Manitoba Hansard — 93 ISSN 542 (Sitting 84, 35th Legislature, 4th Session)

35-4-84

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Fourth Session ·Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 42 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLII No. 84 • 1:30 p.m., THURSDAY, JUNE 17,1993 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL V Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARST AIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Maria nne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMM INGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, Ja mes, Hon. DRI EDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARM E, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Ji m, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDL AY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Je an GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAM MER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Av i s HELW ER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevi n LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Ji m MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, Ja mes, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER, Bria n PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, Jo hn PRAZ NIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Ja ck RENDER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Je rry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WA SYL YCIA-L EIS, Ju dy WOW CHUK, Rosann Vacant Vacant Vacant CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson We llington River Heights Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin- Rus sell Selkirk Concordia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Riel St. Ja mes Lakesid e Charl eswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfie ld Wo lseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli Poi nt Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon We st Assiniboia River East Pembin a Portage Ia Pr airi e Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfie ld Park Flin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Jo hns Swan River Rossmere Rupertsland The Maples PARTY.

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

4374 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, June 17,1993 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS Speaker's Statement Mr. Speaker: Prio r to Routin e Proceedi ngs, I have a statement for the House. I mus t in form the House that Gui zar Si ngh Cheema, the honourable member for The Maples, has resig ned his seat in the House effective Ju ne 17 , 1993. I am therefore tabli ng his resig natio n and my letter to the Lieu tenant-Governor- in -Counc il advi si ng of the vacancy thus cre ated in the membership of the House. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Mr.

Jack Penner (Chairperson of the Standing Com mittee on Economic Developm ent) : Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the Fifth Report of the Committ ee on Economic Development. Mr. Clerk (Will iam Remnant): Your Standi ng Committee on Economi c Development presents the following as it s Rfth Report. Your committee met on We dnesday, Ju ne 2, at 8 p.m. in Room 255, Thur sday, Ju ne 3, at 11 a.m. in Room 254 and Tuesday, Ju ne 15 , 1993, at 7 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legis lativ e Buil din g to consid er bills referred. At the Ju ne 15 , 19 93, 7 p.m. meeti ng your committee elected Mr. Penner as Chair person.

Your committ ee heard representatio n on bills as follows: Bill4- The Reta i l Bus in esses Su nday Shopping (Temporary Amendme nts) Act ;

Loi sur l' ouv erture des com mer ces de detai l les jour s feries modifications temporai res Brent Stewart - Morden and Distri ct Chamber of Commer ce Jo hn Krahn - Mayor of Wi nkler Roger Emery - Wi nnipeg Canadia n Tire Dealers Ver n Dyck and Peter Kaufman - Can adi an Federation of Independent Grocers (CFIG) Harold Ja ntz - Priva te Citiz en Paul McKinnon - Hender son and Mcivor Foods Ltd.

Sandy Hopkin s - Wi nni peg Chamber of Commer ce Don MacKi nnon - We stfair Foods Norman Leach - Manit oba Chamber of Commerce Alfred Schellenberg - Independent Jewellers Joe Borowski - Pri vate Citiz en Charles Finnbogason - Bramalea Lim ited Written Submissions: Mr. and Mrs. Mario n - Priv ate Citiz ens Stan Phil lips- Stan's IGA (Brandon) Eliz abeth Sell ick - Pres id en t, Man it oba Associa tion of Rights and Libertie s Toby Oswald - Canada Safeway Limited Biii 2�The Reta il Bus i nesses Hol id ay Clo sin g Amendmen t, Em ployment Standards Amendment and Payment of Wa ges Am en dm ent Act ; Loi modifia nt Ia

Loi sur les jours feries dans le commerce de detai l, Ia

Loi sur les normes d'em ploi et Ia

Loi sur le paie ment des sal aires Dale Botti ng - Can adi an Fede rat io n of Independent Busin ess Susan Ha rt-K ulb aba - Pr esid ent, Manit oba Federatio n of Labour Charles Finnbogason - Bramalea Limited Jo an Seller and Paul Mois t- CUPE, Manitoba Robert Ziegler - United Food and Commer cial Wo rkers Art Kerr - Manit oba Associ ation of Shoppi ng Centres Rev. Cli ff McMi llan - Wi nnipeg Presbytery of the Unit ed Church of Canada and The Associ atio n of Chris tia n Chur ches in Manit oba Written Submissions:

4375 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA June 17, 1993 Neil Stewart - Roblin and District Ch amber of Co mmerce George Gershman - Pr eside nt, Tourism Association of Winnipeg N. Blundel - District Manager for Ze llers Inc., Hudson's Bay Company Your committee has considered: Bi114- The Retail Busine sses Su nday Shopping (Temporary Amendme nts) Act ;

Loi sur l' ouv er ture des com me rces de detail les jo ur s ferie s modifications temporaires and has agreed to re port the same without amendment. Your comm ittee has also considered: Bill 2 3-- The Ret ail Busi nesses Holiday Cl osing Amendment, Em ployment Standards Amendment and Payment of Wages Amen dm ent Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les jo urs feries dans le commerce de detail, Ia

Loi sur les normes d'emploi et Ia

Loi sur le paiement des sal aires and has agreed to report the same with the following amendment: MOTION: THAT Bill 23 be amended (

a) in the heading of

section 19, by striking out •c oming into force" and su bstituting "C oming into force:

Part 2" ; and (

b) by adding the following after

section 19: Co ming into force:

Part 3 20

Part 3 of this Act comes into force on the day it receives royal assent. All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Penner: I move, seconded by the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson), that the report of the committee be now received. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon from the John Hender son Ju nior High Scho ol fifty Gr ade 9 stude nts un der the dir ection of Ms. Sandra Dr zystek. This school is loc ated in the constituency of Rossm ere.

On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Manitoba Hydro RCMP Investigation Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speak er, on behalf of our caucus, we woul d certainly wish the former memb er for The Maples and his family well in their futur e in Br itish Co lumbia. Mr. Speaker, my que stion is to the Deputy Pr em ier and Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro. Mr. Speaker, yesterday we wer e informed that the RCMP and staff from the federal Department of Environment, utilizing a search warrant, visi ted upon the Manitoba Hydro offices.

I would like the mi nister to advise us on the circums tances and what documents they were attempting to obtain in the visit to Manitoba Hydro. Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for The Manitoba Hydro Act): Mr. Speaker, at the outset, I would like to, as well, on behalf of the government and the Pr emier (Mr. Rl mon) and our party, acknowledge the contribution of the former memb er for The Maples. He will certainly be missed in this House. He contribut ed in a very positive way, and I com pliment him on his contribution. Mr.

Speaker, the member raises an issue which deals with a Cr own corporation which I am responsible for. Details of that at an appropriate time when avai lable, I would be prepared to provide. * (1 335) Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, can the minister confirm that the federal Department of Environment and the federal RC MP are investigating a spill at Great Falls in February, under the federal Rs heries Act? Ca n the minister confirm or advise the House what documents the RCMP and the federal department had to obtain from the provincial government by means, potentially, of a police investigation? Mr. Downey: Mr.

Speaker, the member raises again the issue that deals with a Cr own

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4376 corporation, of which he is asking for detailed documents-- Mr. Doer: I am not asking for them. Mr. Downey: Well, 1 misu nderstood the qu estion then. I thought he was asking for- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Mr. Doer: I asked what documents the federal government was seeking in their investiga tion. Perhaps the minister would take that- Mr. Speaker: The honourable memb er did not have a point of order. * * * Mr. Downey: Again, Mr. Speaker, he asks what documents the federal government are seeking at this particular time.

I would, as I said earlier, after an appropriate time, be prepared to respond to that qu estion after 1 have an opportunity-a nd if it is a federal inquiry, then that is the individual whom those pieces of information would have to come from. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minister responsible for Hydro and the Deputy Premier of the government to please find out what the situation is in Manitoba Hydro. Please find out what the situation is of why a federal department has to go in to a provincial Cr own corporation in this way, and please adv ise the House and the people of Manitoba of the circumstances?

Would the Deputy Premier please give us that undertaking that he will advise the people of Manitoba what the situation is? We are asking ques tions in the House today. We do not have, certainly, all the answers. We are not the government responsible for this Cr own corporation. The minister is. We wou ld lik e to know the reasons for the inves tigation, the cir cums tances around it. We wou ld lik e this mi nister to assu re us that this department and this Cr own corporation will participate fully and co-operate fully with the federal Department of Fisheries and the RCMP. Mr. Downey: Mr.

Speaker, to the best of my knowledge, I would see no reason why there would not be full co-o peration from Manitoba Hydro. I am qu ite prepared to provide appropriate documentation or informa tion that would become available if it is appropriate to in fact ma ke it available to the public. Youth VIolence Reduction Strategy Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I have a new ques tion, Mr. Speaker, on another topic. 1 certainly think that the public interest is served with full disclosure on this matter. Mr.

Speaker, to the Mi nister of Justice or the Deputy Premier : We were advised yesterday there has been a 20 percent increase in alleged assaults with juveniles in the city of Winnipeg. I am sur e all of us in this Ch amber are receiving considerable feedback from their constituents all across the provinc e deal ing with the in cr eased or the perceived increase in assaults and juvenile crim e. 1 would like to ask the government: Given the fact there has been a 37 percent increase since 1988 in these same kind of alleged assaults, what is the rati onale for these increases?

What is the strategy of the provincial government to deal with what I am sure all members would agree is a very disturbing and alarming increase in alleged juvenile assaults? Hon. James Downey (Dep uty Premier) : Mr. Speaker, violence of any kind is unacceptable. I think every memb er of this House would agree that is totally unacceptable. As far as the details of the ques tion, I will take it as notice for the Minister of Ju stice (Mr. McCr ae). Impact of Program Reductions Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, as a former volu nteer memb er of the Boys and Girls Cl ub, I was qu ite surprised to hear yesterday that the executive director of the Boys and Girls Cl ub feels the increase in the assaults in the city of Winn ipeg is due to an in crease in poverty. He was very clear about his perception, working on the streets, that the increase in poverty is leading to the increase in juvenile assaults.

I would like to ask the government: Is there any co- ordination between the Department of Finance, the Department of Family Services, the Department of Education and the Premier's Office in terms of what the im pact of the cutbacks the provincial government has im plemented is? Have any of these cutbacks resu lted in the 20 percent increase

4377 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA June 17, 1993 in juvenile assa ults in the city of Winnipeg through their provincial budget? Hon. James Downey (Depu ty Premier) : Mr. Speaker, it is a very simplist ic way for the me mber of the oppos ition to try and turn an issu e into a political iss ue which would be to his advantage. If he wants to do that, I think we sh ould go back and st art-if we are talking about impact on young people-with the ma ss ive deb t he and his colleagues , when they were in government, piled on the backs of young people and people who are going to have to pay the future taxes.

That is what deficits are, Mr. Speaker. That is what deficit is, is taxes that have to paid by young people in the future. As was sa id ye s terday by the Pr emier (Mr. Filmon), the increase in the interest charge on that debt from when he was in government, when he took over government in 1981 , was so mething like $90 million and ha s cur rently gone to $550 million, which last year was paid for by the taxpayers of Ma nitoba. Un consc ion able-exp enditu res of mo ney in Saudi Arabia on telephone syst ems , building of bridges without a road to the m .

That kind of ir res pons ible spending has caus ed the difficulties for the future of young people of this province. * (1 340) Mr. Doer: I would ask the Deputy Prem ier to publicly apologize to Mike Owen, whom I quoted, who is the executive dir ector of the Boys and Girls Club of Winnipeg. For the Deputy Premier to call Mr. Owen simplist ic, a perso n who is working on the st reets, who is working directly with the s e kids, I think the Deputy Prem ier owes him an apology. Let me quote you so mebody else who is more in contact with the real world than the Deputy Pr emier opposi te.

I would lik e to quo te the di rector of Ross brook House , Sis ter Le s ley Za couman: If so ciety continues to cut off the options , these people will go to the streets. Mr. Speaker, aga in, an exper ienced pers on working directly with kids in the inner city. What options has this govern ment cut off that is forcing kids to go on the st reets? What are the real im pacts of so me of the draconian me asures made by this govern me nt in terms of an increa se in juvenile crime and an increase in terms of sa fety that our citizens are feeling on the st re ets of Winni peg? .Mr. Downey: Mr.

Speaker, I did not ma ke any In ference to the fa ct that anyone else was simplistic other than the Leader of the Opposi tion in what he was trying to do politically. I have lots of res pect, Mr. Speaker, and this governm ent has lots of re s pect for the work that is done at Ross brook Hous e. In fact, I have been ther e with ma ny of my colleague s , atte ndin g functions and being with thos e young people, to show that we are interest ed and to try to make su re there is a clear un derst anding of so me of the needs . But I will try to res pond so people can under st and.

We have so me $400 million less to provide education, to provide family se rvices , to provide health care, to provide all those needs the Leader of the Oppos ition refers to, becaus e we se nd that mo ney to the banks of New York and all tho s e moneylender s he borrowed the mo ney from. We, by law, are obligated to pay that debt before we do one bit of education or one of thos e other su pport programs .

So let it be he who looks in the mi rror and takes the credit and the blame for those individuals who are having difficulty, becau s e there is not enough mo ney to provide for all tho s e things that have been done in the past . Asslnlbolne River Diversion CEC Chairperson Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): I, too, want to st art my comm ents this afte rnoon by recognizing the great contribution by the forme r me mb er for The Maples to this Hous e, to his caucus , his const ituents, and, as well, to his communi ty. Mr.

Speaker, I want to just add that I perso nally will, I think, most ly miss the forme r memb er for The Maples as a great friend. He and his family were friend s to me and my family and to ma ny in this House, and we will mi ss them dearly. We wish them well in Briti s h Colum bia. My ques tion is for the Minis ter of Environment. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Dale Stewart is curr ently the chair perso n of the five-perso n panel which is reviewing the Assi niboine River diversi on project. Mr. Stewart is the sa me perso n who un til Septe mber of 19 91 was the Deputy Minist er of Natural Res ources . Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Natural Res ources and the de partme nt have made no se cret down

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 4378 through the years, at least si nce this governm ent took office, of their su pport for this project. That su pport has been reflected on nume rous occa sions in this Hou s e, and in deed is reflected in the comm ents and the brief they put forward to that very same comm iss ion which Mr. Stewart is now the chairperso n of.

My ques tion for the Minister of Envir onm ent: Does he think it is appropriate that the same individual who was the deputy mi nist er of the departme nt, which had cons istently shown su ppor t for this project, is now the most influential perso n, the chair perso n on the comm iss ion wh ich is review ing it? Hon. Glen Cummi ngs (Mi nis ter of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I have eve ry confidence in Mr. Stewart's ability and capabilities and his willing ness to se rve this province and work with the comm iss ion on the very troubling problems that we put before the comm i ssion.

If the me mb er has so me concer n that he believe s is real , let him put it on the table. * (1 345) Mr. Edwards: I jus t have put it on the tabl e , and that concern is that the Hespeler report which came out in 19 87-and Mr. Stewart was the acting deputy mi nister at that ti me-propos es as a first phase , diver si on fr om Ass in iboine River water down so uth-down through the years , including the current report which went before the comm iss ion. This week, ther e is an abso lute un equi vocal su ppor t for this project. There is talk about mi tigative needs , but ther e is su pport for the project.

That is from the Departme nt of Natural Reso ur ces . This ge ntlem an was the deputy mi nister throughout most of the period of time that the departm ent was re viewing that project. Mr. Speaker, my question for the mi nister is not di rected to the integrity of Mr. Stewart. If this governm ent does not underst and the appea rance of conflict and the need for govern m ent to be circums pect and vig ilant in protecting agai nst conflict of interest, then they do not the underst and the nature of the appearance of conflict. It is re al and it is there. Why is this ma n st ill chairing that comm ission ? Mr.

Cummings: Mr. Spea k er, he is not in the courtroom . He is dealing with a quality civil se rvant who se rved that party faithfully, worked after this organization cam e into governm ent. He is a civil se rvant of the highest quality whom I trus t implicitly with this responsi bility. For him to stand in his place and besm irch the career of a longst anding qualit y civil se rvant is unacceptable, and I challenge him to repeat that outs ide of the Hous e. Mr. Edwards: He is so willingly blind to the conflict of intere st which is bein g created by him , Mr. Speaker, he has put Mr.

Stewart in tha t comprom ising position. It is not a position he sh ould have put him in. Mr. Speaker, the quest ion for this mi nister is why is the perso n who headed the departme nt which was the proponent of this project, why is that same gentle m an the decis ion ma ker on this very sa me project? Mr. Cummings : Mr. Speaker, alr eady th e member is putting mi si nform ation on the record. The propone nt is the Pem bina Valley Task Force. The Pem bin a Valley Tas k Force is the proponent. Let him get his facts st raight, and let him quit attacking a quality civil se rvant. Point of Order Mr. Edwards: Mr.

Speaker, the mi nis ter has very clearly indicated that I put misi nform ation on the record, and I want to clarify that point- Mr. Speaker: Order, please . The honourable Leader of the Second Oppo s ition did not have a point of order. He clearly sa id that at the outse t. There is no point of order. Hayrides Safety Regulations Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan Ri ver) : Mr. Speaker , it is important that people from rural and ur ban se tti ng s learn about each other's way of life.

Yes terday we had a group of young urban children who were doing just that, but unfortunately, it en ded in a se ri ous accident when the wagon they were riding in upse t. I want to ask the acting Pr emier if his governme nt is undert aking a review of this incident, and which departm ents will be involved to se e that sa fety regula tions were being followed? Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, let me first of all express si ncere regret s and sympathy for the young children who were hurt in a freak accident

4379 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17, 1993 yesterday at Bird s Hill Park, but I want to indicate to the Hous e and to memb ers here that the same rules apply to people who drive hors es on the roads as they do with vehicles . We have hun dreds of rule s and regu lati ons basically developed to try and protect the public from injury and from harm , and we apply those ru les. At the prese nt time in this particular case , the RCMP are invest igating the si tuation, and once we have that report, we are prepared to deal with it further. •

(1350) Hayrides Safety Regulations Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Since this is cons idered an amu se me nt ride , a ride for entertainme nt, and there are regula tions for other amusement operations , I want to ask the Minister of Labour whether thes e types of rides , hayrides , fall under The Am useme nts Act and whether there are regula tions to control these kinds of operations , and whet her they were being impleme nted. Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister of Labour): Mr.

Speaker, the definition of amusement is primarily deal ing wi th the mechan ical si de which our departme nt ins pects , as I am su re the memb er can appreciate, but we certainly will be awaiting the results of the RCMP report, and if there are so me recommendation s coming forward that there is an area in the safety scheme that needs to be filled, then we will con sider that. At this time , it is premature to make that analys is until we have received the report from the RCMP. Hayrides Safety Regulations Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Can the Minister of Labour (Mr.

Praznik) or the Minister of Agricultur e (Mr. Findlay) tell us what step s will be taken to se e that regula tions are followed under The Amu seme nts Act or the veterinarian s act and to se e that the regula tions on all of thes e types of operation s acro ss the provinc e are being followed?- becaus e there have been concerns rai s ed about this operation and other operations ab out the safety factors . How ar e we going to know that all of thes e regulat ion s ar e being followed across the province, an d what regulations are being followed? Hon. Al bert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr.

Speaker, there are ma ny people who enj oy riding, wagon-d rawn rides . It is a novelty, part of our heritage, I su ppose . I can recall as a youngst er driving hors es, and that was a me ans of ma king a living at that time. Mr. Speaker, both the Minist er of Labour (Mr. Praznik) and myse lf have given the undertaking that once we have the report from the RCMP, we will review it. If ther e are any dis crepancies , anything that should be address ed, we will do that. Howeve r, I want to sa y, Mr.

Speaker, that ir res pective of how ma ny rules and regula tion s we apply through my departme nt on the highways or in the other departme nts, from time to time you do have accidents. However, we are not taking this lightly. As so on as we have the final police report, we will review it, myse lf along with my colleagues the Minist er of Edu cation (Mr s. Vodre

y) and the Minist er of Labour, and if some thing has to be changed, we will do that. Workforce 2000 Program Justification Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, looking at recipients of the Workforce 2000 private training incentives , it is often difficult to se e where so me of thes e gr ants fit with the econo mi c st rategies for the province.

So I want to ask the Minister of Education why sh e cons iders it mo re important for the economi c futur e of Manitoba to tr ain better cas hiers for private golf courses , as sh e is under Workforce 2000, than it is to ma intain acce ss to education for thos e whom the province ha s cut out of education and Student Social Allo wances and the ACCESS programs . Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Those companies , bus iness , indus try, labour groups who wish to take advantage of Workforce 2000, wis h to participate-a nd I will rem ind the memb er that they also put mo ney on the tabl e- they go through a se ries of criteria, and then the program is mo nitored. There are also checks of the program as it goes along. There is a process of monitori ng. I would als o rem in d the memb er tha t this Workforce 2000 recomm ended by STAC as a mod el to involve the sh aring between governme nt,

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA 4380 business, industry and labour has been a model across Canada, and I repeat the numb er. It has to date trained mor e than 54,000 Manitobans. * (1 355) Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, but the issue is training for what? It was the choices and the alternatives I was asking the minister about. Equality of Access Ms.

Jean Friesen (Wolseley): My supplemental question for the minister is, what steps has she taken to ensur e that in the companies which have received Workforce 2000 money, there is equality of access to that training and that trainees are not selected on the basis of age or gender or even the amorphous attitu de? Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Agai n, Workforce 2000 operates with many sectors in Manitoba, the agricultur al sector, the construction sector, the manufacturing sec tor, wholes ale an d retail trade sec tor, transportation and communi cations sector, finance, insur ance and realty sector, communi ty business and personal services sector. We work and we monitor in each one of those. Each one of those areas that wishes to participate in the program is req uir ed to comply with the criteria, and then there is a monitoring process ongoing and following. Ms.

Friesen: But yet again, the minister read a list that was put in front of her. My question was, is there equali ty of access to training programs in Workforce 2000? Is that a criteria for the grant? Mrs. Vodrey: We ar e com in g to the lin e of Workforce 2000 in the Estimates of the Department of Education. We will be able to review those criteria in detail. However, I would lik e to table a report. The memb er has ju st been so critical of Workforce 2000.

I thought she would be interested in a letter we have from the Carpenters and Joiners of America who said that this important project would not have been possible without the gene rous support an d time resou rces and advice and consult ation-a letter of support for Workforce 2000. Asslnlbolne River Diversion Water Flow Levels Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my qu estion is for the Minister of Natural Resources.

The people of Portage Ia Prairie and Winnipeg have consistently been told by this min ister and memb ers of this gove rnmen t, and indeed the proponents of the Assiniboine River water diversion project not to worry about any decreases in water flow on the Ass iniboine River. Why? because it was going to be supplemented from water from the Shellmouth Dam. That has been shouted across this floor, and that has been stated on nu merous occasions. The water was to be replenished.

Now we have the Ministry of Natural Resources' brie f whic h indic ates at page 6 that: On the Assiniboin e River, im pacts wou ld be variable depending on location and flow conditions. Rows east of Portage would be 20 cubic feet per second lower. That is apparently acceptable as a matter of course as a result of that project. My ques tion for the mi nister: Why is it now acceptable that there be less water for the people of Portage Ia Prairie and indeed down river in Winnipeg, when for years they have been told the water would be replenished? What is it, Mr. Speaker? Hon.

Harry Enns (Min ister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, members know that as a rule I am not bashful in making my views known from time to time on this or any other subject, but I want to make it absolutely clear that it would be inappropriate for me to on a daily basis comment on what is happening at the Clean Environment Commission hearings. My honourable friend the Leader of the third party opposition is a lawyer. He will under stand that I view it somewhat analogous to a ques tion asked of the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) on an ongoing trial, which would be clearly sub judice and would not be answered.

Mr. Speaker, as a matter of notice, I have no intention of answering any ques tions with respect to what is being said on a daily basis at the Clean Envi r onment Comm is sion he ari ngs. Those hearings will be ext ensive, ex haus tive . The

4381 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA June 17, 1993 government places a great deal of importance on those hearings. When they are concl uded and when the ir findings are completed, some three or four or five or 18 months hence, I will be prepared to comment on the matter. Mr. Edwards: This is a brief entitled, from the Manitoba Department of Natural Resources. He is the minister, Mr. Speaker. Is he saying he is not prepared to defend his own report in this House? My ques tion for the mi nister: What is it?

Is it now tolerable that the people down river in Portage Ia Prairie and down from there, including Winnipeg, can li ve wit h less water and there will be no supplemental water? What is it? He has been telling this Hause- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his question. Natural Resources Report Mr. Paul Edwards (Le ader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question again for the Minister of Natural Resources: Is he prepared to defend the report that his department has put forward or not?

Is he prepared to answer for it or does his department func tion without his leadership, because- Mr. Spe aker: Order, please. The honourable member has put his que stion. * (1 400) Hon. Harry Enns (Min ister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, the professional engine ers and other Natural Resources people have specific ma ndates with respect to the managem ent of our natural resources, water being among them, fish being among them, other matters being among them.

They are called upon from time to ti me by different Manitoba groups and organizations and/or citizens, whether they are an irri gator by the name of Ed Conner y who wishes to draw water out of the Assiniboine or whether it is a group of communities like the 15 mun icipalities, towns and cities that represent the Pembina Valley Water Co- operative. They call and they rely on the professional advice of my engineers. That is the advice, that is the position being put forward before the Clean Environment Commission to pass some judgment on as to whether or not a proponent's proposal for a water allocation is doable.

That is not my job. That is for my professionals to assist the Clean Envir onment Commi ssion to come to a decision on that proposal. Human Resources Opportunity Centre Parkland Office Funding Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, a recent report by this government indicated strong su pport for the Human Resources Opportunity Centres across this province. It indicated, among other things, a gr owing demand for the program and a payback to government of $16 for every one dollar spent, a cost-e ffective program by any government standards. I want to ask the Minister of Education about this program, Mr .

Speaker, because, unfortunately, when we ques tioned the Min ister of Education dur ing Estimates, it was evident that there was no consid er ation given for this report when the decision was made to cut the Human Resources Opportunity Centres by 10 percent and to elimi nate the Parkland Centre completely. Wi ll the Minis ter of Education today indi cate whether she has now reviewed this report? Will she now admit that this was a gross miscarriage of justice and a colossal error by the government in making this decision? Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, we are coming to the line that deals with the HROCs and the HROPs in the Estim ates process of the Departm ent of Education and Trai ning, where we will be able to talk in detail about this. However, I did say to the member at other times he has raised the issue, this government did have very di fficult decisions to make. We have attempted to now work through a process with staff to provide the serv ice on behalf of Manitobans. That serv ice is still being provided. He speaks of one particular HR OC and HROP, and we are attempting to serv ice the needs of that particular area through itinerant workers.

Mr. Plohman: Well, Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that the minister made no contingency plans when this decision was made to provide serv ice for the Parkland, she now has an opportunity to correct the mistake. She has an opportunity to review.

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4382 I ask her today whether she will review the decision in light of this report and reins tate the funding and the program for the Parkland Human Resources Centre that is so necessary for the vuln erable people in the Park lan d who ar e depending on that program. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, we have staff from the Brandon area who will be going into the Parkland area. They will be on an itiner ant basis, but the service will still be provided in the Parkland area from the HR OCs and HROPs in the Brandon area.

In addition, in the Parklan d area, we have maintained the Single Parent Job Access Progr am, and we are working very hard to continue to maintain programming and support for the people of the Parkland. Mr. Plohman: How ridiculous. Did you hear that? Itiner ants from Brandon- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honou rable member's comments did not get on the record. The honourable member for Dauphin, kindly put your qu estion now, please. Mr. Plohman: Certainly, I would, Mr. Speaker.

I want to ask this minister: Is this all the commitment that she has to the decentralized program that this government touted high and low as the great saviour for ru ral Manitoba? Is this what she does for decentralization by having workers go from Brandon to service the Parkland? Do you know how far that is? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I wonder when the last time that member was up in the Parkland area. However, let me just say that there were difficult decision s to be made. We have main taine d commitments in several areas of Manitoba.

We will get to the discussion of all of the centres which have remained open, all of the programs which continue. As I said, we are still looking to service the needs of the people of the Parkland. We have main tained the Single Parent Job Access program ming, and we will continue to provide su pport for the people of the Parkland with the trained workers. Flame-Master Furnaces Judicial Decision-Appeal Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, my qu estion is for the Minister of Housing. Last year alm ost 200 homeo wners in Gimli attem pted to get ju stice over defective Flame· Master furnaces.

Now the Minister of Housing failed to act, and he was sued. Last week the minister lost in court, and Mr. Dave Kowcun of Gimli got a $1 ,200-plus-costs award towards a new furnace. I want to ask the min ister whether he will be appealing the court decision. Hon. Jim Ernst (Mi nister of Housi ng) : Mr. Speaker, before they haul me off to jail, we are having this matter un der consi deration as to whether we are going to appeal. Government Action Mr.

Jim Maloway (Elmwood) : I would lik e to know when the minister will be acting on the other 193 people that had defective furnaces and are out a lot of money because of this case. Hon. Jim Ernst (Minis ter of Housi ng) : The cir cums tances sur ro un ding Mr. Kow cun are some what different than the cir cums ta nces surrounding a number of the furnace issues there, in any event, but before anything is done, we will carry out the judic ial process in this matter to determine liability. After that, we will deal with it. Mr.

Maloway: Clearly, this man has won his case, and more people are going to proceed to the courts. I would like to know when the minis ter will decide to do something and solve this case in the interests of Manitobans. Mr. Ernst: The last time I looked, the member for Elmwood was not a member of the appellate court. When they decide, as they will in due course, should we decide to appeal, then we will make a decision. Repap Manitoba Inc. Investment In Manitoba Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, I bring some good news to the House. Mr.

George Petty, the president of Repap, is about to go into his annual meeting tomorrow. He indicates that he expects the company to be in a positive cash flow and in an ability to start back to his expansion plans. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance what this means for Repap's investment in this province. Will we begin to see some of that long-awaited

4383 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA June 17, 1993 investment as a result of the fact that the company is about to become profitable? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I than k the member for the very reasoned qu estion he puts before the House. Mr. Petty extended an invitation to me personally to be in atte ndance at the annual mee ting of Repap. I will unfortunately be unable to attend. We are mindful, too, of some of the turnaround obviously within the coated paper line that is a sign ificant contributor to the well-being of that compan y.

There is no doubt, as we continue discussions with Mr. Petty and Mr. Kass particularly, we will be trying to push more quickly the larger developed project at The Pas and in keeping with the co mmit me nt made by Repap contractually to the province. Yet, I would not want Manitobans to believe that there is going to be expansion, certainly within the context of the next few months. When one surv eys all of the major players within the forest product indus try, cer ta inl y Repap is probably best positioned to take advantage of any recovery within the industry. * (1 410 ) Mr. Alcock: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the minister could tell us, when Mr. Petty phoned to invite him to the meeting if he indicated when we would start to see some of that investment in this province. Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, the company has lost roughly $300 million in the last two years. I do not think their bankers or their financial supporters are going to let them be en ga ged in signi ficant expansion at all in term s of 1993. An Hono urable Me mber: You cer tainly miscalculated that, did you not? Mr. Manness: Well, what I did not miscalculate, Mr.

Speaker, was the fact that the NDP have been against Repap from Day One and indeed the 800 jobs . I did not miscalculate that. In fairness to the question, Mr. Speaker, certainly Repap has made no new time commitment with respect to the major project development. Social Assistance Dental Services Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, I have no intentions of leaving the good constituents of Burrows for Osborne, but when the member for Osborne leaves we will be happy to represent his seat by our party. Mr.

Speak er, for sever al years the City of Wi nnipeg has run a de ntal clinic for social assistance recipients. They treat 4,200 people a year. In the past they have billed on a flat-fee basis. Now, because of provincial standardization of social assistance, the Min is ter of Fami ly Services has decided that they would go to a fee-for-se rv ice basis. Why is the minister making this change when the City of Winnipeg says it will be more expensive to administer? Hon. Harold Gll leshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr.

Speaker, we have been in di scu ssions with the City of Winn ipeg over a numb er of issues to do with the standardization of the Social Al lowances Progr am. The city, of course, has been the serv ice delivery unit for social allowance recipients in a numb er of areas. Part of the changes we are making to have one sy stem of social allo wances in the province req uires some changes in the manner in which the cit y does business. We ar e cu rrently in discussions with them on a numb er of areas, and I am sure that when those discussio ns are completed, we will have arrived at a system which is workabl e. Mr.

Martindale: I would like to ask the min ister why he is forcing these changes on the City of Winnipeg, when the Deputy Medical Officer of Health has said, quote: There will be an overall decrease in de ntal services for patien ts on assistance, and the inevitable outcome will be, of these changes, that teeth which could easily be saved will be extracted. They are providing less serv ice at a more costly rate to admi nister. Why are they doing these things? Mr. Gll leshammer: The province agrees to fund to a certain level the serv ices that are provided by the City of Winnipeg.

If the city wants to go beyond those serv ices, then they have some ability to use funds of their own to do that. Mr. Speaker: The time for Oral Qu estions has expired. Committee Changes Mr. Nell Gaudry (St. Bonif ace) : I mo ve , seconded by the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gr ay ), tha t the com position of the Sta nding

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 4384 Commit tee on Econ omic De ve lopme nt be ame nded as follows: Osborne (Mr. Alcock) for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureu x). Motion agreed to. Mr. George Hlckes (Point Douglas): I move , se conde d by the me mber for Swan River (Ms. Wo wchuk), that the composition of the Standing Comm it tee on Economic De vel opme nt be amended as foll ows: Wo lseley (Ms. Fri esen) for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) for Thursd ay, June 17 , 7 p.m. Motion agreed to. Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimll): I move , seconded by the member for St. Vital (Mrs.

Render ), that the composition of the St anding Com mi ttee on Economic Devel opme nt be amend e d as foll ows : the me mber for Mor ris (Mr. Mann ess ) for the member for Springfield (Mr. Findlay); the member for La Vere ndrye (Mr. Sveinson) for the member for Gimli (Mr. Helwe r); the member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummin gs) for the member for Rive r Eas t (Mrs. Mitchels on); and the member for As siniboia (Mrs. Mcintosh) for the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Rose) . Motion agreed to. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr .

Spe aker , I woul d ask, first of all , whet h e r or not there is a willingn es s to waive private membe rs' hour. Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House to waive private member s' hour? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: No, the re is no le ave. Mr. Man ness: I move, seconde d by the Minister of Environme nt (Mr. Cummings), that Mr.

Spe ake r do now le ave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be gr anted to Her Majesty. • (1 420) Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be gr anted to He r Majes ty with the honourabl e member for St. Norbe rt (Mr. Lauren deau) in the Chair for the De partme nt of Edu cation and Tr aining ; and the honourable member for Seine Riv e r (Mr s. Dacquay) in the Chair for the Departme nt of Healt h. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) EDUCATION AND TRAINING Mr.

Deputy Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): Wi ll the Committee of Supply ple ase come to order. This after noon, this

section of the Committee of Supply , mee ting in Room 255, will re sum e consideration of the Estimates of Education and Trai ning. When the comm ittee la st sa t, it had been cons ide ring item 4. (g )(1 ) on page 39 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass? Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin ) : Mr. De puty Chair per so n, we asked the mi nister about the re port that was commiss ioned by the Planning and Pol icy De velopme nt Branch. The final re port was provided November 5, 1992. We asked this during the ea rl ier part of the Estimates . Has the mini ster had an opportunity now to review that re port? Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Chairper son, yes, I and my departme nt have had an opportunity to look at the report. I am aware that the report was supportive of the role of these programs whe n the y were a part of the Departme nt of Family Services , and now, we will have to lo ok at the role and ex actl y what the function of these particu l ar programs ar e within the Departme nt of Education and Training. I ex plained that to the member , I believe , the last time we spoke about this. Mr.

Plohman: Yes, well, the minister shoul d not be worri ed about whether she has to ex plain things . That is her job. Mr. Deputy Chairperso n, I would li ke to ask the minister if she ha s found out from her st aff what this re port cost to under take . Mrs. Vodrey : That was an ex penditur e done within the Departme nt of Famil y Services . The member may like to addre ss that que stion to the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gille shamm er). Mr. Plohman: The minister is now responsible for this program, Mr. De puty Ch airper son .

The Minister of Famil y Services indicated he woul d ans we r no qu e stions on HR OC, the Huma n Reso urces Opportunity Centres , because they now fall under the Departme nt of Education.

4385 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17, 1993 We ar e not going to be caught in game playing betwee n the two ministe rs . That minister sa id it is no longer his res pons ibil ity. This minister is now respons ible . It is up to her to find out what it cos t when it was com miss ioned and provide a re port to this committee . Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperso n, we are, as I have sa id, not atte mpting to play games by any me ans . We ar e attem pting to provide the information that is the most curren t.

At the mome nt, the Departme nt of Education and Training has to now lo ok at the programs that have bee n trans ferr ed from the Departme nt of Family Services in the light of the work of the Departme nt of Edu cation and Tr aining. This was an ex penditure he is asking about that was acce pte d and passed by the Departme nt of Family Services . It was not passe d within the De partme nt of Education and Trai ning. Mr. Plohm an: Ce rtain l y, when programs are tran s fer re d, all as pects of the dis cuss ion su r rounding those programs are rele vant to the iss ue.

The minister ha s a respons ibility to provide responses on aspect s both before the program came and foll owing be cau se sh e is now responsi ble for the program, and what went on before ha s ever ything to do with how the program is dealt with now. We have a re port done . The minister says she is review ing this re port, and she is going to see how this can be incorporated into the future program changes in her departme nt.

So if you ar e using a report that is commiss ioned by this gover nment, if you ar e using that re port for future decision making, you have a respon sibil ity to provide a report to the committee on what the cos ts of that re port were . Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, I ha ve not been the minister who table d that re port. I am not qu ite su r e how the member has actuall y re ceiv e d that re port, if in fact it was prese nte d to him or if he received that re port by so me othe r mean s .

Howe ver, I will sa y to him that certain l y as Minister of the Departme nt of Edu cation and Tra ining, I am looking ve ry carefull y at these programs now and certai nly will be please d to answer ques tions regarding these programs and my respon sibil ity for these programs as they ar e part of the divis ion of Ad vanced Education and Skills Trai ning. So I will be happy to dis cuss aspects of the program if he cares to ask those questi ons. Mr. Plohman: Well , Mr.

Deputy Chairperso n, I will certainly get to that, but if the minister wants us to table the re port for her ed ification if she ha s not see n it, the n we will be glad to do that. We have a copy. We assu me the minister has access to this . Point of Order Mrs. Vodrey: There ha s never bee n any question of our access to the re port, or mine. I have ex plained that we have been review ing it. I most certainly have see n it. The question was how the member received that re port, how the member for Dauphin received that re port. Mr. Deputy Chairperson : Orde r, please .

The honourabl e minister did not have a point of orde r. * * * Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairper so n, that was certa inl y out of orde r as you have so rule d, because it is none of the minister ' s conc ern whe re I got my re port. What is of concern to her, of course , is what she is doing with the re port, and we ar e asking her how mu ch the governme nt paid to have this re port done . * (1 430) She is res pons ible for the programs .

If she does not know how much and did not bothe r to try to find out, it see ms to me afte r this was raise d, the first thing she sh ould have asked is: How much did we pay for this re port that we ignored? So I am asking her what was the cost , and if she cannot give it to us today, just an under taking that she will find out how much it cost . A si mple phone call by one of her st aff- s he certainly has en ough of them around. As k one of them to go call . Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, as I have sa id from the st art, this re port was commiss ioned by anoth e r departme nt.

It was commiss ioned at a time when these programs were the respon sibil ity of anothe r minister in another departme nt, and the st udy itsel f was to lo ok at these programs within the Departme nt of Family Services . Since the time of that re port, these programs have been tran s ferr ed to the Departme nt of Educ ation and Tr aining. The Departm e nt of Education and Training now has to loo k at these programs to see how the y fit, the function and the

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4386 role of the se programs within our departme nt, and that is ex actly what we are doing at this time . Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairpe rson, I aske d the minister whet h e r she will undert ake to provide us with a cost of this program and a copy of the original comple te re port. Mrs.

Vodrey: I will rem ind the member again that the money ex pend e d for that re port was money ex pend e d by the minister of anothe r departme nt, that it was not ex pended by the Department of Education and Traini ng, and is not to be ex pended in this year under this year's Estimat es which we ar e discussing now. We are discussin g now the Estimates of the Departme nt of Education and Tra ining, and we ar e discussing the spe nding for the coming year. That re port was commissioned by the Department of Family Services , and it has com e from their budget .

So I have said to the member that that minister is the person he might li k e to ask that que stion of. I hav e also under stood from what the member has said, he has offe re d to provide copie s of the re port, so it see ms to me he alrea dy has a copy of the re port, and is now asking, could he have anoth e r on e . Wel l, he already has one . So I would say that he see ms to have the information containe d in the re port.

I am sure, as he has read that information, he is aware that it was constructed to look at those programs as they were part of Family Services , and they ar e now a part of the Departme nt of Education and Training. Mr. Plohman: Mr. De puty Chair per son, th e minist er's comme nts borde r on the absurd. She knows very well we have a copy. It says Phase I, Final Report, and was delive red Novem ber 5, '92. The Policy and Planning branch undertook this. It could have been Executiv e Council, or it could have been under the departme nt. It could very well have been by Ex e cut ive Counci l Pol icy and Planning. Mr.

Deputy Chairp erson, the mi nister knows very well who undert ook this re port, what it cost, whe n it was done . We see a Phase I. I want to know where Phase II, Phase Ill are- if there are othe r phase s, table the re port-and if is the re any additional money flowing. If this was undertaken by a private consultant, as we unde rstand it was, through Prai rie Partne rship or Prai rie Resea rch, that this in fact could mean that additional dollars ar e still flowing in final payme nts. We want to know precisel y when the dollar s flowed on this report and what the cost of it was. Mrs.

Vodrey: The re are no additional dollars flowi ng. There is no mo ne y flowing from the Departme nt of Education and Tr ainin g for any further parts to this re port, any complet ion of this re port. Th ere has bee n no money ex pend e d by the Departme nt of Education and Tr aining, nor will the re be on this re port. Mr. Plohm an: Mr. De puty Chair per son, the minister is dismissing this re port as if it is irr ele vant, as if it is not important. Th ere is certai nly not going to be any money spe nt by this departme nt on this re port.

We ll, I want to just tell her that on e would assume that there would at least be some follow-up by the consul tants with this departme nt since the y have assumed responsibil ity and since this major work was unde rtaken . Wh at follow-up has there been by the se consul tants with the departme nt? Mrs. Vodrey: That ev aluation was done , again I will re mind the member , prior to the tran sfer of the program to the De partme nt of Edu cation and Training. We will be looking at those programs and any information that has come from the ev aluation in the li ght of our over all economic strateg y.

At this point, one of the important points has bee n that the Departme nt of Edu cation and Training now, through its crea tion of the new ea st br anch , the Advan ced Education and Skills Training, they ar e looking at the reorganization to make sur e that the programs which we have brought into Edu cation and Trai ning are well integ rated . We can lo ok clea rly at the role s and what the function of the se programs will be, and that is ex actl y the work that we ar e doing now. Mr. Plohman: Mr . Deputy Chairper son, that is nonsense . I want to know whethe r the minister has received a Phase II re port? Mrs.

Vodrey : The re port that the me mber is spea king of, the whole re port, is a re port that is inter nal to gover nme nt. That re port has not been made publi c. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, I never asked the minister whet her it was made publi c or not. We have a part of that re port. Obviously it is Phase I dealing with the Huma n Re sourc es Opportunity Centr e . I am asking the minister if she

4387 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA June 17, 1993 has a Phase II re port. Yes or no. It is not whe the r it should be made public; I am asking whe ther she has receiv e d a subseq uent phase. Mrs. Vodrey: One mi ght wo nder then how the me mber did acqu ire that re port. The re port is inter nal to governm e nt, and the re port was not re leased. Mr. Plohman: What is the point of the minister 's que stion? To hide from giving this committee the facts?

Pr ov idin g open in formation to the committee that is studyi ng-that ar e membe rs of this Legislatur e studying her departme nt and her irr es ponsibility in her depart ment. Wh at is she trying to do here ? It is nothing but games . Now come cle an with this committee . We ar e asking for a copy of the re port. We ar e asking some very good information that is necessary for the public. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Orde r, ple ase . I would ask the honourable member to choose his words carefully. Mr. Plohman: Certai nly. Mr.

Deputy Chairperson: I am atte mpting to keep the decorum at a fairly level pac e he re, and some of the words the member is choosing ar e not quite appropriate for any committee that I chair. So I would ask the honourable member to choose the m carefully. The honourable minister , to re ply. *

(1440) Mrs. Vodrey: Again, I have said that this re port was comm issioned by anothe r departme nt, by anothe r minister, for the use of anothe r departme nt. Now , the se particular programs have be en transfe rred to the Department of Education and Tr aining. We will be looking thr ough our reorgani zation of our AEST branch, at the function and the role of these programs. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, who paid for this re port? Mrs. Vodrey: The Department of Family Services paid for this report. Mr.

Plohman: Have you at least the kind of commun ication and organization that one would ex pect, that at least whe n a major division and branch of gov ernme nt is tran sfe rr ed to anothe r de partme nt, that along with it came furth e r docu me ntation on this re port, sinc e it is fundame ntal to the future of this program? Mrs. Vodrey: Again, the cost of the re port was paid by another departme nt. It was not paid from the money which is being made availa ble and which we ar e discussing this ye ar in the De partme nt of Edu cation and Tr aining, the Estimates for th e coming year.

What I think is important is that now we will have the opportunity to look at that report and see what parts of it apply to these programs as they are now a part of the Department of Education and Training. Mr. Plohman: Has the minister read the report? Mrs. Vodrey: I have certainly see n the report, had an opportunity to discuss the re port with staff, and I am aware of the conte nts of the re port. Mr. Plohman: Has the minister re ad Phase II of the re port? Mrs.

Vodrey: I will te ll the me mber tha t we certainly have the full re port, and the full re port will be ex amined as these area s are being integrated into the Departme nt of Education and Training. Mr. Plohman: Can the minister tell us whet her she unde rstands the proce ss of Estimates , that the critics, as a matter of course, delve into re ports and happenings of the department ove r the past year, as well as what will happe n in the future year, that this is a ma tte r of tradition in the Esti mates proce ss? Mrs.

Vodrey: I certainly under stand the proce ss of Estimates , but as I have ex plained , the se ar e the Estimates of the Departme nt of Education and Training. This particular re port was commissioned by the Departme nt of Family Services . Mr. Plohman: This

section is the responsibility of this minister at this time . If the minister unde r stands the process of Estimates as she says, she knows that it is standard practice that critics will ask the mi nister que stions about re ports that she is now responsible for that have been completed or ar e in proce ss prior to Estimates . That is a standar d traditional practice in the Comm ittee of Supply and committee of Estimates . Doe s the mini ster unde rstand that to be the case ? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, if the member wishes to talk about the re port-and I do not know if he knows what is in the re port.

I have told him that I know the conten ts of the report. The re port was prepar e d when these programs were a part of another departme nt. We will now

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4388 hav e to look at the re port, but we will have to look at it in light of the function of these programs and the rol e of the se programs in the De partme nt of Education and Training. Mr. Plohman: We ll, Mr. Deputy Chairper son, the minister knows the re port was commissioned prior to the el im in ation of the Park l and Huma n Resourc es Centre . It was based on what was there at that time . Now part of that system is no longe r ther e.

How can the minister review the re port to gain any knowl edge about what she is suppose d to do in the future , if she has alrea dy trashe d part of the program? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, the re were very difficult budget decisions to be made on the part of the Departme nt of Family Services whe n they were going through the budgetary proces s. Now that the se programs have be come housed in the Department of Education and Training, we will be looking at thei r function and future planning from within this departme nt. Mr.

Plohman: Is the minister not aware that when a program is tran sfe rred to her departme nt during the proce ss of a year at any time , it is the n her re sponsibili ty to answe r any and all que stions re lated to that program? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

De puty Chairper son , I am certainl y prepared to answe r que stions regarding the conte nt of the program and ex actl y what our plans are for this program, but the re were decisions ma de in an othe r de partme nt re garding the commissi oning of a re port and ve ry di fficul t decisions made about this particular area , and then the area was tran sfe rr ed to the Department of Education and Trai ning.

I have said to the member that I am certainly , with my staff, lo oki ng at the re port, but if the member can under stand, we have to look now at this re port in light of the Department of Education and Tr aining, not the Departme nt of Family Services . Mr. Plohman: Does the mi nister ex pect us to believe that she was not even consulted on this program, knowing of course that she was now going to be re sponsible for this program in her department, prior to those decisions being made? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, again, I am very happy to talk about the program as it is housed in the Departme nt of Education and Training, but the member knows that when he wishes to discuss the details of decis ion ma king that took place in anoth e r departme nt, then it woul d be that minister who would answe r thos e que stions. What I can do is spea k to the member about whe re we ar e going now. I unde rstand that this program is of inter es t to him, and I unde rstand that he would perhaps like to spea k about what is happen ing with that program now. Mr.

Plohman: The mini ster should have a little more re spect for this proces s and the committee than to play games in this particular case . Point of Order Hon. Leonard Derkach (Min ist er of Ru ral Development): Mr. Deputy Chair, I do not think it is fair- Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Orde r, please . Can I ask you to bring the mike up and start again? Mr.

Derkach: I do not think it is fair for any member around this table who is a member of the Legislatur e to be accusing anothe r me mber of being dishones t or playing game s or any of the kinds of comme nts that I am hearing from the me mber for Dauphin, and I think he shoul d withdraw the m and apologize for his conduct in this Chamber . Mr. Depu ty Chairpers on: The honou rab le member did not have a point of orde r at this time , but I will li ste n carefull y to the words that are coming from the member . • (1 450) • * * Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Deputy Chair, the minister must have more respect for this committee , so that she wou l d no t un de rtak e to le ave us with the impres sion that somehow we can go and ask this othe r mi nister who is no longe r re sponsible for the se programs about decisions that he made . He has alre ady advis e d the committee that he is no longe r re sponsible . We agree ; therefore , he can not answe r que stions on it. This minister is now re sponsible , and if she do e s not under stand that, she should go to her Prem ier and her House leader and others and get brie fed as to what her re sponsibil ity is.

Clea rly , it is a responsibili ty to this committee to answ e r que stions about the program. We ar e not asking confide ntial que stions. We ar e not asking what she knows.

4389 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17 , 1993 We just want to know whether she was consulted prior to the decisions being made, because she was going to be responsible for these decisions, or did she not even know that? Mr. Deputy Chairperson: I would like to inform all hono u rable memb er s that, as rulin gs in this committee have stated, it is not up to the minister to answer any questions being put to them, and they are not requir ed to answer any qu estions coming to them about other departments. Mrs. Vodrey: Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Chair.

Let me say to the member, so that there is absolutely no doubt on the record, my respect for this comm ittee, which is why I have been making every effort to answer the ques tions that are put forward. However, I say again to the member that I am very pleased to answer ques tions about this particular program and will when he asks them, but he is asking questions that focus on a decision made at another time by another person when these particular programs were a part of another department. I am very happy to speak about these programs now that they are a part of the Department of Education.

I most certainly was aware of the reorganization. We believe that the reorganization which was taking place will be very helpful to the people of Manitoba. We are looking now at these programs in the light of the Department of Education and Training. The Department of Edu cation and Trai nin g has a different role. It has a different mandate. It has a different function from the Department of Family Services. So we will be looking at all of these programs in the light of the work that we do in the Department of Education and Training. Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, is the mi nister saying that this report, done when this branch was in another department or this program was in another department, is irrelevant to her considerations now as she is now responsible for it, for all aspects of the program and the report? Mrs. Vodrey : Mr.

Deputy Ch air, as I have answered now probably 10 times or more, I and my department are looking carefully at this report; however, we recognize that this report was done for another department when the circumstances were different because these programs were offered within a department that had a different function from the Department of Education and Training.

Now that it has moved into the Department of Educ ation and Trai ning, I have advised the member that I am certainly aware of the contents of the re port and staff are rev iewing the report carefully, but we now have to review the report in the light of the ma ndate of the Department of Education and Trai ning. Mr. Plohman: Let the record show simply that the minister refused to provide evidence of the cost of this report to this committee. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I want to ask this minister: How mu ch federal money was lost by the cuts that were made to the HROC this year? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, let me begin by saying: Let the record show that this minister is responsible for answering for the expenditures of the Department of Education and Training. I have done so for a great many hour s and will continue to do so because we have a grea t number of programs still to cover. I am certainly more than prepared, have been more than prepared, and continue to be prepared to answer ques tions regarding the expenditures of the Department of Education and Trai ning.

Regarding the que stion that the member has just asked, I am informed that it will take us a short time to calculate any figures which may be involved, but perhaps the member would like to ask another question and then I will give him that information from his first question when I have it available. Mr. Plohman: This mini ster's credibil ity in this committee is certainly strained as a result of her refusal to provide any forthcoming information about this report. It is clear, and she has that information.

I have to say that, as far as I am concerned, there is a credibility gap here, and the mini ste r knows ver y well that this report was commissioned. Its first phase was made available in November of '92. That is only six months ago. It follows that the consultants would have met with staff to discuss the report followi ng, that there would be follow up on that report and could very well be further - Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. Point of Order Mrs. Vodrey: The memb er says the report was ma de ava ilab le. This report was an in ternal documen t. He has obviously some information that is internal.

He is leading the committee to

June 17, 1993 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 4390 belie ve that somehow this was a tabled re port. It is not. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, plea s e . Th e honour able minister did not have a point of orde r. *** Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, th e re port was pre pared Nove mber 5, '92, and we have a copy of th e Phase I re port. Whet h e r the minister says it is confid ential or it was inter nal, that is her proble m. The fact is, it is availabl e to the committee , and we have obtain e d a copy of that re port. Now I am asking th e minister : How much federal money was lost by th e cuts?

I also want to ask her: How many staff will provide the itine rant services from Brandon to the Parkland? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, as the member knows, in this particu lar program, whe n the provincial gover nme nt spends money , we receive half of tha t mon ey back from the fede ral gover nme nt, and th erefore th e money which we will not be re ceiving on behalf of that ex penditure is $534,000. Mr. Plohman: So the min ister is saying that in making this decision th e gover nme nt has forgone $534,000 fe deral dollar s that were providing this service in the province . Mrs.

Vodrey: As I said to the member in my first answer, th e provincial gove rnme nt would ex pend funds and receive a half back. Therefore , yes, we did not receive $534,000. Howe ver, we did, in fact, by provincial ex penditur es then , not ex pend the total amount also. Mr. Plohman: Just to clarify now, the $534,000 is forgone federal dollars. Am I corre ct? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, that is corre ct. Mr. Plohman: How much of this applies to th e Human Re sour ces Opportunity Centre s in this line? None of this is New Caree rs? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, the savings as re late d through th e centre s-and that would be all of th e centre s-that is a saving that has occurred as a re sult of all of the centres , not just one . • (1 500) Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairpe rson, could the minister tell us what th e savings of dollars were to th e gover nme nt and to the federal go vernme nt of the closure of the Parkland centre ? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, on that particular HROC, the province would have spe nt $325,000 and would have received $1 62,500 from the fe deral gover nme nt. Mr.

Plohman: Can the minister ex plain why th ese figures ar e not matched? Is it that some of the ex penditu res of the province are not el igible? Which ar e those , capital spen ding, or what part of it is not el igible for federal sharing? Is th e minister saying that th e $325,000 is th e total and that the actual cost to the province is re ally $1 62,000 and the federal is $1 62,000? That is not what she said, but that way I could read it that is matched. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, I believe that is what I said. The member is now correct.

I did say that the provincial ex penditure would be $325,000 and we would re ceive back from the federal governme nt $1 62,500. Mr. Plohman: The mi nister would be correct in saying th e total cost to th e province is $1 62,500. That is the saving. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, that is correct. Mr. Plohman: I ask the minister , how many staff will be providing itine rant service from Brandon? I would like her to provide us with some statistical information about th eir curre nt work load and th e projecte d incre ase in th e work load. Mrs.

Vodrey: The member aske d th e que stion of what ex penditures would not be cove red under th e federal gov ernm e nt's cost sharing. Under CAP and

Part 3, the area s which would be ex cluded would be re ntal of provincial space , the provincial he alth and ed uc ation tax . The n capital ex penditures must be prea pproved , so the re would be some capital ex penditur es which ma y be acce pted . There would be others which would not be acce pted . I unde rstand that sometimes capital ex penditur es such as a van might be acce pte d under some circum stances and perhaps not under othe r circumstances . The number of staff who will be providing th e itine rant service from Brandon is two . Mr.

Plohman: Two staff from Brandon are going to meet the needs of th e Parkland, now the minister is saying. How many staff ar e the re in Brandon? Jus t to furthe r clarify my que stions on this, are the se full- time staff allocated to th e Parkland, or will

4391 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17, 1993 this be jus t part of their work load ? I asked questions about work load earlier, so I want to know the total staff in Brandon, whether these two are assigned full time, what their work load is at the present time if they are not assigned full time, and how they will be sharing that with the Parkland. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, in the Brandon office, there are four staff assigned to the HROP program. There are 10 .26 assigned to the HROC, and there are four assigned to the Single Parent Job Access.

There will be two of the staff who will assume, as part of their case load, the Parklands area, and they will work as itinerants to the Parklands area. Yes, they are full-time staff. No, they are not assigned full time to the Parklands. They will, as I said, assu me, as part of the caseload, work in the Parklands area. There were, my informa tion says, approximately 120 active cases transferred to the Westman area from the HROP regio nal office, but all the on-site participants will complete their programming and then some will be moving on to work experience.

So for the two staff who will be acting as itinerant, in terms of their caseload, it would increase by approximately 50 each. However, as I said to the member when we discussed this in the policy area, all staff will have to look at what their caseloads are, and they will have to look at the amount of time, including travel, which all of the consultants do, and then look at a division of work in caseload that is the most efficient. That is exactly the place where they are now, looking at the most efficient way to divide up the caseload. This is true for all people who offer clinical services. * (1 51 0) Mr.

Plohman: The minister said earlier there were four staff in Brandon on the HROC, and then she said there were 1 0. 6. Can she jus t clarify that? Mrs. Vodrey: I believe I said there were 14 .26 totally in the HROC and the HROPs. Four are part of the HROPs; 10 .26 are in the HROC programs. Mr. Plohman: I still have not gotten that clear. The minister said four to the HROC and then 10 .26 to the HROC programs. What is the difference? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chair, four to the Huma n Resources Opportunity Progra ms, the HROPs; and 10 .26 to the Huma n Res our ces Opportu nit y Centres, the HROCs. Mr.

Plohman: Yes, okay, so four involved with the program and 10. 26 with the centres. pnterjection] You hear HROC and HROP and see if you know the difference between P and C, if you can distinguish. I can use jargon for the minister, too. I want to be mu ch mor e clear. She likes to play games, as I said earlier, and this is what we are getting here. [interjection] Well, there was mumb ling. She can say, I am not playing games, but I will tell you that is what it is. Point of Order Mrs. Vodrey: Let the record show and I will check Hansard that I believe the member was using the acronym as well. Mr.

De pu ty Chairp erso n: The honour able minister does not have a point of order. *** Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chai rperson, for the record, the Mi nis ter of Family Ser vices (Mr. Gilleshammer) said, and I quote from the April 27 Estimates: "The member is possibly aware that we have transferred our tr aining programs out of Family Services now to Education so that all of the training programs that were in this department and some that were in Labour are now part of the Educ ation and Tr aining department of governmen t." Then he went on to say: "I think, as the Minister of Education (Mrs.

Vodrey) and the Department of Education look at this broad spectrum of people they have to serve and this continuum of service, they have to make decisions within there to decide wher e the dollars are best placed, but knowing that they will have to serve all manner of people who are seeking training and retr aining in Education." It was, he says , "a very difficult decision to downsize in this area, but there was a feeling that there were services that could be offered by other groups within that commun ity and services that could be offered from the City of Brandon." He said that they will serve it from Brandon, right, but he never indicated any answers about that report and other areas of the discussions, and I have not jus t found the exact lin e wher e he indicated that the Mi nister of Education would be the one to answer the questi ons in detail.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I want to get back to the discussion that we were having about staff. The

June 17 , 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA 4392 minister is saying something that is jus t incredible, really, for anyone to believe that two staff on a part-ti me basis are going to serve the whole Parkland in any way that was close to the service that was there before. Is there any intake of additional people that are going to be served, or does the minister jus t see this playing out the string for the people that were already in the system, and once they have been serviced, the oblig ation from Brandon is over?

How are they going to be involved with intake of all of those people who need this service in the future and are not yet part of that service? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, a couple of points. First of all, the member has had trouble with the term HROC and HROP. I will just remind him that they were given their names by his party when they were in government. Then hE! speaks and has read into Hansard what the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) said in his Estimates.

That is exactly what I have been saying today, that we are looking to serve all mem ber s of the commu nity and that we ar e cert ainly looking with the movement in to the Department of Education and Training to provide the full spectrum of service of training for the people of Manitoba, including the Parkland area. If the member did not happen to ask that particular minister about the report, then that was an opportunity missed with that mi nister.

However, I have been prepared to talk about the report by saying that, yes, we have reviewed it, we are aware of the contents, and we are certainly looking at it, but we have to look at it now in the light of the Department of Education and Training. So with that in mind, I do not know if the memb er has any other way he wou ld lik e to look at that report specifically but in the light of our department.

I would then say to the member that-and I think that this is re ally a very im portant part of the ques tioni ng-that we are looking to certa inly maintain a presence in the Parkland area for this service, and we have maintained a presence in the Parkland area for this servi ce. We have also maintained a presence in the Parkland area with the Single Parent Job Access Program . I think the member would agree that that, too, is an important program. (Mr.

Bob Rose, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair) Overall-1 know that we have discus sed this throughout the cou rse of Estimates-there were very difficult decisions to be made. We had to ma ke some very difficult ones, but with those difficult decisions, we have attempted to make sure that there is a presence on behalf of these particular programs available to the people of the Parkland area. We have recognized, as I said, that there is a group in extreme need who are the single parents who requir e the Single Parent Job Access Progr am. That one was maintained.

I cert ainly am aware that there are, I understand, 70 cases for the Single Parent Job Access Program and a single staff does look after those particular clients. So caseloads are a difficult thing when we are dealing with people. I unde rstand that, but we are doing our best to maintain the service. That is exactly what we have done. Mr. Plohm an: We ll, Mr.

Acti ng Deputy Chairperson, to go further on the discussions that took place, the Minister of Family Services said on a numb er of occasions that these had been transferred to the Department of Education and our critic for Family Services the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) said, and I quote: I think the focus in Education and Training probably makes sense. I guess I was asking for clarification so that 1 know whether we should ask our qu estions here or in Education and Training Estimates.

I would not want our critic to enter Education and Training and ask ques tions about the closure of the Dauphin centre and find out that the mini ster was not involved in the decision to do it. So I think it is probably best to ask the ques tions here. He did ask the qu estions, and again the Minister of Family Services (Mr.

Gilleshammer) continued to say that part of the program was transferred as part of the budgetary process, and our critic asked, was there any analysis specifically, analysis or study taken of whether or not to close the centre, what the pros and cons were, and , if so, what did that analysis show? * (1 520) The mi nister simply said, well, part of those discussions, of course, that take place within the branch of government discuss the services that were available and analyze those services and requirements.

One of the decisions we had to make was that we would downsize this area of the department as part of the transfer, focus that

4393 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17 , 19 93 training within the Department of Education and Training to provide training options in that particular area. However, he did not talk about the specific report that was brought in at that particular time. So our critic did ask about whether there was any particul ar analysis, and he was not given an answer or any reference to that report. That is on the record, and so, clearly, when I am asking about the report, it is valid. It is appropriate at this present time.

The report was something that was being used by this government to make decisions and was available. That report was very positive about the HROCs, about the Hu man Resou rces Opportunit y Centr es, and the HROPs, as the minister said, the Human Resour ces Opportunity Progr ams. Now, I would like the minister to indicate to us whether she feels this will provide an adequ ate service to the Parkland to meet the needs of those vulner able people who were se rved by the Parkland Human Resources Centre over the last 17 years, the service she is putting in place. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Acting Deputy Chair, we have reflected during the course of these Estimates on very difficult decisions, and they were difficul t decisions, and as I can say to the member now, we have looked at trying to continue to provide a presence and a support in these areas, and we also mai ntained the Single Parent Job Access Program which appeared to have, certainly, one of the heavier caseloads. Because we recognized that, we attempted to make sure that service was still available. Mr. Plohman: Again , it is basically a nonanswer. We have a nonprogram for the Parkland following this decision.

We have no centre serving the Parkland. We have no referral, no program either, no referral officers. There were two staff who were assigned in the Parkland for that, one in Swan River, one in Dauphin. Those two have been elimi nated. So there is really no one referring people to the workers, these itinerant workers who are somehow supposed to provide these services on an itinerant basis. It is totally absurd and inadequate .

We have established, through the questioning process over the last couple of weeks, in the earlier rou nd we had in Qu estion Perio d and in this committee today, that the move is contrary to the decentralization policy that the government has. It makes a mockery of decentralization. We have established that the Human Resources Opportunity Centres were very efficient, that the report the government commissioned which the min ister will not tell us about in terms of cost and other phases says that, in fact, the payback was $1 6 for every one dollar spent by government.

We have est ablishe d that the federal government was paying half of the dollars, half of the costs, and all the government had to do was have $1 62,500 to provide this service in the Parkland. Throughout we have seen that itinerant services will not provide any level of service and comfort to the vulner able people of the Parkland who require this service and who have depended on this service. I have talked with many of them. It has changed their lives. It is cost-effective. It has kept them out of trouble. In many cases, it has turned their lives around and allowed them to lead productive lives.

They have gone on to meaningful car eers, productive citizens in society, no longer involved with the problems they had in the past, whether it be drug and alcohol abuse in some cases, trouble with the law. There are many costs to society of allowing these people to jus t continue to linger out there without any program for them. The min ister talks about a continuum . She has gu tted the conti nuum. A major portion of that program was gone when th at centre was elimin ated. All these other agencies referred people to the Parkland Huma n Resources Centre. That is gone. So there is no continuum there.

It is a continuum in the mind of the minister only. It is at a theoretical level. There is no practical continuum of training and support to these people. I find it really mind boggling to think that this mi nister could ju stify this decision. She has the report. If it was not considered by the previous minister, then why does this minister not consider it, come back to Treasury Board and say, look, this is ridicu lous. Look at the report. Look at the service. This is a mistake and I want it reversed. I am responsible for these services now. I want this reversed. I cannot put up with this decision.

It does not make sense. It does not make economic sense. It is not cost-effective. It is not efficient. We get matching dollar s on this program . It is being used efficiently-$1 6 to one payback. What

June 17 , 19 93 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITO BA 4394 is going on here? There is every just ification to restore this program . Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I move that 16 .4(g) (1 ) be reduced by $1 50,000 taken from management salaries; and that this committee strongly ur ge the min ister to consider using the resources saved to restore the Parkland Human Resources Opportunity Centre. I want to speak to that motion, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson. Motion presented. The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Rose): At this time, I will take the motion under advisement and be back with a ruling.

Does the member for Dauphin wish to continue with his comments on the motion? I am sorry, I understand at this time it is not debatable while it is taken under advisement. The motion is not before the committee until the ruling is returned. Mr. Plohman: I just want to say, without speaking to that motion, that I have completed my line of questioning on this particular line, and I will await your ruling on the admissibil ity of that motion and pass to other members who may want to qu estion on this particular line. I would not be in favour of passing this section, though, until we have a ruling. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I have a number of questions that I would like to get on the record on this particular line because of the importance of having the Huma n Resources Opportuni ty and other programs tha t ar e made av ailable as successful as possible because of the number of individuals that it has an impact on. I recall a case which I had brought up, and I am not too sure if I made reference to the case before to the Minister of Education but during the Question Period, where someone was on social assistance and we were trying to get that individual off the social assistance .

I see these programs as opportuni ties, not necessarily that will cost go ve rnm ent mo ney, but will in fact save government money.

Ther e were some concerns that I had with respect to, again, the Departmen t of Fam ily Services and some of the cutbacks that were done there and the im pact of those cutbacks on this particular department and particularly, for example, the sing le-parent ACCESS program, because in many cases they rely on services such as daycare facilities. • (1 530) I guess maybe we will start off by asking the mini ster if in fact there has been an impact for individuals that are trying to upgrade, in particular the single parent out there, as a direct result of that particular cutback. (Mr.

Deputy Chairperson in the Chair) Mrs. Vodrey: The member has ma de some statements about the value of these programs, and we have certainly main tained them. We have cert ainly made sure that there continued to be some funding for these programs. But I know, as we have been talking over the past few weeks, that there have been difficult decisions that had to be made across all departments of government, which did require us to look at the amount of money being spent, and did req uir e us to ma ke some very difficult decisions. The member says, particularly in the area of child care .

Ag ain, any ques tions regar ding the implications of the child care surcharge rate for the social assistance recipients are qu estions which do go to my colleague the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gillesham mer), who would have the most detailed information regarding any impacts in that area. However, I can say that, based on the provisions of the Canada-Ma nitoba agreement, the Single Parent Job Access Program and the Gateway program will continue to offset the total actual costs inc u rred by the social assi stance recipients trainees for child care expenses. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, it is expected in this Single Parent Job Access Program that 701 individuals will benefit from it. How does that compare to previous years? Mrs. Vodrey: I am advised that the Single Parent Job Access Program served approximately 730 singl e-parent social assistance recipients in the year '92-93, and the projection for '93-94 is 701 participants. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would be interested in knowing in terms of-if we can just get a couple of years. Have we seen a gradual decline in individuals in this particular program? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, I have the numb ers for '91-92, which are 754; then, as I gave

4395 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17, 1993 the member, '92-93 was 730; and we are looking at estimating 701 for '93-94. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chair person, I am wonderin g if the mini ster can indi cate-these num bers that she has given, given that we are in a recession and one would think the demand for a program of this nature would in fact be increasing, is the minister believing that she is meeting the demands for a program of this nature, or are these using the argument of scarce resources that we have budgeted down to this line? Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, though the member may expect an increased demand, what we have been looking for in these programs is a very good quality of tr aining, and we have been looking to have the quality of the training somewhat more detailed, so we believe that there is perhaps even a greater value. Though the num bers may be slig htly smaller, we belie ve the quali ty of the training is extre mely good and should be helpful to those individuals. Mr- Lamoureux: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I would have tru sted in '91 -92 the qual ity of training would have been extremely good at that point in time, too, that in fact the reason why we see the decrease in in dividuals in this program is because of the governme nt's priorities. I would suggest to you that the government's priorities on this particular line are all mixed up. I would ask the minister if she believes enhancing programs of this nature does save money in the long term for Man itoban taxpayers. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair, the money that is available I know is certainly helpful and beneficial to the individuals who are in the programs, as is the training very beneficial. As the memb er knows, however, there have been very difficult decisions. Manitoba taxpayers have a threshold amount of money that they have available, as does government, so what we have been looking to do is to provide the best training and to provide the greatest amount of su pport and to conti nue thes e programs, because of the benefits. So I certainly do not believe that we are ar guing the benefits of this particular program.

However, I can say that in looking at providing the best program, we do not have as many people involved within the program as previously and there is not an endless supply of money which would continue to al low us to pour mo re and more additional dollars in to this particular program. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, of the 701 individuals, for exam ple, for the upcoming fiscal year, from what I under stand virtually 100 percent of them would be on some form of social assistance or another. Is that not correct? • (1 540) Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.

Deputy Chair person, I am informed that for the participants, income security would provide a needs assessment so individuals would receive the income secu rity or social assistance as the need is determined. However, all participan ts in the program do receive a minimum wage or a trai ning wage to assist them. When we have been speaking about the qualit y of the programs just previously and under the Skills Tr aining component of the Single Parent Job Access, specific vocational trai ning programs are developed and delivered.

They are developed and delivered in conju nction with public and private tr aining ins titutions in areas which offer opportunities for employment and correspond to the career interests of the individual. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, I would go back to the qu estion of cost efficiency and saving taxpayers' dollars. In fact, this is what this government talks about in terms of wanting to be able to do in the programs that are out there is to save money.

I am wondering if the minister could tell me, if you had a program that instead of decreasing but you increased at this particular area of expenditures, would it not save the govern ment money not only in terms of the long term , but also the short term ? Is that not a fair assessment? By attempting to get individuals who are predominantly receiving some form of social assistance or another and providing them the skills and assisting them in getting into the workforce, that is not going to cost governme nts money.

In fact, in the long term, I would argue it would save government a considerable amount of tax dollars. Mrs. Vodrey: That is exactly the goal of our reorganiza tion, is that under our reorganization, we want to make available to Manitobans the greatest numb er of opportunities for those Manitobans to develop the skills they require. So as we go through the budget lines in this area, the member will see that there has been significant

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4396 dollars devoted in this whole skills training area, and as I have said when we discussed the literacy portion, the spectrum goes from the lite racy programs which are commun ity-based right through to the colleges and univer sities and other skills training opportunities. For many individuals, they do requir e literacy training and numer acy training as a starting point, and for those programs to be offered within an individual's community is really a very helpful start. Then there are, as we have discussed, many kinds of programs in between.

Chairperson's Ruling Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honou rable me mber for Tur tle Mou ntain (Mr. Rose), who was acting as Chair person at the time, took under advisement a motion that was moved by the honourable memb er for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman). I have found that the motion is in order. *** Mr. Deputy Chairperson: It has been moved by the hono u rable memb er for Dauphin that lin e 16 .4(g )(1 ) be redu ced by $1 50,000 from ma nagemen t salaries and that this commit tee strongly ur ge the min ister to consider using the resources saved to restore the Parkland Human Resources Opportunity Centre.

Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Ch ai rperson, as I indicated during the questioning and prior to the motion I made in this House, it is clear that during the shuffle of this im portant program from the Department of Family Services to the Department of Education, ther e was a critical change in that program. The critical change was the elimination, the virtual elimi nation of service to the Parkland region, both from the program and the centre point of view. The Human Resources Opportunity Centre and the Human Resources Opportunity Program has been in place for some 17 years in the Dauphin and Parkland region.

It has served over that time to help people with little hope in life, many times rejected, very low self-est eem , with no future, caught in a syndrome of hopelessness and despair, many times dependent on drugs, involved in crime, dependent on other chemical abuse, and they had their lives turned around.

I have talked to these people, and I woul d implore each of the mem bers around this table to talk to people who have gone thr ough those programs to understand the human dimension of this kind of a decision, a decision for $1 62,000 that eliminates a program that serves a couple hundred individuals, clients, in the Parkland region every year over that time. That adds up to thousands of individuals who have been helped. They are not 1 00 percent successful, but in at least 50 percent of the cases and more, they are su ccessful in reversing this terrible syndrome of despair and turning around their lives.

We talked to those people about that, and I am saying to the members of this committee, this is an opportunity to take mo ney from ma nage me nt services and provide it where it is more important, because 50 percent of the dollars, half the dollars, are going to come from the federal government. You get a $16 payback for every $1 spent. You forget about the politics of hammering the Parkland. Surely, the member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummings) and the memb er for Roblin-Russell (Mr. Derkach) should have been standing up for the Parkland, whether that centre was located in Dauphin or Roblin or Swan River or Ste.

Rose, wherever. It was serving the Parkland. I say this has been a terrible omission. They would have to be the first to admit it. They do not even have to take my word for it. They can talk to the people there. They know it, and they should stand up and su pport this motion which would see a reversal of this decision that took place, prior to this minister assuming control, under the Department of Family Services or jointly with that transfer.

The minister will not talk about the evaluations that were done, the report that was commissioned, about the cost of that report, how much the government spent to put in place an analysis that showed very positively that thi s program was needed , that the dem and for the program was expanding actually. There was a tremendous need for this program, and it was so cost-effective, more than any other program I have seen in terms of evaluation at 16 to one. Ther e is no rati onale. The mi nister cannot explain the ra tionale. She talks about itinerant service jus t down the road here.

We ll, it is a hun dr ed mi les away , and ther e is a park in between. I explained that when we discussed this earlier. In slippery conditions, you do not talk about driving in miles there. You talk about driving in

4397 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA June 17 , 1993 hours. Otherwise you go around the park and it is much further. Those people cannot be expected to relocate. Single parents, for example-the minister keeps talking about Single Parent Job Access. These single parents are going to take their kids and have to move to Brandon or The Pas, to the nearest centres now? It is totally ridi cu lous, and the member for La Verendrye (Mr.

Sveinson) should think about this, instead of trying to make some witty comments that show, in fact, he has none. * (1 550) The fact is this program has been a tremendous support for the Parkland area, a major area in this province. We have represe ntatives on this government. Surely you would look at supporting this motion. It is in order. It takes money from managemen t and it puts it in to the program, restores the program-an opportunity here to restore that program. I ask for your su pport in turning arou nd , rever sing, a terrible mistake at best.

I mean, we can characterize it as a mistake during the shuffle of these programs from one department to another. There is certainly no rationale for it. No one has given any evidence. This minister cannot ju stify it. She is talking about two staff who will be part time in the Parkland to provide some couns elling. Wher e are they going to refer these people? As I said, Brandon and The Pas. It makes no sense. Let us mak e a smart decision on the basis of the money that is involved here that will help so many people and bring some good news to those people. It is not for me that I am asking this.

It is not for any of us. It is for the people who need this service. The memb er for Roblin-Russell (Mr. Derkach) and the member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Cummin gs), surely, who represent this area of the province that was being served by this program should not fall for this line about itinerant services from Brandon. Where is the commitment to decentralization here? What kind of nonsense. What a mockery of that program if we do not turn this around. I leave it there, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, and I move that the question be put. Mr. Depu ty Chairperson : The memb er has moved that the qu estion be put.

All those in favour of the question being put, say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: All those opposed, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: I say the Nays have it. Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Deputy Ch airperson, I am happy to take a little bit of time to speak on this motion, because I think that I have, over the course of this discussion, spoken about the importance of skills training to Manitobans, and cert ainly to all Manitobans, including the Manitobans who live in the Parkland area. When I look at, f1rst of al l, the kinds of Manitobans who might take

part in this kind of a program, I under stand they are Manitobans who, for some reason and perhaps for many reasons, have had some difficulty in receiving training or receiving employment. The reasons for that may be many. I also understand that when individuals wish to take

part in a training program, it does take them some time to prepare them selves and also to believe that they have the support they need to actually enter into the trai ning program. Because of that, we also recognize that one single training program is not necessarily the only or the correct trai ning program for those in dividuals. We recognize there needs to be a number of options for individuals to take

part in training programs. The memb er for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) has focused on a single training program as the one and only program, and his em phasis seems to indicate that all individuals should take

part in this program and this program only. What I would like to say to him is that I believe people need a series of opportunities, and that was one of the reasons why this particular set of programs was moved into the Department of Education and Trai ning. In the past, these programs were segr egated. They were in the Department of Family Services, and that was very helpful. The report the member spoke about was done for the Department of Family Services, but there has been a recognition in the skills training area that people do need the opportunity for a series of choices.

The opportunity to provide those choices comes as we move these particular sets of programs into the Department of Education and Training.

June 17, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4398 I have spoken during the cou rse of this discussion about the spectrum of programmin g which is now available. Individuals are no longer required to look only at one type of program, one kind of program, but they are now able to look at a series of programs. We believe that by looking at a number of different programs, they will be able to ma ke the choices that are re ally mo st advantageous for them. I have spoken about the kinds of programs that individuals might like to take advantage of.

I have spoken about them from the literacy end, which provide the very basics in education, those skills required in literacy and in num eracy for individuals to then move on into other kinds of programming. Now that these programs are integrated within the Department of Education and Training, we will be able to look at and help Manitobans look at, again, the whole range of programs, and, I believe, find the program tha t is best su ited for tha t individual.

I would say to the member, again, he has had trouble with the whole concept of choice in a number of different areas, and we are saying now we think it is im portant for individuals to be able to look at a number of different areas. We also think it is im portant to be able to make sure that individuals such as single parents have the opportunity for the Single Parent Job Access Progr am, and that particular program has been maintained in the Parkland area.

I did speak about the caseload that the Single Parent Job Access Program has, and the Single Parent Job Access Program , because of the caseload, was maintained there, and we look for that program to continue to su pport people in the Parkland area. We have also said that for individuals who still require the services offered through the HROCs and the HROPs, we will provide an itinerant service for those individ uals, that ther e will still be a presence of this kind of trai ning program that is available in the Parkland area.

So I ju st want to put to rest some of the issues the memb er has raised, and, finally, in the area of evaluation, I would just like to remind the memb er again that this evaluation was commissioned when these programs were a part of the Department of Family Services, and because of that, the whole paper was prepared to integ rate them into that particular department. Now these programs are in the Department of Education and Training, so we have to look at that evaluation, and with that evaluation, we have to see how it applies to the ma nda te of the Department of Education and Trai ning. So, Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I would definitely not support the motion of the member for Dauphin. Mr. Derkach: I would like to address this whole area, as well as the motion that has been put before this committee by the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman). Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would have to su pport the Minister of Education in terms of the direction she has taken with regar d to providing all Mani tobans wi th edu cation and trai ning opportunities in our province.

Indeed, I would have to say the programs that are being offered by the Department of Education and Training today in terms of retraining individuals across this province are second to none. Many other ju risdictions can learn a lot of lessons from the dir ecti on this government has taken with regard to training and retrai ning citizens in all areas of our province. The government moved to consolidate programs from various departments into the Department of Edu cation for the purpose of efficiency and effectiveness, indeed trying to limit the number of duplications that occur in government from time to time.

When we took governmen t in 1988, I think it was very evident that there was no co-or dination of the kinds of program s tha t were being offered throughout government, and that was typical of the approach tha t was taken by the former administration. I think that taxpayers in this province would expect that we would conduct our affairs in an effective and efficient manner so that we do not duplicate services, so that we do not try to have several de partmen ts offering sim il ar kinds of programs. So for that reaso n, these programs were consol idated wi th in the Department of Education and Training.

It does give a focal point to training within one department, and certainly clients then know they can address their concerns with that department when it comes to Education and Trai ning. * (1 600) Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think the min ister, through this course of Estimates review, has been

4399 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17, 1993 very successful in pointing out that this department is indeed addressing the needs of Manitobans in terms of education programs, literacy programs, training programs for those who require them. I could use the example of Workforce 2000 and indicate to you that here is a new program that was developed by this department that has indeed been an extr emely successful one.

Even in a time when I was Min ister of Education and Tra ining, there were provinces that were looking at this program with some envy, because they recognized how im portant, innovative and effective this program was. As the Minister of Education and Training has reported, some 54,000 Manitobans have taken advantage of this program since its inception. Now, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) has focused on a program within his particular town.

He has made a very bla tant political stance on this issue and his rhetoric, of course, rings hollow, because there are opportunities in the Parkland. I am an MLA who represents that area, as well, and I can tell you ther e are many and varied opportunities in the Parkland area. I could just identify a couple of opportun"1ties that are now available which have not been in the past. Again, I indicate to the member that, yes, we had a Parkland campus at the time when the former adm in istration was in gove rn ment.

Today , we have expanded those opportunities to people who do not merely live in Dauphin but live in surrounding areas. We have centres outside of the Dauphin area, in man y areas , where they are offering opportuni ties for tr aining, for education to all mem bers of our society and, indeed, there are choices. I allude again to the FYDE program, the First Year Distance Education Progr am. There was no such program in the Dauphin area when we took government. Today, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we have a very su ccessfu l First Year Dis tanc e Edu cation Program operating in the Dauphin community.

I could speak about the native educ ation component of the De partment of Education and Trai ning. When we dec en tra li zed positions from Edu cation , we ensur ed that the Dauphin area would receive some recognition for the kinds of people that live within that area. It is for that reason that we mo ved personnel from Win nipeg to Dauphin so that people who need the services of the Native Education Branch could be served in that area. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think there were eight positions decentralized to Dauphin at that time.

I would invite the member for Dauphin to take the time to walk into that Native Education office and to look at the kinds of programming and opportunities that are available to citizens of Dauphin and the sur rounding area. Point of Order Mr. Plohman; Mr. Deputy Chair person, on a point of order, the Minister of Rural Development has just said that he decentralized eight positions to the Parkland. There are only three people working righ t now. There is one vac ancy. What is he talking about? There are only three staff. Mr. Dep uty Chair person : The honour able memb er does not have a point of order.

It is a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Derkach: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, let not the me mb er for Dau phin try to insinua te, by the remarks that he puts on the table, that indeed there has been no recognition of the needs of the people in the Parkland area, because he is absolutely wrong. Mr. Deputy Chai rperson, I also would like to ind icate that within that Parkland area which I represen t and in the en tire area ther e ar e opportunities today in education that have never been available in that area before. People in that area under stand that. Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I have to say also that people in that area understand that governments have to take control of their spending habits . Indeed, we would like to be able to do more, but there is one reason why we cannot do more, and that reason is because of that enormous debt that was left to this government and to the people of this prov inc e by the ad min is tration of the New Democ rats un der the Pawley admin istra tion. Whether we like it or not, that is why we are forced to ma ke some very difficult decisions. Those decisions are not jus t made in one department.

Those decisions have to be made across the broad range of departments that exist in government.

June 17, 1993 LEGIS LA TJVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4400 The me mber for Dauphin has to take some responsibility for that enorm ous debt that this province faces, because he was the mem ber who was the Mi nister of High ways at the time who constructed a bridge to nowhere in Selkirk, who spent over $20 million on a bridge which really went nowhere and there were no roads to. That is the kind of expenditure that has caused us to make the decisions that we are making right now. It goes further. We could talk about the MTX expenditure of $27 million lost to Saudi Arabia, Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, by the former administration, which the member for Dauphin was a minister of and sat around the cabinet table making decisions. Today, unfor tuna tely, Manitobans across this province have to endur e that kind of difficulty because of those decisions that were made during that time. Yes, we have had to make some very difficult decisions. They have not been easy. They have impacted on Manitobans from the north right down to the south. Indeed, we have had to look at how we can deliver services in more effective ways.

When you look at this particular program that the member for Dauphin speaks about, the Minister of Education and Trai ning has indicated very clearly that within the scope of program s in the Department of Education and Training they will look after the needs of the people in that Parkland area by sim ply reorga nizing the del ivery of those services from within the department. Mr. Dep uty Chair person, the memb er for Dauphin cannot under stand that, because his method of addressing problems was to tax the people of this province and continue spending inappropriately. It was tax and spend, tax and spend.

That is the approach the New Democrats have taken. That is why today, or jus t in the last few days, we have witnessed the kind of demise of the New Democrats in Alberta. They have gone from 16 members in Alberta to zero, and that is caused by the old- think of New Democrats across this land. That is the kind of old-think that this member professes. So he sits in his chair, as critic of Education, and the only things he can really come up with as solutions are to tax the Manitoba people more, spend more and continue with that old rhetoric and that old way of thinking that New Democrats have been accustomed to.

I have to support the Minister of Education and Training wholeheartedly in that she has taken a new approach to education and training in this province. She has taken a fresh look at the needs of Manitobans, and she will deliver programs to Manitobans, whether they are in the south part of this province or the north part of this province, and will deliver them effectively. So I am completely opposed, and I am astonished that the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) would be so narrow minded as to bring this kind of motion forward in this committee. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, it is a pleasure to engage in the debate. I do not want to hold an element of su rprise for the committee. I will go right to suggest that I do strongly su pport the minister and am totally opposed to the motion. * (1 61 0) When those of us in Treasury Board had to in volve ou rselves in these very, ver y difficul t decisions, not the least of which was to pass jud gmen t ultima tely on the Human Resources Opportunity Cen tres, not only in Parkland but indeed elsewhere, I must tell you that it was an agonizing decision.

But, jus t indeed as the first cousins and/or sisters and brothers of the NDP party, particularly the Choices group, said, look, a gove rnment at times has to make hard, hard choices, I am here to tell you that we had to make a very hard choice, and we did. We looked at all of the training area. We sensed ther e was some overlap and duplication. We sensed there were some areas that had to be addressed.

So we went to work, indeed as the taxpayers of this province would want us to do, acknowledging that no program of government should ever be immune from scrutiny, that there is not a program anywhere in government that should not be challenged from time to time. We have been watc hing care fully the development of this program, bearing in mind that it provided some degree of social service. We were mindful of that, that every one of our programs does within the social field, and there is no argument there. But the reality is it was time to ma ke choices. So, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, evaluations were done.

Let me say, and I will go a little bit further than the Mini ster of Edu catio n, who probably will not

4401 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 17, 19 93 appreciate me saying so, but what do you do when you are also part of decisions of govern me nt, which, at this point in time, is hir

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-4-84
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 4th hansardpdf 84.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	4d30a5a4959ae491748f41bcb2c3ed4444717cd1

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