Manitoba Hansard — 15 September 2003 (Sitting 06, 38th Legislature, 1st Session)

38-1-06

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session - Thirty-Eighth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LIV No. 6 – 1:30 p.m., Monday, September 15, 2003

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

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

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

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

529 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, September 15, 2003 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a matter of privilege. I rise because the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) misled the Legislature when she made statements in Question Period last week with regard to agricultural programming impor- tant for producers affected by the discovery of a case of mad cow disease in Canada. The Minister of Agriculture misled the House on four separate points.

First, the Minister of Agriculture said on Monday in Question Peri- od that the federal Minister of Agriculture had said nothing positive about cash advances for producers affected by the discovery of mad cow disease in Canada, when the Agricultural Policy Framework and the accompanying bilateral agreements will provide cash advances, as the honourable Member for Swan River (Ms. Wow- chuk), our provincial Minister of Agriculture, was admitting by the end of the week.

Second, the Minister of Agriculture said on Monday that interim payments, also known as cash advances, would only be available when 50 percent of the provinces sign on to the Agri- cultural Policy Framework, not mentioning that such cash advances could be available under bilateral agreements or as the minister has called these later in the week, mirror agreements which are also bilateral agreements. Third, the Minister of Agriculture misled the House when she indicated on Tuesday that under the Agricultural Policy Framework itself, the formula requires 50 percent of provinces.

Later in the week she was admitting that she was wrong and the criteria for the Agricultural Policy Framework coming into force are 60 percent of the provinces, representing 50 percent of eligible net sales. Fourthly, the Minister of Agriculture said on Tuesday that the federal Minister of Agriculture had changed his mind in providing bilateral agreements when in fact by the end of the week the Minister of Agriculture, the Member for Swan River (Ms.

Wowchuk), was acknowledg- ing that she was preparing to sign a bilateral agreement as well as the Agricultural Policy Framework in the next few days and that the bilateral agreement would provide for the cash advances that the federal Minister of Agriculture indicated in his August 12 news release. If there had been one misleading statement, it might have been excusable as a misleading comment made in error in the heat of Question Period, but there were four misleading state- ments.

Either the Minister of Agriculture was deliberately misleading the House or the Minis- ter of Agriculture was herself incredibly poorly informed as to the facts surrounding the negoti- ations between the Province and the federal government with respect to cash advances to producers flowing as a result of the mad cow crisis. In my view, Mr.

Speaker, it is very important to go into some of the details of these allegations which are very serious, which I am making today, and to show how it infringes on my ability as a member of the Legislative Assembly to do my job in representing constitu- ents and people around the province when I am not receiving proper and correct information from the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wow- chuk). Mr. Speaker, on Monday, first on the issue of whether the Agricultural Policy Framework or bilateral agreements can provide cash advances.

In Question Period on Monday I asked the min- ister as follows: It is my understanding that the Agricultural Policy Framework provides for the provision of substantial cash advances. Can the

530 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 Minister of Agriculture tell us about how this is going to work and when such cash advances might be available? * (13:35) In response to my question about cash advances, the minister replied: I have had many discussions with the federa l minister with regard to all the assistance we are looking for for producers across western Canada to deal with the BSE crisis, including, and here the minister mentions several items, one of which was looking for cash advances for producers.

The provincial Minister of Agriculture then said: We have had no response from the federal minister to be positive on any of those questions. The Minister of Agriculture provincially directly contradicts the information in the press release from the federal Mi nister of Agriculture on August 12, which said disaster assistance will be advanced to producers under bilateral agreements with provin ces that have already committed funding. These advances constitute a transmission measure until new business man- agement programming is fully implemented.

The federal minister clea rly talks about cash advances, and these advances or interim pay- ments were later in the week being mentioned in a positive fashion by our provincial Minister of Agriculture. Indeed, I quote the provincial Min- ister of Agriculture's statement in Estimates on Thursday when she said: I have that news release from the federal minister put out on August 12 that indicates there will be a cash flow this fall before the new year. That is spelled out. The Minister of Agriculture clearly has indicated that her comment on Monday was in error.

The minister clearly admitted she misled the House in her answers to questions on Mon- day, September 8. The Minister of Agriculture on Thursday in Estimates further clarified this when she said and I quote: The federal government has given their commitment to ensuring that there is a cash flow, and they have said that this money will flow quickly to those provinces that have signed on to the Agricultural Policy Framework.

Yes, it will have to be an agreement outside the Agricultural Policy Framework, the bilateral agreement or mirror agreement, but they have given their commitment that this is what is going to happen. We have also had the minister give his word on this matter on conference calls that we have had. That is the Minister of Agriculture provincially speaking. The Minister of Agriculture, the Member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), misled the House on Monday when she said there was nothing positive about cash advances from the federal minister.

Indeed, as indicated by the end of the week, the minister herself was speaking very positively about these cash advances or interim payment to be provided either through the Agricultural Policy Framework or through these bilateral or mirror agreements.

As the provincial Minister of Agriculture knows and has so indi- cated later in the week, there has been some delays in provision of the cash advances or interim funding through the bilateral agreements but we understand that it is now likely that when the minister signs the Agricultural Policy Frame- work she will also sign a bilateral or mirror agreement and that it is hoped that money will flow with reasonable speed once this agreement is signed.

Thus the first time the Minister of Agriculture misled the House was when she indicated that the federal Minister of Agriculture had not provided anything positive with regard to cash advances. The second point on which the Minister of Agriculture misled the House was on whether bilateral agreements were possible. On Monday the Minister of Agriculture said: When there are enough provinces that have signed on to the program, the Agriculture Policy Framework, the federal minister has said there will be an interim payment that will flow.

On Monday the Minister of Agriculture was either unaware that the situ- ation had changed on August 12 or deliberately misled the House when sh e indicated that there was a mandatory requirement for so many prov- inces to sign on before the cash advances or interim payments can flow. The minister reiter- ated this position on Tuesday when I asked for clarification of the requirements for cash advan- ces or interim payments to flow. The minister said very clearly: There has to be 50 percent of the provinces signing on. By the end of the week, the Minister of Agriculture was talking about the importance of

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 531 these bilateral or mirror agreements and indeed was providing an indication that she was pre- paring to sign such a bilateral agreement at the same time as she signs the Agricultural Policy Framework. I give as an example, the minister's statement in Estimates on Thursday afternoon: Provinces are now working under bilateral agreements, so what the federal minister said is for those provinces that have signed on. Until such time as the full framework is implemented, he will put in place transition measures, that is, through the bilateral agreements.

The third point on which the Minister of Agriculture misled the House was on the criteria for the Agricultural Policy Framework to come into effect. * (13:40) On Tuesday in Question Period, the Minister of Agriculture said in respect to the Agricultural Policy Framework that there has to be 50 percent of the provinces signing on. Indeed the criteria, as the minister herself admitted later in the week, is that there need to be 60 percent of the prov- inces representing at least 50 percent of net sales. At least those were the criteria as we were told later in the week.

On Tuesday in committee the minister was able to issue a clarification. In her first try she got closer to the formula but did not get it right. She said it will need either six provinces to sign on or 50 percent of the producers. This was wrong, both in fact that the actual requirement is not an either/or, but both of the thresholds to be met. The second threshold was not 50 percent of producers, but 50 percent of eligible net sales. Finally, later on Tuesday, we were given an accurate answer by the Minister of Agriculture. Indeed on this point it was in fact accompanied by apology.

I am sorry, said the minister. It is six provinces and 50 percent of eligible net sales. The fourth point on which the minister mis- led the House was with respect to the ability of the federal government to provide cash advances through bilateral agreements. On Tuesday, Sep- tember 9, in Question Period I asked the minis- ter: Is she not aware of the federal government's commitment of August 12, which indicates very clearly that the federal Agriculture minister can indeed flow the cash advances or interim payments once the bilateral agreements are in place?

The Minister of Agriculture, the Member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), said in her reply: The federal minister did put out a press release saying he could flow the money and then he changed his mind on that. He is not flowing bilateral money. Those were the words in Hansard from the minister and as I heard them. Mr.

Speaker, by the end of the week the Minister of Agriculture was admitting that the federal Minister of Ag riculture was preparing bilateral agreements or mirror agreements, as she has called them, for Manitoba and Canada to sign and that the signature of the government of Manitoba on this agreement, together with the signature, as I understand it, on the Agricultural Policy Framework will allow the federal govern- ment to provide cash advances to Manitoba producers affected by the discovery of mad cow disease in Canada.

I quote, for example, from Estimates on Thursday afternoon from the Minister of Agri- culture: On this side agreement or mirror agree- ment that we will be looking at, it will result in money flowing to the producers. She is admitting that what she said on Tuesday was wrong. She also said on Thursday in Estimates, I quote: "If you look at the next page of the news release, it says funds will be available in September and payments are expected to reach produ cers in early October. The federal minister has told us this money will flow to cattle producers." Again, direct refuta- tion of what she had said earlier on.

She said: "Madam Chairperson, this is an opportunity for us to get cash flow." Again, a refutation of what was said earlier in the week. Mr. Speaker, I find it extraordinary that the Minister of Agriculture, in her answers in Ques- tion Period last Monday and Tuesday, should have misled the House four times. This is a very serious matter, since we are dealing with a crisis, the mad cow crisis, which is having dire effects on many Manitoba producers.

532 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 I could read letters and e-mails I have received from those affected by these tragic cir- cumstances in Manitoba, but I know that all members of the House are aware of the very dif- ficult situation with cattle, sheep, elk and bison producers in Manitoba. Indeed, as the Free Press said on August 21, this is an economic crisis nparalleled in recent history. It is very serious. u * (13:45) We should expect in times of crisis to have clear and accurate statements from the Minister of Agriculture.

To have four statements in two days from the Minister of Agriculture which turn out to be misleading is of very great concern. To have erroneous information provided with res- pect to the availability of cash advances, which was the very critical issue being debated on Monday and Tuesday, as you will recall, makes this all the more extraordinary. I will now move to why, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the prima f acie question of privilege exists. A prima facie question of privilege must be brought before the Legislature at the earliest possible time.

I bring it forward now because it was only at the very end of Estimates on Thurs- day that it became clear the extent to which the Minister of Agriculture had misled the House on Monday and Tuesday. This is now the earliest possible time. Mr. Speaker, it is also important to demon- strate that a prima facie question of privilege exists. In this context, I would refer the Speaker to the debates in the House of Commons on January 31, 2002, and February 1, 2002, which refer specifically to a si milar case in which a minister of the Crown misled the House of Com- mons.

In the case referred to, this was an instance in which Art Eggleton, then-Minister of Defence, had, similar to the Minister of Agricul- ture (Ms. Wowchuk) last week, made statements to one effect on one day and then to a different effect on subsequent days. The case is very similar in that the national Minister of Defence had clearly provided mis- leading information to the House of Commons, whether deliberately or not. In the case of Mr.

Eggleton, evidence was provided consistent with page 234 of the second edition of Joseph Maingot's Parliamentary Privilege in Canada, which explains that in order for the Speaker to find a prima facie case of a matter involving a misleading statement, there must be an admis- sion by someone in authority, such as a minister of the Crown or an officer of the department. In the case of Minister Eggleton, there was evidence of two contradictory statements by the minister recorded in Hansard.

In the case of the Minister of Agriculture, the Member for Swan River, we have evidence in Hansard of a series of contradictory statements. With respect to precedent, it is also impor- tant to refer to The Question of Confidence in Responsible Government by Eugene Forsey and G.C. Egglington. I am sure the Chair is familiar with this publication. It was used extensively in the McGrath commission. On page 19, it reads as follows: The cornerstone of our Constitution is the sovereign whose government is carried on under several realms. Mr.

Speaker, it goes on to say that government is a trust which the sovereign dis- charges. It is a trust that cannot be thrown up or ignored by some nihilistic whim. In the same publication, speaking of responsibilities of min- isters, the authors write: It entails frankness and openness with the sovereign or her personal representative and a proper respect for the Royal or Vice-Regal right to warn and advise. This pertains directly to the information that members of Parliament should expect in all statements and information passed by ministers to this Legis- lature.

The Chair would surely be familiar with the phrase: The trust is the coin of the realm. In all frankness, I would submit that based on the behaviour of the Minister of Agriculture that this Legislature can no longer trust the min- ister because of the contradictory statements on very critical issues provided last week and the fact that the minister misled the House four times.

The discussion on January 31 and February 1 in the House of Commons refers to an incident also in 1963 when the House resolved that in making a personal statement which contained words which he later admitted not to be true, a former member had been guilty of contempt. I would refer this to the Speaker.

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 533 I would also mention that in Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Form, Sixth Edition, page 25, under

section 92, Interfering with Members, it states: A valid claim of privilege and respect to interference with a member must be related to that member's legislative duties. I would suggest in the strongest possible terms that members of the Manitoba Legislature must be able to rely on information they receive in response to questions placed to ministers in this forum, in this Chamber. This, Mr. Speaker, goes to the very cut and thrust of the responsi- bilities of ministers in the Manitoba Legislature. A high standard has to be met.

That standard has ot been met by the Minister of Agriculture. n * (13:50) Very often, according to Marleau and Mon- petit on page 433, in a case such as this one the Speaker has ruled that the matter is a disagree- ment among members over the facts surrounding the issue. As such, these matters are more a question of debate and do not constitute a breach of the rules or of privilege. This case, Mr. Speaker, is different. It is not a case of disagreement. The facts are that the minister misled the House on four separate occasions. It is recorded in Hansard.

Even if one might argue that one or two of these could be disputed as different

interpretations of what was said, this certainly cannot be used to apply to all our instances. f This question of privilege therefore differs fundamentally from the situation where some members think one way and other members think another. The facts are there. The fact is that the Minister of Agriculture made four claims in this Chamber on Monday and Tuesday and then later on she provided facts which were com- pletely different from her answers on Monday and Tuesday. Mr. Speaker, these are not ordinary times. Our province is facing very unusual and ex- ceptional circumstances in the mad cow crisis.

We are involved in a situation where many farm- ers are facing extraordinarily difficult circum- stances. It is not just us in the Legislature, but those whose livelihoods are hanging in the balance who must be able to rely on the support of a minister who is strong, who is clear about the situation and provides accurate information from a government perspective. Mr.

Speaker, in the ruling made by the Speaker of the House of Commons in the case of Art Eggleton, the Speaker said: The authorities are consistent about the need for clarity in our proceedings and about the need to ensure the integrity of the information provided by the gov- ernment to the House. The Speaker also referred to the importance of the integrity of information at critical times, as we have today in dealing with the BSE crisis and its effect on Manitoba's agricultural community.

In making his ruling on February 1, 2002, the Speaker referred to th e fact that the then- Minister of Defence indicated he had not delib- erately misled the House of Commons. The Speaker, however, referred to Marleau and Montpetit, on page 67: There are affronts against the dignity and authority of Parliament which may not fall within one of the specifically defined privileges.

The House also claims the right to punish as a contempt any action which though not a breach of a specific privilege tends to obstruct or impede the House in the performance of its functions, obstructs or impedes any member opposite of the House in the discharge of their duties. On the basis of the arguments presented by honourable members and the view of the gravity of the matter, the Speaker concluded the situation before him February 1, 2002, where the House was left with two versions of event, is one that merited further consideration by an appropriate committee. I

now therefore move, seconded by the Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), that this matter of privilege I have raised be referred to the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs. Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing any other members to speak, I would just like to remind all honourable members that a matter of privilege is a very serious matter and it has to be heard word for word. So I ask the co-operation of all hon- ourable members, please. Before recognizing any other member to speak, I would remind the House that contri- butions at this time by honourable members are to be limited to strictly relevant comments as to

534 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 whether the alleged matter of privilege has been raised at the earliest opportunity and whether a prima facie case has been established. As my practice I have always gone from one side to the other side, so I will recognize the honourable Government House Leader. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, first of all, we have to remind ourselves that a question of privilege is rarely to come up in the House, that set out in Beauchesne. Of course, Speakers have always said that is the case in Manitoba.

The first question is: Was the matter raised at the earliest opportunity? The member himself states that the matters actually arose on Monday and Tuesday of last week, and we would make the argument that it is too late to raise it at this point. * (13:55) Second, Mr. Speaker, on the question as to whether there is a prima facie matter of priv- ilege, it has been ruled time and time again in this House that allegations as to facts do not fulfil the conditions of parliamentary privilege. Just to make that point clear, it was put into the new rule book with the consent of the member who raised this issue.

There are issues being debated quite frankly in his presentation. These are matters that are more properly the subject of question and debate which we would encourage the member, of course, to pursue rather than a purported matter of privilege. Finally, I will just say that when it comes to allegations that a member has misled the House, that has never constituted a condition for parlia- mentary privilege.

One must show not only, first of all, that there was a deliberate misleading, not just a misleading, but that has to be accompanied according to ruling after ruling in this House of evidence that is so conclusive that there can be no question as to motive. Usually what that depends on then is the member under question having admitted to deliberately misleading the House and that certainly is not case. This is simply a debate. Mr.

Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): I think all of us in this House would acknowledge that a matter of this nature is extremely serious especially when this province is faced with, I think I would use the term, horrendous potential tragedy that exists in the rural part of this province with regard to the BSE issue. But coming back to the case, it is true that in this House the minister has made state- ments on Monday and Tuesday which she later changed on Thursday. I think the member, the Liberal Leader (Mr.

Gerrard), indicated in his remarks late Thursday that in fact he learned what the minister's position was, and it was different than it was on Monday and Tuesday. In consulting with the critic for Agriculture, I am informed in fact that is the case, that the minister's position did change and her message did change in the Estimates process on Thursday afternoon as compared to Monday and Tuesday.

I think it is the minister's obligation, at that point in time, if she has misled this House in answers in any previous time, it is incumbent upon that minister to rise in his or her place and then to set the record straight be fore members of this Assembly go out to their constituents and go out to the interest groups and relate the message that has been given in this House by the minister.

This is a serious matter because, throughout the week, members on this side of the House questioned the Government on the position this Government has taken with respect not only to the APF program but in a matter of dealing with the crisis that is before us. In asking our ques- tions, from both the Liberals and from the Official Opposition in this House, we made it very clear that given all the situations that exist in the province, this is probably the most serious situation that faces this province.

It is for that reason we need clarity in the responses we get from the Government and we need statements made by the Government to be accurate and not misleading. I think the Liberal member is right, that the minister has misled this House in a very serious fashion and that indeed, although she changed her position at the end of the week, she has not retracted the statements that she made in the beginning of the week. This is what is so serious, Mr. Speaker. I can show other examples where she and her Premier (Mr.

Doer) have been on the air and have put figures in front of the Manitoba public which are not true, which did not exist and which do not reflect what the situation in this province is

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 535 really like. So the Liberal member today rises in this House to raise attention to the matter that we have a very serious situation in this province and yet we have a government that does not appear to be managing this in a very serious manner. As a matter of fact, they mislead, not only this House, but they mislead the very people that they are supposed to be helping in a very serious and potentially tragic situation. Mr. Speaker, I think you as Speaker have a very serious obligation as it relates to this matter.

I think the comments that have been put on the record by the leader of the Liberals need to be taken seriously. I think there is evidence in what the member has put on the record that would show this is a prima facie case to begin with, and indeed he has indicated he has brought this to the attention of the House at the earliest possible time. I have consulted with the Opposition critic for Agriculture who was at the committee on Thursday afternoon and he concurs that, yes, this is probably the first time this matter could have been raised in this House. And so, Mr.

Speaker, I would seriously support what the Leader of the Liberal party is saying and, secondly, I would very seriously ask you to consider this matter in its utmost seriousness and with some expediency because of the nature of th e crisis that is facing he rural part of our province today. Thank you. t * (14:00) Mr. Speaker: A matter of privilege is a serious concern so I am going to take this matter under advisement to consult the authorities, and I will return to the House with a ruling. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Education and Youth): Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to table the 2002 Annual Report of the Teachers' Retire- ment Allowances Fund of Manitoba. Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Indus- try, Trade and Mines): I am pleased to table the Annual Report for the 2002-2003 fiscal year for the Manitoba Development Corporation. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the following: the Crown Lands Review Final Report of July 2003. Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Labour and Immigration): Mr.

Speaker, as Minister of Labour and Immigration, I would like to table the Supplementary Estimates Information for the Department of Labour. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Cash Advance for Producers Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the previous govern- ment had to deal with the flood of the century, the second-worst recession in our province's history, widespread forest fires and drought. They also had to deal with the reduction of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal transfer payments.

Through it all, the Government had to make difficult decisions in order to deal with all those crises. Yet, as the Premier (Mr. Doer), this Premier fumbles his way through the BSE crisis, the only difficult decision he seems to be making is to not help our farm families in crisis by refusing to provide them with a much-needed cash advance. This is not a difficult decision. It is a heartless one.

I would ask the minister how much longer she is going to make these Manitoba families suffer before she finally agrees to give them a cash advance, or has the minister been told to hold off until the Premier can be the supposed white knight when it suits his political calendar? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agri- culture and Food): Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you that our Premier, today, is dealing with this very important issue.

He is meeting with western governors and western premiers addressing the very important issue of border opening because it is the border opening that is going to make a difference for our producers. Mr. Speaker, we addressed this issue long before the member thought about it although he did say we should put in place low-interest loans. There is cash available in producers' hands. I can tell you I talked to producers last weekend. I do not know whether members

536 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 opposite did, but I talked to many producers. They told me the program is working. They know the program is ther e when they need the cash flow. Those that need the cash flow are using the programs. Others are planning to use it if they need a cash flow. Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, what we are talking about here is helping 12 000 families and saving a beef industry that in Manitoba was worth half a billion dollars in 2001. Today is the 119th day of this crisis. Manitoba has lost $119 million. That is a fifth of what the enti re industry is worth to our economy.

Last Thursday the Premier said his Govern- ment was, and I quote, making decisions every day in Treasury Board where not to fill a posi- tion, to not fund a program, to not proceed with something, but he refused to provide specifics. This Government is delaying programs and pro- jects and making spending cuts on a daily basis to free up money to deal with the BSE crisis. Would the Deputy Premier please tell us what those cuts are and how much has been saved? Ms. Wowchuk: What I can tell you, Mr.

Speaker, is that from that case, where that first case of BSE was diagnosed, that one and only case, our Government has been working on it. As of Friday there was in excess of $180 million that we have put into programs for Manitoba cattle producers; $100 million in low-interest loans, much lower than interest in other prov- inces; $15 million for the BSE slaughter feed program; $2 million to improve slaughter capa- city; and on Friday we announced $12 million to assist in moving feed into those areas where there is a shortage of feed and then $10 million to extend the beef slaughter program.

We are there with the producers and we are offering better programs than are offered in other prov- inces. Mr. Murray: Once again, only that heartless, uncaring government would applaud programs that are not working. Mr. Speaker, on June 3, the Premier's candidate in Arthur-Virden told the Brandon Sun that the Doer government's failed agriculture policy is what hurt his chances in the recent provincial election, saying, and I quote, I do not think the Government has been strong in agriculture in the last term. Mr. Speaker, Mr.

Kalyniuk did not think the Premier had an effective agriculture policy in the last term. He must be extremely disappointed in the Doer government today. The Premier refuses to provide any specifics. Last week he told reporters he was spending program cut decisions in the dollar ranges of $100,000 for each one of those decisions. If the Doer government has truly made such decisions, will the Deputy Premier please tell the House today what are they? Ms. Wowchuk: Well, I think, Mr. Speaker, it is the policies of that government that hurt them in the last election. There is no doubt about it. Mr.

Speaker, this is a very serious issue and one that we have been working in very close consultation with people involved in the agri- culture industry. We have put in place over $180 million to help producers in this province. We have $100 million in low-interest loans, loans that are lower than in any other province; $15 million into the BSE slaughter and feed pro- gram; $2 million to enhance our slaughter capa- city that was neglected by the previous gov- ernment– Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Cash Advance for Producers Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr.

Speaker, while other provinces rushed to the aid of their cattle producers, this Government refused to do anything that would provide meaningful relief to people in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, cattle producers in Manitoba have been left out in the cold by this Doer gov- ernment. I would ask the Minister of Finance why he has not argued to implement a cash advance program but instead has sat back and twiddled his thumbs while his Government has set up ineffectual programs which, at the rate they are going, will take years to flow any cash o the farmers in Manitoba. t * (14:10) Hon.

Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): If the member wants the answer, he might start by

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 537 talking to the Opposition Leader (Mr. Murray). In his letter of July '03, he said: Low-interest loans are loans without any interest attached to them. He emphasized the loans program. We have offered a $100-million loans program. We have offered the lowest rate of interest in west- ern Canada of all the provinces that are offering loan programs. We are making sure that pro- ducers have access to cash flow when they need it. Mr. Loewen: Mr.

Speaker, the Finance Minister should be aware that only 104 out of 12 000 families have been able to access this program. It is not working. In 1997, the Leader of the Oppo- sition repeatedly demanded that the Government flow funds to families who were affected by the flood immediately. Today he is refusing to act on behalf of the cattle producers and farmers in rural Manitoba who are faci ng this crisis. This is a double standard. I would ask the Minister of Finance to explain and to insist that a cash advance program be set up by his Government immediately to provide meaningful support.

By that I mean by getting money into the hands of the farmers that need it. Will he insist that program get set up immediately? Mr. Selinger: The member from Fort Whyte indicates the program is not working. The only thing that is not working is his research. It is 170 people that have received loans, not 104 as the member indicated. It is always helpful if the member gets his facts right. The Manitoba Agricultural Credit Cor- poration has the expertise in handling loans programs. They are work ing overtime to process these loans.

They are ensuring that people who have the need will get the cash in order to carry them until we have a federal partner that is prepared to contribute to their portion of the needs under the Agricultural Framework pro- gram to ensure that farmers get access to the risk management programs that we have agreed to sign on to with the federal government. Mr. Loewen: Mr. Speaker, 104 on Friday, 170 on Monday, 66 a day. It is going to take years. The cows will all be dead before these people flow money to the cattle producers in Manitoba.

A cash advance program will only cost this Government $20 million, less than one-third of 1 percent of the provincial Budget, a small price to pay to provide struggling families with the relief they need and to save an industry. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister: Is he telling farm families that he has mismanaged provincial spending so badly that he cannot find the funds to provide support during this crisis or is his Government just th at coldhearted that they are refusing to care? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the member has forgotten what has been announced.

There is a $100-million loan program with low-interest loans, 3.25 percent for farmers over 40, 2.25 percent for farmers under 40, the best interest rates in western Canada. We have moved on the $43 million– Mr. Speaker: Order. I think it is only fair in this House when an honourable member asks a question, for other members to have decorum in the House so the honour able member can hear his answer. It is very difficult to hear when everyone is shouting back and forth, back and forth. I ask the co-operation of all honourable members, please. Mr. Selinger: Mr.

Speaker, it is pretty clear that this Government responded with a loans program advancing the Agricultural Framework agreement. Friday, there were announcements on freight assistance as well as a slaughter program that complemented the slaughter program we put in place during the summer. This Province is working on a daily basis to improve resources for producers that are cash strapped. These members opposite change their minds from day to day. In July they want one program, in September they want another. I suggest they get their caucus together and come to some con- sensus about what they really stand for.

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Cash Advance for Producers Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, whether it was the BSE recovery program, the slaughter program, the feed program or the loans program, this Government has been a day late and a dollar short when dealing with the BSE crisis. A feed transportation program has just been announced, but many local producers do

538 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 not even have the money to buy the feed or the groceries. When will this Minister of Agriculture announce a cash advance program that will function and work? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agri- culture and Food): Mr. Speaker, again the member is completely out of touch. He does not understand that producers have moved their hay and they have told us that they are very happy with the freight assistance program. It is what they asked us for– An Honourable Member: Betty Green. Ms.

Wowchuk: Yes, in fact Betty Green said that the freight assistance program was a good program. Mr. Speaker, the members continue to ask for a cash advance when in fact the cash is on the table. The difference between our programs and other provinces is that ours is at a lower interest rate. In Alberta, the interest rate of the program is 5 percent. In Ontario, there is no program. In Saskatchewan, the interest is at commercial rates.

What we really need is a national program, and we have been calling on the federal govern- ment to show leadership here and put in place a national program so that provinces would not have to put together their own program. Mr. Penner: Well, Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Government has no plan to deal with the BSE crisis other than to hold photo ops for plans that do not work. Well, photo ops do not buy feed, they do not pay fuel bills, they do not pay school taxes and they do not put food on the tables of 12 000 farm families that are hungry and do not know where to turn for money.

When will this minister recognize that the farmers' wallets are empty? There is no money. How can she portray the agricultural industry– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I am sure all members are aware that we do not allow exhibits to be used in the Chamber. I ask the co-operation of all honourable members in the future. The honourable Member for Emerson, to finish his question. Mr. Penner: Will the minister today announce a cash advance program so farmers can get on with their lives? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, we announced the program and it is a low-interest loan program.

I am going to tell you what I heard from farmers on Friday when I visited them. I stopped at one farmer's place who said he had picked up the application form, he had filled it out and taken it to the bank and the bank said: You do not need the loan. I will carry you. So it is working. We are getting the banks to stay with the producers. I talked to another producer, Mr. Speaker, who said he does not need the cash flow right now but he knows the program will work for him if he needs it later in the fall. I talked to another producer who filled out the forms and he has his money. Mr.

Speaker, the program is working. As of today, over $6 million has been approved for producers in this province and more are apply- ing. I only wish the other members would get on board and recognize this program– Mr. Speaker: Order. Minister of Agriculture and Food Resignation Request Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, the Government clearly has not been listening to struggling Manitoba farm families. They need a cash advance to buy feed, to pay bills and to keep a roof over their families' heads.

Our family farms are hurting and facing a mounting stress and a mounting crisis, yet this Government seems oblivious to their dilemma. Mr. Speaker, will this minister now do the right thing and resign? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agri- culture and Food): Mr. Speaker, when this issue arose, farmers and provinces asked the

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 539 federal government to put forward a loan pro- gram or a cash advance. We asked the federal government for that. They refused to do that, so provinces then took this on and we in Manitoba put in a hundred million dollars in low-interest programs. In other provinces there are loan programs. They are at a higher interest rate. Our program is working, money is flowing into farmers' hands. I know more money will flow into farmers' hands, but ultimately the farmers want to get their money from the marketplace and we have to work to get that border open.

We have to get cattle moving in this province. That is what armers want us to do. f * (14:20) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Cash Advance for Producers Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): Sadly, Mr. Minister, this Minister of Agriculture is floun- dering in her response to the BSE issue in rural Manitoba. The loan program is hard to adminis- ter, and, despite her best e fforts to defend it, it is not working well. Certainly, a perfect example of their floundering is to start the feed assistance program, withdraw it and then start it again. Mr.

Speaker, this confusion and lack of leadership is leaving a lot of cattlemen in an absolute state of despair. In fact, the crisis line people confirm that th ere are people who are literally being driven to suicidal thoughts about this serious, serious situation that the industry is in. When will this minister move to a more appropriate cash advance? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agri- culture and Food): Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the member will quote statistics from the rural crisis line which their administration can- celled.

It was this administration that put the service back for people of rural and northern Manitoba. We put the service back. The $15 million that was a BSE slaughter program was not working in Manitoba. We changed it to a feed program to work within the $15 million that was available. This was at the advice of the Manitoba Cattle Producers. We worked with the industry. I can tell the member he is wrong. We did not reinstate the feed assistance program, Mr. Speaker. What we did was reinstate the slaughter program so that Manitoba producers are not at a disadvantage to other provinces. Mr. Cummings: Mr.

Speaker, that is a perfect example of how this minister announces and then brings details in later. She has not provided any details on her transportation program. Peo- ple are looking at the Government and saying, have they forgot that harvest is over. Sixty days ago is when I should have been making plans about firing that straw if I would have known there was a program that would have assisted me and would have made it so that I could afford it. It is gone. Mr. Speaker, will this minister now provide some details on her transportation program? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr.

Speaker, I give farmers more credit than that member does because farmers have been making decisions all summer. Farmers have been rolling up straw, farmers have been moving that straw. There is very little straw left on fields because farmers made deci- sions. They moved the straw. We were working with them, we told them we would put in a freight assistance program. That freight assist- ance program is retroactive. It will cover their costs and details of the program will be available within a few days. Minister of Agriculture and Food Resignation Request Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, there is the perfect example of announce now, plan later. Try and get the weekend headlines in the media and then the people out there who need to be dealt with, they can wait for the details. The minister has just confirmed that she is incompetent, unwilling to provide leadership, and the only way she can fix this is to resign. Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agri- culture and Food): Mr. Speaker, the member did not ask a question, but I will provide him with a little bit more information.

540 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 What we said on Friday was that we were putting a freight assistance program in place. It would be administered by Manitoba Crop Insur- ance and the details of the program would be available at the offices later this week. Mr. Speaker, we have talked to producers. Producers are quite comfortable with the idea that they are going to be getting some freight assistance because it is exactly what they asked for. It is unfortunate the member does not understand that.

The details will be in the farm- ers' hands very soon and they will be compen- sated for part of their costs for moving their feed, supply their hay and straw as they had asked for. This is what producers asked for. This is what we have worked through with them and this is what we have put in place. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Cash Advance for Producers Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): I am hear- ing the devastation many families are going through and are facing and I worry that the ones who are the most desperate are not reaching out for help.

Will the Minister of Agriculture now listen to the families in need and put in place the cash advance program they need so desperately before it is too late? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agri- culture and Food): What we have asked for is a national plan here to deal with a national dis- aster. When we were not getting national leader- ship, provinces put in their own programs and there has been leadership from the provinces. Alberta has put in a loan program at an interest rate of 5 percent. Saskatchewan has put in a loan program at commercial rates. Saskatchewan's is a loan program at commercial rates.

Our loan program is at 3.25 percent and 2.25 percent. The money is flowing to producers. Producers are taking advance on their cattle. Over $6 million has flown out already. More will flow as pro- ducers make their application. Members continue to talk about cash advance versus low-interest rate loans. They were the ones that suggested a low-interest rate loan, as had some of the cattle producers also suggested and they want to change their minds and go to a cash advance. The money is flowing o producers. t Mrs. Rowat: Mr. Speaker, the farm families need some answers.

They do not need the bick- ering of no answers. The BSE crisis continues to take an incredible toll on the farm families and the financial pressure and the emotional stress is at a crisis level. It is apparent that the program the Government has put forward is not working. Will the Minister of Agriculture please put in place a cash advance program today before it is too late? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the member that we are very concerned about farm families and that is why we have put over $180 million in place for producers, and the programs are working.

I am very pleased that our interest rates are lower. If the cattle start to sell and people want to pay off their loans, they can pay them off just as they would pay off their cash advances. This is no different. It is working, and I would encourage the member to talk to her producers and explain to them that they can use this as a bridge. They can use this money as a bridge until such time as the federal government flows the $600 million that they are holding or until such time as the federal government flows the interim payments that they are talking about after we sign the APF.

There are things, but they should use this money as a bridge to get them through until they can sell some cattle, till the border opens or other money flows. Mrs. Rowat: Mr. Speaker, I am talking to the farm families in my constituency and ones that are living in the areas that I have grown up in and you are not helping the situation. You are not working with the farm families. You are not listening. Farm families do not know how they will survive and that fear ra ises stress levels even higher.

With the co-ordinator of the crisis line indicating that suicide is on the cattle producers' minds, my question is to the Minister of Agri- culture: Will you avoid potential tragedy with the farm families and help put in the cash ad- vance program, please, today, before it is too late? Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, the situation facing farm families is very critical and that is

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 541 why we had a team of people, that is why we have ag reps and farm management specialists who are out there to work with people. That is why we have the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation there to take applications and work through the people with their application, with the producers. I can tell you that there have not been any denials up to this point of people who have made application. Those people who have made application for loans, the ones that we have worked through, have been approved.

So I would encourage the member to talk to the producers that are in very serious crisis, to look at taking the $50,000 to use as a bridge, to use as a bridge until other programs kick in or until such time as the bord er opens, because ulti- mately the opening of the border is the most mportant thing we can think about. i * (14:30) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Cash Advance for Producers Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr.

Speaker, the cardiac surgery program was in serious trouble for several years and despite warnings that patients might die, the Minister of Health brushed off these warnings and patients did die. I would like to ask the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) if she would do better than the Minister of Health, listen to the warnings related to the BSE crisis and commit to a cash advance. Hon.

Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): I think it is very important that members opposite recognize that as Doctor Koshal said in his report: For 20 years reports had been received by various governments, of which members oppo- site were government, that they did not act on with respect to the cardiac services. I remind members that several years ago, Mr. Speaker, when we announced our cardiac revitalization program, members opposite, and I can name you because I know where they were sitting, opposed our cardiac revitalization program. I urge mem- bers to get on side with us to support the 42 recommendations of Dr.

Koshal to ensure that what happened can be improved as Dr. Koshal aid. s Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, nine cardiac sur- gery patients died waiting for care under the watch of this Health Minister. They died waiting before this Government acted. I would like to ask the Minister of Agriculture to act now and to put forward a cash advance before the threat of suicide on the rural farm stress line becomes a reality. Mr. Chomiak: First, we do not know how many people were on the waiting list prior to 1999 because there was no waiting list, Mr.

Speaker, prior to 1999 by members opposite over 11 lean years when they cut back programs. Second, Mr. Speaker, I remind members that one baby, two babies, three babies, four babies, five, up to twelve died before members even started to put in place programs. We took those recommendations. We did not blame members opposite as they are doing. We said we would work in improving that situation and we did. Third, Mr. Speaker, I might add it was members opposite that cancelled the rural and farm stress line when they were government, and they have to account for that. Mrs. Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, this Government is playing a dangerous game. I would like to ask the Minister of Health to tell us how many people are going to have to die before this Gov- ernment does the right thing. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, every single day in this Government since we were elected to office, we have worked hard to improve the situation. Mr. Speaker, there are 15 million contacts between physicians and patients every year in this province. There are 10 million diagnostic tests between patients an d physicians. There are tens of millions of contacts between nurses and patients.

We have put in place more resources and improvements. A member only has to look to some of the reports that rank Manitoba. It is very funny how members opposite can talk about concern but when Maclean's ranks the WRHA as No. 3, versus members opposite, there is not a peep from members opposite. Yes, people have problems in the system. We work at it every day. The public knows we are improving it, and I suggest that is one of the

542 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 reasons they have more confidence in the pro- gram that we have introduced in terms of health care than the 11 lean years of cutbacks and firing of nurses and other professionals. Crown Lands Report Release Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): To the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger). Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Member for River Heights has the floor. Mr. Gerrard: The Government released last Thursday a report on the independent review of Crown lands.

The minister waited to table this report in the Legislature until today, four days after he released the report to the press. Mr. Speaker, my office tried repeatedly on Friday and this morning to obtain a copy of the report. I ask the minister why the Government was so eager to release the report to the media and so reluctant to release it to the members of this Legislature. Can the minister also enlighten the Legislature as to the problematic situations referred to in the report? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Conserva- tion): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's question.

I know he has raised questions in regard to Hecla and I think he would appreciate that this report was an internal report that was commissioned in 2001, having recognition by the former Minister of Conservation of the need or structural changes. f We are quite pleased to make this report public, even though it is essentially an internal report, because we are committed and have been committed as a government to try and deal with the clear deficiencies not only at Hecla Island but in terms of Crown land transactions.

Even though it was an internal report we think it should have been shared, yes, with the media, and today it was tabled by the Minister of Finance in this House. That is the appropriate thing to do. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, the Crown Lands report emphasizes the need for procedures to ensure that opportunities for the sale or lease of Crown lands are available to all Manitobans on an equal basis. I ask the minister: Does this mean that situations other than the one on Hecla occurred where the lease or sale of Crown lands was not made available to all Manitobans on an qual basis? e Mr. Ashton: Mr.

Speaker, the member raises a very important question, because for many years that indeed was not the policy. In fact, my predecessor stopped, for example, the leasing of remote cottages without any type of process to ensure it was transparent and accountable to all Manitobans. As part of our clear commitment to make sure we have transparency and accountability with Crown lands, I have directed that there be a review of all Crown land transactions. In fact, we are going to go back to 1990 to make sure, Mr.

Speaker, that there were not other circum- stances like Hecla, and if there were indeed circumstances like Hecla, we will take the same action that we are doing with Hecla, something that was never done in 1997. We will make sure it is referred to the appropriate legal counsel because we want to clean up the handling of Crown lands in Manitoba. Provincial Nominee Program Preferential Treatment Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My question is for the Minister of Labour and Immigration. Mr. Speaker, the Provincial Nominee Pro- gram is a program that was established in 1998. It is an excellent program.

Manitoba has eco- nomically and socially benefited by this program where thousands of immigrants from abroad have come to our province and made our prov- ince their home and have contributed in very many ways. I am greatly concerned, Mr. Speaker, that allegations of preferential treatment have been laid against members or individuals within the ormer minister's staff. f My question to the Minister of Immigration today is: Is the Minister of Immigration aware of any inappropriate behaviour from former minis- terial staff from the Department of Immigration? Hon.

Steve Ashton (Minister of Labour and Immigration): I am pleased the member raises a

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 543 question about the Provincial Nominee Program, because it is one of the success stories, Mr. Speaker, of this Government and this province because it is a very important initiative. In fact, we have seen steady increases. We have the most successful program in Canada. I will be as Minister of Labour and Immi- gration announcing further enhancements in terms of our immigration policy that we believe will lead us to the point where this year we have 4700 immigrants and we will be able to increase it.

I would urge the member, if he has any con- cerns about any individual immigration case or any further information he would like to share with me, I take very seriously both the program and maintaining the integrity of the program and would urge the member to raise any concerns with me either in this House or directly. I will ake sure I follow up on that. m * (14:40) Physician Resources Rural Manitoba Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin-Roblin): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Many rural communities face difficulties in attracting and retaining doctors.

Can this minister tell the House what actions he is taking so that rural Manitobans have access to service of doctors? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to report that every year since this Government has taken office there are net more doctors in Manitoba than at any other time. In addition, there are clearly difficulties in terms of some rural doctors.

I note that, in the Brandon Sun, one of the doctors who is leaving says he is even going for a pay cut because of the rota and says: I want to go to a place that does not have the on-call and the difficulty we have in rural Manitoba. Notwithstanding that there are more doctors in rural Manitoba today than when we came to office in 1999. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, I have asked Doctor Cram, who is a well-respected doctor in rural Manitoba, lived, grew up and practises in rural Manitoba, to undertake an immediate look at some of the situations and see if there is any- thing even more that we can do to improve the situation in rural Manitoba. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Loan Program Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): Today, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture con- firmed what all cattle producers in Manitoba know, that her loan program does not work.

She has acknowledged the fact that less than 2 percent of the producers in this province have qualified for a loan. I want to ask the Minister of Agriculture: Does she believe that 2 percent or less than 2 percent is a satisfactory number for Manitoba cattle producers? Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agri- culture and Food): Mr. Speaker, the member has said that only 2 percent of the producers qualified. That is not accurate. What I have said, that their loans have not been denied. People who have made applications have been given their loans.

It is not that they do not qualify, but there has been a slow application; 170 appli- cations have been approved and over $6 million has been approved. Mr. Speaker, I would encourage the mem- ber, rather than trying to point at the program and say it is not adequate, they should be work- ing with producers and telling them that there is cash here. Those producers they refer to as having difficulty paying bills should be en- couraged to take this $50,000 and bridge them through until other money starts to flow. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has xpired. e MEMBERS' STATEMENTS École Christine-Lespérance Ms.

Theresa Oswald (Seine River): It is my pleasure to rise today to celebrate the achieve- ments of the communities surrounding École Christine-Lespérance. This school is a strong Francophone centre in our community. The

544 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 teaching and learning environment is second to none, from the vibrant and creative pre-school class to the strong academic, athletic and musi- cal achievements in junior high. J'aimerais reconnaître le comité de parents qui, au courant des quatre dernières années, a travaillé inlassablement afin d'amasser des fonds pour bâtir un terrain de jeux formidable.

Les administrateurs de l'école, l'ancien directeur Maurice Landry, présentement à la retraite, et la directrice adjointe Dolorès Beau- mont, ont encouragé et appuyé les activités du comité de parents très actif. La présidente du comité de parents, Madame Gisèle Bazin, et l'inlassable présidente du comité du terrain de jeux, Madame Lynn Guertin, ont coordonné les efforts de demandes de subventions et la levée de fonds communautaires.

Ces efforts ont donné de très bons résultats, notamment en amassant assez de fonds pour compléter les deux étapes de construction du terrain de jeux, mais aussi en réunissant les gens du quartier dans un but commun. Les efforts extraord inaires de Madame Guertin ont été reconnus quand elle a reçu un certificat de mérite du prix du Premier ministre pour service bénévole en 2002. Translation I would like to recognize the parent committee which, for the last four years, has worked tire- lessly to collect funds to build a fantastic play- ground. The school administrators , the former principal, Mr.

Maurice Landry, now retired, and the vice- principal, Dolorès Beaumont, have encouraged and supported the activities of this very active parent committee. The chair of the parent committee, Mrs. Gisèle Ba zin, and the tireless chair of the playground committee, Mrs. Lynn Guertin, co-ordinated the efforts to apply for grants and to fundraise in the community. These efforts have yielded very good results specifically by raising enough funds to complete the two phases of the playground construction, but also by uniting the people of the neigh- bourhood around a common goal. The extraordinary efforts of Mrs.

Guertin were recognized when she received a Premier`s Vol- unteer Service Award certificate of merit in 2002. English The school and community celebrated its success by holding a grand opening for the play structure on June 19. A barbecue was held. The soccer pitch was loaded with active participants, and children's entertainer Jake Chenier was on hand to delight the crowd with his music and unfailing sense of humour. Félicitations à tout le monde. Translation Congratulations to everyone. Canada Foodgrains Bank Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to put a few words on the record today about a Domain-area harvest that took place recently as part of the Chipin Growing Project in support of Canada Foodgrains Bank. The Canada Foodgrains Bank was created by a group of churches and various Christian organizations as a response to the hunger crisis within certain countries. This collaborative effort involves the donation of time, money and har- vested grain in order to help people in countries less fortunate.

The Foodgrains Bank provides assistance to poverty-stricken areas while allow- ing local groups to partner together and build bridges between Canadians and other members of our global economy. Today, I would like to focus more speci- fically on Manitobans who have participated in this project, the farmers in and around Domain. For about five years now, these farmers, Chris- tian and non-Christian alike, have believed their efforts can contribute to the common good, so they put their time and machinery to work. This growing season they planted and tended a 276-

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 545 acre patch of spring wheat in order to donate that crop to the Chipin Project. I am proud to say this Chipin Project is an excellent example of the spirit of Manitobans. Setting their priorities aside, hardworking people take the time to focus on the needs of others and work together to achieve a common goal. It is my privilege today to acknowledge the kindness and generosity of these citizens within my constituency. In contributing to the Chipin Foodgrains Bank Project, the farmers of Domain and area have extended a compassionate hand to those in need.

It is projects like these and the farmers of Domain that have contributed to Manitoba's honourable reputation for being among the most generous volunteers in Canada. These farmers deserve ou r recognition for their hearty effort and unsparing contribution to those less fortunate. Thank you to all involved in the Chipin Growing Project for demonstrating your generous spirit and congratulations on your contributions to such a worthwhile cause. Sarb Sanjha Dashmesh Tournament Mr.

Cris Aglugub (The Maples): I rise today in the House to tell you about the Sarb Sanjha Dashmesh Tournament and a particular sport in the tournament called kabaddi. I was pleased to attend this tournament with the MLA for Radisson (Mr. Jha) on August 7, 2003, at the Maples Community Centre. This annual two-day tournament is unique to the Indo-Canadian community and is arranged by the local tournament committee chaired by Kulwant Singh Brar. The competitors and spec- tators come from across Canada to compete in various activities such as soccer, volleyball, bas- ketball and more traditional sports such as kabaddi.

Various kabaddi teams were invited from Calgary, Edmonton and Toronto to com- pete in these games. One sport that caught my attention is called kabaddi in Indo-Canadian terms. Kabaddi combines both rugby and wrestling. The teams compete for points by capturing or touching the players of the opponent teams. It begins by one team sending a raider into the opponent's side, all the while chanting "kabaddi, kabaddi." The aim of the opposing team is to hold the raider and to impede him from returning to his own court until he takes another breath.

It is certainly incredible to watch the skill and power of the players and the strategies employed for self- defence and counterattack by the players. Over- all, the experience of the event and the tradi- tional game of kabaddi was an exhilarating and a learning experience for me. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank the Indo- Canadian community for hosting the tourna- ment, especially the non-profit and religious organizations such as the Singh Sabha of Win- nipeg, the Sikh Society of Manitoba, the Kal- gidhar Darbar, the Khalsa Diwan Society of Manitoba, the Guru Nanak Darbar and the Ramgharia Society of Manitoba. Through their influence and immense effort, they raised the needed funds to make this tournament a success- ful event. * (14:50) Canadian Fly Fishing Championships Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr.

Speaker, this past weekend, I had the pleasure of attend- ing the Canadian Fly Fishing Championships hosted in the Russell and Roblin area. I am pleased to say that the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Tourism and of Sport (Mr. Robin- son) was in attendance at the closing cere- monies. It was an excellent evening. Organizers of the event made an excellent choice of location, selecting East Goose Lake, Tokaryk Lake, Gull Lake, Shell River and Pine River as the fishing competition sites, all well known for their trout population.

The champion- ship ran from September 6 to 12, and proved to be an exciting time to remember for competitors and volunteers alike. The Canadian Fly Fishing Championships hosted approximately 100 competitors, all hop- ing to fill the three remaining spaces on the Canadian team headed to Slovakia for the inter- national championship next year. A few festivities that accompanied the championships were a symposium, a medal cere- mony and a banquet at the Russell Community

546 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 Centre. The Fly Fishing Championships brought fishermen from all across Canada and even attracted a few enthusiasts from overseas. This was an excellent way for our local businesses to gain some exposure and give visitors a taste of the friendly Manitoba hospitality. This was also a unique opportunity to demonstrate the beauty of the Parklands area and to boost it to the local tourism industry. Mr. Speaker, it has been my privilege to share with the Assembly the exciteme nt of this weekend's Canadian Fly Fishing Championships. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank Dr. Vern Rosnoski, the chair even ts co-ordinator whose organizing committee and all those who volun- teered many hours of their time and the talents that they have to make this weekend a success. I would also like to express my appreciation to all area residents who had the vision for these lakes and who have helped create some of the best fishing opportunities in North America. On behalf of the Assembly, I would like to acknowledge the efforts of these fine folks whose service to the competitors and our guests of the event made this an impeccable event.

It was a pleasure to attend this sporting event, hosted by Russell, Roblin and surrounding areas and a true joy to spend some time in the great outdoors of this beautiful province. Canadian Forces Firefighters Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): I would like to pay tribute to the over 300 soldiers from Manitoba, both regular and reserve forces, who have been and who are still battling the forest fires in British Columbia.

Manitoba men and women from the 38th Canadian Brigade Group from Charlie Company of Winnipeg's Second Battalion Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry and the First Regiment, Royal Canadian Horse Artillery from CFB Shilo have been a part of what is currently the Canadian Forces' second largest deployment of forces after their contri- bution to the security force in Afghanistan. Mr. Speaker, they have been performing extremely demanding work up to 12 and 14 hours per day under perilous conditions to sup- port the B.C. Forest Service in protecting local communities and infrastructure.

Our forces have been deployed in the most fire-ravaged areas, including Kamloops, McClure, Barriere, Cran- brook and Kelowna. Despite the heat, dirt and danger, they have kept their morale high. We are very proud of their dedication and professionalism. I would also like to acknowledge the voluntary support of employers who granted leave to reservists to take

part in the operation. Our thanks should go as well to the Honourable Pearl McGonigal who, as the Manitoba chair of the Canadian Forces Liaison Council, has done much to garner this support. We are especially grateful to the families of the soldiers. It has been a trying and painful experience for them to see their loved ones leave for an area that some have likened to a war zone.

During this emergency in B.C., Manitobans are reminded of the help that Manitobans received from Forces personnel across Canada during our time of crisis in the 1997 flood of the century and the help that Québec and Ontario received during the ice storm of 1998. On behalf of my colleagues, I would like to acknowledge our deep gratitude to all the Mani- tobans who have come to the aid of our fellow citizens in the British Columbia interior. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Mr. Speaker: The House will now resolve into Committee of Supply.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) EDUCATION AND YOUTH * (15:00) Mr. Chairperson (H arry Schellenberg): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply meet- ing in Room 254 will now resume consideration of the Estimates for the Department of Education and Youth.

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 547 As has been previously agreed, questioning for this department will follow in a global man- ner. The floor is now open for questions. Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): I would like to ask the minister a series of questions in regard to the Sunrise School Division, River East Trans- cona amalgamation. I take it the minister is aware of some of the co ncerns parents have in regard to services that are provided in the vari- ous school divisions. Has he had an opportunity to meet with vari- ous councils, in particular, the Springfield par- ents council? Hon.

Ron Lemieux (Minister of Education and Youth): Thank you for the question. I thank the Member for Springfield for that. I have had a chance to meet with the president of the parents councils association. I believe she is from Oakbank, and I think also the president is as well, from the area. Our dis- cussions did not really involve any issues around amalgamation that affected the old Transcona- Springfield School Division. Mr. Schuler: Would the minister entertain my- self giving him a map that, when I ask questions, it would be a little bit clearer for him? Would he entertain that? Mr.

Lemieux: No, I thank the member for the offer, but I know the old boundaries and where they went and what communities. No, I am fine. Thank you. Mr. Schuler: That is quite surprising that the minister would turn down some information, slightly unbecoming of an educator, but we will move on from there. Is the minister aware that Springfield stu- dents have lost access to three out of four of the high schools they had formerly access to when they were part of the Transcona-Springfield School Division? Mr.

Lemieux: Just with refere nce to the previ- ous at least suggestion that the Member for Springfield made that I should have a copy of the map, I am very much aware of the southeast region. I think I am fairly knowledgeable as far as where the old Transcona-Springfield bound- aries were and also wh ere the Agassiz bound- aries were previously, but I thank the member for the offer for that. With regard to his question, I understand that, with the agreement that was made with regard to services, I understand there should not be any loss of programming for any children.

At least that is what I have been advised, and that is what I believe is the result. Mr. Schuler: Well, then the minister is getting poor advice. I would like to ask the minister: Is he aware that there is now only one high school in the Springfield area? Mr. Lemieux: I understand that there is a high school in Oakbank and that certainly for students who want to have bilingual services or immer- sion services that is also available for the stu- dents in the area. Mr. Schuler: I do not know if the minister has any idea what he means by in the area.

Where would Senior 1 to 4 students go for immersion courses close to Springfield? Mr. Lemieux: I thank the member for the ques- tion. My understanding is that Pierre-Elliott- Trudeau is the school that the students would go to. The Senior 1 to Senior 4 students, if they wanted to receive instruction in immersion, would travel from Dugald or Oakbank and would travel into Transcona.

This is all part of the agreement that was, well, I am not sure if grandfathering is the correct terminology, but certainly the agreement allowed students to travel and continue getting their education in immersion, a very good one, I might add, at Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau. Mr. Schuler: Is the minister aware that that grandfathering runs out in 2005? Mr. Lemieux: I believe it was a three-year agreement that was entered into. I understand that all the parties participated. There was a lot of give and take and exchange with regard to the services, but my understanding is that the school

548 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 division is certainly pleased with the services they are getting, at least what I have been advised, from Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau. Mr. Schuler: To the minister, yes, the parents are very pleased with the continuation of their education at Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau when it comes to French immersion. However, that does come to an end in 2005. Busing will no longer be provided. Then it becomes a decision of the River East Transcona School Division if they want them there.

The grandfathering runs out in 2005, at which time then it becomes the responsibility of Sunrise School Division. Per- haps the minister could tell this committee where, then, the Springfield students could find French immersion in the new Sunrise School Division. Mr. Lemieux: My understanding is part of this agreement allows the parties to come together at the conclusion or prior to the conclusion of this agreement. If the agreement wants to be extended by Sunrise, then it is something that would have to be certainly discussed with River East Transcona on whether or not that agreement is extended or not.

I mean, the parties would certainly have to discuss that to arrive at some agreement if Sunrise wishes to extend that agreement. Mr. Schuler: Has the minister been given any indication if there is any interest on the side of any party to continue that agreement? Mr. Lemieux: The member from Springfield mentions that it is 2005, I believe, that the agree- ment ends. It is somewhat premature I think to be looking at whether or not to extend the agreement. I think all parties are observing whether it is working for them or not. I think they are observing to find out whether or not this will actually work.

I think it is somewhat pre- mature for them to be en tering into discussions, either one way or another, on the issue. Mr. Schuler: Actually the minister is quite wrong there, and, as an educator, the minister should choose his words a lot more carefully before he makes comments like that, because that is not the case, Minister, not in the least. If parents want to put their children into an elementary school or a middle school, they want to know now where their children will be going for Senior 1 to Senior 4, not 15 minutes before they enrol them in Senior 1.

That is quite irresponsible on behalf of the minister to suggest that now is not the time for the parties to get together and start making those discussions and making those decisions. The parents have very serious decisions to make about their children. Maybe the minister has forgotten what it is like to have little children going into the school system and deciding for their children where they should be going and what kind of programming. This is what is harming the Dugald elementary school, which is the immersion school, the catchment area school for French immersion in the Springfield area.

I would suggest to the minister that in fact, no, it is not in a year from now and it is not in a year and a half from now that the school divi- sions should be getting together. It is now, so that parents have some kind of stability when they start making decisions insofar as where they want to go with programming. So I ask the minister: Has he been given any indication, at this point in time are there dis- cussions between the two school divisions in regard to if there is going to be a continuation of students being allowed to go to French immer- sion at Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau? Mr.

Lemieux: Well, there is nothing prohibiting parents speaking to their school boards or their school boards speaking to each other. They cer- tainly do not contact the Minister of Education every time they have a meeting and have a discussion, no matter what or how important the issue is. It might be a good idea for them to contact the department and have discussions about a lot of issues, but they certainly do not. They are duly elected, and they have a responsibility to govern their school divisions accordingly.

There may be discussions taking place at this moment, as we speak, with regard to services, whether or not students go to Lorette, for example, to get their immersion education or whether or not they continue doing what has certainly taken place over the last while. Certainly, I would say that I am not aware of whether or not there are any discussions taking

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 549 place between the parents, their school division, or whether the two school divisions are meeting on a regular basis to make that determination. I am letting the member know that they certainly are observing to see whether or not the system is working right now, and, if they wish to renegoti- ate an agreement, whether or not they want to change that agreement slightly or do a major change with regard to their agreement.

So I am just saying to the member that I am not aware if they are meeting right now as we speak or have met with the agreement expiring in 2005 and what is going to happen to the children who may be currently in Grade 6 right now, are looking three years down the road and going into Grade 9. I am certainly not aware of it. Mr. Schuler: Mr.

Chairperson, this minister speaking about duly elected school boards is black humour at best when it was this Govern- ment that absolutely tram pled over every school division and every duly elected school board member with threats and bullying when dealing with the school boards. So the minister talking about duly elected is an insult at best. Mr. Chairperson, I would like to point out to the minister that right now I am not asking the parents and I am not asking the school divisions, I am asking the minister.

I will rephrase my question: Is his department, if the minister is not, is his department aware of any discussions between Transcona-Springfield and Sunrise School Division in continuing or discontinuing the joint services agreem ent or whatever it is called, insofar as regarding vocational and French immersion students going into the Transcona part of River East Transcona? Mr. Lemieux: I thank the member for the question. Once again, I believe the department is not aware of any conversations taking place. It is in the very infancy of this agreement.

I realize children who are in Grade 6 in three years will be entering Senior 1 or Grade 9, but the agree- ment itself, it is in its early stages. Whether or not these school divisions are entering into dis- cussions at this stage or not, I believe and my department believes, well, certainly we have not been included in any of those discussions in one way, shape or another. It is up to the divisions. If they want to pursue it that is fine. If they want to enter into any conversations they want, they are certainly free to do so. Mr.

Chairperson, with regard to the com- ments about trampling over rights of school divisions, there are a lot of conversations that took place with a lot of divisions that wanted to amalgamate. Their rights were not trampled over, and a lot of discussions took place with regard to amalgamation. The member certainly is open to pass his views on to Sunrise School Division, can cer- tainly speak at any time to River East Transcona. I understand he knows a couple of members on that board.

He is welcome to speak to anyone he wants about maybe they should get their act together and get moving, if that is the way he feels. If he feels strongly they should be talking about issues three years down the road and get moving on it, I encourage him to do so. * (15:10) Mr. Schuler: This whole project was born out of politics. It has been wrought with politics from day one, from the Premier's office, from the Cabinet office on down, and that is the prob- lem with this whole issue. It was the problem from day one. The Norrie report was never followed.

It was used to some degree, abused in most cases and the minister at that time used it as a smoke screen to push a political agenda. That is very unfortunate. I would like to ask the minister: If the agreement is not continued in 2005, seeing my generous offer to provide him with a map, which he stubbornly refused, which is unfortunate, can he tell me within the Sunrise School Division, where would the students then go, if they are not going to be given access to Pierre-Elliott- Trudeau. Where would they then go for French immersion education in the Sunrise School Division? Mr.

Lemieux: It sounds like a hypothetical to me.

550 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 Mr. Schuler: It is not. Mr. Lemieux: I thank the member for the ques- tion.

It is somewhat hypothetical, but I would like to try to pass on some comments to the Member for Springfield on the individual we had working with, and who is highly respected, a member of the Manitoba Association of School Trustees, who, for a number of years, worked with MAST and was highly respected by a lot of school divisions, went around and talked to all the school divisions and asked the school divi- sions what they felt about amalgamation, questions like: What areas of success or accom- plishments should be noted, do you think, as a result of amalgamation?

Well, technology has been a big improve- ment for their division. They think Sunrise having the amalgamation take place that tech- nology will really improve as a result. Board relations, they felt, would certainly improve having Agassiz and the old part of Transcona, the Springfield part, getting together, planning process, relationships among people within the division. I just want to say i t i s s o m e w h a t h y p o - thetical to think of what a parent is going to do in three years' time or what the parents are going to do in three years' time or where they are going to send their children.

They may continue to send their children to Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau, which I understand their staff is a tremendous staff with regard to the service they provide as educators. My understanding is that Sunrise is really pleased with the services they get from Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau. I know the Sunrise School Division is working extremely hard trying to co-operate and trying to make this issue, trying to make, not just the issue, but make this agreement work. I have no idea.

I would like to re-use the word of "hypothetical," but certainly three years down the road it is difficult to say what the parents would choose or what direction they might want o go. t Mr. Schuler: Minister, if, 2005, this contract runs out, and we happen to be in 2003, would that not leave two years? I think the minister sh ould be careful with his numbers. There are not three years left. We are so far into the pike that this is no longer hypothetical by any stretch of the imagination.

Parents now have to plan what they are going to do with their children's education for the next, not two years, not three years, for five years, six years, seven years, ei ght years, depending on where they are, whether they are entering into the school system in kindergarten, whether they are in Grade 3, whether they are in Grade 6. They cannot wait for the minister to dilly around and hear no evil, see no evil, do not care less attitude and all of a sudden 2005 comes around and we have the problems. I will help the minister out. Clearly he does not know the answer and he should not have refused the map.

Then at least he would have had the answer. Where they would have to go is Powerview, Manitoba. I am sure the minister, in all his wis- dom, has a clear idea where Powerview, Mani- toba is. Could the minister tell us, from Dugald elementary school to Powerview, Manitoba, about how far that would be? Mr. Lemieux: Thank you very much. I am just going back to my coaching days, coaching ringette and coaching hockey. I would say it is about, probably certainly an hour's drive, I would think. Thank you. Mr. Schuler: I will lay this out for the minister.

Dugald is actually the kindergarten to middle school immersion school for Springfield. Cur- rently, from Dugald elementary school to Pierre- Elliott-Trudeau is 11 kilometres. If that agree- ment fails, from Dugald to Powerview, Mani- toba, will be 91 kilometres. I hasten to add to the minister that a bus would not go direct 91 kilometres. It has to pick up other students. You have to factor in weather. You have to remember that it is not like a car, it does not have the same maneuverability. These students do not have air conditioning, nor would they have seat belts.

They would drive to Powerview, Manitoba, which is 91 kilometres one way. Does the minister feel that that is acceptable for parents to be looking at as an option for their children when deciding whether or not they will go with French immersion? Mr. Lemieux: I am not sure why the member from Springfield raises Dugald to Powerview,

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 551 but my understanding is that there are immersion schools in Beausejour, which is a lot closer than Powerview. There is an English and immersion school located at Edward Schreyer School in Beausejour, and also Beausejour Elementary has an immersion program as well. No one likes to see children riding on buses for a long period of time. My children were very fortunate. We lived not too far from a com- munity where they had to be on the bus for about approximately a half hour.

Within my own constituency I have children riding on the bus for an hour and 20 minutes or so from Falcon Lake. They go to high school in Steinbach, and they are on the bus for about an hour and 20 minutes one way. No one says this is right. This is not ideal possibly, but this is what is hap- pening to many students around the province. Certainly I would say it is a little bit pre- mature to say that this agreement may not be extended. We are looking at a couple of years, two to three years down the road now, depend- ing on which way you look at the school map. But it is slightly premature.

I am sure Sunrise School Division, if they feel that is in the best interest and are listening to the parents of that school division, they want their children to go to Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau, which is, I understand, around 12 kilometres away. I just want to say that the member from Springfield, I do not know if the member from Springfield wants me as the Minister of Edu- cation to be, as he put it, steam-rolling over the parents and telling them which school they should go to or somehow look into a crystal ball and determine what is going to happen in two to three years with regard to planning.

I have a great deal of trust not only in the superintendents of those divisions, but also in the school trustees to work these issues out, and I believe they will in the best interests of the children. Thank you. * (15:20) Mr. Schuler: I am actually appalled at the minister's answer. First of all, the French courses that are offered at Edward Schreyer School do not constitute an accredited immersion program. The minister and his department should know that. It is not an accredited program. It is not a French immersion.

The only accredited French immersion program in the Sunrise School Divi- sion right now is in Powerview. For goodness' sake, you would think the department and the minister would know that. That is why right now the agreement is until 2005 that the students go from Dugald, which is the elementary and middle schools catchment school, to Pierre- Elliott-Trudeau. I would suggest to the minister there are some discussions taking place that Beausejour, classes be added on and that it become an accredited immersion program.

If the minister would have followed the debate and the former minister can tell today's minister that that was the problem with Beause- jour, that it did not have an accredited Senior 1 to 4 immersion program. It is not accredited immersion. I am quite surprised. Currently, it is 91 kilometres one way to Powerview, Manitoba. That is the only ac- credited immersion program currently in exist- ence in Sunrise School Division. I would like to have the minister clarify that point for the record. Mr. Lemieux: Well, Mr.

Chairperson, if the member from Springfield is making reference to somehow there are problems with the immersion program in Beausejour, that is something the Sunrise School Division should certainly look at and improve the program within Beausejour, within their own Springfield School Division. I just want to quote a paragraph out of the agreement for the member from Springfield. Hopefully, he will bear with me here. It says: "This agreement shall be reviewed annually in April by the participating school boards. The agreement may be extended or revised by mutual agreement of all parties involved.

Any changes with implications for Manitoba Education Train- ing and Youth require the concurrence of the minister." This is something that, as the member mentioned, and I do not know whether or not he was certainly doing it on purpose, but he said that discussions are taking place. I am pleased to hear that. If parents are talking to their school

552 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 board and talking about their plans down the road, I think that is excellent, as I mentioned. The member should be encouraged to pass on his views to parents and others about their education options in two or three years down the road. I just finished quoting from the agreement, which says that these are being reviewed. Now, if Sunrise School Division wants to improve the immersion program in Beausejour, that is prob- ably something else that t h e y s h o u l d b e d i s - cussing internally.

I do not want to in any way suggest that they have to do that, but I am sure they probably are looking at that, looking at their own immersion program within their own school division. Thank you. Mr. Schuler: I would point out to the minister there is nothing wrong with the French being taught at Edward Schreyer School. The only thing is it is not an immersion program. The minister should know that, after he put on the record that it was. I suggest to the minister that he is floundering right now on this issue. That is most unfortunate, because parents are looking for answers and not for the minister to flounder.

I would point out to the minister that there is another component to this. Currently, there is no vocational high school in Springfield. Can the minister point out where in the Sunrise School Division is there currently a vocational high school? Mr. Lemieux: The member from Springfield talks about floundering. The fact of the matter is, if the member from Springfield knows anything about immersion programs in the province, he will know that there are gaps in immersion throughout the province. Whether these are a lack of science teachers, math teachers, there are gaps.

Now, if the Sunrise School Division wants to strengthen the immersion program in the Sunrise School Division, certainly they can do everything under the sun possible. They can look for French immersion teachers in science, in math and do whatever they can to strengthen their program, whether it is in Beausejour or in other communities. Now, that is something that they are aware of already, and I am sure they are looking at that as their option, or they can re-negotiate the options that they have when this agreement expires.

So all I would mention to the member from Springfield is that whether a division is amalgamated or not, there are some gaps in immersion programs throughout the province, in Manitoba. This is not necessarily a good thing, I agree, but what we are trying to do certainly is we are trying to get a better handle on what is going on with regard to immersion programs and the importance of immersion programs in Manitoba. But the immersion program in Beausejour at the elementary level is absolutely rock solid, rock solid.

There are a few gaps at the high school level which I understand they are also trying to do something about. Now, this is some- thing for which we have been prepared all along, and the department works closely with the com- munities. It is not, I believe, that there is not a will from Sunrise to do something about im- mersion. I think that ther e is a high need for an immersion program in the Sunrise School Division. So they have some options.

Either they can work hard to improve the immersion program in their school division, or they can renew or work towards renewing the agreement that they have with River East Transcona. Thank you. Mr. Schuler: Suggesting that the minister is floundering on this issue, Mr. Chairperson, was being kind. I am not suggesting that there is not good immersion programming in Beausejour. In fact, I know it is good. It is very good immersion programming.

The problem is that right now, as it stands, there is no immersion programming at the senior years, and I believe it will take the addition of seven classrooms and considerable extra money. Is the minister prepared to fund Sunrise School Division to get this program up and running by the time the contract of 2005 expires, so that this program can be put into place? Has the department been approached in regard to the funding of an immersion program in Beausejour, and is the minister pr epared to forward the funding?

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 553 Mr. Lemieux: Well, I do not want to say that the member from Springfield does not know how the funding formula works. I would be the last one to suggest that. But if the numbers are there, if the students are there, the funding formula, certainly a good part of it is based on the number of students. So if they have a high need, students wanting to go to Beausejour to the immersion program, the funding will accompany those students. Mr.

Schuler: But then you have the school division caught between a rock and a hard place, because until 2005 there is no great demand for it because those students are currently being bused to Transcona. So what the minister is suggesting, you have to wait for the contract to expire. Then all of a sudden you have the need, and then over the next five or six years, somehow a program will be developed which at that point in time, I might suggest to the minister, the need may not be as great because by then people will have looked elsewhere, at other programming, or they will have left.

This is where this entire amalgamation issue was not thought out. We laid these issues in front of the former minister. He acknowledged all the problems and very little was done to deal with them. Now is the carnage. Now parents sit there and do not know what they are supposed to do in regard to their children's education. I ask the minister a question in regard to vocational high schools. Unfortunately he did turn down my map, which was unfortunate for him. Can he tell us in which towns currently vocational high schools exist within the Sunrise School Division? * (15:30) Mr.

Lemieux: With regard to the programming that the member is asking about, my under- standing is that the chil dren currently or the students certainly go to, I believe, Transcona, to receive some of the pr ogramming as well as to Lord Selkirk School Division. Just to touch on that a little bit, I just want to add that this has gone on for many, many, many, many years, long before amalgamation ever took place and continues all over the province with school divisions that do not offer either industri- al arts or programs that they cannot provide. They send those children to other school divi- sions.

They have agreements between them to do so. They are looking at the dollar and they are trying to save a dollar and use taxpayers' dollars wisely, because the numbers do not warrant it. What they do is they send children to other school divisions that offer those programs. This is happening all over the province, whether or not the amalgamation has taken place or not, and has for years and years and years and may con- tinue to do so. There is a declining enrolment in a lot of school divisions throughout Manitoba.

A lot of the schools just feel that they had to be very careful in what programs they offer because they just do not have the student base, student population to do so. So, they have arrangements with other school divisions. This has happened for years and years and will continue to happen. It happened certainly during the 1990s when the member from Spring- field's party was the government. It happened in many, many school divisions. In fact, Agassiz School Division used to send their students to Lord Selkirk long before amalgamation ever took place.

What they are trying to do is they are trying to make best use of their taxpayers' dollars and being very prudent on how they spend it. They are not always easy decisions, but those are the ones that are made by the local school divisions. Mr. Schuler: Mr. Chairperson, I am pleased the minister actually got one right. He is absolutely correct. There are no vocational schools cur- rently in Sunrise School Division. Until this point in time, actually the students from what used to be Agassiz School Division were bused to Selkirk.

In fact, on the other side, I have taken a central town, the high est concentration of students, the students from Oakbank, were bused to Murdoch MacKay. Just so everybody knows the distances, Oakbank to Murdoch MacKay is 17 kilometres. The concern that parents have is that if River

554 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 East Transcona will not renew the contract or Sunrise School Division and River East Trans- cona do not get to some kind of agreement, Oakbank to Selkirk is 29 kilometres. That is again a substantial addition on to the time, be- cause, again, you do not drive straight as the crow flies. The bus, of course, has to go up and down roads, picks up students or whatever the case may be, and takes them to Selkirk. There is another possibility, and that is Steinbach, which is 52 kilometres away and clearly is not reason- able.

Again, what this is all about to the minister is there is not a lot of thought that went into the amalgamation issue. It is the parents that are struggling with decisions to make for what they think is the best interests of the their children. Perhaps the minister would like to comment on if the 2005 agreement is not renewed, does that then mean that all vocational students would have to be bused to Selkirk, Manitoba? Mr. Lemieux: What I would like to do is when the member talks about not very much thought, there was a lot of thought given to amalga- mation.

There will be a lot of other school divisions that will be amalgamating, but it will be on a voluntary basis. In years to come, because of declining enrolment, school divisions will get together and they will definitely want to amalgamate as a result for a lot of reasons. The gentleman that we had working with amalgamated divisions asked a lot of questions of the different divisions. They came up with a number of answers saying, what are the benefits of amalgamation.

Improved access to programs and services for students; more efficient use of fiscal resources; creatio n of new collaborative principal centre organizations; adoption of best educational practices on research; technology and many other different areas that amalga- mation will prove a true benefit to all the students. The parents will be able to see that. No one expected it to happen overnight and it will not happen overnight. It is truly hypothetical to think of what the school division is going to be doing in two to three years as to what they want to do on their programming.

A lot of those school board mem- bers, if they are in conversation with the parents now, and if they have their finger to the pulse of what is going on in their area, their region, we will get a pretty good idea from their parents on what they would like to see happen. If the parents in Dugald or Oakbank want to see strengthening of programs in their area, well, it is incumbent on the school division to be addressing that. If they want it continued as it was in the 1990s and continue that kind of pro- gramming, that is fair too.

It is a decision of that school division, but it is a difficult decision that the parents, along with their elected officials in that area, are going to have to make, granted. That is something that they will have some time to do. As the member from Springfield has commented on, I have no way to verify this one way or another, but I understand, as he men- tioned, that there are conversations taking place right now as to what is going to happen in three years. I see that as a real benefit. Thank you. Mr.

Schuler: Can the minister tell us: Does his department currently fund part of the costs of the transportation of students from Springfield into the River East Transcona schools? Mr. Lemieux: I am sorry, could I have the member from Springfield just repeat the ques- tion, please. I am sorry, I did not catch it all. Mr. Schuler: Does the Department of Education currently fund in part or in whole the cost of transporting the students from the Springfield area to programming in River East Transcona? Mr. Lemieux: I have been advised, Mr.

Chairperson, that it is in the agreement where it talks about transportation currently available for eligible Springfield students attending Transcona schools will continue to be provided. The Province will provide funding for busing these students, including local costs, until June 30, '05. Mr. Schuler: I believe the challenge for this Government is to ensure that the Springfield students no longer suffer the loss of educational and career opportunities that resulted from the split of their school division. I would like to ask the minister: Is he prepared to create permanent access for students

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 555 of Springfield to the high schools in Transcona and continue to fund the cost of transportation for these rural students? Mr. Lemieux: Well, I thank the member for the question, Mr. Chairperson. I just wanted to com- ment with regard to, not necessarily overall programming, but the educ ation that is received from the students in Sunrise. The new Sunrise School Division I believe is a quality education. I think a lot of the parents would comment on that.

I do not think they believe they are getting a lesser education as a result of, for example, the immersion parents would comment that they are not getting a lesser education as a result of going to Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau. I would also second that. I believe that is important to put on the record because the teachers and staff are working very, very hard to ensure the quality education those students ar e getting is the best it possibly can be in Manitoba.

I know when this agreement ends, and as the member mentioned from Springfield, there are discussions taking place now, I do not want to speculate on what is going to happen by the end of June '05. I believe those conversa tions that are taking place now will contribute to that decision, but it is imperative that the parents let their school board know what they want. If they feel very st rongly about immersion programs, they had better start recruiting and working hard to get teachers in those specialty areas, like math, for example, or science that are a challenge all over Manitoba with regard to im- mersion.

It is not just as a result of amalga- mation, but it is as a result of teachers going through the system that are able to teach immer- sion, whether it was in the 1990s when the member's colleagues were the government of the day. Those are the challenges they faced then, as we face now. It is getting more professionals who are able to teach those specialty areas that is a real challenge for us. I do not want to speculate on what is going to happen in '05 and what is going to happen with regard to the agreement, but I know that part of the agreement now is transportation.

We are working with the division to provide $50 a head per child with regard to amalga- mation. There are many different areas we are working to assist not only the division, but also we continue to provide a person in an advisory capacity to work with the department in any challenges they might face. As a department, we are very supportive of the Sunrise School Division, of amalgamated school divisions, and we have heard that anec- dotally back to us that they appreciate all the work we are doing.

Also, the administration should be really thanked for all the hard work they have done to ensure that amalgamation is going to work. We are not going to turn the clock back to the 1990s, heaven forbid, where you have tax increases of 149 percent in Agassiz. Maybe that is why they are having a hardship in providing those immersion programs now in Beausejour when they got hammered by almost a 150% increase,

whereas our Government has provided an unbelievable amount of funding to those divisions, not only for capital projects but also for funding those divisions. I thank the member for the question. We do not want to be speculating on what will happen two or three years down the road. * (15:40) Mr. Schuler: Again, this minister and his Government never get the point. At no point in time did anybody talk about the quality. This is all about how long children have to sit on a bus and be bused somewhere to get the programming they had readily accessible before. The minister misses the point entirely.

To sit there and be so callous as to say, well, they have really good education and it is good quality. Yes, absolutely. Powerview has a great program, but 91 kilometres to have it accessed by students from Springfield, that is not reason- able, especially when you think it is 11 kilo- metres away. Yet, unless the minister is ready to answer some of the ques tions I have asked they

556 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 15, 2003 will be going 91 kilometres, but it will be more than that because the bus, of course, does not go straight 91 kilometres. The Government has proven that the whole amalgamation issue was about punishment poli- tics. They have gone through with it. I guess they could argue that it worked. The electorate gave them their majority. The kind of nasty politics that they ran. It worked for them. The children suffered. This is about transportation time. Rather than going 11 kilometres to Pierre- Elliott-Trudeau, they now go 91 kilometres to Powerview.

Instead of going 17 kilometres for vocational education at Murdoch Mackay, they now have to go at least 29 kilometres to Selkirk. It is about the busing. It is about all of those costs. Will the minister commit that he will continue to fund and ensure that the students in French immersion and vocational education continue to get access which is very close for them in River East Transcona and will he continue to fund them as compared to them having to go anywhere from an extra 20 to 70 kilometres one way every day to get the same education? Mr. Lemieux: I thank the member for the question.

There are two points I would like to make. Yes, we are committed to a funding at the rate of economic growth and will continue to do so. It will not be minus, minus, plus one, minus two, plus zero. What we will do as a govern- ment, we made a commitment to fund at the rate of economic growth, and all the school divisions certainly appreciate it. I am glad the member from Springfield admitted how difficult it was in the 1990s when children from Falcon Lake had to travel an hour and 20 minutes all the way to Steinbach to go to high school.

I do not want to be too political with regard to the answer, but these challenges lay in the 1990s with the previous government. They certainly are challen- ges for us as a government. Yes, it is a difficult one. No one likes to see their children be on the bus more than a half hour or 45 minutes. It is very difficult for children. When you start to get to Grade 9, maybe less so for children that are in high school, but it is still a challenge no matter what as a government that we continually face. Safety was an issue with regard to busing. We provided monies for strobe lights.

We are trying to assist on the safety end of busing. All of those issues are very important because we know that children will continue to bus. We cannot provide a bus for ev ery child that wants a ride less than a kilometre and a half away from their school. We are not going to be providing a bus for every child that wants a bus from a block away from their school. No. The Province of Manitoba cannot afford it. Let me get this straight. The Member for Springfield wants us to spend millions of dollars on new buses and add to the strain on the provincial purse strings. Is that correct? Mr.

Schuler: To the minister. What reality does this individual live in? What I am suggesting to the minister is save money. Rather than bus students 91 kilometres, bus them 11 kilometres. I am absolutely astounded at this minister who cannot get the fundamentals of math right. We are talking, rather than busing them 91 kilo- metres, let them be bused just 11 kilometres. The minister should not have turned down the math. He should educate himself. After all, he is the Education Minister. For how long, we do not know.

Rather than busing students 29 kilometres to Selkirk, let them be bused 17 kilometres to Murdoch Mackay. It is cheaper. Figure out the fundamental basic math that you save money this way, Minister. Instead of 91 kilometres, you bus them 11. It is far cheaper. The minister asked about Beausejour. I will give him the numbers for that. From Dugald to Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau, 11 kilometres. Dugald to Beausejour, 43 kilometres. Do the math, Minis- ter. It would be far cheaper to keep busing them 11 kilometres one way than 43 kilometres and much cheaper than going 91 kilometres.

That is what this issue is about and the minister should stop talking about 0.5 kilometres and 1.2 kilo- metres because he knows nothing about what he is talking about and he has proven so far that he has very little knowledge about his department. I would say shame on this minister. We are talking about saving a lot of kilo- metres. Try 80–11 kilometres as compared to 91. It is far cheaper going to Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau than going to Powerview. Far cheaper going to Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau than going to Beausejour. Should I give him the other ones? Murdoch

September 15, 2003 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 557 Mackay, 17 kilometres, Selkirk, 29. There is a considerable saving if they go to Murdoch Mackay. Yes, Minister, that is what I am uggesting. s Am I suggesting new buses, new bus routes? No, I am not, Minister. The buses exist right now, and they should continue to use them. So the minister should stop putting false infor- mation on the record. That is shameful what he is doing, trying to twist that somehow busing children 91 kilometres is cheaper than busing them 11 kilometres. The minister should have a little bit more responsibility. Mr.

Lemieux: First of all, I do not believe anyone is being bused 91 kilometres from Dugald to Powerview. Number two, it is all hypothetical. This member from Springfield is living in a hypothetical world. No one knows whether or not this agreement will be extended, whether or not people want to work, with all due respect to the member. No one knows whether or not people want to continue this agreement, whether or not they want to improve services themselves locally in Beausejour. The member is hung up on amalgamations and somehow that is such a terrible thing. It has not been.

The feedback we are getting is that there are many positive reasons for amalga- mation. Those board members are certainly anecdotally letting our people know this. Yes, there are some challenges, but that agreement ends in '05. The school board should be having that discussion. As the member suggested, may- be they are now discussing what they should be doing with regard to services. Those services took place long before amalgamation. Sending students to Selkirk, which Agassiz did. The con

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	38-1-06
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	38th 1st hansardpdf 06.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	50c7a0466afd24b287b5ce0b6b19582f0232d4f7

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