for their ideas. I think you insult leaders in our community by saying that somebody who is following through on some of their ideas is leading them. They are the leaders and they are giving advice to all Manitobans. I want to thank them for the hundreds of hours that they are volunteering beca use they believe in this province. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. 18th Street Bridge (Brandon) Construction Mr.

Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): On a new question, Mr. Speaker. We certainly recognize the gr eat contributions those Manitobans make. I wonder why the Premier will not just come clean, clear things up and disclose publicly who is paying for the campaign. How much money is going in from taxpayers, how much from ratepayers to Crown corporations, and how much is coming in from other sources? Until such time as he clears that up, we have every right to be concerned about the involvement of his political staff in this campaign of spin over substance. On the topic of spin over substance, Mr.

Speaker, we see reported in the Brandon Sun that the provincial government has now announced that it does not expect preliminary work on the 18th Street bridge to be completed and approved until late 2006. Construction will not begin until 2007, with the completion date now scheduled at 2008. Some weeks ago the Premier spoke to the Brandon Chamber of Commerce, this was in May, that the bridge would be widened once it was approved by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Oh, yes, the Premier put on quite a show in Brandon.

He said that the matter would go to the highest levels of the federal government to speed up the process. The minister of highways and transportation chimed in, Mr. Speaker, indicating that the government was se eking sign-off from those darn feds and that they did not want to hold up the environmental approval for two years. Mr. Speaker, we now learn that they have not even submitted the designs and the environmental assessments to the Depart ment of Fisheries and Oceans.

In the Premier's trademark shift-the-blame game, he is already blaming the federal government for not responding to a request that his government has not even submitted to them. So why is the Premier blaming the federal government for his government's own incompetence? * (14:00) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): We have been working on the design of the bridge since the request came in from the mayor. That work will be done in the next week or so. It deals with two facets; one is the engineering work required and secondly, it deals with flood protection for the city of Brandon. We are working on both those reports.

They will be ready simultaneous to help the federal government. We will be putting out a request for contracts within four weeks, Mr. Sp eaker. If the requests from contracts can be issued simultaneous to the report, we think the reports we are doing for the bridge will be helpful to the federal government. We hope the environmental assessment process is timely. I would point out– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: –the federal government has the option of having a sign-off based on our work which we have done. We think that shortens the time process.

I do not want to prejudge what the federal government is going to do. Actually, we have the money in the budget. We have the design work that has gone on all over the last 12 months. We have second design work going on of flood protection in the city of Brandon. Both those reports will be ready within 10 days, and we will be going out for requests for proposals from the private sector along with the environmental concurrence from the federal government. The federal government could choose to do as they did in the floodway and give us sign-off. We hope they do that.

That would be optimum because we could proceed on the earlier time schedule. The only caution I would make is all of us have to be careful because we cannot presume what the federal government will do, but we hope the work that has gone on in the last year will be helpful to the federal government. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, the Premier has certainly changed his tune on this issue. Back in May, he was blaming the federal government, trying to create the impression to the people of Brandon

3320 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 that it was the federa l government that was responsible for the slowdowns and the foot dragging on this issue. I am pleased that he has now confirmed it is his government that is responsible. The spokesman for the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Mr. Chudobiak, said that he does not expect the environmental process to take very long because the bridge, and I quote: Would have a small impact on fish habitat. It is a bridge, not a culvert. This is from the federal department.

So given that it is not the federal government who is to blame for the foot dragging on this issue, given that it is his government, why is he spinning the people of Brandon? Why is he spinning the people of Manitoba? Why is he blaming the federal government for his own government's foot dragging? Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, I hope he is right. This will be a very good thing because we will be able to proceed a lot faster– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr.

Doer: Well, the Paul Edwards theory of we have the election locked up permeates through the whole arrogant caucus, I would point out. We will wait for the people to decide that, Mr. Speaker. I would advise the members opposite to do the same thing. We said that the design work would be completed. It is completed on time and it includes two components; one, the engineering work for the bridge which is ready within 10 days to go, and secondly, the banks on the Assiniboine River that are adjacent to the bridge and affect flooding.

So if the member opposite asked both questions to the FO and got the same answer on both questions, he only seemed to answ er one question about the bridge not being a culvert. I am glad he has both answers and that is good. We have the money in the budget. We are ready to go. We have two reports that will be released in the next 10 days. I would point out, I need no lectures from members opposite about building things in Brandon.

We may get it done earlier and that would be better for everybody, but I remember seven times members opposite promised to build the new general hospital in Brandon and seven times they failed. That is why we represent both seats in Brandon, because the people in Brandon know who is on their side. They know that they promised it seven times. They know we did it, and we are going to do the 18th Street bridge when we get both reports done; one on flood protection and one on the bridge. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, the Premier says that the people of Brandon know who is on their side.

I find it interesting in that case that the Member for Brandon West (Mr. Smith), the minister and his government is known around Brandon as the minister of no. We have got, with Crocus, WCB, Aiyawin and health care, under this government; we see with the floodway, we see with the Premier's spin on the Brandon bridge, Crocus, WCB, Aiyawin, health care and the floodway, we see spending going up while results are going down. We see under his government whistle-blowers being fired while incompetent ministers are being protected. We see other governments being blamed while his government dithers.

We see spin is up while real information is down. Everything that should be down is up. Everything that should be up is down. When is the Premier going to stop spinning and when is he going to start leading? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the only thing going down is the member opposite because, as his arrogance goes up, the support will go down for all members across the way. They have already sized up the curtains in the Premier's Office, but you know what? There are a lot of Manitobans who will have a say on that, and I know how wide they are. Well, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Brandon West (Mr.

Smith), the minister responsible, increased his majority in 2003. He increased his majority over the former mayor in 2003 because, unlike the Tories who said no to the new hospital in Brandon, this minister said yes and got it done. As opposed to the members opposite, they said no to inner city housing in Brandon. The Member for Brandon West and the Member for Brandon East (Mr. Caldwell) said yes to inner city housing. The members opposite were dithering away as the Shilo base potentially eroded with the German troops going back to Germany.

We said yes to having more troops in Shilo, and that is a strong military base because of the Member for Brandon West. Mr. Speaker, we said also yesterday that the roof was leaking, the money was gone, the operating costs were gone, the Keystone Centre was being

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3321 treated as a second-class facility under the Tory government. The minister of Brandon West and Brandon East said yes to a new facility within there. We have also said yes to a new ACC campus on the Brandon Mental Health Centre. We have said that the enrolment in Brandon University was going down under the Tories. It is going up under the NDP and you know what? Those non-partisan editorialists can write what they will, but the people of Brandon know what is going on. Mr. Speaker: Order. The clock is ticking.

We are trying to get as many questions and answers in as we can. * (14:10) Manitoba Cattle Producers Association Meeting Request Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): This NDP government is ignoring all protests against their plan for a $2-per-head tax on Manitoba cattle sales. The Manitoba Cattle Producers Association has requested a meeting with the First Minister to discuss the implications of the cash grab on their industry. I ask the Minister of Agriculture: Does she believe the First Minister should not meet with MCPA on this important issue? Hon.

Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): Mr. Speaker, this is an important issue and one that we have discussed many times with the industry. I can tell the member that indeed a meeting has been set with the Premier and the Manitoba Cattle Producers. But, Mr. Speaker, we are proceeding with the implementation of the $2-levy because we think it is very important that we take every step that we can to increase slaughter capacity in this province so that we are not caught in the same situation again should the border close. I believe in economic development in this province.

The member opposite believes in economic development in Alberta and other areas. Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, this minister goes on about the meetings. I am asking her when the meeting is going to be; in the next day, in the next week, in the next month? That is the real question. Ms. Wowchuk: As I indicated to the member opposite, the Manitoba Cattle Producers have asked for a meeting with the Premier, and I can tell the member opposite that the meeting has been set. It will happen very shortly. But, in the meantime, Mr. Speaker, we are going to proceed.

We are putting in place the levy so that, indeed, we can have investments in slaughter capacity in this province and we can have economic activity in this province. It is very unique to have a levy and to have the Prov ince match that levy as well. That shows our commitment that we want slaughter capacity increased in this province. I wish the member opposite would get on board and say that it is a good idea. Mr. Eichler: Mr. Speaker, clearly this minister does not have a date set or she would have said when it is going to be. Tell this House today when the meeting is going to be. Quit that rhetoric. Ms.

Wowchuk: Well, the member opposite would like to worry about specific dates and when those meetings are going to be held. Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member opposite that the date of the meeting has been communicated to the Manitoba Cattle Producers and the meeting will happen as will other meetings. I want to tell the member opposite that we are also moving forward with implementing the levy. We want to see applications from many groups of people who are interested in increasing slaughter capacity in this province.

I wish the member opposite would get on board and recognize how important it is that we increase slaughter capacity in this province. Rather than speaking out against it, what he is really doing is supporting the economic growth of Alberta and other provinces. Child Welfare System Public Inquiry Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, 31 children have died as a result of homicide since 2001, and the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Melnick) has refused to answer questions, refused to answer letters and, indeed, is very secretive about her department.

In fact, Family Services has the highest number of Freedom of Information requests in 2005 of any department; 177 requests. This is exactly why we need a public inquiry so the secrecy of this minister is exposed. Why will the Minister of Family Services not ask the Premier to call a public inquiry into the delivery of child welfare in this province? What is she hiding? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to note that the members opposite called for a public inquiry dealing with the tragic

3322 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 circumstances of Phoenix Sinclair. We said we will have the two independent reports plus the case management review of the case. We also stated that the Chief Medical Examiner would have a responsibility under the law to examine the circumstances. There are, of course, two alleged persons charged with murder in that tragic case. But, Mr. Speaker, I also stated at that time that we would be willing, and it would certainly make it very clear to have a public inquiry on that case. I have said that before. Mrs.

Taillieu: The Premier has recognized that there is a crisis in this province regarding children in care, 31 children have died either in care or released from care. Last week the Premier said they were not homicides. Obviously, he has not thought a lot about this, but today he is talking about calling a public inquiry. Why do we not just do that now, Mr. Speaker? Why waste any time? Will he call it now, today? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we did not want to talk about overall numbers during the tragedy of Phoenix Sinclair because I think any child who dies in care or has been in care in the last year is a tragedy.

We have the numbers from the last 10 years and the numbers of any child any year are not comforting to any member of this House, including us. So we have not got into the "numbers" comparison. We have been very careful about that, but this did not start with the change in government in 1988, nor did it start in terms of 1999. In fact, the overall numbers are down, but any one child who dies in care or in direct, or having had services is not good for any of us. So, therefore, none of us can succeed until there is no child who dies in care. Criminal Property Forfeiture Act Review Mr.

Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, in 2003 the NDP government introduced The Criminal Property Forfeiture Act. As is so often the case with this government, they made a grand announcement and said that it would make it a lot harder for gangs to shelter their funds and proceeds of crime in seemingly legitimate enterprises. Yet, we found out on Friday, last Friday, that there has been no application that the minister is aware of under this particular act. He said it was going to bring increased safety and yet there is no application.

Can he indicate whether or not this legislation is under review, because it is ineffective, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (M inister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce, and this reflects what I said when the legislation was introduced. I hope that there are no applications. I hope no one profits from their criminal notoriety and I hope it stays that way. One of the purposes of the legislation was to send a message that we do not want those who cause so much harm and suffering to others to actually profit then from that wrongdoing. So I hope it stays that way.

I hope the number of applications remains a big fat zero. That is the hope. Mr. Goertzen: Well, in fact, what the minister said in Estimates is that he was disappointed. He was having his chief adviser on gangs review the legislation because he was disappointed by the application and he was hoping to bring forward changes. That is quite different than what the minister says today here in the House. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask him again. Is it being reviewed because it is ineffective legislation? They announced lots of spin. They announced lots of things that they say are going to be tough.

He said it would help reduce crime. Today he says he hopes it is never going to be used. Which one is it? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, there is some misunderstanding about what is being reviewed by the special counsel on organized crime, and that is the organized crime legislation. The notoriety legislation is not directed only at criminal organizations. I remind members opposite, Mr. Speaker, that that piece of legislation was introduced in Manitoba as the second province in Canada.

I understand that every province is now moving in the direction to make sure that there is a seamless web of that kind of legislation across the county. I hope, as for Manitoba, I state the same for other provinces and, indeed, territories that there are no applications. I think that kind of legislation is very useful but it has to be in place in all provinces. I commend those provinces that have promulgated that kind of law. Child and Family Services Review Process Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, conditions in Manitoba Child and Family Services have deteriorated to the point that they are now so

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3323 appalling that front-line workers have written a letter to the Manitoba Institute of Registered Social Workers as well as to the minister's department expressing grave concerns about excessive and unsafe caseloads and the resulting risks to children in care. I ask the Premier: Will he promise to ensure that this letter reaches the external review of Child and Family Services? Will he instruct his Minister of Family Services (Ms. Melnick) to table this letter in the Legislature today? Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): Well, I will make sure, first of all, it is not our letter but I will inquire with the group that wrote it on the availability of it. That would be a courtesy. Secondly, we certainly, if they are willing, it certainly should be provided to the external reviews that are taking place. The caseload numbers have gone down. But, Mr. Speaker, we know from people who say they are under pressure and we acknowledge that the caseload numbers have gone down when you look through the inquests of the past, but the social workers would say the caseloads are still too tough.

Part of what the external review committee is going to do is look at those numbers and those factors. Certainly I have no difficulty with them having all information, including that letter. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, when caseload workers have 35 or 40 or more than 40 high-risk children to be following, this is not good enough. I hear repeatedly that honest, hardworking, responsible Child and Family Services workers are being threatened by the minister of child and family services and the people work ing for her that if they speak out, they risk losing their jobs.

I ask the Premier: Will he amend that immediately to assure the honest, responsible Child and Family Services workers that they should be coming forward publicly with their concerns so that the dramatic, drastic and ap palling risks to children are being thrown to light and available to people to understand so they can be corrected? * (14:20) Mr. Doer: The caseload numbers, we have increased 113 positions or 26 percent. We had more money in the budget that was held up for a number of months in the Estimates by bell ringing, Mr. Speaker, by the member opposite.

The whistle-blower legislation would, as I understand, cover all thes e agency concerns. But, Mr. Speaker, you know, the social workers association, the School of Social Work, if you look back over the years, I can recall numbers of reports from social work organizations, unions, various other groups calling on greater staff workloads, staff- children ratios. I believe the number was over 80, 70 or 80 about 10 years ago. It started to go down in the late nineties. Then it went down even further under us. Is it the right number?

I just want to say to the public that the external agencies say to us that we have to put more money in. I can assure you this government on this side is committed to kids and will find a way to resource it for the benefit of our children in Manitoba. Bill 34 Proclamation Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, this government's unwillingness to do the right thing and call for a public inquiry in regard to the Crocus Fund is going to lead to 25 percent of its legislative agenda not passing this session.

My question to the Premier is: Will the Premier give a guarantee in writing that if we agree to pass the whistle-blower legislation today that he will proclaim it into law by the end of July? Is he prepared to give that guarantee to this Legislature? If not, I do not know if we will have the opportunity to really pass this legislation. Surely to goodness, the Premier is prepared to give that guarantee by the end of July that the whistle-blower legislation would, in fact, be proclaimed by him and this government. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, no individual in this House or no individual outside of this House should think that they have the opportunity to blackmail the government into making decisions. Today it might be this issue; tomorrow it might be where he sits; the next day it will be how many questions they get; then it will be on points of privilege; it will be on matters that did not even get resolved in the last election campaign. Governments have to govern for the people, and we are not going to negotiate with a guy that puts his word in invisible ink as he did in 2003. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired.

3324 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Highway 16 Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): You know, Mr. Speaker, once in awhile and very seldomly, one experiences something that is almost unbelievable. I had that opportunity just this past weekend. Before I explain the experience, I want to tell the House that the highway I travel at least twice a week, Highway No. 16, is falling apart before our eyes and is becoming unsafe and deplorable in many areas. But, Mr.

Speaker, last weekend, as I watched traffic avoid potholes and weave around Highway 16, and I was travelling along this highway, I happened to see in one of the potholes in Highway 16 a duck enjoying itself in the pothole. Highways in Manitoba are becoming so bad that even the ducks are beginning to swim in the potholes. They are trea ting them as their own swimming pools. Now, Mr.

Speaker, if I had an opportunity to ask the minister, I would ask him when it is that he is going to start paying some attention to the condition of our second most important highway in Manitoba and that is the second Trans-Canada Highway, Highway 16, and starting to repair those deplorable potholes that are absolutely ruining the un dercarriages of cars and trucks that carry freight east and west in this province. Mr. Speaker, when th e Premier (Mr. Doer) spoke of that crane, that extinct bird that we had in this city of Winnipeg, that was a building crane.

There is one other bird that is extinct in this province and that is the construction equipment that we used to see on our highways. We do not see it there anymore. We do not see it on our major routes in this province because this government has decided to change its priorities and not pay attention to the highways that are needed to carry our freight and our people throughout this province. It is a sad day. Not is it just 75. Not is it just Highway No. 1 but, indeed, No. 16 that I happen to travel on a twice-a-week basis that is falling apart before our eyes. Mr.

Speaker, as I say, once in awhile we come across something that is unbelievable– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mining in Manitoba Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, mining is an important industry in northern Manitoba. In many northern communities it is the No. 1 employer and the backbone of the local economy. Mining is the second-largest primary resource sector in the province employing approximately 3,800 people directly and 11,000 indirectly. However, no mine lasts forever. Mine closures can be devastating to communities.

Therefore, it is important that various levels of government and the private sector work in concert to ensure minimal disruption to families and to communities when mines shut down. As in the past, our government is committed to helping those communities now and in the future. Right now mining is thriving in Manitoba. According to the 2006 Fraser Institute survey, mining and exploration companies rank Manitoba second in Canada and third in the world for our government's mining policy.

Our government supports mineral exploration to encourage and support Manitoba's mining industry through the Mineral Exploration Assistance Program (MEAP). Through $1.4 million in assistance, the MEAP currently supports 39 mineral exploration projects worth $24.8 million in economic development. Since 1999, the MEAP has fostered $74.9 million in reported exploration expenditures with $12.2 million in assistance. It is estimated that for every $1 million paid through MEAP, $6.2 million is generated in exploration expenditures, a return that has increased 67 percent since 1999.

Over the last 10 years, exploration expenditures in Manitoba have averaged $31.8 million annually. This year's increased activity is expected to bump expenditures upwards of $52.7 million. We celebrate the importance of mining in an annual Mining Week. This year during Mining Week, various creative mining and mineral-related activities were available for children at The Forks in Winnipeg in order to acquaint them with the importance of mining and minerals. The city of Thompson, built on Inco's nickel deposit, is celebrating its 50th anniversary.

There has been continuous mining activity in Snow Lake for well over 50 years. Flin Flon has been in the mining business for over 75 years and the future still looks very bright. Mining will continue to play a huge role in Manitoba's economy. We look forward with great optimism to even greater expansion of mineral exploration and mining in the near future. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3325 Charleswood Rotary Club Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I rise today to congratulate the Charleswood Rotary Club on the occasion of their winning the Mayor's Volunteer Service Award in the environment category. In January 1995, the Winnipeg-Charleswood Rotary Club undertook the Assiniboine Forest Project to help restore tall grass habitat to the southern area of Assiniboine Nature Park.

The Winnipeg-Charleswood Rotary Club goal was to restore the southern part of the Assiniboine Forest to its natural tall grass habitat and create trails, interpretative signage and benches to help visitors learn about and enjoy the area while still maintaining the habitat. Each summer the club conducts work parties to help extend the trail system, and under the watchful guidance of the city's naturalists, replant native species to areas cleared before the park was established.

The club has organized more than $250,000 in donations and grants for the forest over the last 10 years, culminating in the very successful boardwalk project. Last fall the Charleswood Rotary had a Bridging the Gap project where they provided inner city youth with the opportunity to visit the Assiniboine Forest and participate in associated stewardship activities. The youth participating in this project were able to encounter the beauty of a forest ecosystem and also personally contribute to a worthy environmental cause.

They also held the first Charleswood Rotary Fun Run last fall to raise money to design and construct a more visually appealing and appropriate entrance for this 700-acre natural area. Once again, we offer congratulations to the Charleswood Rotary Club for helping preserve this natural forest in the Charleswood area. We acknowledge the hard work and commitment of this service club to the citizens of Charleswood, Winnipeg and Manitoba. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. * (14:30) 50th Anniversary Andrew Mynarski V.C. School Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr.

Speaker, June 2006 marks the 50th anniversary of Andrew Mynarski V.C. School. This school is both a commemoration of one of Canada's most heroic airmen and a place of learning that has formed young minds for half a century. Today, it is with great pleasure that I recognize this school's accomplishments and contributions to our community. Born in Winnipeg to Polish immigrants in 1916 in the city's North End, Andrew Mynarski laboured as a leather worker before enlisting in the Air Force in 1941.

Trained in Canada and stationed in Britain, Mynarski was part of the advance Air Force that helped prepare Europe for its eventual liberation. On June 12, 1944, on a nighttime raid over Combrai, France, Mynarski's Lancaster bomber was struck by enemy fire. As the plane hurtled toward the earth, Mynarski sacrificed his opportunity to escape to come to the aid of a fellow airman trapped in the twisted fuselage. After a desperate effort, he was unable to free his comrade-in-arms.

Fire burning about his body and through his parachute, Mynarski stood to attention and saluted his friend one last time before jumping from the blazing plane, and while Mynarski did not survive the burns he suffered, that airman lived to tell of his heroism in that hopeless moment. The legacy left by Andrew Mynarski, V.C. is well served by the school that bears his name. It is a testament to his selfless commitment that his courage helped bequeath the school that continues to pride itself on striving for excellence, a quality amply displayed by Mr. Mynarski himself.

On their 50th anniversary, I ask all members to join me in congratulating the school for having embodied the virtues Mr. Mynarski showed in both life and in death. Congratulations to the organizing committee for the 50th anniversary activities. May the many alumni attending events on June 16 and 17 enjoy meeting former classmates and reminiscing about their school days at Andrew Mynarski V.C. School. Crocus Investment Fund Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): We need a public inquiry into the Crocus Investment Fund. Thirty-three thousand Manitobans have lost $60 million or more dollars. Mr.

Speaker, this inquiry needs to be called. The government now says it was high risk, but on June 16, 1997, the present Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) stood in this Chamber to say, Crocus is a good fund. He said specifically that his NDP party was proud of the labour-sponsored venture capital fund, and that the NDP had a

part in creating and supporting the Crocus Investment Fund.

3326 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 The present Minister of Health, in talking of the Crocus Investment Fund said, and I quote: That venture capital investment funds are essentially collective efforts on the part of the residents of a jurisdiction whether it is a town, a city or a province to mitigate the effects of large corporate decisions to remove investment from a community. The present Minister of Health made the point clearly that the Crocus Investment Fund was different from other venture capital funds.

He very clearly gave the impression, consistent with much else that was said and done at the time, that investing in Crocus was like investing in the province. There was no mention there was high risk. Mr. Speaker, Crocus investors were misled in the 1990s and at least until 2003, about the nature of the risks in investing in Crocus. Manitobans deserve answers about Crocus because as the Minister of Health said in 1997, it wa s a collective effort of the Province. The government must call a public inquiry into the Crocus Investment Fund.

We Liberals will keep our pressure on the government until a public inquiry is called. GRIEVANCES Mr. Denis Rocan (Carman): Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to grieve this afternoon. By way of background, the reason that I am grieving is that a few years back an individual by the name of Teddy Bancroft and his lovely wife, Sandra, who had actually retired to Treherne, moved out of the city of Winnipeg and took ownership of a particular restaurant in the Treherne area. Teddy and his wife, over several years in the coffee shop, would hear several stories about Chief Yellowquill and the Yellowquill Trail.

Teddy and his wife got so taken up by Chief Yellowquill and the Yellowquill Trail that they sold their restaurant, and they started to investigate the true validity and the whereabouts of this particular trail. After many years of consultations and inquiries and research, talking to several landowners and getting the pictures of this particular trail, he was convinced that they had actually discovered and found the whereabouts of this trail. So we set up a meeting with the Historical Society and Teddy with all his maps, and we sat down.

Ted and Sandra tried to explain to them all of this information that they have found. But, unfortunately, the people from the Historical Society had decided that this was not the time nor the place to try and change some of the history books. So Ted and Sandra just went on their way. They had decided, well, that was the end of it. Well, on several occasions I had the opportunity to meet with Ted. He kept telling me about all this history. So I said to Ted, why do you not do me a favour and just write it down on paper, and I will find an opportunity some time in the Legislature to put it on the official record.

This is all that Ted wanted because he wanted to share the information that he has found. The words that I am going to put on the record now are from Ted and Sandra Bancroft, and it is titled The Yellowquill Trail. The story all started when Sandra and I moved to Treherne to operate a restaurant. For about six months I heard many stories of the Yellowquill Trail. I then decided to phone th e Historical Branch. They told me that this was not the Yellowquill Trail because it ran east and west and not north and south as was told to me.

Many years later I still heard a lot of stories of these people and they all said that this was the Yellowquill Trail. I then decided that this was a historical trail as the settlers survived off this trail. So, on retirement, The Treherne Times knew I was going to do this and they ran an ad suggesting to people who knew of the trail to contact me. Well, I got many calls. I had people take me out, and they showed me approximately 20 miles of the trail that all connected together. Some of the trail was still existing and ruts were six feet deep.

Some of the trail did not exist anymore, but it all went together like a glove. With this information, I decided to document the trail. The people who had introduced me to a certain part of the trail signed the map for me and also where the trail existed. I put stakes in the ground and measured between the st akes so that a hundred years from now, with this map and a metal detector, you could still find this trail. I worked on the trail for approximately two years, and Sandra was out on the trail with me holding a tape for me. I documented the trail to the correction line, which was between 20 to 25 miles.

I had been shown where the trail went from there to Swan Lake, but the company that made the map of this area was ReproMap of Dauphin, Manitoba, and their map ends at the correction line on the road running east to Notre Dame. So this is as far as I mapped. Our plans on retirement, two years earlier, were to go south for the winter months, so that is what we eventually did.

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3327 Before I started making the trail, I did some research. I found out that Chief Yellowquill worked with the government on the making of the following reserves: Long Plain, Sandy Bay and Swan Lake. The government thought highly of Chief Yellowquill and so decided he could stay where he lived. They gave him the

section of land where he lived on, which was on the south side of the Assiniboine River, and they called it Indian Gardens. At this point, I knew the Historical Branch was wrong and that this was really the Yellowquill Trail and that is why I documented the trail. At this time Indian Gardens is owned by the Swan Lake Reserve. In doing research, I found that Chief Yellowquill had a gun accident and his arm was badly shot. The Indians then took him to Rathwell, which was approximately five miles. Two people cut off his arm and saved his life.

George Punton, now deceased, who lived just across the road from Indian Gardens as a child, grew up with Indian children, and he told me that he had often had dinner with them. He also said an Indian man who had a large rope burn on one arm told him that he would go south on the trail each summer and visit other Indians in the United States. The Indians also told him that this trail went into the southern United States. As the trail crosses the Assiniboine and goes south approximately 12 to 15 miles, there was a branch that comes off the trail and goes down to Pinkerton Lake.

The Indians would spend the summer there, harvesting the bulrushes or cattails. They would put their foot under the root and pull it out of the water, cut off the root and dry it and then pound it into flour. They made what is known as bannock. They would also take this flour and mix it with dried berries and dried meat and put it in the linings from animal stomachs. It was then called pemmican, and they would bury this on the trail for food. * (14:40) A person named Archie Carter lived beside this trail. Mr. Carter was born in 1901, and these are some of the stories that he told me.

The Indians would come to his mother's house for her biscuits. They would put up their tent near this house, his house, and they told Mr. Carter that this trail went through Arizona and into Mexico. He said you always knew when they were coming because their carts were not greased and you would hear them coming half a mile away. You always knew where they were camped because they never took their pegs out of the ground. History of LaVerendrye. Pierre LaVerendrye used this trail between 1738 and 1740, and he made three trips. He built the fort at Portage la Prairie. He also built a fort at Pierre, South Dakota.

He came from Montréal to build posts for fur trading with the Indians. From Montréal he came down the Mississippi to the Missouri River, then up the Missouri River through Pierre, South Dakota and down the Missouri. He left the Missouri on the Yellowquill Trail and into Manitoba. Along his route he built posts for fur tradin g. The fur trader stood a long-barrelled gun, and when the pelts stacked that high the Indian would get the gun. So the trail has been used for hundreds of years, if not for thousands of years.

I received a letter from Sanderson's of Holland, and they tell a story of their forefathers coming to Holland, Manitoba, as pioneers. Their names were John and Jim Sanderson. They broke 50 acres each in their first year. The next year they had a good crop of 40 bushels per acre and they kept a thousand bushels. The balance of the 3,000 bushels was hauled to Portage la Prairie by oxen during the winter months, which was a 45-mile trip on the Yellowquill Trail. They would get to Long Plains the first night, the second day they would reach Portage la Prairie. They would unload, get supp lies and head back.

The second night they made it to Long Plains, and on the third day the train was back to Treherne. I mention train because others from Glenboro, Cypress River and Treherne would also make this trip. Natives or settlers along the way offered lodging for the men, a spot on the floor if you would, stable room and feed for oxen and breakfast for the driver for 75 cents. The early settlers dreaded those trips. In fact, one homesteader wrote that, of all the hardships he faced and there were many, marketing the grain was his most worrisome because of the extreme cold weather.

To keep from freezing a driver would repeatedly run back a few paces from his load and then return, only to repeat the process. By the time Portage la Prairie was reached, he probably travelled, in miles, twice the distance as the plodding oxen. The CPR came to this area in 1886, and a platform was then built. Grain was delivered in bags which were weighed and emptied by hand into boxcars. They held 600 bushels. Because the train only came to Holland during the first year, grain was hauled for 20 miles from the west. Sometimes bags were left in the snow awaiting the next train.

3328 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 Jean Davidson of Treherne told me a story of when she was very young and lived near Pinkerton Lake with her parents who were settlers. Her mother and father got very sick. Her father could not get out of bed. Her mother would take her out to the barn and, as her mother would lean on an animal, she would tell her what to feed the other animals. While this was happening, two Indians walked in. The Indian trail was nearby, an d they knew the Indians. One Indian could speak some English.

The Indians told them to go back into the house, and they would take care of the animals until they got better. And they did. When you got sick, an Indian– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Rocan: Is there leave? Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member have leave? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been granted. Mr. Rocan: When you got sick, an Indian would walk into the bush and would bring out something for you to eat. The settlers liked the Indians and classed them as good, honest friends. Another person who lived in that area as a settler for 12 years told me he had an agreement with the Indians.

They could use his stove and sleep on the floor, but not use his food. When he sold out 12 years later, the only thing he had missing was a kitchen fork, and he believes he must have mistakenly thrown it out as the Indians were very honest and would not steal anything. He classed the Indians as very honest people. This is as was dictated by Mr. and Mrs. Ted Bancroft, and I appreciate the opportunity to put that on the record on their behalf. But, in closing, I would like to take this opportunity to wish everybody a safe and enjoyable summer, and may God bless each and every one of you. Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker. ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): I wonder if you could canvass the House regarding Bill 212, The Historic Trans-Canada Highway Act, seeking leave of the House to ensure that this bill is reinstated in the Fifth Session of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature at the stage at which it was at the Fourth Session when that session becomes prorogued. Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement? [Agreed] Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, as bill s were reported from committee earlier this afternoon, I am seeking consent of the House to consider concurrence and third readings for these bills: Bill 25, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Payday Loans); Bill 29, The Degree Granting Act; Bill 32, The Real Property Amendment Act; Bill 33, The Northern Affairs Act; Bill 34, The Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act; and Bill 41, The Pharmaceutical Act. Mr. Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to consider concurrence and third reading for these bills: Bills 25, 29, 32, 33, 34 and 41. Is there agreement?

An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Speaker: No. There is no agreement. Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader. Mr. Goertzen: I simply want the record to indicate that the Progressive Conservative Party was willing to give consent– Mr. Speaker: Order. It is either granted or it is not granted. * * * Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, alternatively then, would you then see if there is unanimous consent of the House to reinstate the following bills in the Fifth Session of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature: Bill 25, The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Payday Loans); Bill 28, The Manitoba Museum Amendment Act; Bill 29, The Degree Granting Act; Bill 32, The Real Property Amendment Act; Bill 33, The Northern Affairs Act; and finally, Bill 38, The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act (Fund for Housing Revitalization). Mr.

Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to receive the following bills in the Fifth Session of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature: Bill 25, 28, 29, 32, 33, 38? [Agreed]

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3329 Mr. Mackintosh: Just for the information of the House, Bills 34 and 41 continue under the sessional order and maintain their position as well and do not need leave of the House and as well, 39, small claims and 40, medical amendment. Mr. Speaker, today is third reading day as discussed with other members, and so, therefore, would you please call the following bills: 12, 14, 20, 11, 34 and the rest in order as they appear. I understand that, yes, there was not a consent to consider 34 today.

So I withdraw that from the list, although I would love to have done that. So the rest in order, then, following Bill 11. Mr. Speaker: Okay. We will deal with concurrence and third reading of Bills 12, 14, 20, 11, and then we will do the bills in order as they are listed. CONCURRENCE AND THIRD READINGS Bill 12–The Highways and Transportation Amendment Act Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal an d Northern Affairs (Mr.

Lathlin), that Bill 12, The Highways and Transportation Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. * (14:50) Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): We concur with the intent of the act on this side of the House to ensure that the safety of our roads is a priority in the province of Manitoba. We believe that it is important to ensure that there are pr oper laws passed that that safety can in fact be enacted.

However, there are certain instances when we must reflect on our roadways that we have to drive on today, and last winter was no exception to what we have seen far too often during the last six years during the tenure of this NDP government. We saw roads where fuel tanks fell off trucks. We saw roads where bumpers fell off of vehicles. We saw roads where recreational vehicles being towed by pickup trucks hit the ditch and caused large accidents. We saw roads that were deteriorated to the point where tires were blown and axles were broken off cars.

It was just a little while ago, a week or so ago, when I saw a car pa rked beside the road, a relatively new car parked beside the road where the axle and wheel were lying beside the road. Those are the unsafe conditions that we find Manitoba's roadways in when there is a government in power that for almost seven ye ars has done absolutely nothing. Then they turn around and try and recite the record of the previous Filmon administration. Well, I want to leave on the record, Mr.

Speaker, before we leave this session that the Filmon government four-laned 75 highway from Winnipeg to the U.S. border, that it was the Filmon government that started four-laning No. 1 highway from Brandon to Saskatchewan. Over the last seven years nothing has been done except they are now surfacing a 13- kilometre stretch of that road. The rest has still yet to be built.

We can go on and on and on with the highway projects, 217, 216, 201, 204, 332, 210, and I can go on and on at the highways that were built during the Filmon administration and the highways minister had the audacity to stand in this House and cite verse and poem. He said nothing had been achieved in highways during those 11 years, 11-and- some-odd years that the Filmon administration had governed. Well, how wrong they can be and that is just a demonstration, Mr.

Speaker, as to how wrong these ministers of this administration and the Premier of this administration can be, and he has been the leader that has led the misinformation that has been constantly present in this Chamber. With regard to Bill 12, Mr.

Speaker, I want to say that we think that there are certain things in this bill that should have been addressed and should have been addressed properly, such things as recognizing that communities in rural Manitoba especially do have needs from time to time to identify events such as fairs, stampedes, rodeos, all those kinds of things, community events, hockey events, baseball events, all those kinds of things should be allowed to put signs up along our roadways when tourists come or neighbours or friends come from out of province and travel and do not always know the exact route to be taken to the event, to allow it to put up those signs to identify those communities.

That is what we would have liked to have seen. That is what we would have put in the act, Mr. Speaker. We would have also liked to have seen an accommodation made, and we put before the committee six amendments to this bill. One of those amendments said that we believe that farmers play

3330 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 an important role in ensuring the safety of our highways. They mow the grass and the hay out of the ditches and the sides of the roads, and they rake it and they bale it. We ask simply that this minister recognize that as a contribu tion to the safety of our highways and allow those farmers to have those bales stay there so that they can dry to the extent that they can be hauled and stored safely. The minister denied that. He denied allowing the farmers to participate in the maintenance of our roadways and our ditches.

We have never seen that before in this province wh en there was a charitable offer made. We made amendments. We put forward an amendment that said, let us recognize when there are accidents, and little monuments are put up beside the road identifying those accidents scenes, that those little monuments be allowed to remain on the roadways in commemoration of those people that lost their lives, where the families went to the trouble to identify those areas, and the minister said no. Mr. Harry Schellenberg, Acting Speaker, in the Chair That is the problem with this administration.

This administration clearly has no compassion for the involvement of the broader community in ensuring that our roadways will be well kept: No. 1, with such actions as helping mow the roads, helping make the hay, feed our cattle with what comes off those roads, to identify accident scenes, to identify unsafe areas by putting up little commemorative crosses and little monuments saying this is where our family members lost their lives on these roads.

We have no compassion for those community organizations that spent huge amounts of voluntary time organizing community events such as 4-H activities in rural Manitoba, such as baseball games to keep our young people off the streets, such as hockey tournaments, such as sunflower festivals, such as rodeos as will happen again this summer in Morris, Manitoba, such as all kinds of fairs and events all across this province. Yet this government and their minister are saying: We do not care about rural Manitoba or those events; they do not need to be identified. Therefore, we will not allow this.

I said clearly, I think clearly, this is a demonstration of an authoritarian kind of government under the NDP administration that we have seldom ever seen in this House before. Safety of roads?

Yes, we are all in favour of safety, but when those little monuments in the ditches cause no vision problems, when those community identi- fication signs cause no visionary problems, then why not let them be used to advertise the events that many of these volunteers in these communities have played large parts in to ensure that they are done well and done safely and therefore keep our young kids active in communities and teach them how to make things happen in our communities? Those are the concerns we have with this bill, and that is why we are going to have some concerns about the passage of this bill. Mr.

Speaker in the Chair Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Oh, the honourable Member for Arthur-Virden. Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I t i s m y pleasure to put some words on the record in regard to Bill 12 as well, and I know that my colleague from Emerson has outlined very clearly the impact that this bill will have on rural Manitobans and Manitobans in general, Mr. Speaker. No one is in favour of signs that would obstruct any kind of traffic flow or any kind of visionary issue in regard to Manitoba, Mr. Speaker. There is no doubt in anyone's mind about that, but this bill does not do that.

This is a heavy-handed bill that increases the fines to individuals and uses the wrong tactics in regard to trying to clean up the roadsides across Manitoba, and that has always been a concern. * (15:00) In my role as critic for Transportation, when this bill was brought in, I had the opportunity to send out a letter to all the municipalities in Manitoba, and got many replies back from those municipalities and towns indicating that there would be a concern with this bill in regard to some of the local events that the Member for Emerson has just talked about: sporting events, community special events and programs, fairs.

It was even mentioned some of the powwows that would take place in some of our communities, Mr. Speaker, those of us th at are privileged enough to have those opportunities. I just want to give you one prime example of the lunacy that might take place if this bill was driven right to its tee, and I say that with respect to that word, but, in one of the communities in my constituency, they have a mascot for their community, and they have been asked to move it because it is six feet inside the boundary of where it would be. There is no road on the other side of it,

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3331 Mr. Speaker. There is no visionary concern with this. In fact, the only thing at the level of a car's headlights, of a passenger's head in this vehicle would be a four-inch post that the monument sits on. It is 20 feet off the ground, and so it would block no one's vision. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to point out that that is one of the reasons why there is some concern with this bill.

We need to make sure that we do not have different rules in different areas of the province: those in the North versus here in the south; cities and urban areas versus our communities. But, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say while we are on the issues of traffic that I live in the constituency where No. 1 highway is, and this government for this whole session has gone on and on and on about the work that will be done on No. 1 highway and the twinning of No. 1. Well, Mr.

Speaker, I can tell you that there were 11 kilometres from Hargrave corner to just east of Elkhorn that was finished last fall, oil-based on top. The only thing that needed to be done to it was the paving. Those tenders were let out last fall and pulled for some reason within a few days last fall. Now the only work that is being done on that whole

section is the paving of a road that could have been done last fall from the twinning of No. 1 highway west to the Saskatchewan border. Last fall, Mr. Speaker, those who are in charge of the construction contracts, the contractors, did their very best that they could in making sure that they shaped the base of that new highway all the way to the Saskatchewan border, about another 23 kilometres from where this paving will end right now. I just have to inform the House today that there is no work going on on that road as we speak in this House today.

There has been no work all spring on that road, the twinning from Elkhorn west to the Saskatchewan border, and there is some concern that there will be no work done on that road this year. I want it on the record that the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Lemieux) in March of '05 indicated that road would be twinned in '06, and this spring on CJOB the Prem ier (Mr. Doer) himself indicated, no, it will be done in '07. So, Mr. Speaker, that is the shambles that this government has in regard to their projects in highways in Manitoba.

Then they bring in a bill like this that really does not do anything to improve the safety of our highways. All it does is collect more money for them, and they are not even using it to build roads in Manitoba anyway. Thank you very much. Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 12, The Highways and Transportation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la voirie et le transport. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: No. Some Honourable Members: Yes. Voice Vote Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. I declare the motion carried. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker: On division. The motion will carry on division. Bill 14–The Water Rights Amendment Act Hon.

Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Northern and Aboriginal Affairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 14, The Water Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les droits d'utilisation de l'eau, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): Well, thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I certainly want to have a few minutes to put a couple of things on the record today in regard to Bill 14. We on this side of the House have some reservations about the amendment to The Water Rights Act. We certainly did ask the minister to withdraw this particular

3332 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 legislation altogether in committee last week. We think there are a number of concerns that we have within this particular bill going forward that need to be re-addressed. This is clearly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as we have seen in other legislation the government has brought forward, another example of the heavy hand of government coming forw ard whereby they are implementing heavy-handed legislation on Manitobans. Quite clearly, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the presenters that came forwar d on this particular bill also indicated the very heavy-handed nature of the bill versus what some of the federal legislation coming forward is. Clearly, it is the stick approach in Manitoba versus the carrot approach which the federal government has been bringing forward with their particular legislation. Now what this bill does, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it gives the government the authority to implement water police, if you will, and it gives the government the authority to implement further fines on people in regard to water issues.

So we think that this really, this entire legislation and in fact The Water Rights bill itself, legislation, should be addressed. We feel that, under the existing legislation, The Water Rights Act, as it exists right now, the minister does have authority to address the issues that he may view, or his department may view, as being illegal. So our view is, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that this particular piece of legislation is not necessary, and we had encouraged the mi nister to withdraw the legislation altogether.

We feel that this is just another tax grab that the government is after, and we certainly have reservations about passing this act. We know this government talks about consulting with Manitobans before they bring in either legislation or regulations under different acts but, quite frankly, Mr. Deputy Sp eaker, that is far from the truth. And just another associated piece of legislation was passed June–The Water Protection Act was passed; then the government very shortly after that brought in the water quality management zone regulations.

Quite clearly, there is a very bad disconnect between what the Department of Water Stewardship is trying to impose on Manitobans and what in fact Manitobans really want. So we feel there is indeed a very bad lack of direction or no direction at all within the Department of Water Stewardship and, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, a very bad disconnect between the departments of Agriculture and Conservation, which obviously have various departments that should be looking at agriculture and, in fact, the environmental safety throughout Manitoba. * (15:10) So this, in our view, is just another example of that disconnect between the departments and the disconnect between legislation the government is bringing forward, and what Manitobans are really looking forward to, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

So, quite frankly, our view is, as many Manitobans have come to the government and said there should be some incen tive packages there for Manitobans to complement water issues and water quality issues in Manitoba, as opposed to the government coming in with a heavy-handed approach–so that is why we, as the Progressive Conservative Party in opposition, have reservations about Bill 14 going forward. With those few words, I know there is a lot of legislation to deal with today, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but I wanted to tell our concerns to Bill 14. Thank you very much. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe we are on debate on, what bill is it? Bill 14? Mr. Deputy Speaker: We are on debate on Bill 14. Mr. Lamoureux: I just wanted to put just a few words on the record in regard to Bill 14. I think there are some concerns that we have in regard to it, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Whether it was through committee or second reading, we had the opportunity to put a number of things on the record. It is a bill in which I do not believe that we can support at this time. Thank you. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is the concurrence and third reading of Bill 14, The Water Rights Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les droits d'utilisation de l'eau. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3333 Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Some Honourable Members: No. Voice Vote Mr. Deputy Speaker: Those in favour of the motion, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Those opposed to the motion, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Yeas have it. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker: On division. The motion is carried on division. Bill 20–The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership Amendment Act Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Concurrence and third reading on Bill 20, The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la protection des exploitations agricoles familiales et la

Loi sur la propriété agricole. Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 20, The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership Amend- ment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la protection des exploitations agricoles familiales et la

Loi sur la propriété agricole, reported from the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Food, be concurred in and now be read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): W e w a n t t o p u t a few things on the record in regard to Bill 20. I realize that the minister has a hard time meeting with the various organizations when we are bringing it forward. Recently, we had asked, even today in Question Period, about the MCPA having a meeting with the minister and the Fi rst Minister.

They go on record as saying they are prepared to meet with them, yet they are not prepared to give us a date. I know with respect to Bill 20, there are some changes in there that are mainly housekeeping, but we would like to see that bill move forward and see that the minister and the government make the changes as necessary. So thank you for that, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: Question. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 20, The Family Farm Protection Amendment and Farm Lands Ownership Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la protection des exploitations agricoles familiales et la

Loi sur la propriété agricole. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Some Honourable Members: No. Voice Vote Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Yeas have it. The Chair declares the motion carried. Bill 11–The Winter Heating Cost Control Act Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern A ffairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 11, The Winter Heating Cost Control Act;

Loi sur la limitation des frais de chauffage en hiver, as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Quite frankly, this bill should be renamed the "raid Manitoba Hydro once again legislation," Mr. Deputy Speaker, just like this government did in 2002 when they brought in a piece of legislation that raided $203 million out of Manitoba Hydro coffers. As a result, Manitoba Hydro had to borrow money because they

3334 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 did not have cash on hand. It ended up costing Manitoba Hydro ratepayers double the amount of what they took from Manitoba Hydro. Again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we see legislation one more time. They did no t learn their lesson back in 2002 when they raided Manitoba Hydro. They had the worst drought in the history of the province of Manitoba. Both of those things led to a significant deficit for Manitoba Hydro. It only served to increase the debt and make the debt equity ratio even worse than it was. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, we do know at the time, after the drought, the then-Minister responsible for Hydro indicated that they were not likely to take any more money out of Manitoba Hydro coffers. That was back in August of 2004, right after the drought, and I want to quote and put on the record what the Minister of Hydro said at the time. He said: It is unlikely to the point of absurdity that we would do such a thing in the face of the current situation. We know we had a huge problem last year. We know we have rate increases.

He went on to say it would be pretty imprudent of us in the short run to say, wow, we have a huge increase, let us take it. That would be silly in terms of policy and, obviously , fly in the face of the intention of the regulator. * (15:20) Mr. Deputy Speaker, this was after the regulator had to make a decision to increase hydro rates by 7.25 percent as a direct result of their raid. But did they learn their lesson?

No, they have another bill in front of this Legislature today which is looking at once again raiding Manitoba Hydro, having Cabinet determine what amount of Hydro export revenues will be put into a slush fund for this government to do as it chooses. Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Manitoba Hydro ratepayers are not going to stand for this again. This is again complete political interference. You know, at committee, when we asked the minister whether Manitoba Hydro was consulted and had approved, he was not able to give us a clear answer. He said Manitoba Hydro does not set government policy.

Well, that speaks volumes to what this legislation is. It is government policy, true and simple, and experts from Manitoba Hydro that were appearing before the Public Utilities Board just last month indicated that they were very concerned about the debt equity ratio, the worst debt equity ratio of all the electrical utilities across the country. They were extremely concerned, and under oath at the Public Utilities Board they indicated the importance of achieving a better target of debt equity and having an adequate level of equity could not be overstated.

They indicated that a five-year drought could cost the corporation upwards of $2 billion. Mr. Deputy Speaker, they went on to say that drought is not the single worst risk factor. We will not even get into the issue of the east side or the west side of Lake Winnipeg to build a new transmission line, but they did caution about the catastrophic loss of infrastructure that could even be worse than a drought and have a worse impact on the bottom line of the corporation. They did state under oath that it could be argued that there should be no sharing of export revenue until target equity levels are obtained.

This was just in May, and what does the government do in June, just a couple of short weeks later? They ram this bill through the legislation without consultation from Manitoba Hydro officials, and this is ill thought out. As a result of this legislation and their ability to skim dollars off the top of Manitoba Hydro export revenues, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we are going to see hydro rate increases over and above what Hydro believes they need just to make ends meet. So time will tell, and we know that this legislation is only going to serve to penalize Manitoba Hydro ratepayers even more than this government has done.

It is time they kept their hands out of the cookie jar. This is a government that has never seen a pot of money that they could keep their hands off. When you look at all of our Crown corporations, we see time and time again that this is a government, because of its spending addiction, that has to look for every source of income, and they have now politically interfered with Manitoba Hydro once again. We cannot, and we will not, support this bill, and we will ensure that ratepayers of Manitoba know exactly what this bill is going to mean to their pocketbooks in the future. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am going to be very brief on this and to sum it up by indicating that Mr. Schreyer, I think, said it best in terms of that this bill is, in fact, perverse and not in the long-term best interests of this province. Nothing has changed. Thank you.

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3335 Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 11, The Winter Heating Cost Control Act;

Loi sur la limitation des frais de chauffage en hiver. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: No. Some Honourable Members: Yes. Voice Vote Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed to the motion, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Yeas have it. Formal Vote Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Yeas and Nays being called, call in the members.

The question before the House is the concurrence and third reading of Bill 11, The Winter Heating Cost Control Act;

Loi sur la limitation des frais de chauffage en hiver, that this Bill 11 be now concurred in on third reading and passed. Division A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: Yeas Aglugub, Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Bjornson, Brick, Caldwell, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Irvin-Ross, Jennissen, Jha, Korzeniowski, Lathlin, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Martindale, McGifford, Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Reid, Rondeau, Sale, Schellenberg, Selinger, Smith, Struthers, Swan, Wowchuk.

Nays Cullen, Cummings, Derkach, Driedger, Dyck, Eichler, Faurschou, Gerrard, Goertzen, Hawranik, Lamoureux, Maguire, McFadyen, Mitchelson, Penner, Rocan, Rowat, Schuler, Stefanson, Taillieu. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 32, Nays 20. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Chair declares the motion carried. * * * Mr. Speaker in the Chair Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill 27, and then continue with the rest in the order that they appear under third reading and passing. * (16:00) Bill 27–The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale), that Bill 27, The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, as we bring this session to a close, I want to put a few words on the record. I would like to begin by thanking the staff who have worked so hard for Kevin and myself.

I know that they have sometimes felt that they have had to work so hard because two of us have had to try and do what 20 or 30 of the other parties have done, but we have worked valiantly, and we appreciate the efforts of our staff. We certainly appreciate the support from members of our constituencies and many from around Manitoba, who have provided advice and support in some way or another. Mr. Speaker, I have been now in this Legislative Chamber for some six and a half years, and I would begin with a general observation. This session, we have seen an NDP government which is poorly– Mr. Speaker: Order.

I would ask the member up in the press gallery to turn his light off.

3336 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, I would point out that the NDP government this session has been poorly organized, has produced the sloppiest series of bills that I have ever seen, and, on the Liberal side, we have provided some 40 or more report stage amendments. We have commented at great length on many of the bills because we see that they are flawed and need major improvements. These deficiencies we have pointed out again and again to the government.

They have been quite arrogant and have not listened in spite of some very well thought through and carefully put together suggestions. You might say that we have sent a ringing message to the NDP that they have no more free ride, that this is a time when we need a lot more accountability. It was very much apparent in this session, and the MLA for Inkster and I are going to do everything we can, not only in this session, but in future sessions to make sure that there is much better accountability than there has been.

In numerous bills that the government has put forward, they have added amendments to provide specific protection to their ministers and individuals who are carrying out their mi nisters' orders from any neglect or any action that has been done, except where there is bad faith. Mr. Speaker, this is far too far in removing accountability and democr acy from the government of this province. Democr acy needs accountability. As my friend said, when he looked at some of these clauses, this government thinks it is God, that it can make no mistake. We know better.

We know that it is very important to protect individual citizens and Manitobans from the abuses of government, and we need to make sure that there is proper accountability. Mr. Speaker: Order. I am sure the honourable member will tie that in to Bill 27, The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs– Order. I was just given some additional information that I was not aware of. The honourable Member for River Heights, to continue. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are the party which, time and time again in this legislative session, has spoken up for accountability.

We have introduced amendment after amendment to bring in better accountability, and this government, sadly, has not listened. I would suggest that, at some point in the future, we are going to be coming back, and we are going to revise those sections which remove the accountability of government, because Manitobans deserve better than that. This government has been sloppy and moving more and more in the direction of trying to control everything from the centre.

We saw that clearly in The Public Schools Finance Board Act, where they want to take away a board and replace it with a committee of three deputy mi nisters, where by using the provisions or the lack of provisions, or what have you, the ability to sequester information from public view, they will be able to hide the deliberations of deputy ministers in this committee, move things behind closed doors and centrally control things rather than having what we see as much better, which is much better openness, transparency and accountability.

We see that Bill 11, which we have just voted against, is a perverse way of approaching this, as even the former Premier Ed Schreyer has said. We look at The Elections Reform Act and we suggest that there could have been much better provisions that could have been put in this bill, that we could have had elections set at defined times every four years, that there could have been recall provisions to recall ministers who do not do their jobs properly and MLAs who are not attentive to what is going on.

There could have been much better measures in that bill to provide for better democracy instead of what the government wants to do, which is to control, control and control even to the extent of putting straitjackets on members in terms of how they can act and where they can go in this Chamber. We have provided positive suggestions on this side of the House in terms of Good Samaritan legislation, a bill which would help to decrease the extent of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, a bill that would have provided fairer pricing for milk in northern Manitoba.

We have put these measures forward, but we have not been supported by the government which does not appear to believe in these noble efforts. There have been a number of major issues this session. Let me talk about one of these. I would put it in this way. The future of the city of Winnipeg is at stake. We have a situation in the east part of Winnipeg, in the St.

Boniface Industrial Park, where the government had a choice to support Vita Health and a growing pharmaceutical industry and their willingness and concern and desire to expand four- or fivefold and, on the other hand, the desire of this government to put a hog-processing plant there,

June 13, 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3337 which would mean that other businesses and industries will move out and we will lose more jobs than we gain. There could have been an option here to put that hog-processing plant outside the city just like the hog plants outside of Brandon and outside of Neepawa. Winnipeg should have been treated no less well than Brandon and Neepawa. But this government, in looking at the future of Winnipeg, wants us to be a centre of the hog-processing industry rather than a centre for high-tech manufacturing.

We could have had both, had the government been smart enough to work things out with the R.M.s around Winnipeg and the city of Winnipeg to put this outside of the city of Winnipeg. There were alternatives. The government made their choices, and, of course, we make our choice to stand with the citizens of Winnipeg against this government. We will continue to stand with the citizens of Winnipeg against this government. * (16:10) Health care has clearly been a major issue in this session.

We have seen promises and commitments of this government broken like matchsticks, gone up in smoke, and, sadly, emergency rooms not working well, poor planning, when they could have and should have made sure that there were adequate numbers of residents training and staying in Manitoba. This government decided not to, and the result is that we have a situation here in Manitoba where there is something like 15 emergency room physicians short in Winnipeg alone. This government has only just increased the number of residency slots to five, and five is a long way from 15. Poor planning, poor planning, poor planning.

The Pharmaceutical Act, which the government put such a low priority on and then brought it right at the end of the session. Even then there were choices that could have been made, but time and time again, not only from the introduction from second reading and even today, there was a possibility of putting a priority on this legislation and the government chose not to. We would have preferred to see The Pharmaceutical Act go all the way through, but it was the government who set the agenda, the priorities and made the choices. They gave this a low priority.

When it comes to agriculture, we have seen once again a government which is enmeshed in poor planning. Instead of trying to balance drainage and water storage and make sure that the investment in infrastructure was being made to decrease risks for farmers, this government has time and time again made the choices that it was not going to do that. We saw this in the Seine River, which I went out and visited a number of people who have had problems with flooding in recent years where they never had problems in the past years.

It was very clear that the problems of this government and the way they are managing and enforcing things is creating troubles and troubles for people in parts of the Seine River. There have been opportunities to do something about the environment in Lake Winnipeg. The government had choices. They had good science in some areas, but they chose not to use it in how one can decrease phosphorus into Lake Winnipeg.

As a result, we expect more, not fewer, algae blooms, more problems for Lake Winnipeg, more problems for pollution from a government which, about three years ago, said they were going to clean Lake Winnipeg up in three years. Well, it is not better, and it looks like it has been getting worse in their term of government. When it comes to the North, we tried with our milk bill, but we also note, for example, that there is a Northern Affairs Act which could have been put through, but the government chose not to give it the kind of priority that it needed.

More and more we have groups coming from the North, from Grand Rapids petitioning out front over issues that have not been settled for 45 years, people from South Indian Lake concerned about issues that have not been settled for 30 years. You know, this government has had almost seven years now and it has not acted. The floodway could have been managed well, but we are $135 million over budget and climbing. We do not yet have an accounting for why it is so far over budget.

We do not have a plan yet for what the government is going to do, but we are fearful because time and time again this government has not managed expenditures well, and we fear that we will see a further example of this. When it comes to Child and Family Services, we have had some 31 children die from homicides over the last number of years. This is a tragedy. It is very, very sad, and it deserves much better than we saw from this government. There have been inquires called into Child and Family Services, but we still have not gotten the proper terms of reference for the external inquiry, and we wait.

We were pleased to receive, however, the terms of reference, and

3338 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 13, 2006 reasonably done for the intern al inquiry. It is too bad that they could not have at least applied a minimum standard to the external inquiry the same way. Day by day, we have more horror stories coming forward, more problems, more people in the system ready to come forward with issues because they are so concerned about kids at risk in this province, the way this government is operating the system.

We need a much better forum to bring this out into the open and to get it resolved because under this government they are doing everything they can to stop people from speaking, to stop people from coming forward. We found this year to our horror that the government is running places like 170 Hendon, which are dens of iniquity, of drugs and prostitution, and, surely, if you have a government, it should be a model landlord and not the worst tenant in the province. Shame on this government for what they are doing. Mr. Speaker, one of the central focuses of this session has been the Crocus inquiry.

A public inquiry is badly needed and with every passing day it becomes clearer and clearer that a Crocus inquiry is needed; 33,000 Manitobans have lost more than $60 million. As I said today in my member's statement, the Minister of Health (Mr. Sale) when he was the MLA for Crescentwood, provided a bit of an explanation that the Crocus Investment Fund was really a fund which was a collective of all the province, that it was very different from any other venture capital fund, and that it really was the province that people were supporting, that he never even mentioned high risks or concerns.

As recently in his budget speech of 2003, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) was praising Crocus. It is no wonder that so many peopl

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	38-4-89b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	38th 4th hansardpdf 89b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	4c0635591c129a50c73fec02a6158a8b8a917f5c

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