Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 32 (35th Legislature, 3rd Session)

35-3-32

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Third Session • Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 39-40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLI No. 32 ·1:30 p.m., WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18,1992 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty- Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERILLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CONN ERY, Edward CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R.

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

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

Johns Swan River PARTY Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP Liberal NDP PC PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC NDP PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

13 65 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, March 18,1992 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): I must inform the House of the unavoidable absence of Mr. Speaker and would ask, in accordance with the statutes, that the Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Dacquay) take the Chair. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Ms.

Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Deputy Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Laurene Myrnold, Kim Maksymyk, Caroline Rizkalla and others requesting the government show its strong comm itment to dealing with chil d abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. Mr. George Hlckes (Point Douglas): Madam Deputy Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Allison Dewar, Laurie Sutherland, Katie Sutherland and others requesting the government show its strong commitment to dealing with child abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. Ms.

Marianne Cerllll {Radisson): I beg to present the petition of Carole Cahill, Shannon Mason, Debra Delveaux and others requesting the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code to prevent the release of individuals where there is substantial likelihood of further family violence. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Madam Deputy Speaker {Louise Dacquay): have reviewed the petition of the honourable member, and it complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that: The bail review provisions in the Criminal Code of Canada currently set out that accused offenders, including those suspected of conjugal or family violence, be released unless it can be proven that the individual is a danger to society at large or it is likely that the accused person will not reappear in court; and The problem of conjugal and family violence is a matter of grave concern for all Canadians and requires a multifaceted approach to ensure that those at risk, particularly women and children, be protected from further harm.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code of Canada to permit the courts to prevent the release of individuals where it is shown that there is a substantial likelihood of fur ther con jugal or fam ily viole nc e being perpetrated. (Mr. Dewar) *** I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member, and it complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules.

Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT child abuse is a crime abhorred by all good citizens of our society, but nonetheless it exists in today's world; and It is the responsibility of the government to recognize and deal with this most vicious of crimes; and Programs like the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign raise public awareness and necessary funds to deal with crime; and The decision to terminate the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign will hamper the efforts of all good citizens to help abused children.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the government of Manitoba show a strong commitment to deal with Child Abuse by considering restoring the Fight Back Against Child Abuse campaign. (Ms. Barrett)

13 66 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 *** I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member, and it complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules.

Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? * (1 335) The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that: The bail review provisions in the Criminal Code of Canada currently set out that accused offenders, including those suspected of conjugal or family violence, be released unless it can be proven that the individual is a danger to society at large or it is likely that the accused person will not reappear in court; and The problem of conjugal and family violence is a matter of grave concern for all Canadians and requires a multifaceted approach to ensure that those at risk, particularly women and children, be protected from further harm.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code of Canada to permit the courts to prevent the release of individuals where it is shown that there is a substantial likelihood of fur ther conj ugal or fam ily violence being perpetrated. (Mr. Reid) I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member, and it complies with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read?

The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that: The bail review provisions in the Criminal Code of Canada currently set out that accused offenders, including those suspected of conjugal or family violence, be released unless it can be proven that the individual is a danger to society at large or it is likely that the accused person will not reappear in court; and The problem of conjugal and family violence is a matter of grave concern for all Canadians and requires a multifaceted approach to ensure that those at risk, particularly women and children, be protected from further harm.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the province of Manitoba may be pleased to request that the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) call upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Criminal Code of Canada to permit the courts to prevent the release of individuals where it is shown that there is a substantial likelihood of fu rther conj ugal or fam ily violenc e being perpetrated. (Mr.

Chomiak) Introduction of Guests Madam Deputy Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all members of the House to the public gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, from Victor Wyatt School, thirty Grade 4 students under the direction of Mr. Bell. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable memb er for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay). Also with us this afternoon are eighty-two Grade 9 students from the Sargent Park School, who are under the direction of Mr. Robert Forrester. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD North American Free Trade Agree ment Government Position Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Deputy Speaker, during the last provincial election-and dare I mention the Leaders' debate?-1 asked the Premier (Mr. Filmon) of the province a very, very serious question about free trade with Mexico and asked the Premier whether he was opposed to the free trade position, what is your position? The answer from the Premier at that time in the debate was, no, we are not going to support the free trade with Mexico.

Since that time we have seen the unconditional "now go to a conditional "maybe.w On countless times in this Chamber, we have been asking the government their position on not only the substance of the free trade agreement but the timing of the free trade agreement with Canada, United States and Mexico. In fact, I asked the Premier this question in his Estimates last spring. I would ask the Premier in light of the fact that the Prime Minister is now stating that they are on a very fast track for free trade with United States and

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 1 367 Mexico, and in light of the fact that the Prime Minister is even talking about dates as early as April of 1992, has the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) advised the federal government to put this on the slow track so that Canadians will have an idea of what is in the agreement, or has the Premier not phoned the Prime Minister to communicate our concern about the fast track that the Prime Minister is now taking with the President of the United States and the President of Mexico? * (1 340) Hon.

Gary Fllmon (Premier): Madam Deputy Speaker, if I were the Leader of the Opposition, I would not want to mention the last televised debate either. I repeat, at the time, in 1990, nothing was known of the proposal or of any potential proposal for a free trade agreement as to whether or not there was anything that was supportable or not supportable. Since then as information has come out, Manitoba has put its position clearly on the table and has written to the Honourable Michael Wilson indicating that we would not be able to support a free trade agreement unless six conditions were met.

Those six conditions were as follows: (1 ) Manitoba insists that the trilateral negotiations must not result in a renegotiation of the current Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement;

(2) Manitoba believes that Canada must seek assurances that under any free trade agreement, labour standards in Mexico will improve in line with Mexican prosperity and will be adequately enforced;

(3) Manitoba believes that negotiations between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico must encompass broad cover age of issues with respect to environmental standards;

(4) Manitoba calls upon the federal government to ensure that comprehensive and adequately funded adjustment measures be provided to ensure that Manitoba and Canada are equipp ed to capitaliz e on the opportunities provided by trade liberalization;

(5) Manitoba stresses the need for policies at all levels of government which reinforce the efforts and needs of Manitoba businesses in adjusting to trade liberalization within a globalized world market; and

(6) Manitoba urges the federal government to follow through on its commitment to involve provinces in developing the Canadian mandate and objectives and to implement full provincial participation throughout these negotiations. That is the clearest position that has been put forth by any provincial government in the country, and that is the position of the government of Manitoba. Mr. Doer: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) has given us no answer of whether he advised the Prime Minister to go on the fast track which is presently in existence now.

I guess we will just step aside like we have done before, and Mulroney will sign the free trade agreement, and then we will pull our six conditions out of the hat at the end of the day after it is all over. The Premier has stated that we have taken the strongest position of any other government In Canada. I would point out that he made no statement to the Prime Minister directly at the last First Ministers' meeting dealing with the economy.

I would also point out to the Premier that the Premier of Saskatchewan has said directly to the Prime Minister, in front of all Canadians, as far as the North American free trade negotiations are going on, the so-called Mexico round, Saskatchewan urges that they be shelved until the lasting impacts of the Canada-U.S.A. Free Trade Agreement become more clear. I would ask the Premier of Manitoba: Will he be taking a strong definitive position on the fast track that is now in existence at the economic First Ministers' meeting next week with the Prime Minister? Mr.

Fllmon: I will say to the Leader of the Opposition that he is jumping at media reportS and doing things with respect to things that are put in various speculative reports. I remind him that in response to these speculative reports, Trade Minister Michael Wilson has stated that, firstly, there is no deal yet and there will be no deal unless it is good for Canada. Secondly, the final agreement could well be very different from the speculation that is currently in the media. Finally, the reports that have been in the media have been based upon material that is both partial and out of date.

I suggest to him that the best position for us to be in is to state unequivocally the conditions that must be fulfilled before such an agreement is acceptable to Manitoba and the people of Manitoba. That is what we have done, and we have put it forward very clearly, not in political statements or knee-jerk reactions, but in very well-c onsidered and

13 68 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 well-presented concerns that must be met in order to be acceptable to us. North American Free Trade Agreement Government Study Tabling Request Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): The Premier did have an unequivocal position in the last election campaign during the debate, Madam Deputy Speaker. He now has a set of six conditions, but he cannot tell us whether he is in favour of a "fast track, slow track" or whether he has advised the Prime Minister on any track to follow. He quotes Michael Wilson.

This is the same person who told Canadians that the GSTwould be revenue neutral. Again, we see the Premier not taking a strong stand. They have the Georgetown draft. The provinces have the Dallas draft on trade, and they cannot tell us yet whether they think the Prime Minister should go ahead and initial this agreement or not in terms of a quick pace and whether he will take any stand at next week's First Ministers' meeting, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have a further question to the Premier.

In 1988 in this Chamber, the Premier stated on August 5, 1988, that free trade with the United States based on their empirical study would create between 1 0,000 and 15,000 new net jobs in Manitoba. Madam Deputy Speaker, I assume the Premier has again an empirical study on the free trade agreement with Mexico. He has a very, very expensive Economic Secretariat that he has put in place to give Manitobans that kind of empirical material. Will the Premier today table the study that his secretariat has done on the winners, losers and job opportunities with a North American free trade agreement? Hon.

Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Deputy Speaker, while we have drawn on the resources of some of the national studies that are being done on the Canada-U.S. Mexico free trade, the best resource that we have are the people of Manitoba and the people doing business in Manitoba. In the development of our position on this particular issue, we met at length with all of the central organizations. We met with labour unions.

We met with the academic members of our various universities and communities and helped utilize them in developing our policy, because they are the ones who have to deal with any change in a North American free trade agreement on a day-to-day basis in terms of doing business here in Manitoba. They have provided us with some of their concerns. It was based on those reviews and consultations that helped us formulate the position that we did in fact take and to attach the six conditions that were put in place to any support for North American free trade.

We will continue to work with the private sector in terms of meeting the concerns of Manitobans. * (1 345) Aboriginal Justice Inquiry Report Northern Court Services Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): My question is to the Minister of Justice. When government has virtually ig nored recommen dation s of the Abori ginal Justice Inquiry-so far its major actions had been two photo-opportunity press conferences featuring the Justice minister (Mr. McCrae) and the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey), hardly the sort of action that was promised when the report was handed down six months ago.

My question is for the Minister of Justice. Has he read the report yet and, if he has, does he reconcile the recommendations of the report with his plan to create a two-tier justice system, where the service in northern communities is even worse than it is already? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Deputy Speaker, if I understand the honourable member correctly, he was referring to a newspaper

article today, not naming some unnamed sources, and it relates to contr act negotiation discussions which are underway. I was contacted by the newspaper involved and declined to comment on the specifics of the issues that are the subject of collective bargaining. The honourable member knows better than to suggest that this government has ignored the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry recommendations. He knows also that we await with anticipation the participation of aboriginal leadership in discussions that will lead to implementation of real programs for real people in Manitoba. Mr. Harper: Madam Deputy Speaker, northerners expect a better system-

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 13 69 Madam Deputy Speaker: Question. Aboriginal Justice Inquiry Report Northern Court Services Mr. Eli Jah Harper (Rup ertsland) : My supplementary question is to the Minister of Northern Affairs. Has the Minister of Northern Affairs read the report? Does he disagree with the report in terms of court services in northern communities? Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Madam Deputy Speaker, the government has reviewed the report. We have established a process by which positive changes can be made on behalf of the aboriginal people.

As soon as the aboriginal people identify themselves to work on those working groups, action will be taken. Aboriginal Justice Inquiry Report Northern Court Services Mr. EliJah Harper (Rupertsland): Will the Minister of Northern Affairs answer this question? Aboriginal people are tired of being treated as second-class citizens. How can this government justify cuts when the northern justice system is creatin!;r8nd not only failing the people in the North? Will the proposed cuts not result in more guilty pleas and more people needlessly serving time in prison? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I have no idea what the honourable member is talking about, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do not see anything relating to cuts with respect to the delivery of justice services, the delivery of real services to real people. In fact, if the honourable member engages in discussion with me when we get to the review of the Estimates of my department, I would be happy to discuss the many, many aspects of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry to which this government is committing itself to move forward with aboriginal people in the future.

It would be nice, however, and we look forward to having the aboriginal leadership join us at the table so that we can together implement these things. Perhaps the honourable member can use whatever influence he has with the aboriginal leadership in this province to encourage them to join us at the table. • (1 350) School Division Boundary Review Cancellation Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Madam Deputy Speaker, we have been pointing out to this government since 1986 of a need to review school division boundaries, a review that has not been conducted effectively in this province for 40 years. Finally in the 1990 campaign, we got a commitment from the Premier that, yes, along with the revision to The City of Winnipeg Act, we would get a review of school division boundaries.

Can the Premier tell this House today why his government has deliberately backed down to their commitment to parents, children, trustees and the need for education in this province? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Madam Deputy Speaker, as was, I think explained and outlined quite adequately yesterday by the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs.

Vodrey), there are a number of issues th at are acti vely under consideration and under action by the minister and her department, many of which have varying effects on the delivery of education services throughout the province of Manitoba that need to have the time to be able to take effect and to be able to be dealt with by the various school divisions involved. Yes,l will openly and freely admit that the promise the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs) referred to was made during the election campaign. I made that promise believing that there was a need for a review.

Subsequently, as a result of the fact that we are dealing now with the new Education funding formula; we are dealing now with new Franco ph one governance struc ture to be implemented over the next while; also with respect to the High School Review implementation-a ll of those matters I have been persuaded by members of school boards in the educational community are matters that require adjustment, flexibility and response by the school community, the education community-now is not the time to further impose yet another potential major change on them.

This is a matter that ought to be put on the back burner at the present time. I believe that the Minister of Education made the right decision and the right policy decision on this matter. I am quite happy to accept it. Mrs. Carstalrs: Madam Deputy Speaker, the reasons why the minister has given for why it is not

13 70 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 the appropriate time was the review of The Public Schools Act, which has been going on now for a year, the Francophone schools governance issue, which has been going on now for two years, the implementation of the High School Review, which has been going on for three years, and the implementation of the new finance model which was proceeding prior to the last Speech from the Throne.

Can the Minister of Education or perhaps the Premier-because she was not in the cabinet at that time-e xplain why they made a commitment to review those boundaries on December 5, 1991 , when all of those things were at that point going on? • (1 355) Mr. Fllmon: Madam Deputy Speaker, as I said, those matters are underway. Those matters all require a great deal of time, energy and commitment on the part of not only members of the staff of the Minister of Education and the department, but school divisions throughout the pr ovince.

Teachers, resource people, administrators, school board members are all involved and engaged in the implementation of all these many things. They can only be spread so thin in terms of implementing these changes and after discussion-and I invite the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs.

Carstairs), rather than do as she normally does, which is to impose from on high her judgment on the people in the education community, every other community, I suggest to her that she do a little consultation with those people and find out whether or not they wanted to have yet another potential major change imposed upon them at the same time as they are coping with all of these other changes. I am convinced from my consultations and discussions that they did not at the present time. I invite her to once in a while get in touch with the people out there who have to do those things. Mrs.

Carstalrs: I will com pare my list of educational stakeholders whom I have talked to, to his list any day, and I will come out far ahead. School Division Boundary Review Impact Francophone Governance Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Madam Deput y Sp eak er, my question is to the Minister of Education. Since the review of school division boundaries will not take place, how does she believe that the issue of Francophone governance can be dealt with quickly and effectively in that it affects a number of school divisions? Hon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training) : Madam Dep uty Spe aker, in answering that question, I would like to say that the matters are in fact two separate matters. In consultation with the educational stakeholders, with school divisions and with parents who have let us know the pressure at the moment on the educational system, this government listened to them, and we said: I believe you. The issue of Francophone governance, Madam Deputy Speaker, we are pleased to be moving ahead with in a very active way, and there will be an announcement soon regarding implementation.

Core Area lniUatlve Renewal Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): My question is for the Minister of Urban Affairs. Last June the minister received federal proposals for a new Core Area Initiative. He was, he said, hopeful, and he said the province and the federal government were this close. Some weeks ago now, he received a revised proposal from the federal government. It seems clear now that it is this government which is dragging its heals on the future of the core area. My question for the minister is: Will he tell the House exactly what the obstacles are in his view?

Why is his government choosing to stand in the way of such significant programs? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs) : Madam Deputy Speak er, I can advise my honourable friend, as I have on a number of occasions, that we are in the process of negotiating with our two partners in this matter. The fact of the matter is, though, Madam Deputy Speaker, that while we are reasonably close, I think, to an agreement, we are not prepared to sign an agreement at any cost for the sake of signing an agreement.

We want to have the best possible agreement, and they will be the first ones to criticize if we signed an agreement that was not the best possible agreement. We will continue to work toward that end. I am hopeful that within a short per iod of time, we will ha ve sig nificant announcements to make.

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITO BA 13 71 Ms. Friesen: Could the minister then tell the House, give us a time table, when is he prepared to make a decision, so that the remaining employees in the Core Area Initiative can stop packing their bags? Will he in sum manage this transition in a responsible and appropriate way? Mr. Ernst: Madam Deputy Speaker, the management of the Core Area offices, as a matter of fact, has been managed in a most responsible way. We are not carrying on with large employee groups that have nought to do, whose jobs have been completed.

We are keeping a small staff there to ensure ongoing programs are looked after. We have taken the initiative with respect to the core area immigration training programs, that they will in fact be kept on as skeleton staff. They will be kept on for the next two months in anticipation of a new agreement. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is being well managed. Ms. Friesen: Madam Deputy Speaker, could the minister then tell the House in light of the Jess than spectacular funding that we have seen for Core Area Initiative in the past, what level of funding is he proposing for the next Core Area? Mr.

Ernst: Madam Deputy Speaker, almost $200 million of taxpayers' money has been spent in the core of Winnipeg over the last 1 0 years. That is a spectacular amount of money. The fact of the matter is at the moment we are in negoti ations with respect to a subsequent agreement. That agreement, as I have said on a number of occasions, is under consideration at the moment. As soon as we have finalized that, I will be pleased to advise the House. • (1 400) Human Resources Opportunity Centre Closure Mr.

Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Deputy Speaker, in the last budget, Selkirk was hit hard by this government when it announced the closure of the School of Psychiatric Nursing without any consultation. Now we find in this budget Selkirk is the only community to lose its Human Resources Opportunity Centre; again, no consultation. My question is to the Minister of Family Services. What criteria did this minister use besides an electoral map when he made the wrong decision to close this centre? Hon.

Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Madam Deputy Speaker, from time to time, we hear from opposition members the need to evaluate and look at training programs to assist people who are seeking employment. We have some successful programs that I could tell you about in that area. The Single Parent Job Access Program is one I would speak of that has graduated a number of people into the work force. We also have the Gateway program which assists young people in particular in retraining at a number of areas to get into the work force.

Simply, besides adding programs-and we have referred to the Partners with Youth program-we also have to evaluate the programs that we have and look at ones that are not as successful as other ones and reprioritize some of our spending and some of our initiatives in that area. One of the decisions we have made in this budget is to look at the training plant in Selkirk. We feel that we can offer that service through the HROCs in Winnipeg and Gimli and, at the same time, have those people serviced in those areas and also put in place some new programs that we will be announcing in the not too distant future. Mr.

Dewar: Everything is going to Gimli, Madam Deputy Speaker. Service Expansion Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Will the minister keep the Selkirk centre open, in fact expand services there, so we have some more trained workers in this province and fewer unemployed? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Madam Deputy Speaker, again we hear opposition members asking for expanded services, expanded expenditures.

When we looked at the pretend-budget that was brought down last Tuesday, it called for only 5 percent additional expenditures in Family Services, almost 4 percent short of what our budget has in it. That $20 million that they would not spend, I challenged the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) yesterday to Jet us know where they would not spend that money, whether they would take it out of training programs or whether they would take it out of daycare. I am sure the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) would not hear of that. I suspect that there were a number of members

13 72 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 concerned in putting that budget together, and we have far, far surpassed the calls for spending in Family Services. Closure Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk) : Will this minister table in the House any studies which demonstrate that Gimli is more cost effective than Selkirk? Hon.

Harold Gllle shammer (Minister of Family Services) : Madam Deputy Speaker, we have a number of effective programs, and I reference the Single Parent Job Access Program. [interjection] I see a former Minister of Education laughing at the thought that there are effective programs in training people. I reference that program and the Gateway program. We do have human resource centres in a number of areas of the province. We are going to add new resources to job training, and we are reprioritizing some of the funding that we have in this area. Manitoba Heritage Foundation Granting Authority Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Deputy Speaker, this government and in particular the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship do not support, apparently, volunteer organizations. We need to look atthis particular minister when she took away the funding capabilities of the MIC and gave them to a politically appointed board. Madam Deputy Speaker, while we were listening to the budget last week, the deputy minister met with the Heritage federation, and once again this government has chosen to take away from the volunteers the funding or the granting authority from the organization.

My question to the minister is: Can the minister tell this House why the granting authority has been taken away from the Heritage federation? Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I will attempt to answer that question for the critic from the second opposition party and indicate that, in fact, the heritage community will be served in a very reasonable and good way as a result of the changes that were made. There has been no reduction in the amount of funding to the heritage community as a result of the decision.

In fact, there may be more dollars available, because the money that will be distributed will not go as much toward administrative costs but will go to the community organizations who need the money most. Volunteer Board Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Deputy Speaker, why did the minister not sit down with the federation and discuss the problems that she had with their operations and suggest options for them to reform instead of simply firing the volunteers? If she is using the administration costs, she entered into the agreement with the federation and knew full well what the administration costs were.

You cannot use that, Madam Deputy Speaker- Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Does the member have a question? Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizen ship) : Madam Deputy Speaker, I realize full well that there are many, many volunteers within the heritage community and within all communities who dedicate and commit their time to serving their interests and their needs, so I do nothing but com mend volu nteers for their contribution. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have on occasion met with the Heritage federation as I have met with the entire heritage community.

We believe that the process that will be put in place to deliver funding to the heritage community will indeed serve the community well and be administratively less costly. Mr. Lamoureux: The question quite simply to the minister is: Why does she not trust the volunteers in administering this program? If the administration is the argument that she is basing the cutting out of this particular organization of the volunteers, why does she not just simply sit down with these volu nteers and work out some sort of an agreement- Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Mrs.

Mitchelson: Madam Deputy Speaker, I know that the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has been the critic for Culture, Heritage and Citizenship for several years now, and I believe this is the first time he has ever asked a question on Heritage in this House. I do not think he spent much time on Heritage issues through the Estimates process either. So I would encourage him, like I know the critic from the NDP party does, to meet on occasion with members of the heritage community to attempt to understand the community and the needs of the

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 73 community, and then maybe he can ask some really informed questions. Vegetable Producing Industry U.S. Inspections Mr. Edward Connery (Portage Ia Prairie): My question is to the Minister of Agriculture. Manitoba is a leader in Canada in high-quality vegetable production. Distributors in the United States want our produce, but importers and exporters alike are harassed by the United States Food and Drug Administration by putting loads under detention while they do residue testing.

This unfair trade practice ties up space in the wholesalers' coolers and ties up this fresh product. They have never found a load unacceptable in their testing. Can the minister inform this Legislature what action he has taken as the federal government has taken none? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Deputy Speaker, very clearly this is a very significant issue for the vegetable industry. Clearly what the United States is doing is, in my mind, putting in place nontariff trade barriers. The normal rate of inspection of vegetable loads going into the United States is 1 percent.

We found evidence in the last couple of months that they are inspecting as many as 25 percent of the loads going into the Minneapolis market in particular. It seems that the same trade harassment does not occur for going to the Texas market or Chicago. * (141 0) I have sent a letter to the federal Minister of T rade back in August of last year. My officials met with American officials in October of last year.

I have again-because probably have to say the increased rate of inspections in the last two months- sent another letter this month asking the federal minister to talk to his counterparts in the United States to be sure that we are not being harassed in this process, although I would say, in my opinion, we are being harassed in the process of the rate of inspections applied to Manit oba pro duce going to the Minneapolis market. Federal Day Haul Worker Program Mr. Edward Connery (Portage Ia Prairie): My question, Madam Deputy Speaker, is to the same minister.

The federal government is phasing out its assistance for the day haul of Manitoba workers. The vegetable growers employ large numbers of workers from local reserves. If this occurs, we will have inadequate workers and at the same time aborigi nal people will be depr ived of their employment. Will the minister vigorously lobby the federal government to reinstate this program fully? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Deputy Speaker, yes. North American Free Trade Agreement Impact Agricultural Industry Mr. Edward Connery (Portage Ia Prairie): My last question, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Free trade with Mexico could be a disaster for Manitoba and Canada. Manitoba exports very little agricultural produce but imports of cheap-labour-produced vegetables could have a serious negative impact on Manitobans- Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Does the honourable member have a supplementary question? Mr. Connery: -and especially aboriginal people. Will the minister forcefully put forth Manitoba's concerns in regard to a free trade agreement with Mexico? Hon.

Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Deputy Speaker, with regard to the Mexico market, it is important for those who export canola, those who export breeding stock, particularly bulls, sometimes for swine. About less than 1 percent of our export market exists in Mexico, and we import less than 1 percent of our agricultural commodities from Mexico. It is a very small market. I will take the member's concerns forward to any of the discussions I am involved in.

I would also like to remind members of this House that the United States market has grown very, very significantly for Manitoba agricultural exports. In 19 87, we were exporting 14 percent of Manitoba agricultural exports to the United States. It is now 32 percent. It is the highest market for us in the whole world. Second place at 12 percent is China. Third place is the old U.S.S.R. at 12 percent. The United States is the big market, and that is what we want to improve our position with in regard to the agreement we have in place.

13 74 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 Broadway House Closure Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Deputy Speaker, last week the staff and residents of Broadway House, a provincially operated transition home for women with mental disabilities, were notified that this facility will be closed May 31 , with a loss of seven jobs.

Did the Minister of Family Services consult with community groups such as the Association for Community Living or the Residential Coalition of Service Providers before he closed Broadway House, or was it closed, as the staff of Broadway House was notified, to satisfy the Treasury Board req uir ements of decre ased spending and decreased services? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Madam Deputy Speaker, the member references decreased spending and decreased services.

I would point out to her that this department has the highest increase in spending of any department across government, some 8.7 percent increase in our budget. [interjection] Well, the member wants to talk about social allowances. We have brought in some very innovative changes, greater reforms than the previous NDP government ever brought in. We created a new program for the disabled. We brought up the liquid assets levels, initiatives that my friend in the NDP has brought forward frequently. There have been a tremendous number of reforms brought forward.

As far as working with the community to provide programming for mentally handicapped people, we have had a number of working groups. We have some initiatives we are going to be bringing forward. We have major legislation that we are bringing forward that I have shared with the critics of the other two parties. We have some very innovative things that are happening in that area. Employees' Status Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Deputy Speaker, what is the status of the seven staff at Broadway House, several of whom who have worked at that facility for over 1 0 years? Hon.

Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure the member listened very carefully to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik) when he discussed some of the positions that were being removed from government, and there is a process in place that is taking place at this time. I had the privilege of meeting with the Minister of Labour and members of the MGEA just yesterday to talk about those issues. The honourable Minister of Highways (Mr. Driedger) was in attendance.

There seemed to be an understanding of the process and a feeling that the process was working and that some substantial changes had taken place which provided employment for people who occupied some of those positions. Alternate Facilities Ms.

Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Deputy Speaker, since the minister did not consult with community groups beforehand and since those seven people will be laid off, how can the minister assure the residents of Broadway House, the service providers in the community, that there actually will be adequate appropriate facilities for these women so they can live quality lives, or is it, as we know is the fact, that this facility was closed down and those people wer� Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon.

Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Madam Deputy Speaker, I can assure the member and the House that the residents will be well taken care of in other facilities. Certainly the providing of services is uppermost in our minds in the department to be sure that appropriate services are provided for those people. Co-operative Housing Federal Program Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Deputy Speaker, co-operative housing provides affordable housing and a sense of community for 65,000 households in Canada.

In December 1991 , the federal government made their Co-op Housing Program a permanent program, yet in February in their budget they cut it completely in terms of funding. Can the Minister of Housing tell us if he has communicated with the federal Minister of Housing to protest this arbitrary decision which will mean fewer housing starts in Manitoba and fewer jobs in Manitoba?

March 18 , 19 92 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 75 Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Yes, Madam Deputy Speaker. Mr. Martindale: I would hope that the minister would share his communication with me. Constitutional Issues Housing Responsibility Mr.

Doug Martindale (Burrows): Can the Minister of Housing tell us what the policy of the provincial government is regarding the federal government's constitutional proposal to devolve responsibility for housing exclusively to the provinces, a proposal which is opposed by the Canadian Home Builders' Association, the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada and the Canadian Housing and Renewal Association? Hon.

Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Madam Deputy Speaker, the whole question of a strong central government, the fact that we need the dollars represented by a strong central government for programs such as this is one that our government has supported. We continue to support that. Certainly we do not want to see the federal go vernment of fl oad a pr ogra m such as housing-w here they pay currently 75 percent approximately of the subsidy costs of those housing units-onto the provinces at all, Madam Deputy Speaker.

We have seen all too often in the past where programs such as that, while with great promises in the beginning and appropriate dollar backup for that, seemed to dwindle over a period of time. It is something that I do not think we want to support at all. •

(1420) Madam Deputy Speaker: Time for Question Period has expired. Nonpolitical Statement Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): May I ask leave of the House to make a nonpolitical statement? Madam Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for Rupertsland have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Madam Deputy Speaker: Leave. Leave has been granted. Mr. Harper: Yesterday, South Africa took one small step towards granting the majority of its population the right to vote and the right to be treated as full citizens in their own country.

This marks a positive move not just for the citizens of South Africa, but for human rights elsewhere. Aboriginal people , whether they live in Africa or other continents, are rightly celebrating this small step forward. Canadians should not feel smug about this. The record of the country has not been much better. We look forward to all South Africans being treated equally. ORDERS OF THE DAY BUDGET DEBATE Madam Deputy Speaker: To resume adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness), standing in the name of the honourable member for Rossmere, who has 11 minutes remaining. Mr. Harold Neufeld (Rossmere): Madam Deputy Speaker, I am looking up in the gallery. I am sure Barb Biggar is up there some place, and I am sure she is listening. I am also sorry that the president of the MGEA left before I had a chance to speak because, if time permits, I have a few suggestions for him. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am one of the few people in here who can remember World War II. I was 11 years old when the war started and 17 years old when it finished.

I can recall the way people co-operated, the way that people worked together. There was no differential between races. There was no differential between sexes. Everybody worked together. Those who were too young to buy War Savings bonds bought War Savings Stamps. Women knit socks. Everybody worked for a common goal. We have a common goal today. We have a war. It is not as great as the one that we had, but we have a war. That is a deteriorating economy, and we should work together. For some reason or other we pull apart and everyone goes their own way. Everybody pulls at a piece of the government.

Everybody wants more than their share. Madam Dep uty Speaker, the lawyers are threatening to strike. Strike for what? Because they cannot get enough money, up to $200,000, they take out of this economy per lawyer-t hat is a maximum-and they want to strike. Ali i can say is, is that all it takes? Let us give them less, and they may strike.

13 76 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 Our justice system is suffering from the lawyers who go to the courts for retrials and appeals. I believe in justice, but the legal system is no longer just. What difference does it make how evidence is obtained to whether a person is guilty or not? What difference does it make whether or not he or she have had their rights read to whether he is guilty or not? Guilt is not a matter of what the police officer has done to get the evidence or how he has been arrested-{inte�ection] If you have had your house broken into, is he guilty or is he not guilty?

I do believe that a little common sense in the justice system would go a long way. I think that some of the decisions which are handed down qu alify those who make the dec isions for handicapped parking. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me talk a little bit about what I think some of the causes of the recession have been. The excesses of the '80s is a big cause. What were those excesses? Leverage buy-outs was one of them. Too many of them; too much money was lent with too little security and too many S & Ls went broke.

Too much money was spent on greed and not enough money was spent on research, not enough money was spent on modernizing equipment. Those were some of the problems. The Boeskys, the Mil kens of the '80s are causing us a problem today. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have another problem with the '80s. That was the era in which more and more industry came to government for grants. Why did they ask for grants? They asked for grants because they were creating jobs. Madam Deputy Speaker, they were creating jobs for their own enrichment. They are not creating jobs for government and they should not come to government.

Government should be there to help them and create a climate, and I challenge the industry to go out and create jobs and to expand their businesses, not neccesarily with government help but with government help insofar as creating a climate is concerned. I have no time for those who believe that government is the answer to every one of their problems, and that has been the case all too often. I can talk about the help that has been given to the Winnipeg Jets. I very much oppose the help that is being given the Winnipeg Jets.

I was not at cabinet the day this was decided upon, but I find it obscene to give a grant not only to cover the losses but to give someone a profit on a phantom investment. That is what we have done, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do believe that industry has to take its share of the blame for what has happened to us in the '90s. I think unions and labour have to take their share of the blame. Industry should have, in many cases, denied the wage increases that were given. Labour should not have asked for those wage increases. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have to look forward. How do we get out of the dilemma we are in?

I suggest to you that we work together-labour, industry and government. It is up to government to ensure that labour and industry work together co-operatively. It is up to government to bang heads together if they do not. It is up to government to ensure that its residents are properly looked after. It is up to government to make sure that the industry properly looks after their workers. It is up to government to ensure that industry carries on in a manner that is going to make Manitoba more progressive, that is going to make Manitoba wealthy and that is going to make Manitoba a good place for us to live.

Industry is not alone in that. Labour has to take its share of the blame as well. Labour has been greedy and industry has been greedy. Let us stop the greed and let us look ahead. Let us look ahead and see what we can do to make Manitoba a better place. Do not ask government for help at every tum. Do not say to government, you cannot layoff. Do not say to government, you have to pay more. Do not say to government you need more grants for this or that charity of your own particular choice. There are too many self-interest groups that are working for purposes which often seem only to enrich their own lives.

I become upset when I see a headline like this, unmarried with taxes, unmarried couples will pay millions more. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, they have been getting away with it for years. They want all the benefits given to those who are married, like health benefits, like pension benefits, but do not want to pay the same amount that married people pay. That is the kind of reporting we get in our papers today, totally false. There was a time-how much time have I got left?--{interjection) Madam Deputy Speaker, while I was on vacation a month ago I was watching a talk show and on the talk show was a

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 n lieutenant-commander of the U.S. Navy. He was a man about in his late 30s. He was black. He was out preaching to the young people of the United States that they should get up and work and not ask for government help. He said that if you want an education, go work for your education. Work hard and you will get a 3.8 and 4.0 grade point average, and you will get bursaries and you will get scholarships, and if you cannot get a 3.8 and 4.0 grade point average, go out to McDonald's and get a job, and you will get an education.

Do not expect someone else to do it for you. A phone call came in and the individual spoke of African Ameri cans, and the lieutenant-commander cut her off right away and said, I am tired of all the names that I have been called in the past. He says, I have been called a Negro, I have been called black, I have been called coloured, I have been an Afro-American and an African American. He said, I am none of those things, I am an American. If we could say that in this country, if we could say that in this province- ! am a Canadian-but we do not. •

(1430) Madam Deputy Speaker, when I first went on the job market, I could not call myself a Canadian. I insisted I was a Canadian and they would then ask, do you speak any other language, and I admitted I spoke German, and they would then either discard me or tell me to wait for a phone call. Now we have gone full circle. Now we are again to the point where we are not Canadians. We are some kind of Canadians, but not Canadians.

I was told that I would have to work harder than anybody else because I was not Anglo-Saxon, when I finally did get a job, and the person who told me that had just retired from the army as a major. He came around from the back of his desk, and he shook my hand and he said, Harold, good luck. That is the advice I give to those of you who think you are being discriminated against-work harder. I can tell you it works. I became a chartered accountant because I worked hard. I have been president of the Manitoba Institute of Chartered Accountants and past governor of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants.

That is not bragging. That is fact. I got that because I listened to the major who told me, because you are German, you will have to work harder, and I respect that man to this day. I give you that advice, and I hope you will follow it, and let us forget about the fact that we are different nationalities. Let us forget about the fact that we are different colours or different sexes. Let us remember only that we are Canadians, and we have a common goal. We have a common goal that Manitoba must improve. Manitoba must be best and let us stop jabbing at one another and let us work together.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank you. Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome the opportunity of rising in this debate. I cannot help but, at the onset, to reflect on some of the comments of the member for Rossmere that I have heard in these few moments this afternoon in the Chamber. I unfortunately did not have the opportunity to listen to all of his comments from his previous comments yesterday, but they certainly are indicative of the rather independent spirit the member has exhibited as a member of that side of the government.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I would hope that he would take part of his message to his own caucus colleagues, because when he talks about grants to industries and grants to governments, members on that side of the House have instituted a process of providing grants on an unparalleled training, on an unparalleled scale to private companies to provide training on a private basis. As they have done that, they have cut back the public components, the public education system, something that has been held dear and close to the hearts of all Manitobans.

As they cut back the public system, and something all Manitobans generally have held to be important, they have provided grants and initiatives to private industry to do private training. Madam Deputy Speaker, in a consultation paper prepared by the federal government, Learning Well, Living Well, the federal government says, and I quote: A 1987 survey indicates that only one-third of employers provide formal training for employees ranging from 27 percent of small firms to 92 percent of large companies.

What is happening, Madam Deputy Speaker, is not only are we subsidizing the training for these firms, now we are resubsidizing, we are double subsidizing these private firms to provide the training that they have not provided. That is one of the major spending initiatives of this government in terms of they have talked about initiatives for private

13 78 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 training, and that is outright grants to private companies, something that this member says in theory that he is so opposed to. They are providing those grants at the expense of the public education system. They are providing to private companies like Success/Angus, which members on that side are quite familiar with, that are doing very well, thank you, charging $5,000 for a course that has been cut from Red River that used to cost $500.

What does that do to the poor student or the single parent who seeks a job and who is looking for that retraining and who is working as hard as the member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld) says? What does that do to that student who has to pay $5,000 now as opposed to $500 last year? I ask the member for Rossmere to take that into consideration when he talks about grants and initiatives to companies and what government should be doing and what government should not be doing, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I would hope that he would take the same attitude with members of his own caucus as he takes in his discussions with members of our House in his Budget Debate. Overall, I have spent some time trying to put this budget into some kind of a perspective, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have read past budgets, and I have looked at kind of the history of the approach of budgets. I guess the best and most appropriate term or view that I could come up with to describe this government and this budget is "unleadership, w that this budget and this government is a classic example of unleadership.

The budget can only be looked at in the context of the previous five budgets of this administration and, in particular, the budgets since the last election. At the onset I would like to indicate that I recognize that there is a worldwide recession, but this province, the province that I grew up in, the province that I have lived in, the province that I am raising my family in, Madam Deputy Speaker, used to be in the middle of the pack in terms of the Canadian context. It used to be at the middle level, not below, not above, but generally in the middle of the pack. Now we have fallen far, far behind.

One of the reasons we have fallen far behind is because of policies initiated by this government. Let me cite some statistical evidence to indicate why, to indicate my point, Madam Deputy Speaker. Rrstly, in economic growth between 1990 to '91 we have fallen from fifth to tenth. Dead last. In employment growth, between 1990 to 1991 , we have gone from fifth to eighth. In population, net interprovincial migration, we have gone from seventh in 1990 to eighth. In urban housing starts, we were at eighth-no thing to be proud about-in 1990, now we have dropped to ninth.

In building permits we have gone from seventh to eighth. In manufacturing shipments we were at sixth in 1990, and we have dropped to the Tory level, No. 10. In investment, we were around the middle of the pack in 1990. We have dropped to near-Tory levels, eight out of 1 0. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is quite clear that the legacy of a federal Tory government, a worldwide recession and a provincial Tory government have resulted in Manitobans seriously feeling, far more than they had to, the effects of this very serious recession.

I want to relate a few individual instances in my own constituency to try to outline for members opposite the effect of these policies and the effect of these initiatives, unleadership, this lack of leadership on the part of members opposite and what it has done in my own constituency. In the last month or two there have been two constituents I have dealt with who have in fact lost their homes-foreclosure. One was a working mother who lost her job, lived in the house for eight years. She lost her home-foreclosure.

Another was an individual who was on workers' compensation who was cut off, and he also lost his home. The families were put out of the house and were forced to seek rental accommodations somewhere else as a result of foreclosures. I have seen individuals who should qualify for home care who have had it cut off. I have an individual in my constituency who talks to me regularly who is a double amputee, and he cannot get home care despite the claims of the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) of the expanded home care budget.

What the Minister of Health fails to note, there is an expanded demand out there as demographics change. I walked up, several weeks ago, to the door of a home of a fellow who had lost his job that morning. It was not last week, it was not two weeks ago. Can you imagine the effect of walking to a door on a sunny morning, and the fellow coming to the door

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 79 and almost being tearful and saying, oh, I have just lost my job. Every single week, when I go door knocking, there is not a street in my constituency where I do not encounter individuals who are unemployed, who have lost their jobs. These are individuals who have worked for a lifetime. In the old days, these are individuals-let us by way of example, let me just for illustration-these individuals, who, if the plant would have shut down at CN or the job would have cut back at CN, they would have gone to CP, something like that.

Well, as our bases shut, Madam Deputy Speaker, they do not have these options, and as the effect of these policies in the worldwide recession has been felt, these options have been closed on them. • (1 440) Madam Deputy Speaker, since the Finance minister (Mr. Manness) is present, I should point out about three weeks ago on the doorstep a woman who said to me: Can you not tell the government, can they not see in front of their faces what is happening in this economy? Can they not put two and two together? Do they not know what is happening out here? So I pass it on to the government.

Do you not know what is happening out there? An Honourable Member : How many new jobs are created in your constituency by this budget? Mr. Chomlak: The member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) asked how many news jobs are created as a result of this budget. I dare say, there have probably been jobs lost as a result of this budget in my constituency. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have been on the doorstep and I have talked to hundreds, literally thousands of constituents. One of the interesting trends that I have noticed is the number of adult children that are now being forced to stay at home.

As I indicated earlier, on every single street in my constituency there are unemployed. Madam Deputy Speaker, over and over again, I hear about the scourge of taxes and what effect that has had on individuals. You know, the one touchstone that this government always returns to and comes back to, the one complete and utter inaccuracy that the government often refers to is the question of taxation. I want to quote from the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) in his 1991 budget, and I am quoting from the minister's address, page 7 where he says, quote, "We reject the dishonesty inherent in the federal approach to health and higher education financing-repeated, unilateral reductions to transfers," etcetera. "We reject the dishonesty inherent." Madam Deputy Speaker, we on this side of the House, we reject the dishonesty inherent in the provincial government offloading, the offloading of taxes, the inherent dishonesty, to use the words of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), in dealing with his federal counterparts.

We reject that and this government has done that over and over again. Madam Deputy Speaker, the former Minister of Education advised on the record in this House last year that the education support level, the local property taxes for the education portion of property taxes in this province increased by 1 0 percent last year alone. That is following, I suspect, nearly double-digit increases the year before and nearly double-digit increases the year before. That is the offloading. That is the dishonesty that this Finance minister (Mr. Manness) accused the federal government of doing.

The very same thing is happening at the local level. I am only speaking, when I talked about the 10 percent rate, about the education portion, the special levy, which is the local level that is raised. Madam Deputy Speaker, I cannot understand the near hypocrisy of this government and its failure to recognize what its policies are doing in terms of the offload and the movemen t of taxes from the provincial level to the local level. If this government was true to its word, it would simply state that fact.

It would make it very clear instead of offloading and then ducking the responsibility, and then, when school boards and municipalities and divisions come back to the government, saying we are not responsible for it. I will use the words again of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), this inherently dishonest approach. Madam Deputy Speaker, this lack of leadership, this careening back and forth, I have been trying to get a fix on this provincial government in the last five budgets. One of my approaches is to put it into a phase, into a chronology.

We have the '88 to '90 period, when we had a minority Tory government. Now, at that point we had a government that was always in potential of dropping, and then we saw the sort of classic Manitoba mold of a government, a

13 80 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 somewhat responsive, somewhat progressive government. There is no question that that government was far more responsive and far more progressive than what we have today, certainly. So we have that first phase, and that was political expediency totally. The members of the caucus that are far more idealistic on that side of the House were kept in check. Then we had the 1990 election, the man-in-the boat election, and we saw the real government.

We saw the emergence of the real Tory government, and that is when we saw, as reflected by the memo that was sent out by the Tory fund raisers to deal with the hidden agenda of the Tory party, that was a slash-and-cut Tory government. That was the one where the Minister of Finance was let lo ose, and the ideolog ues in the Conservative party were let loose to do the kinds of things that Tories love to do best, where they can emulate their federal cousins and their federal counterparts, and do what Tories do best. I will at least give them credit for consistency. The Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) has been consistent in that policy. Although his ascendancy was somewhat in wane between '88 to '90 because of the fact that he was held in check by a minority government, once 1990 came through, bango, that was it. That was their chance to do it. Now, what has occurred as a result of that is a sort of flip-flop. Now they are uncertain. The public out there has said, hey, wait a minute. We do not like this Tory government. We do not like this mean spirit. We do not like this lack of any kind of government, the stand-aside government, this lack-of-initiative government. We do not like a lot of these cuts.

We do not like what we see. So we have seen this government go from a sort of a moderate approach, to slash-and-cut, to now unleadership; they have sort of backed off; they kind of do not know what to do. You know, there is something quite illustrative, and I just want to point this out, of the government's approach, and that is to deal with the High School Bursary Program.

When the High School Bursary Program was cut in the last budget, and we raised it on this side of the House, we raised it amidst guffaws and amidst groans and laughing from members on the opposite side of the House-you know, this is our budget, this is our cut-and-slash budget. They laughed when we raised these concerns. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) But you know what, when we filled up our caucus room with people who were suffering the effects of this High School Bursary cut, all of a sudden the laugh ter turned .

When we called press conferences, when the media was alerted, when the Minister of Education admitted that he had made a mistake, when the Minister of Education admitted he had not consulted with the Minister of Family Services in the cutback on the High School Bursary Program, all of a sudden the laughter turned to seriousness, and the government sat in their cabinet room, and they looked around the table, and they said, hey, where is Mike? Where are our latest polls? They looked around and they said, now what are we going to do? They looked around and they saw that there was a reaction.

They had thought that they could get away with this cut. They saw that they could get away with the slashing of the High School Bursary Program like they thought they could get away with the cut to English as a Second Language, but we did not let them do that. I should not take credit for it, we should not take credit for it. It was the people of the province who were affected. It was those students who came to us, it was they who managed, who forced this government to back down.

Nothing was more illustrative than the fact that we had a press conference at ten o'clock in the morning and at 11: 30 that very same day, all of a sudden, the minister was reinstating a portion of the program. I am thankful that he listened, and actually I will give them credit for that, but that is illustrative of this careening government, careening from side to side or from place to place. While I am on it, let me talk about the school boundaries review introduced with great fanfare in two separate budgets. A strong comm itment of the member for Roblin-Russell (Mr. Derkach), the minister.

He used to chastise the former Minister of Education this side for not having the political will and the political courage to push it through, but by gosh he was going to push it through. • (14 50) Mr. Acting Speaker, the government had the support of all three parties to do a review. There was no question. There were resolutions that came

March 18 , 19 92 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 81 by in this House. There was an amendment to The Public Schools Act last session that dealt with the boundaries review. There was no question that members were in agreement that some kind of review could take place, but what kind of review would take place?

That is what caused this government great difficulty for when it was leaked out, for when it became public that what this government intended to do would be to slash school boundaries in the city of Winnipeg without consultation, to postpone elections of all things, because they could not get their act together. When that came about, when the public heard that this government was going to undemocratically postpone elections, when the public heard that this government was going to slash boundaries and move them about without consultation, then the chick ens came home to roost .

Then this government stepped back and said, oh, my gosh, have we got ourselves in a political-now, had they proceeded under a proper agenda, perhaps the matter could have been dealt with, but it was already too late. Already the communities out there were alarmed, already the public was up in arms. What was this government going to do? Were they going to cut the size again and see salaries dou ble ? Were they going to really save efficiencies? What was this government doing? When the government discovered that they had bungled this great initiative of the former Minister of Education, they backed off.

Frankly, given the boundaries review that they were going to implement, I would rather see no boundaries review. We made that quite clear. Given what we knew that this government was going to do, when we saw that, we said no way we could support that kind of lack of direction, lack of consultation, lack of basic democratic values. So I can only say that we have moved from one phase to another phase to another phase, and now we have a government that is sort of careening back and forth. The analogy I have is a car that is out of control, and everyone is jumping for the steering wheel.

For a while, it was the Premier (Mr. Filmon) who had his hand on the steering wheel from '88-90. There were a few people backing him up, and there was Mike in there, and they were just careening along. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) was reaching over, and they said, no wait, wait till 1990, wait till the election, then Clayton you can have control.of the car. You take care of the steering wheel, it is.all yours. Nineteen-ninety came, Clayton jumped in there, and all of his Tory- The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laurendeau): Or der, please.

I would like to remind the honourable member that all honourable members shall be nameless. Mr. Chomlak: I apolo gize. The Min ister of Finance (Mr. Manness) jumped in there, got control of that steering wheel, Mr. Acting Speaker, and he took off with that car. He took off with that car so fast he left some of his Tory members behind scratching their heads saying, where is this car going? Then we heard the response from the public, and now they are all trying to jump back in and take control of that car and trying to steer it. That is why it is kind of unleadership.

They are trying to get some control on that car. So we see this change in direction, this change in initiative and this flip-flop on policy, some of which we agree with, frankly, because they should have done it in the first place, and some of it which we do not agree with, Mr. Acting Speaker. That is why they sort of try and get the car back into the groove, back to those sort of '88-90 grooves. Members of this House know of what I am speaking, I am quite certain, because in fact the evidence is clear that is what is happening in terms of this government and this budget. Mr.

Acting Speaker, the funding model, I want to talk about the funding model for a moment or two, because it has been something that we on this side of the House have spent considerable time on in discussing with members opposite and providing suggestions. You know, the funding model is another example of this careening vehicle sort of floating all over the place. For a while the former Minister of Education had his hand on that steering wheel, but it has been taken off and now it is sort of-we do not know quite what the direction is. For four years the funding model was studied.

There was an advisory comm ittee, and we supported that concept. There was a long-standing tradition in Manitoba to have a minister of advisory committees. What was not a long-standing tradition in Manitoba history was to keep the report of the advisory committee secret. That is what this government did. They kept the report of the advisory committee secret.

13 82 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA March 18 , 19 92 The minister promised me in the House, promised us in the House on many occasions that report would be released so that the public could consult and deal with the funding model. Mr. Acting Speaker, he promised me at Christmas 1990. Then he promised me at Christmas 1991 , and then he promised the summer of 1991 . He got the report June 4 and nothing happened. I kept asking the minister. I kept asking the minister not only in the House, but I asked the minister in the hallway, personally, when are you going to release the report? He never did.

Then he came out with his funding announcement in Oc tober. In fact, it was Halloween, and he came out with his funding announcement. We had warned him of the dangers of that funding model and what would happen. Mr. Acting Speaker, the former minister said that we were only fearmongering, the usual response, and that the NDP was engaging in trick or treating. You know what? What did he do after that? He changed the funding model to reflect some of our concerns. Then what did he do after that? He changed it again. Then what happened? The Premier (Mr. Almon) changed the minister. Then what happened?

The new minister changed the model again. The model is still being changed because that model has some serious problems, some serious flaws, and we warned them about that. We warned them, Mr. Acting Speaker, that if the model was imposed as it was it would result in massive job losses, and we are seeing that. We are seeing in two divisions alone over 1 00 jobs lost. We told them there would be program cuts. In Transcona-Springfield alone, as a result of the fundin g model-and presumably Transcona Springfleld was one of the "winners in the funding model" -eight programs were cut.

We have seen programs cut, I dare say, probably in the hundreds across the province, and the inequity that is built on a foundation of inequity continues. The Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) has told me time and time again in this House in the last couple of weeks that the funding model is working fine. Yet yesterday at her announcement to extricate themselves from the school boundary review she said one of the reasons for doing it was because of the assessment of the funding model. That strikes me as a tiny bit contradictory, Mr.

Acting Speaker, because what they are doing is using the very excuse that the minister had said. They are using an excuse of the funding model when the minister before frequently said in the House, everything was fine on the funding model. We will continue to press on the funding model. We will continue to press on this government to deal with education equitably, and there will be much more said on that, I can assure members of this House, by members on this side of the House when we get to the Estimates of the Education department. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I get the impression the last week that members on that side of the House, the Premier in particular, were offended by criticisms of the budget. I cannot help but remark for several days before the budget was released, members on that side of the House were really quite confident, and I was expecting some kind of blockbuster budget that was somehow going to do more than stand aside. I was as disappointed as I usually am with respect to the Tory budget, but I do not know where the basis for the false confidence of members opposite was in the days preceding the budget.

I do not know why the Premier expected anything but criticism. I do not know why members on that side of the House, the Premier in particular, are so offended when we dare to criticize this budget, because we owe it to the people of Manitoba. We owe it to the 52,000 people who are unemployed that are looking for some kind of action from this government, and there is none. I do not know what members on that side of the House expected or even desired from this government. Another interesting point, Mr.

Acting Speaker, while I am on that point, was I guess I am surprised why members have not been more responsive to queries from the public. Even last spring, members on that side of the House were confidentially going out door knocking around the city of Winnipeg. In fact, they were in my own riding. They have been on very many streets. They either preceded me or followed me on very many streets. I guess I find it curious, because they have been on streets where the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) was laughed out of the home.

The people next door told me that they could hear that he was coming to their home, because there was the laughter and the anger from members in that house yelling. That was a poll, I should indicate, that voted for members opposite.

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA 13 83 I do not know what members expected when at another door they went to an individual who had just been laid off by this government, in fact, by the Minister of Justice, the Attorney General, and what was the reaction, Mr. Acting Speaker? What has been the response? All of these reactions, where have they taken them? Where have they deposited this response in their repertoire, as they sat around the cabinet table and tried to determine where they were going? What effect has that door knocking had on them?

I am afraid it has not had very much. * (1 500) They talk fondly about how much more money they are spending on education, and I looked back into the 1990 budget-and I have many more statistics which I will be citing during the Estimates process, as I normally do-and noted that the proportion of expenditures of Education in 1990 were 18 .2 percent of the total pr ov incial expenditures, and this year, two years later and after a considerable amount of inflation and the like, the total of the Education expenditures, a proportion of the total provincial budget, is up to 18 .3 percent.

That is one percent of an increase over two years. For a governm ent that supposedly made education a priority, I cannot understand that approach, and I do not think the public of Manitoba does either. I do not think the public of Manitoba has any confidence any longer, if they ever did-and they might have had at one time-i n this government, with respect to its approach to education and the future of education. The era of unleadership, the era of floating around, careening back and forth, is upon us in education as well.

I must tum to one of the areas that the government has flown up the flagpole in a couple of Throne Speech Debates, and we keep waiting for initiatives, and that is the area of training. Every one in this House, every government and almost every individual in Canada has heard over and over again, ad nauseam, I would dare say, about the need for training in our country and in our province. That is in fact one of the keys to the future. What I would like to do is just read in a couple of quotes, again from a Tory government publication.

Frankly, it does not lay out a framework, but it does have some useful statistics, and that is the consultation paper of Learning Well, Living Well produced by the Government of Canada. Just with respect to training, I want to cite a few of the quotes that bring facts to bear on this whole question of training because, frankly, I am tired of hearing governments and people say that we need more training. My question to them is: In what, where and how? I mean, let us get down to brass tacks. Let them not just talk rhetoric.

With respect to this challenge, I want to quote: Even while we confront jobless rates of nearly 8 percent-if it were only that low-the job vacancy rates of jobs that cannot be filled with the right qualifications is the highest in nearly 20 years. There are 600,000 job vacancies in an economy with almost one million unemployed. I have already quoted the fact that- no, I have not quoted it: Private industry spends only 0.3 percent of our gross domestic product on training. The rough comparable figure in the United States is over twice that.

Australians invest three times more than that; the Japanese, over five times; and Germans, nearly eight times more. Let me quote also from this federal government document: Australia is encouraging greater private sector training through a tax on nontrainers. France has a system of paid educational leave and is promoting greater enterprise. I will be tying this all together to the context of my comments, but the point, Mr.

Acting Speaker, is that we publish paper after paper after paper; we have throne speech after throne speech after throne speech; we have government initiative or lack thereof, constantly talking about the need for training and setting up the job bank and the whole like, and we have no action. We have had no action from this government for several years.

I know for a fact that they have sat around the cabinet table again and said, hey, Mike, we have to get this put together, and Mike has gone off and he has the Department of Education working like crazy to produce what should have been produced two years ago, their job inventory and their matching of jobs and job programs. Members opposite know that. They know they are way behind their schedule. They are way behind their itinerary. An Honourable Member: Who is this Mike guy? Mr. Chomlak: Mike Bessey.

They sat around the table and they got Mike to do that and Mike is on their back and they are cranking out those statistics. They are doing that, Mr. Acting

13 84 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOB A March 18 , 19 92 Speaker, because they do not have an inventory, they do not have a basis upon which they are making these spending decisions, these allocations of millions of dollars to private companies, with no criteria, no evaluation, no overall plan tied into it. That is the greatest-it is probably the worst of all worlds. They are probably better off doing nothing than doing something that is as ill-founded on the basis of no empirical data. That is what they are doing.

We could accept an initiative that had at least some kind of empirical basis and some kind of direction. They are not doing it. They are way behind. They are trying to put it together and we are anticipating, we are waiting for the massive, the great announcement sometime down the road. What they have done is they have allocated millions of dollars. They are running off money to these companies. No one knows where they are going, how they are doing it, in fact who is doing it.

We are still waiting for a concrete training policy, a training proposal from this government despite flowery words in the throne speech on several occasions. Members opposite know that is the case. That is what bothers me about the training initiatives or the lack of training initiatives of members on that side of the government because they have swallowed hook, line and sinker the rhetoric that we have heard around, but there has been no action and there is no plan and we are still awaiting it.

The free trade agreement with Mexico that this government is sort of-we are not quite certain what this government is doing other than the fact that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) has on one occasion said he is opposed to it and now he says he is sort of opposed to it with conditions, and what are those conditions. It smacks of the debate on the GST. In retrospect now, the members on that side of the House were opposed to the GST. We barely heard their voices during the debate about that tax. It is the same thing on the free trade debate with Mexico.

American and Canadian companies are not interested in the Mexican market, Mr. Acting Speaker. What they are interested in is cheap Mexican labour and its low wages. Not only does It have low wages, but it has health and safety conditions called by the Wall Street Journal abysmal. What the effect and what this government and what this overall philosophy of the support of the free trade agreement will do will be to-ye s, it will be to go towards a level playing field, but it will be the lower level playing field, to lower our conditions, to lower all of our standards down towards the Mexican level.

That is the fire that members on the opposite side of the House are playing with. They did not know what they were playing with in the Mulroney Free Trade Agreement that we got burned and burned badly and now they are dabbling in it again. They are just sort of attracted by that light, the brightness. They are just running after it again and they are not taking a stand. The result is going to be that we are going to find ourselves locked into another agreement that is going to lower standards on this side of the border and is going to result in more difficulty for Canadians, not less.

Members do not seem to realize that on the opposite side of the House. We will raise it over and over again, although I think the member for Portage Ia Prairie (Mr. Connery) is aware of some of the dangers and raised them today in Question Period. • (1 51 0) I could go on, Mr. Acting Speaker, at great length about the lack of government initiatives on the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. You know, it is very curious. During the Estimates process on Justice the last several years, every time we would ask the Minister of Justice (Mr.

McCrae), what about the Aboriginal Justice lnquiry?--he would retort, just wait until the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry is launched and then you will see action. Over and over again we heard that. When that report comes down you will see action. I believe he said to the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin), when that report comes down you will be pleasantly surprised. Still we see no action. We see no initiative on the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. In fact, we see retroactive steps. We see backward steps by this government. We see the minister talking about a million dollars in programs in his suitcase.

We do not know what it is and, like so many things in this government, it is all tied up in PR and it is all tied up in crisis management, crisis control, which is a large part of why that car is careening about and why we have a lack of unleadership by members on that side of the House. I have a number of initiatives I would like to propose in terms of alternatives. I will wait and I will suggest most of those, because a lot of them are related to Education, during the Estimates process.

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 138 5 I will outline to members opposite some of our alternative views and some of our vision in terms of Education as promised, Mr. Acting Speaker. Thank you very much for the opportunity of addressing the Budget Debate. Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Mr. Acting Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure for me to stand and speak on this government's fifth budget in a row that has looked to the people of Manitoba to give us advice on what they want to see their government do.

I am sure that most members of the House as they have been out visiting with their constituents and listening to what their constituents have to say have clearly heard time and time again that people in Manitoba are fed up of paying taxes. They are tired of being taxed to death. I mean, we hear even more criticism of Winnipeg City Council right now and the kind of pressure they are under and the tax revolt that is going around in Winnipeg. We know that peopl e, especially in tough economic times, do not want to see governments spending above their means year after year. We all know even in our own household, Mr.

Acting Speaker, that we cannot spend more year after year than what we earn, because as a result of that we build up a debt and a deficit and eventually lose everything. (Madam Deputy Speaker in the Chair) Madam Deputy Speaker, we as a government have made a firm commitment to Manitobans that we will attempt to keep taxes down and to keep more money in people's pockets so they can choose how to spend their money.

I think we have attempted over the last several budgets to deal in a very common-sense way and act fiscally responsible yet maintain the services that are greatly needed on the social side of things for people that need human services. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased and proud to be a part of a government under the leadership of our Premier, Gary Filmon, and my colleague the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) who has brought in the fifth budget in a row that has not increased personal taxes. There have been virtually no new taxes as a result of this budget.

I think the people of Manitoba, generally speaking, are happy, and I know that my constituents are presenting to me some very positive feedback on the kinds of initiatives this government has taken. I have listened to the opposition as they have sat in this House day after day since the budget was announced and have been very critical. I just listened to some 40 minutes of the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) negatively spouting his comments about all of the wrong things this government is doing.

I did not hear in that 40 minutes one positive thing or one positive suggestion on how in fact he, if he were in government, was going to make a difference or make a change or make anything better. I have listened for several days to opposition parties, both opposition parties, that have not- An Honourable Member: Oh now, be nice. Mrs. Mitchelson: Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have not as yet heard, I do not think, from the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), but I am sure, because I know that he does have some common sense and some understanding, and I know that he listens-{interjection) Well, he must.

I am sure that he has listened to his constituents and that when he sees something that this government is doing that is a positive decision that he will support that. I am looking forward with interest to hearing his comments and maybe even his approval of this budget when he speaks a little later today. Madam Deputy Speaker, I feel it important in this budget this year to put several comments on the record about the different responsibilities that I have in my portfolio, no one area of responsibility any less impor tant tha n ano th er.

The newest, I suppose-well, let me start with my responsibility as Minister responsible for the Status of Women and indicate how proud I am as a minister to follow in the footsteps of the former minister, Gerrie Hammond, who was the Minister responsible for the Status of Women before I took over. I worried that I would not be able to fill those shoes, because I think that Gerrie Hammond left a record for this government and for the women in Manitoba, a record that we can all be very proud of.

She started, even before she became a minister, to travel throughout the province and listen to women and women's issues through the Women's Initiative back in 1988. As a result of that Women's Initiative, I believe that we have accomplished much. As a result of her consultations, as a result of what the women of Manitoba told our government, we were able to respond in many positive ways. We were able to look at the issue of family violence, and increase the number of wife abuse shelters in the

13 86 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 province from three shelters to 11 shelters, and I think over a period of four years that is something that we ca!"l--,-rlot that we want to be proud of anyone that promotes or condones family violence, but we do want to be able to provide the services to those women and to those children who so desperately need that kind of service at a very critical and unfortunate time in their lives. We also increased funding to crisis lines throughout the province.

We ran an Abuse is a Crime campaign, which was a very successful educational tool in informing all Manitobans of the issue of violence and how we as a province and a government would not tolerate that violence. We have had great success with our family violence court, and the length of time that it takes to hear issues of concern on family violence. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have increased substantially funding to our wife abuse shelters, and I know that the Minister of Family Services (Mr.

Gilleshammer) will have some announcements to make shortly as a result of this year's budget that will be very positive, and in no small part as a result of some of the people that the Minister of Family Services has surrounded himself with. One of these people, of course, is Marlene Bertrand, who is the former director of Osborne House, the largest shelter in the province of Manitoba. • (1 520) Madam Deputy Speaker, as a result of the good people giving good advice to the Minister of Family Services (Mr.

Gilleshammer), I have difficulty believing that the opposition could not be pleased with some of the announcements that will be made in the near future. We as a government were the first government to provide Core funding to the Indigenous Women's Collective, a Native umbrella organiz ation that speaks on behalf of many aboriginal women throughout the province, and we are proud of that. I have come to understand and respect the women in the aboriginal community greatly over the last number of months.

I have said in this House before, and I will repeat again, that, as I travelled up north and met with women in some of the northern and more remote communities, I listened and was appalled to hear their stories. I heard, and I listened to, and I cried with those women who told me of the circumstances that they and their children were subjected to, and how they really felt that they needed support and help and guidance.

I was angry, Madam Deputy Speaker, at what I heard, and you know, I feel that at times I have led a very sheltered life in a very safe community and have not been exposed or have not heard the kinds of stories that I heard those days. Madam Deputy Speaker, the problem is overwhelming, and I do know that the women are standing up today and they are saying that we are not going to tolerate this. On International Women's Day, we announced our aboriginal women's policy, Speaking to the Future, and had great support from the aboriginal women's community for that policy.

As I attended other activities and functions that day, I went over to the Immigr ant Women's Association. I guess my feeling and my sense of accomplishment in dealing in partnership with the aboriginal women and coming forward with the policy that they are excited about and supportive of, I felt that I could not help but share that policy too with the immigrant women. I said that abuse crosses all cultures and all parts of our Manitoba society. It is important that women from all backgrounds and all cultures work together in partnership, because together we have strength, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Together we can try to overcome some of the problems that exist and in that way have a better life for all women in Manitoba . As I was speaking, there were nods, positive head nods around the room from women there who felt that this was an issue that crossed all of Manitoba society. I know that a commitment is there from the women in our province to work together, to speak out and to try to deal in a positive way with some of the violent issues that are facing us today right here in Manitoba. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe we have come a long way.

I do know there is a lot more to do, and we have a commitment through the Women's Directorate, through the advisory council. We will continue to work forward and deal with issues that affect women and try to deal with them in a very positive way so that someday we may not have to have within government a Women's Directorate or an advisory council that deals specifically with issues, because I believe we are working toward a mind-set within society that, you know, women's issues are not just women's issues, but they are society's issues and all of society.

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 87 I know quite frankly I am in a minority, as are some of the other female colleagues in this House. In the Legislature there are 11 of us out of 57 members. I do know that we have five women mem bers that sit around our caucus table, three around the cabinet table, and I will tell you that unless we had the full co-operation of our male colleagues that sat around that table, we would not accomplish anything. So I think there has to be, and I know there has to be that co-operative working relationship.

I do know that all colleagues who sit around our caucus table have issues and concerns that affect women and children at heart. We will make the right decisions for the right reasons, working in partnership, men and women, to accomplish these goals. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to move on now to some other areas of respons ibil ity, respo nsibili ty that I have conce rning ma ny Manitobans in the culture, heritage, recreation, citizenship parts of the department, a very varied responsibility.

I know the former minister is in the House listening, and I think she will agree that it is an extremely busy portfolio. You seem like you are torn in many different directions with many different demands, not only on your time to make policy decisions and set direction, but also, if I might say, on the social side of things, because the activities and the invitations that I receive as mini ster-a nd I know she did too-te ar you in many different directions, and you just cannot possibly be in all places at all times and accept every invitation.

I do want to thank my colleagues who sit in the Legislature with me in government for their support, because I do know that many, many times many of them have come through and been able to attend activities and functions that I have not been able to be at because I could not be in two places at one time. I want to thank them for their co-operation and for their work on behalf of culture, heritage, recreation and citizenship in this province. Not only do we deal with those areas of program mi ng, but we deal with the cu ltural institutions too that we support.

In tough economic times and when government has to set priorities, we look at health care. We have ma de major commitme nts to health care, a 5.7 percent increase or $1 01 million this year in the budget. We have increased Family Services by 8.7 percent and Education by 5.5 percent. Madam Deputy Speaker, we know that Manitobans want those services, and we know that we have made them very high priority funding. We have made decisions to put those departments high on our priority list as well as economic development.

I am pleased to say that within the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, that I think this year we have done well and that we recognize as a government that not all of the money that we can spend and can allocate can go to Health, Education and Family Services, but that there has to be a quality of life around the provi nce, too, and that culture, that heritage, that imm igration and that recreation do contribute in a very positive way to our quality of life.

We were able to maintain many of the programs and redirect and restructure things within the department, in fact, so that we will even be able to deliver service better to those communi ties that we represent. We do know too that our culture and the arts in our province can contribute in a very positive way to the economy, to tourism, as well as to the quality of life, but at times it is important to review what our priorities are , to red ir ect resources within departments, to change the emphasis and to revise existing programs and create new initiatives.

Needs change as people ch ange and as communities change. I think that we have been able to try to move and make changes where necessary based on the needs of the commu nities that we serve. The one area that I inherited last year was the Citizenship Division, it was moved over. We took a bit of Imm igrant ACCESS from the Department of Fam il y Services.

We got Adult ESL and the Working Group on Immigr ant Credentials from the Department of Education and brought them all under one umb rella within the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship. * (1 530) We have looked at the best ways that we could utilize the resources that came to us to structure a division that would meet the needs of new immi gr ants coming to Canada, and those imm igrants who had only been here for a short period of time and needed the kind of services that we had to offer.

As a result of the Working Group on Imm igrant Credentials and the report that we received just a month or so ago, we have been able to restructure this division within our department I think in a very

13 88 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 positive way to attempt to serve the community and the community needs. I will not go into a lot of detail, because I think I made a fairly lengthy statement in the House the other day that dealt with the Credentials and labour Market Branch within the division. We now have a policy branch that will be dealing very proactively with the immigration policy, the bilateral policy that we are looking at formulating with the federal government.

We have an ESL adult language training and access branch within the division and also a Citizenship Branch that will deal with the granting programs that are available to help immigrants access the kinds of services they deserve, and they need to become productive members of Manitoba's society. I am looking forward with anticipation to the positive work that can be done as a result of the restructuring in this area. I suppose I always need to be looking at challenges in dealing with the communities that we attempt to effectively serve. One area that I would like to talk about also is the arts in Manitoba.

I think our commitment has been shown. When we first came to government, when I first took over this responsibility, after 1 0 years of no formal arts policy, we undertook an Arts Policy Review. We realized and recognized that times change, needs change, and it was time to take a look at and review arts and arts funding in the province, I guess, to best utilize the public resources and look at how the public and private sector could work together to ensure that we had the most vibrant community we could possibly offer to Manitobans.

In response to that Arts Policy Review, there were several recommendations, some we were able to act on immediately and others that have taken a little longer. One of the recommendations that was in that Arts Policy Review was to restructure within our branch the arts funding. As a result of that, this year in the budget process we have been able to develop an Arts branch, which will no longer be a Cultural Resources branch, but it will be an Arts branch.

We have worked together with the Manitoba Arts Council, with the Multicultural Grants Council, and with the department to try to streamline the process so that many of the organizations out there do not have to go to three different sources of funding. It means less bureaucratic red tape because when an organization has to apply to three different areas to get funding, they have to usually apply to three different programs that involve different detail and an awful lot of time commitment.

We now have attempted to structure it so that either the Arts Council, the Multicultural Grants Council, or the Arts branch will be responsible for funding one organization totally. That will in fact cut down on the volunteer time which will need to be spent by many organizations and many boards in trying to access government funding, and it will cut down on the bureaucracy that is needed within government and within those organizations to try to help communities and com munity organizations access the system.

I believe we have come up with a structure that is going to be of benefit to the arts community as a result. Another area that we as a government have made a major commitment to in my department is in funding for capital within our arts institutions. Before we took over as government, most of our cultural institutions are well over 20 years old now, had been built and then somewhat forgotten. Total budget when I took over as minister for many, many years for capital upgrading of our facilities was some $200,000 per year.

Madam Deputy Speaker, when you have got several buildings, like the museum, like the concert hall, like the art gallery, that are over 20 years old, $200,000 does not go a long way to make major improvements. We have over the last few years attempted to upgrade those facilities to a quality that will serve the arts community that uses those facilities. I am pleased to say that we have another $4 million in the budget this year to do the badly needed work on the Museum of Man and Nature and the Concert Hall.

We have also in this budget managed to find an increase in funding for our cultural industries in the film and sound production areas. I am extremely pl eased and proud, when under the former adm inistration, we did have a cost-shared federal-provincial ERDA agreement on culture, and as that agreement ended, Madam Deputy Speaker, the federal government has pulled their funding out of cultural industries year by year. I know that our governm ent has a major commitment, because we do know what the film industry and what the sound recording industry can do and have done for our province. I am really

March 18 , 19 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 89 pleased to see that in these difficult economic times we have been able to find some extra money to keep our cultural industries viable. If I can just talk about what cultural industries have done for Manitoba, last year alone $8 million was spent on independent film and sound production throughout the province. It creates jobs and there is econom ic spino ff in ma ny of our small communities as a result of the films that have been produced throughout our province. I know that my colleague the MLA for Turtle Mountain (Mr.

Rose) would be interested, and I am sure he does know that there is a film crew presently working in his constituency near Souris. The film will be a $3-million television production of a Manitoba novelist Margaret Laurence's book, The Diviners. I am pleased and proud. Here we have a film crew working in Manitoba, producing a movie in a local community in southwestern Manitoba based on a book by a Manitoba author.

So I think we have much to be proud of in our Manitoba community in the area of film, sound, writing, and the talent that works in our province as a result of the film industry being so successful. * (1 540) In this budget, too, we are also following up on some of the promises we have made to the multicultural community in the last year that will benefit our newcomers as well.

We, as a result of the multicultural policy, put in place a secretariatthat would deal intergovernmentally with the issues that were brought forward from the community to government and to try to focus programs within different departments that would deal effectively with the multicultural community. We are now in the process.

Of course, we have recruited and hired two people to work in the outreach office, and we are in the process now of, having hired the staff, being able to put that outreach office-it will be like a store-front operation within the core area of the city of Winnipeg where people will be able to come to attempt to access the government services that they need. So I am pleased that is underway and will be up and running in the very near future. The recr eation commu nity has not been overlooked in this budget either. I think we all recognize and realize the benefit of recreation to our quality of life.

Last fall I announced the new recreation policy which outlined government's commitment and our recognition of the importance of recreat ion . As a result of tha t poli cy announcement we were able to replace the recreation district program, which had been in place since 1 972 and was not meeting the demands of the recreation community today. We were able to announce a restructuring of that grant program to better serve the communities throughout the pr ov ince of Mani toba.

Sinc e I made tha t announcement last fall, I am pleased to say that the community throughout the province of Manitoba has received that policy well and is looking forward to the implementation and the changes in the recreation district program. We are also in the recreation area extending the research agreement that we entered into with the University of Manitoba three years ago. It has been a very successful agreement, and we are going to continue that on for another two years to look at recreation trends and issues throughout the province.

I am pleased to say, too, that we will be continuing with the Northern Recreation Directors Program, which was originally designed as a two-year pilot project. It is due to end in the fall of 1992. I am really pleased to say that as a result of this program, this pilot project, I believe that we have been able to train some 22 or so recreation directors, trained from communities in the North to go back to communities in the North and provide the very needed services in those communities. I am pleased to say that in conjunction with my colleague the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr.

Downey), that through his department this year we will be able to utilize and hire those recreation directors to deliver services and opportunities to their communities in the North. Madam Deputy Speaker, we also, through this budget, made some changes to the heritage funding and will be winding down the operations of the Manitoba Heritage Foundation which I spoke to earlier in Question Period today. I think that the community will be well served, and I know that from talking to and from the feedback from the community that they are looking with anticipation to the new structure.

I want to make it very clear today that the community will be consulted and will be a part of the process of the decision making. I know the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has some questions, and I will reiterate again, that unlike the critic from

13 90 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 18 , 19 92 the NDP party who has a background and an understanding of the history of Historic Resources Branch within our department, the member for Inkster I do not believe has a clear understanding. I know he does not because you could just tell by the tone and the lack of understanding in his questioning today. I know after Question Period he did tell me that he was going to take more of an interest in the heritage community.

I welcome that, because I believe it is importantthat all parties in this House have an understanding and a working relationship with the community. I cannot say that about the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) because I know he has been actively involved in his community. I have met with members of his community, and they have many good things to say about the member for St. Boniface and his understanding of the issues.

I think I have covered all of the areas within my department that have been affected, and I think in a very positive way through this budget process this year, but I think I would be remiss if I did not talk about another area of responsibility, and that is lotteries. We have seen some major change over the last few years in the areas of lottery generation of revenue with the Crystal Casino, which is supporting special health care projects through its revenue, and with the new introduction of the video lottery terminals in rural Manitoba hotels.

We, I think, have done something good with the introduction of video lottery terminals in rural Manitoba. It has been a boost for the hotels, for the economy and, I think, for the increased sense otwell being of many communities as a result. One of the good things about that program is that through the Department of Rural Development the minister will be using the money that is generated from the communities, and putting that money right back into the communities into rural economic development.

Sometimes we tend to forget when we get criticism across the floor from the opposition about lotteries or how we are functioning or what we are doing is that lotteries do good things for many Manitobans, not only in the health care system now with our commitment of casino revenues going into the Health Services Development Fund, not only through the Video Lottery Terminal program which will put money right back into rural Manitoba communities, but into our cultural organizations through the Manitoba Arts Council, through the Man itoba Sports Federation, to the heritage community, to conservation projects through the Department of Natural Resources.

Those dollars that are generated in the community go back to the community in so very many ways. I am pleased to have had the opportunity to be a part of directing some of the money to health care, to rural development and to conservation in our province.

I think on that note I will close and say I look forward to a continuation of debate on the budget and ultimately the passage of this budget, and on to the Estimates process where we can deal in detail and hear from the opposition the positive recommendations that they have and suggestions that they have to contribute to improving the health and the economy here in the province. We have taken many of the right steps.

We have moved in the right direction, and I know that the taxpayers and the people of Manitoba will benefit in a very positive way as a result of some of the decisions that we have made to date and the decisions that we will make in the future. I guess, ultimately, our end goal is to make Manitoba a better place in which to live, to get the economy rolling again, and to do the right things for the right reasons.

I would ask members of the opposition, Instead of being quite as critical as they have been in the past, to take a look at some of the good things that are happ ening, applaud as business moves into Manitoba and as jobs are created and give us credit when some of those positive things start to happen. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. • (1 550) Mr. Nell Gaudry (St. Boniface): Firstly, I would like to say, I will be speaking in both official languages today, of which I am very proud to be able. I did not get a chance to put my comments on the throne speech, but first I would like to say, I was pleased to

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-3-32
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 3rd hansardpdf 32.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	5213bfe0bb767b56aec8ec282aa254156c2fdb03

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