Manitoba Hansard — 5 June 2001 (Sitting 41, 37th Legislature, 2nd Session)

37-2-41

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Seventh Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LI No. 41 - 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, JuneS, 2001

Member AGLUGUB, Cris ALLAN, Nancy ASHfON, Steve, Hon. ASPER, Linda BARRETT, Becky, Hon. CALDWELL, Drew, Hon. CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. CUMMINGS, Glen DACQUA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary, Hon. DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry FAURSCHOU, David FRIESEN, Jean, Hon. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. GILLESHAMMER, Harold HELWER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie LA THLIN, Oscar, Hon. LAURENDEAU, Marcel LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. LOEWEN, John MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. MAGUIRE, Larry MALOWAY,Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn, Hon.

MITCHELSON, Bonnie MURRAY, Stuart NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom PENNER, Jack PENNER, Jim PITURA, Frank PRAZNIK, Darren REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. ROCAN, Denis RONDEAU, Jim SALE, Tim, Hon. SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Harry SCHULER, Ron SELINGER, Greg, Hon. SMITH, Joy SMITH, Scott, Hon. STEFANSON, Heather STRUTHERS, Stan TWEED, Mervin WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Seventh Legislature Constituency The Maples St. Vital Thompson Riel Inkster Brandon East Radisson Kildonan Ste. Rose Seine River Russell Selkirk.

Concordia Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Portage Ia Prairie Wolseley River Heights Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon St. James The Pas St. Norbert La Verendrye Fort Whyte St. Johns Arthur-Virden Elmwood Burrows Lord Roberts Minto River East Kirkfield Park Interlake Emerson Steinbach Morris Lac du Bonnet Transcona Southdale Rupertsland Carman Assiniboia Fort Rouge Wellington Rossmere Springfield St. Boniface Fort Garry Brandon West Tuxedo Dauphin-Rob lin Turtle Mountain Swan River Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C.

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

262 1 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, June 5, 2001 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Kenaston Underpass Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Spe aker, I beg to present the petition of Garry Paliowor, Melissa Donaldson, Phyllis Brown and others. praying that the Premier of Manitoba (Mr. Doer) consider reversing his decision to not support construction of an underpass at Kenaston and Wilkes. Mani toba Hydro Lines Routes Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr.

Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Lloyd Kolbuck, Paul Jensen, Raymond Burtnick and others, praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro (Mr. Sel inger) consider alternative routes for the additional 230kV and 500kV lines proposed for the R.M. of East St Paul. Kenaston Underpass Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Pat Lund, W. Stem, Mark Potapoff and others, praying that the Premier of Manitoba (Mr.

Doer) consider reversing his decision to not support construction of an underpass at Kenaston and Wilkes. Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Larry Wiebe, Katharina Arendt, Donna Holms and others, praying that the Premier of Manitoba (Mr. Doer) consider reversing his decision to not support construction of an underpass at Kenaston and Wilkes. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Ivan Balenovic, Janeen Balenovic, Dean Magnus and others, praying that the Premier of Manitoba (Mr.

Doer) consider reversing his decision to not support construction of an underpass at Kena ston and Wilkes. READING AND RECEI VING PETITIONS Kenaston Underpass Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen), I have reviewed the petition, and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Some Honourable Member s: Yes. Mr. Speaker: The Clerk please read.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk ): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT the intersection at Wilkes and Kenaston has grown to become the largest unseparated crossing in Canada; and THAT the volume of traffic for this railroad crossing is twelve times the acceptable limit as set out by Transport Canada; and THAT vehicles which have to wait for trains at this intersection bum up approximately $1. 4 million in fuel, pol lute the environment with over 8 tons of emissions and cause approximately $7.3 million in motorist delays every year.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Premier of Manitoba consider reversing his decision to not support construction of an underpass at Kenaston and Wilkes.

2622 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), I have reviewed the petition, and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Some Honourable Member s: Yes. Mr. Speak er: Clerk, please read.

Madam Clerk: The petition of the undersigned, The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company and National Trust Company humbly sheweth: THAT it is desired to transfer the personal trusteeship and personal agency business of National Trust Company to The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company. For such purposes it is necessary for The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company to be appointed as successor trustee to National Trust Company. The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company and National Trust Company wish that

an act be passed to provide for the transfer of the personal trusteeship and personal agency business of National Trust Company to The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company and to ensure that the rights and obligations of those who have relations with National Trust Company and The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company with respect to that personal trusteeship and personal agency busi ness are clearly determined. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislature of the Province of Manitoba may be pleased to pass

an act for the purposes above mentioned. And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray. Mani toba Hydro Lines Routes Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Springfield (Mr. Schuler), I have reviewed the petition, and it complies with the rules and practices ofthe House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Yes. Mr. Speaker: Clerk, please read. Madam Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT the R.M. of East St.

Paul has the highest concentration of high voltage power lines in a residential area in Manitoba; and THAT the R.M. of East St. Paul is the only jurisdiction in Manitoba that has both a 500kV and a 230kV line directly behind residences; and THAT numerous studies have linked cancer, in particular childhood leukemia, to the proximity of power lines. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro consider alternative routes for the additional 230kV and 500kV lines proposed for the R.M. of East St.

Paul. * (13: 35) Kenaston Underpass Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Morris (Mr. Pitura), I have reviewed the petition, and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Yes. Mr. Speaker: Clerk, please read.

Madam Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT the intersection at Wilkes and Kenaston has grown to become the largest unseparated crossing in Canada; and THAT the volume of traffic for this railroad crossing is twelve times the acceptable limit as set out by Transport Canada; and THAT vehicles which have to wait for trains at this intersection bum up approximately $1. 4 million in fuel, pollute the environment with over 8 tons of emissions and cause approx-

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 2623 imately $7.3 mil lion in motorist delays every year. WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIO NERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Premier of Manitoba consider reversing his decision to not support construction of an underpass at Kena ston and Wilkes. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger), I have reviewed the petition and it complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member : Yes. Mr. Speaker: The Clerk please read.

Madam Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT the intersection at Wilkes and Kenaston has grown to become the largest unseparated crossing in Canada; and THAT the volume of traffic for this railroad crossing is twelve times the acceptable limit as set out by Transport Canada; and THAT vehicles which have to wait for trains at this intersection burn up approximately $1. 4 million in fuel, pollute the environment with over 8 tons of emissions and cause approxi mately $7.3 million in motorist delays every year.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Premier of Manitoba consider reversing his decision to not support construction of an underpass at Kenaston and Wilkes. PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Comm ittee of Supply Mr. Conrad Santos (Wellington): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education, Training and Youth): Mr. Spea ker, it is my pleasure to table the Annual Report of the Teachers' Retirement Allowances Fund for the year 2000. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table today the report to the Legislature of The Financial Administration Act relating to the Supplementary Loan and Guarantee Authority for the year ended March 31, 2001. Also I would like to table the 200 1 and 2002 Revenue Estimates Supplementary Information for Legislative Review for the Department of Finance.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 36- The Enhanc ed Debt Collection (Various Acts Amended) Act Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selin ger). that leave be given to introduce Bill 36, The Enhanced Debt Collection (Various Acts Amended) Act (Loi visant a faciliter le recouvrement des creances (modification de diverses dispositions legislatives), and that the same be now received and read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, this bill amends The Executions Act, The Garnishment Act and The

Summary Convictions Act, to improve the ability of the Government to collect outstanding fines and the ability of victims and general creditors to enforce restitution orders and judgments. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable

2624 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 members to the gallery, where we have with us today 42 students from the Victoria-Albert School under the direction of Mr. Dave Leochko and Mr. Myron Moszynski. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes). Also we have, from the International Education Program, 32 Grades 10 to 12 students under the direction of Ms. Karen Strobel. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for St. James (Ms. Korzeniowski). Also in the public gallery we have, from J. H.

Bruns Collegiate, 25 Grade 9 students under the direction of Mr. Bill George. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Southdale (Mr. Reimer). Also we have, from Joseph Wolinski Collegiate, 26 Grade 11 students under the direction of Mrs. Linda Connor and Mr. Janicki Volickrishnen. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. * (13 :40) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Essential Services Act Amendm ents-Health Care Workers Mr. Stuart Mu rray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, last week the Premier tried to downplay the idea that his Government was going to dismantle The Essential Services Act and create his own health essential services act. There was no legislation before the House he said as though to dismiss it was not part of his hidden labour agenda. We know that the regional health authorities have been made aware of the Premier's health essential services act. We also know that they have some very grave concerns about it. Mr.

Spea ker, my question to the Premier: Knowing that the existing legislation has been working well because it was created with a focus on ensuring patient saf ety as the priority, why is the Premier willing to put patient safety at risk by potentially introducing this dangerous legislation of his own? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I have never heard more scare mongering over a hypothetical question on a hypothetical piece of legislation in all my days in the Legislature. An Honourable Member : Just say you are not doing it. Just say no. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Spea ker, the member opposite will probably note that there is no proposed legislation on the Order Paper. Mr. Mu rray: Mr. Speaker, the Premier will also note that there has been documentation that has been passed around, and in fact, every regional health authority that has learned of this proposed legislation has come out with a voice, a very strong voice sending a strong message. That strong message is that the health and safety of the patients may be put at risk if the Premier's proposed legislation goes through.

Rather than dismantle a piece of legislation, The Essential Services Act, will the Premier today commit to scrap his plans for introducing his own health essential services act? Mr. Doer: Mr. Spea ker, the situation in Manitoba is pretty self-evident. There are employers and people responsible for management that want the situation maintained or they want essential services legislation. Employees, nurses and others want the legislation repealed.

Both of those positions we find not acceptable in the sense that, between 1981 and I believe 19 96, there was a voluntary essential services agreement literally covering a hundred percent of the health employees all across Manitoba. Right now, since 19 96 to the year 2001, there is not one voluntary essential services agreement, and I know quite frankly last year when we were dealing with the medical technologists and a number of other people, close to 70 percent of the people were designated as essential, allegedly by the same group that the Leader of the Opposition is

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2625 talking about, and there was no remedy like arbitration to settle it under the previous government's legislation. Having said that, the reason why we are out consulting and working on issues is patient care will remain the No. 1 priority for this Govern ment, and it will continue to be that no matter what legislation. Mr. Mu rray: Mr. Speaker, patient care will remain protected as long as it is the health care professionals that have a chance to ensure who the essential services are. That is the current legislation.

We support safety of the patients before politics. This Premier is more interested in paying back his union bosses who helped him get elected rather than worrying about the safety of the patients. Will the Premier commit today to putting the needs of patients before his politically motivated agenda and scrap any intention of bringing forward his health essential services act? * (13 :45) Mr. Doer: Mr. Spea ker, I do not know whether the Leader of the Opposition is aware, but there is an essential services act in Alberta that was defied over the last week, and services were withdrawn.

Ambulance services were not pro vided to people. When the former government brought in an amendment to The Essential Services Act to provide the 19 96 provisions to the ambulance staff of the City of Winnipeg, we proposed an amendment to provide arbitration similar to the firefighters, which was defeated by members opposite in government. In other words, there are deficiencies in terms of a mechanism to deal with a group of people if they are deemed to be essential. What is the remedy to get a solution if there is no right to strike? So, Mr.

Speaker, we are not suggesting that we are bringing in legislation right now, but to suggest that everything is perfect is to deny the existence of some of the difficulties in the present legislation. I would say that Cam McLean, who chaired a committee of employees and health care management, came up with a proposal dealing with life and limb situations which was developed in the early '80s, that was in existence from 1981 to 19 96. Mr. Spea ker, this agreement was made up of people from both management and employees, both nurses and admin istrators. Mr. Quagley [phonetic], I believe, and Mr.

Swerhone were representing the two ma jor hospitals. I believe it was Joyce Gleason representing nurses. Clive Derham was representing health care support staff, and Cam McLean. This can hardly be considered to be "some kind of boss on one side or the other." It was just good patient care, life and limb. The members opposite closed almost every emergency ward in the city of Winnipeg. They tried to privatize home care. We need no lecture from them on protecting patients. We will protect patients. Essential Services Act Amendm ents-Health Care Workers Mrs.

Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Well, the Premier may try to say that there is no bill before the Legislature, but in fact the Department of Health staf f are currently out there meeting with people, talking about this legislation. In fact, health care- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mrs. Driedger: Certainly 1 0-minute conversations with an assistant deputy minister I am not sure constitutes consultation, but health care professionals in Manitoba have voiced very serious concerns about the Doer government's proposed essential services legislation.

I would like to ask the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) who lobbied her for these changes in this legislation. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I know this is a novel idea for members opposite, but when we look at important issues of patient care we do consult a number of people: management, employees, experts in the field. We do consult a number of people.

2626 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 We take the whole issue of provision of essential services very seriously. For example, in the last round of civil service negotiations when we were dealing with withdrawal of services of the whole correctional services component, rather than going through this at every set of bargaining rounds we put in place an arbitration process so public safety would be paramount.

We will ensure, whether we are dealing in the direct public service or the health care service or in the family services where there are a number of vulnerable people that require services or whether it was ambulance services with the City of Winnipeg, when we proposed an amendment to have arbitration for ambulance attendants similar to firefighters, a position rejected by members opposite, I think our record on essential services has always put patients first and will always put patients first. Mrs.

Driedger: With the Premier indicating that they consult with people, I would like to ask him: Do they listen to people? The health care professionals are expressing huge concerns about this particular legislation. Will he listen to them besides just consult with them? Mr. Doer: Yes, we are listening to a number of people. We are listening to the fact that 10 0 percent of the health care staf f were under voluntary agreements. Before 19 96, zero percent of the health care staff, for example, were under voluntary agreements after 19 96. We are looking at the fact that firefighters and police have arbitration.

Ambulance attendants in the city of Winnipeg do not have any remedy under Conservative legislation for purposes of essential services. * (13 :50) Because we are listening to people, Mr. Spea ker, I can say to the House there has been no final decision whatsoever on proposed legislation. We are continuing to do our work on various ideas.

I can assure members of the public that lif e and limb was always part of the previous government's-not the previous govern ment's, the previous, previous govern-ment's vision on health care services, and whether it is in the direct public service, whether it is in the correctional services, whether it is in family services with vulnerable people, whether it is in the Department of Labour that affects some members of society, the rights of patients, patient care, life and limb situations obviously is the first priority of this Government. Mrs.

Driedger: I would like to ask the Minister of Labour if she has consulted with front-line workers in the health care system and what they might have said to her about this particular piece of legislation, because I think it is the health care professionals who have something to offer. The Premier (Mr. Doer) is just backtracking on everything right now. I would like to ask her if she has consulted with front-line health care workers. Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour and Immi gration): As the Premier has said, there is a range of opinion about the essential services legislation that is currently in effect.

The nurses, who are some of the front-line workers that the member is referring to, want to have the essential services legislation repealed in its entirety. As the Premier said, we are consulting with a range of people who are concerned and who are interested in this issue. Again, to reiterate, we will do everything to ensure that life and limb, that patients are protected, that people who are in vulnerable positions are protected no matter what the situation is.

We want to assure the member opposite and all members opposite that we will continue to talk with everyone who has an interest in this position before anything is finally determined. Essential Services Act Amendmen ts- Health Care Workers Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Over the last week we have heard the Premier, (Mr. Doer) and again today, as well as his Minister of Labour, both indicate several times that they believe that the essential services legislation should be watered down to protect life and limb only. The present legislation puts patients first.

My question is to the Minister of Labour: Why do they want to jeopardize patient safety by putting union bosses first?

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2627 Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour and Imm igration): We are ensuring and will continue to ensure that patient safety, that people in vulnerable positions, whether they are in hospitals or under the Department of Family Se rvices or wherever they may be, are protected. As the Premier (Mr. Doer) spoke earlier, we had off ered an alternative, which was arbitration, for the ambulance attendants which was turned down in discussions of the last piece of legislation several years ago. Mr.

Speaker, we are committed to patients, to health, to safety of all individuals in our society, and nothing we will do will jeopardize those particular principles which we believe very strongly in. * (1 3:55) Mrs. Mitchelson: My question, and a very legitimate question to this Government and his Minister of Labour is: Why would they want to go back to the '8 0s and talk about life and limb when the legislation that is in place today puts patients first? Why would they want to water down that legislation and remove the safety that is already there, Mr. Speaker, for patients first? Ms.

Barrett: This question, as are all the other questions, is very hypothetical, because if the member will look on the Order Paper, the member will see that there is absolutely no legislation dealing with essential services on the Order Paper. It is a hypothetical question. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, my question is very simple to the Minister of Labour: Why would this Doer government have gone out and consulted with the regional health authorities to water down the legislation and jeopardize patients' safety by changing the essential serv ices legislation? Ms. Barr ett: Mr.

Speaker, I do not know where the member gets the idea that any consultation that we do is with a view to watering down patient safety. That is absolutely not what our position is. We are committed, as we have stated in the past and continue to state, to ensure that individual citizens in our province be they workers in health and safety, be they people who are vulnerable under the auspices of people working in family services, be they patients in hospitals, their health and safety comes first and always will for this Government. Essential Services Act Amendme nts-Health Care Workers Mr.

Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Spea ker, we have just heard the Premier say from his seat that this is all hypothetical, yet the RHAs and the professionals in the field do not feel that this is all hypothetical or else they would not be commenting on the intended legislation. My question has to do with the essential services that are being identified by the Labour Board, as opposed to those essential services that are identified by medical experts in the field.

Can the minister tell me why she feels that the board would be in a better position to identify which services are essential, as compared to medical experts in the field? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): First of all, the question again is hypothetical. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Thank you. First of all, again, it is a hypothetical question because there is no proposed legislation before this Chamber.

Secondly, when you take 60 percent of the jail guards that may be considered essential and go to I 00 percent with an arbitration process, that is enhancing what was there when we came into office, not watering down as quoted by the members opposite. Thirdly, Mr. Spea ker, one of the issues, the Labour Board, is a legitimate issue. Right now, under the existing legislation, the Labour Board is the body that deals with this. This is one of the concerns from health care professionals that is inadequate in the existing legislation. * (14 :00) Mr. Derkach: Mr.

Spea ker, can the minister or the Premier then, since the Premier is now answering for the minister, can I ask the Premier to tell Manitobans how in cases of extreme emergencies, especially in rural Manitoba, the Labour Board will be able to act quickly enough

2628 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 to bring additional resources to prevent a fatality or a death in times of extreme emergencies? Mr. Doer: The present legislation, as understand it, provides the Labour Board with the final authority on these matters. Mr. Speaker, that is one of the comments coming back from a number of bodies that perhaps, and again you are talking about, quote, your existing legislation. Because the existing legislation deals with the Labour Board, they are already asking us to improve legislation that they do not want us to bring into the House. Which side do they want? Mr.

Derkach: Mr. Spea ker, once again I think the Premier and his minister demonstrate the fact that they do not understand this legislation. I want to ask the Premier now: If in fact he is trying to improve the legislation that he has intended to bring forward, why is it that RHAs, why it is that medical professions have now raised issues that certainly raise serious concerns about this intended legislation and where it is taking this province? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, you have people that want certain parts of this legislation. You have other groups, like nurses, that feel the whole act should be repealed.

You have concerns being raised a number of times about the Labour Board, which is the final arbiter under the existing '96 legislation. You have ambulance drivers that were scoped into this legislation by members opposite. When we proposed to really protect the public by having arbitration which the union agreed to, the employees agreed to, that citizens of Winnipeg would agree to, that certainly we had proposed in an amendment, members opposite watered down our amendment and did not provide arbitration. Like firefighters they watered it down, at the expense of public safety in the city of Winnipeg.

Essential Services Act Amendment s- Health Care Workers Mr. Stuart Mur ray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Sp eaker, the Premier at one point talked about a novel idea. He talked about the fact that he mentioned in the same breath, Alberta. I think that we on this side of the House would hope that they would understand a novel idea by understanding what it is like to be competitive the way that they make Alberta competitive. Maybe they will find that a novel idea. Mr. Sp eaker, the existing legislation on The Essential Services Act- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr.

Mu rray: Thank you, Mr. Spea ker. The current Essential Services Act, that legislation is working. If I had to take my aunt, who broke a hip today, to the hospital I would have confidence that she would get the correct care because the health care prof essionals would ensure that that took place. Under this proposed legislation, if my aunt broke her hip, how would I have the confidence that the essential services as they are proposing to change would ensure that those people are not the ones making the decisions?

They are taking away the ability for the health care professionals to ensure that people like my aunt if she broke her hip would get the correct care. I ask the Premier: Why will he not listen to the people who are telling him their concerns about his proposed legislation? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, there is no proposed legislation. The whole premise of the question was false. Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, then my question is very simple to the Premier: Will he tell us today that he is not going to be bringing in any changes to The Essential Services Act as was deemed his health essentials services act?

Mr. Doer: The Essential Services Act in Manitoba, I have already said that we have improved the situation on essential services. We believe that the provision of life and limb services in Manitoba is essential in any essential services legislation. We also believe as the members, and we have canvassed a number of organizations and representatives, there are some views already being expressed about the Labour Board which is the ultimate decision maker under the existing legislation, something the member opposite was critical of last week.

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2629 Should we look at something more appropriate, for example, on a body that would have both employee and management experience specifically in health care dealing with the health care sector? I want to tell the member opposite there are all kinds of issues that a government must address. There are all kinds of improvements that must be made. There are all kinds of consultations that take place. The consultations take place. We look at the consultations. We rework some of the ideas.

Some of the documents members opposite are talking about are two or three documents old, four or five weeks old, and this is an ongoing process. We do not have proposed legislation on the Order Paper, but we are certainly- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Members opposite identified last week they were going on a rant about the ability of the Labour Board to make a decision on health care services. In fact, that was in place in 19 96 under the legislation of the final arbiter. So, on one hand, they criticize the legislation, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe they did not realize that the consultations that were going on dealing with the Labour Board, where in fact the Labour Board was in place under their legislation and exists right now in the Legislature. Mr. Mu rray: I can only make reference to the fact that it was brought to our attention that there was an announcement about the proposed health essential services legislation that was made. So we find that there is a proposal that they are reversing. We find that they are not answering the questions, very straightforward questions, about proposed legislation.

We know from seeing what we have read, from what the regional health authorities are saying, they are saying very clearly in one loud voice the proposals that this Premier is trying to bring forward is bad legislation because it puts patients' safety at risk. Will the Premier today just tell all Manitobans, because all Manitobans want to know, that there is no health essential services legislation, which is his proposed legislation, coming forward? Mr.

Doer: The member opposite now has psychic powers that he can declare something that is not even before the Legislature, something he has not even read he calls it bad. It is like a Monty Python skit dealing with this leader. Tube rculosis Outbreak-W ildlife Status Report Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): My question is to the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Lathlin) or the Premier (Mr. Doer). My question concerns the cases of tuberculosis reported over the last several months in elk, in wildlife and in cattle in the neighbourhood of Riding Mountain National Park.

In light of the very serious tuberculosis outbreak in the last several years in Michigan, which has infected almost 300 deer as well as coyotes, racoons, black bear, bobcat and red fox and now into 13 cattle herds, I ask the minister to indicate to the Legislature today the present state of tuberculosis and wildlife in Manitoba and to tell the Legislature what he is doing with respect to tuberculosis in Manitoba wildlife. Hon.

Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education, Training and Youth): Staff for Conservation and natural resources, of course, are always engaged with the field in issues such as the member mentions, tuberculosis being one of them. There is a great sensitivity vis-a-vis this disease in terms of cattle herds and so forth, but their processes have been well established in Conservation to monitor and arrest any sort of outbreak of this nature that may have a transference between domestic stock and wildlife. * (14 : 10 ) Mr. Gerrard: My supplementary is to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh).

Is it true what we hear that the cause of bovine tuberculosis in cattle near Riding Mountain National Park may be illegal baiting of elk near Riding Mountain National Park leading to infected elk saliva getting into the bales which are then later fed to cattle?

2630 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 I ask the Minister of Justice what he is doing in the case of this alleged illegal activity. Mr. Caldwell: Mr. Spea ker, the member refers to alleged illegal activity. I will take the question as notice. Mr. Gerrard: My supplementary to the Minister of Justice. I ask the minister what he is doing to investigate illegal activity, which is said to be going on in this province, to get to the bottom of the situation in case it has a relationship to the tuber culosis which is a concern in the area of Riding Mountain National Park. Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): Yes, enforcement of wildlife laws, Mr. Spea ker, are under the enforcement of the conservation officers in the Department of Conservation. To go over what investigative activity is going on is certainly some of the issues; the techniques that they are using, obviously, are very, very much part of their protocol. I would say this is a very serious issue. We are aware of cases in Saskatchewan with the disease spreading from captured elk to livestock, and we are aware of situations and concerns adjacent to the Riding Mountain National Park.

I met with the vet, with the Member for Dauphin Roblin (Mr. Struthers), in Grandview a few weeks ago and went over a lot of the concerns, a lot of the precautions that are being taken by farmers, by wildlife people, by conservation people, by vets on the maximum precautions against the spreading of the disease. There are problems with the wildlife in the livestock areas that are ad jacent to Riding Mountain National Park. The Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) is very concerned about this, as well, in terms of preventing the spread of the disease from wildlife to the livestock.

We are very concerned about taking whatever measures we can to prevent the spread ofthis disease. It is a serious issue. I acknowledge the seriousness of the question that has been posed by the Member for River Heights, and we acknowledge the challenge to ensure that our livestock is protected, our wildlife is protected, and that any spread of tuberculosis from existing stock that has it, whether it is outside of the province, is contained and prevented. Mining Industry Government Initiatives Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr.

Spea ker, last Friday I was pleased to participate in the official opening of the Chisel North mine near Snow Lake. The mineral industry is extremely important to the economy of Manitoba. In light of the fact that this industry is currently facing some challenges, can the Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines inform this House what initiatives this Government is undertaking to ensure that in future there will be many more mine openings such as Chisel North? Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Indust ry, Trade and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, yes, last Friday we had the opportunity to open a new mine in Manitoba, which is good news not only for northern Manitoba and the community of Snow Lake but for all Manitobans. We rely on minerals for our day-to-day lives, and it is an important source of revenue for our overall economy. The No. 1 thing that we need to do in terms of the mineral industry is invest in the science of the data collection that is absolutely essential for the future and the well-being of the mineral industry.

One of the things that the previous government did not do is invest in that science database; in fact, they starved the Geological Services Branch for 10 years. It took a change in government and a commitment from a government that under stands the importance of the North and this sector to invest over 7 percent in the

section that provides geological mapping for industry, particularly at a time when we see the ma jor mining companies reduce exploration. So congratulations. Labour Legislation Ministerial Responsib ility Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, after the Bill 44 debacle it appears that the

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 263 1 Premier (Mr. Doer) of Manitoba is reluctant to let his Labour Minister steer yet another piece of labour legislation through this House. Like most Manitobans, he has clearly lost confidence in his Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett). Will the Premier confirm that his Minister of Labour will not be responsible for the proposed health essential services legislation? Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): A point of order, Mr. Sp eaker.

There are 20 or 30 bills on the Order Paper; this is not one. This is a question about a non-existent bill. It is entirely hypothetical. Rule 410 .(12 ): Questions should not be hypothetical. It wastes the time of this Legis lature. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Opposition House Leader, on the same point of order. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Spea ker. We already know that there are memos from the Manitoba regional health authority that speak about the proposed essential services act, which this Government is prepared to take through the House.

So we do not believe this is a hypothetical question. There is a lot of discus sion out there, and this legislation seems to be coming forward. We are just making sure that they put on the brakes. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, at this time I am going to take the matter under advisement to check with Manitoba practices. I would ask the honourable member if at this time he would wish to rephrase his question so I can bring back a ruling to the House. * * * Mr. Schuler: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

How can patients have confidence in the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) to protect patient safety when the Premier does not have confidence in her ability to oversee substantial changes to labour legislation in Manitoba? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, we have the utmost confidence in the minister and all ministers. I know there is an old memo floating around that is so dated in terms of our consultations that it is quite a bit old and, quite frankly, absolutely out of date. Having said that, the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Mackintosh) is involved in issues of essential services; the Minister responsible for the Treasury Board and the Civil Service (Mr. Selin ger) is responsible for matters of the essential services; the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) is responsible for matters dealing with essential services; the Minister of Intergovern mental Affairs (Ms. Friesen), Mr. Speaker, deals with some of the issues of municipal ambulance transportation and deals with issues of essential services; the Minister of Labour (Ms.

Barrett) deals with issues of essential services dealing with the Fire Commissioner's office; the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale) deals with Family Services for Vulnerable People; the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Ashton) deals with airports that are important for people dealing with essential services, and on and on and on it goes. I am glad last week- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. * (14: 20) Mr. Doer: And, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Lathlin), as we speak, is dealing with a serious situation in the community of Minnedosa, along with the Minister of Health (Mr.

Chomiak), dealing with a fire and a situation of evacuation of residents. So, yes, all ministers of government deal with it. Last week the members opposite dealt with it by saying the Labour Board was not appropriate to deal with essential services which is in the legislation. That is a useful idea, and we will incorporate that into all of our thinking on essential services.

2632 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 Labour Legislation Ministerial Responsib ility Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Spea ker, we know that the Doer government's commitment to protect life and limb is just not selling out there in the concerns of The Essential Services Act. Although the Premier says that there is no act coming forward, my question to the Premier is: Which minister will be sponsoring the bill? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, there is no bill and there is no sale. There is just consultation. Thank you. Mr. Tweed: Mr.

Spea ker, I am wondering if the Premier could tell us which minister will ensure the health and the safety of the patients of Manitoba. Mr. Doer: Mr. Spea ker, it certainly will not be a minister that will close a number of emergency wards. It certainly will not be a minister that will hire Connie Curran to fire a thousand nurses. It certainly will not be a minister that will bring in profit in home care. The whole caucus. not just ministers, cares about patient care, something members opposite forgot while they were in government. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. I have a ruling for the House.

Speaker's Ruling Mr. Speak er: During Oral Questions on Thursday, May 24, 2001, the honourable Official Opposition House Leader raised a point of order concerning remarks spoken by the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) on a previous point of order. The honourable Official Opposition House Leader stated that the honourable Minister of Health had made reference to the honourable Member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger), calling the honourable Minister of Health a liar.

The honourable Official Opposition House Leader then indicated that the honourable Member for Charleswood had not called the honourable Minister of Health a liar. I took the matter under advisement in order to peruse Hansard. Subsequently the honourable Government House Leader rose on a point of order regarding the use of the word "lying" or "lies." I indicated that the matter was already taken under advisement. I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the points of order.

In looking back at this issue, on page 224 1 of Hansard, the honourable Member for Charleswood stated "what does he say to the student nurses who have recently phoned me and said 'Myrna, why does the Government keep on lying about that? How do you make them stop lying?"' On page 2242, the honourable Minister of Health is recorded as saying "the member stood up in this Chamber and accused me of lying." From my reading of this exchange, I would rule that this is a difference of

interpretation over the facts, with the honourable Member for Charleswood saying one thing and the honourable Minister of Health saying another.

Concerning the issue raised by the honourable Government House Leader of whether or not the comments of the honourable Member for Charleswood were unparliamentary, I would advise the House that page 526 of Marleau and Montpetit states that "expressions which are considered unparliamentary when applied to an individual member have not always been considered so when applied 'in a generic sense' or to a party." From rulings of previous Manitoba Speakers, Madam Spe aker Dacquay noted in a ruling delivered on December 8, 19 97, that Speaker Rocan had twice ruled the term "one big lie" in order, with the qualification that the phrase had not been targeted at an individual.

In addition, on May 4, 19 99, Madam Sp eaker Dacquay also ruled in order the phrase "I never encountered as many liars in one proceeding as I did during this inquiry" because the words were not used to directly or indirectly allude to specific members of the Assembly. I would therefore rule that in this case, given that no specific members were targeted in the comments, there is no point of order regarding the use of unparliamentary language.

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2633 However, for the clarification of the House, should the words "liars," "lie" or "lying" be used in the future in the context of addressing specific members, these words could be considered unparliamentary. It would also not be in order to use these words directly to specific members while quoting from constituents or other outside sources. MEMB ERS' STATEMENTS Environment Week Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to have this opportunity to put a few words on the record about Environment Week, which is being celebrated across Canada and provincially here as well this week. I am disappointed, however, that the Conservation Minister has chosen not to make a statement in this House to mark this important event. Canadian Environment Week is held the first week of June each year to coincide with World Environment Day proclaimed by the United Nations in 19 72 and celebrated on June 5. A number of events wiii be held across Canada and here in Manitoba to mark Environment Week.

For an example, there is the commuter challenge, where people are encouraged to find more environmentally friendly ways to get to work, whether that means taking a bus, car pooling, walking, biking or using a scooter to get around. There is the Clean Air Day, which examines the importance of clean air and the implications of climate change. Locally, the Green Fair is underway, bringing together suppliers and potential purchasers of green products. I hope the Conservation Minister takes to heart the important messages that are being discussed during this week.

He has some lessons to learn about protecting the province's resources. It was only a few short weeks ago that the Canadian Nature Federation gave the NDP government a C-minus grade for its record on protecting the environment. The Government failed to meet its election promise to protect wildlife habitat, slipping below the B-plus standard set by the previous Filmon government, which led the country in turning unprotected Crown lands into parks and wildlife reserves during the '90s.

The Conservation Minister has also come under fire for failing to properly notify the public about a ma jor gasoline spiii in East St. Paul, about failing to promptly remove lindane contaminated soil in East St. Paul, for failing to notify the Pointe du Bois residents about an oil spill in the Winnipeg River, and he has been chastised about a wash water spill in Brandon. The Conservation Minister has also been singled out for the multitude of meetings he missed, which included several during his short time on Treasury Board. Then there is the department's backlog in processing drainage permits.

Environment Week is about acting today for tomorrow. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable member's time has expired. * (1 4:30) Chisel North Mine Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Fiin Flon): It is with great pleasure that I rise today to bring attention to a very important development for the Snow Lake region. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co. has officially opened the new Chisel North mine in Snow Lake, a key project that will have many benefits for residents of the area, which includes the employment of about 80 people.

The $32-million capital investment is part of Hudson Bay's $400-million investment in a six tiered expansion called the Triple Seven Group of Projects. The mine will boast a production rate of approximately 600 tonnes per day of zinc-rich ore and is expected to be in production for at least I 0 years and hopefully much longer. I had the opportunity, along with MaryAnn Mihychuk, Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines- Mr. Speaker: Order. I would like to remind all honourable members, when referring to other members, it is by constituency or ministers by their portfolios, not by name. Mr. Jennissen: Sorry, Mr.

Speaker. I had the opportunity, along with the Minister of Industry,

2634 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 Trade and Mines (Ms. Mihychuk), Peter Jones, Senior Vice-President of Hudson Bay; Bob Doak, Manager of Snow Lake operation; Robert Libbey, Project Foreman; Garry Zamzow, Mayor of Snow Lake; Tom Farrell, Deputy Minister of Labour; Hugh Eliasson, Deputy Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines; and many others, to take

part in the official opening of this very special project. The Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines and I also took this opportunity to meet with Mayor Zamzow and the Town Council of Snow Lake, where we had a very productive discussion on key issues concerning Snow Lake. The opening of the new mine is yet another example of the Snow Lake region's important economic capabilities, and I am proud to be able to take

part in these important initiatives in the constituency of Flin Flon. B.C. Election Results Mr. Harry Enos (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker. I take a few moments to rise in the House today to mark an important occasion for all of us, certainly for our sister province British Columbia, which today officially is ending 10 years of New Dem ocratic Party rule. It has import for all of us.

It was apparent, of course, to British Columbians for far too long during those 10 years, but in the middle of that campaign that brought about that huge majority was the startling fact that this, our richest province, was about to become a have-not province. That is what 10 years of New Democratic Party mis management had done for it. I cite that only because of the difference of attitude that we have heard today. Mr.

Spe aker, a census and census information has always been important, but for the first time I noticed when this year's census came along, the emphasis this Government and this minister put on the fact that if you did not fill out your form we would lose $32,000. In what? In transfer payments. One of the things that I took some pride in in the last administration was that we were getting away from that mindset. We should have been proud to become a have province instead of a have-not province. We were not there for a while, but this Government wants to re emphasize something like that: Let us stay on the dole.

That is now ending for British Columbians. We can be thankful for that. St. Vital Agricultural Society Ms. Nancy Allan (St. Vital): Mr. Speaker, recently I had the pleasure of attending a wonderful evening organized by the St. Vital Agricultural Soc iety, the Garden Booster Night, an evening celebrating the appreciation of horticulture. The mission statement of the St.

Vital Agricultural Socie ty is to encourage excellence in horticulture, baking, handicrafts and graphic arts and to provide educational and promotional opportunities for the wider development of these skills. to instil a love of gardening, especially amongst our youth, to promote beautification of our homes and environment and to maintain an awareness of St. Vital's agricultural traditions. The St. Vital Agricultural Soci ety has a rich 92-year history in St. Vital and will be presenting their 93rd annual display and fair August 13 , 14 and 15 .

This fair will recognize the importance and value of this organization and agriculture in the St. Vital community. The fair's theme for 200 1 is entitled "A Walk through Nature's Garden." I would like to take the opportunity to invite you to stop by and see the different classes up for judging, from cut flowers, paintings, photography, vegetables, fruit, preserves, and particularly the junior gardening competition. The competition is intended to make young people aware of gardening and encourage them to develop long-lasting gardening and environmental skills. Mr. Spea ker, 200 1 is the Year of the Volunteer.

Special thanks and recognition go out to the dedicated volunteers whose time and energy make the fair a success. Their commitment ensures the fair is still thriving. Congratulations and special thanks to all the exhibitors for participating in this very worthwhile event and also thank you to the many sponsors who support the fair and

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 2635 contribute to the agricultural community in St. Vital. Truck Driving Competition Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, rise today to recognize two constituents from my area who have recently won competitions demonstrating skill in their field of employment. Steinbach residents Frank Klassen of Penner International and Jack Blatz of Big Freight Trucking won awards in their individual classes at the recent Provincial Truck Driving Championships.

Both proved their superior driving skills in a competition which had participants demonstrate driving skills on a test track designed to simulate the conditions of daily driving. As well, drivers participated in events that tested their ability to detect safety hazards on the vehicle itself. Because of their success, both Mr. Klassen and Mr. Blatz have earned spots on the provincial driving team, which will compete at the National Professional Truck Driving Championship in Surrey, British Columbia. This was the 20th Provincial Truck Driving competition for Mr.

Klassen, who has previously won his category seven times and has been named Grand Champion four times. His long time success is particularly notable at a time when driver safety, through reduced speeds and greater attention, are rece1vmg increased attention. Indeed, those who make their living on the road know all too well the importance of saf e driving and the danger that can occur from careless operation of the vehicle. The trucking industry plays an important

part in the economy of Manitoba, and I commend the many drivers in our province who are committed to improving and maintaining a high standard of driving skill, which in tum increases safety on our roads. On behalf of the residents of the Steinbach constituency and all the members of this Chamber, I would like to congratulate Mr. Klassen and Mr. Blatz on their success and wish them well as they represent Manitoba at the upcoming National Professional Truck Driving championship. Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DAY * (14: 40) Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr.

Sp eaker, it is the intention to deal with bills today. If you could call the bills in the following order: With regard to second readings, Bill 41; and then debate on second readings, 9, 12 , 14 , 15 , 29, 30; then second readings again, Bills 40 and 25. If there is time remaining, adjourned debate on 17 . SECOND READINGS Bi11 41 -An Act to Comply with the Supreme Court of Canada Decision in M. v. H. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr. Sale), that Bill 41,

An Act to Comply with the Supreme Court of Canada Decision in M v. H. (Loi visant !'observation de Ia decision de Ia Cour supreme du Canada dans !'arret M c. H.), be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Mackintosh: On May 20, 19 99, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that same-sex, common-law partners should be able to apply for partner support, or what some people call alimony, from each other.

The court in that decision, which was an eight-to-one ruling, one justice dissenting, ruled that the Ontario legislation which prohibited these applications was in contravention of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In that case, Mr. Speaker, the court looked at the legislation and the evidence that was before the lower courts in light of

Section 15 , which deals with equality rights, and with

Section 1, which deals with reasonable limits in a free and democratic society, in coming to its determination. Following that Supreme Court decision, both the former and the current governments in Manitoba committed to abiding by the ruling in the case which is known as M v. H. Shortly after

2636 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 taking government, Mr. Spea ker, an analysis was begun to determine what Manitoba legislation was likely impugned or affected by the Supreme Court decision. Now, Mr. Spea ker, when the Supreme Court of Canada makes a ruling in a matter such as this, it is always incumbent on the legislatures of the provinces and territories, as well as the federal Parliament, to review legislation and ensure that there is compliance with the pronouncements of the Supreme Court of Canada. The reason for this, Mr. Speaker, is quite straightforward.

It is important that legislatures and governments act legally. Therefore, as a result of deliberations and the review of Manitoba legislation, this bill seeks to amend I 0 provincial statutes. The three areas that are dealt with in the bill include obviously the extension of partner support rights and obligations; second, it deals with the issue of survivor benefits or the rights of survivors and extends the obligations and the rights to same-sex couples in relationships of some permanence; and third, deals with the issue of pension benefits.

This bill, of course, does not affect the institution of marriage as we know it. Only the federal government has that constitutional ability to affect who can marry under the Constitution Act of Canada. Indeed, the federal Parliament, as recently as in the last year or so, in the legislation which dealt with same-sex, common law relationships, determined and made a statement in that legislation that marriage was a union between a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others. Mr. Spea ker, this bill in Manitoba recognizes a distinction between spouses on the one hand and common-law partners on the other.

When it comes to defining common-law partnerships, Manitoba's bill follows the federal approach, which I think is valuable for several reasons, not the least of which is consistency in using gender-neutral

definitions of common-law partner and common-law relationship which apply to both same-sex and opposite-sex conjugal relationships. Where the term "common-law partner" is used, it is defined from act to act. We have already used "common-law partner" in other legislation. For example, last session, amendments to The Income Tax Act and the Victims' Bill of Rights uses this definition. As I said earlier, this is consistent with federal legislation which allows for consistent application of family law, in particular, in Manitoba, whether the law is federal or provincial in nature.

The statutes which contain support provisions needing to be amended in order to comply with M v. H are The Family Mainte nance Act and The Dependants Relief Act, and there are then consequential amendments, procedural amendments in The Court of Queen's Bench Act. The Family Maintenance Act has been amended to allow a common-law partnership to be found after three years of cohabitation and to extend orders for partner support to same-sex, common-law partnerships. The act will also now allow for more flexibility in applying for support after the relationship has ended.

The Dependants Relief Act, as drafted, includes same-sex cohabitants in the definition of dependants, and actual dependency will be the determining factor in deciding what support is owing from an estate. Cohabitation must have been ongoing or subsisting for three years before death, whether the partners are same sex or opposite sex. The Court of Queen's Bench Act is being amended to allow applications for relief respecting same-sex, common-law relationships to be heard, as I recall, in the Family Division of that court. Acts contammg support-like provJSlons which require amendment to comply with M v.

H include The Pension Benefits Act, that is for provincial pensions; The Civil Service Superannuation Act, that is Civil Service pensions; The Teachers' Pensions Act, and that speaks for itself; and, as well, The Legislative Assembly Act dealing with MLA pensions. Amendments to these statutes will allow same sex, common-law partners to have entitlements in relation to credit splitting, death benefit, joint

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 2637 pension provisions that currently apply to common-law spouses. The

definitions applying to length of cohabitation have been changed to allow access to benefits after a cohabitation period of one year unless one of the partners is currently married to a person outside of the partnership. These acts will now also allow for a same-sex, common law partner to have entitlement to survivor's benefits where the relationship was subsisting at the time of death. Other acts with support-like provisions are The Fatal Accidents Act, The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act and The Workers' Compensation Act.

These acts allow for pay ment of benefits to common-law partners on the death of one partner, giving rise to a claim under one ofthe acts. Under these acts the new provisions will allow for same-sex, common-law couples to claim survivor benefits where the relationship is subsisting at the time of death and has been in existence for three years prior to one partner's death. The legislation that is being amended is not just about rights but it is also about obligations and duties.

More specifically it is about the obligation of persons in dependent relationships, those obligations that can be so imp ortant to those in vulnerable economic positions in a relationship. The Province considers it imp ortant to respect the law and the Supreme Court. It is also important to respect the dignity, the rights and the security of all Manitobans. This is the right thing to do, Mr. Speaker, both out of respect for the law and the rights of all. * (14: 50) This is the next important step m Manitobans' struggle for greater fairness.

We know that when legislation af fecting human rights is introduced or there are changes in public policy that further the recognition of rights, it is always open for observers to say that the legislation goes either too far or does not go far enough. That is part of the history and the evolution of the development of human rights in the world, Mr. Speaker, but this evolution or this journey is an important one.

Indeed, there are so many challenges that remain outstanding, whether in the area of Aboriginal justice, whether in the area of disabled access, not only in respect to the physically disabled, in the area of gender discrimination. I can go on and on with examples, but this is an ongoing struggle that requires attention. Mr. Spea ker, I was just looking at The Human Rights Act of Manitoba as it then was in the early 19 70s. I recognized in that act that the grounds of discrimination as listed were race, colour, religion, ethnic or national origin.

When you look at the human rights code of today in Manitoba, we have in addition to those enumerated grounds age, sex, including pregnancy, marital or family status, sexual orientation, source of income, political belief, disability, of course. Indeed human rights commissions today and those who are working to improve the rights of Canadians recognize that systemic discrimination which may not be as obvious but is more pervasive is an important challenge to deal with.

So what we see is here in Manitoba, for one, a remarkable change in the recognition of human rights and those characteristics of individuals that should not be determinants of their treatment in society. Mr. Sp eaker, this bill that we are introducing for second reading today is one part of that journey and one step and, I would say, an important step towards greater equality here in Manitoba in addition to recognizing the respect of Manitobans and members of this Legislature for the rule of law in Canada. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. House Business Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On a little bit of House business,

263 8 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 yesterday in Hansard on page 2550 in the second paragraph, the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selin ger) stated: He assures me that the Legislature, when the Public Utilities Committee of the Legislature meets on the 18 th of June. I do not believe that that committee has been called yet. I was wondering if the House Leader could inform me if we are calling it for the 18 th of June. It might be more appropriate if we had it announced in the House. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Spea ker, I will confirm that date.

I think perhaps as early as this afternoon we can confirm that date in the Legislature to have that committee struck. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 9- The Vital Statistics Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Mr. Speaker: To resume debate on second reading, Bill 9, The Vital Statistics Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les statistiques de l'etat civil et modifications correlatives), standing in the name of the honourable Member for Steinbach. Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Mr. Sp eaker, Bill 9, The Vital Statistics Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act is a bill that is amending the prov1s1ons dealing with registration of the name of a child, amending also the requirements for obtaining certificates or copies of registrations pertaining to births, marriages, deaths and stillborns. It is changing the name of the district registrars to event registrars and clarifying their duties.

In introducing the bill, then-Consumer and Corporate Affairs Minister stated: This change to naming restrictions recognizes the diverse ethnic traditions of all Manitobans. Older records are historical treasures and releasing them will facilitate genealogical research. The minister also noted that Vital Statistics has received a number of requests from parents who wish to give their child a surname in accordance with their cultural or religious traditions. The existing legislation provided that a child's surname could only be the surname of either parent or a combination of the parents surnames.

These changes, which respect multi culturalism, will provide parents with unrestricted choice for their child's surname. Manitoba is a province that prides itself on being respectful of other people's cultural and religious traditions. These legislative changes recognize and respect the heritage of all Manitobans. I note that the bill also provides for the removal of restrictions to access to older records. Birth registrations over 10 0 years, marriage registrations over 80 years old and death records over 10 0 years old will be opened.

I am sure this will be of interest to a number of people, particularly historians and people interested in genealogy. In addition, the bill provides for the creation of a new type of certificate that should prove beneficial to the courts in making decisions on parentage. It should provide the court with sufficient information to make decisions while protecting the mother's privacy.

I commend the minister for attempting to modernize the language in this legislation, and thereby making the legislation easier to understand and more responsive to the needs of Manitobans, so I would move that this Bill 9 go to committee. Thank you. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Spea ker, I would just like to speak very briefly on this bill because I am a member of the Manitoba Genealogical Socie ty, and I know that members of MGS will be very pleased to know that the bill removes restrictions on access to older Vital Statistics events records currently only available to family members.

More specifically, copies of birth registrations over a hundred years old, marriage registrations over 80 years old and death registrations over 70 years old will be available to the general public. I know that this is very important to people doing genealogical research. Anything that opens access and allows the public access to records in the past that were closed to them is an

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2639 improvement, and it is commendable that we are doing this. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: The question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 9, The Vital Statistics Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Bill 12- The Real Property Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on Bill 12 , The Real Property Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les biens reels). Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Mr. Spea ker. Bill 12 , The Real Property Amendment Act, amends the act to eliminate the requirement for duplicate certificates of title. It enables the district registrar to destroy existing duplicate certificates of title that are on file at the Land Titles of fice or are presented for registration purposes. Concerns have been raised that the reliance by the public on a duplicate title may be misleading and risky as the duplicate title may not show all instruments that are registered against the land. These could include judgments. liens and caveats.

If this can provide some clarity, it should prove beneficial. I note the amendments are also aimed at keeping pace with changing technologies such as the increase of electronic record keeping. For example, the elimination of the duplicate certificates of title should assist in the development of electronic registration of instruments in the Land Titles of fice. So this bill will be similar to that in provinces such as Saskatchewan, Alberta and Ontario, which no longer issue duplicate certificates of title. So I recommend that this bill pass and be sent to committee. * (15 :00) Mr.

Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 12 , The Real Property Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Bi11 14-The Consumer Protection Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on Bill 14 , The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia protection du consommateur). Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Mr. Spea ker, Bill 14 , The Consumer Protection Amendment Act, is

an act that offers protection to a buyer by allowing the buyer to cancel an Internet agreement if goods or services purchased under the agreement are not delivered within 30 days after the specified delivery date. When the Internet agreement is for travel, transportation or accommodation services, or for goods or services prescribed by regulation, this bill would allow the buyer to cancel the agreement that they had not provided on the date agreed upon. This bill also makes several corrections to the French version, and since 19 94 the number of Canadians using the Internet has tripled.

Estimates put Manitoba Internet usage at between 44 and 48 percent of the population. This use takes many forms, including research, educational and entertainment purposes. Another growing area of Internet usage is by e-shopper. An increasing number of Manitobans are taking advantage of the opportunity to make purchases over the Internet. It is important that we provide protection to these consumers as

2640 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 governments already do in the more traditional marketplace. The Manitoba government has been active in regulating Internet commerce, providing for consumer protection in the on-line transactions. As with any legislation that regulates a sector that is undergoing a rapid transition, one could reasonably expect the need to tinker with The Consumer Protection Act in order to better protect on-line shoppers. In this case, the changes address delivery requirements recognizing that the 30-day grace period for delivery of time-sensitive purchases needed to be improved.

This is not unreasonable as consumers are making purchases with the expectation that certain goods and services need to be delivered on time or the reason for their purchase is lost. I appreciate the effort the Government is making to update the legislation to ensure that goods and services are delivered in a timely fashion to consumers who make these purchases on-line. I would hope that the necessary steps are taken to ensure that this legislation will be enforceable. So I would recommend that this bill be passed to committee. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Hon.

Scott Smith (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The honourable minister will be closing debate. Are there any other speakers? Mr. Smi th: As my colleague across the way had mentioned, more and more people are starting to do transactions by e-commerce here in Manitoba and certainly all across North America. In fact, the globe is becoming a smaller and smaller place with transactions being done all around the globe very quickly. This bill certainly does add to the protection for consumers here in Manitoba.

On the time sensitive issue, as the member had mentioned, certainly the 30-day grace period does not meet the standard that we would like to see for consumers as present. The examples of time- sensitive transactions could be travel services or sporting goods tickets or perishable items that may be transferred via e-commerce. Certainly, to go to this, Mr. Speaker, provides people in Manitoba, on a national basis and international basis, with much more protection in this area. We see this as a growing area that trade is picking up continually.

It is becoming more and more apparent that younger and older consumers are using this form of transaction and that the 30-day grace period certainly needs to be addressed. Mr. Sp eaker, the amendments as proposed will give delivery-sensitive items the appropriate recognition for consumers of protection, and we believe this bill is a protection here in Manitoba and internationally. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is second reading of Bill 14 , The Consumer Protection Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Bill l� The Mortgage Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: To resume debate on Bill 15 , The Mortgage Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les hypotheques). Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Mr. Spea ker, Bill 15, The Mortgage Amendment Act, allows for a reverse mortgage that allows homeowners to turn the equity in their home into cash without making mortgage payments or selling their homes. It is a type of a mortgage that I became familiar with in dealing with my wife's parents and their estate, and we found it very useful in the later years to accommodate them so that they could preserve their lifestyle and not have to move out of their home. Reverse mortgages do have benefits as the funds may be used in any manner the homeowner chooses. In addition, since this is

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 264 1 classified as a loan, the funds are tax free. Under a reverse mortgage, no payments are required until the homeowner dies or sells the property that is provided as security. However, interest continues to accumulate on the principal amount, and therefore the amount of the loan increases while the equity in the home decreases. This bill will require that reverse mortgage lenders provide full and accurate disclosure to the costs and conditions of reverse mortgages at least seven days before the borrower signs the mortgage.

If the lender does not provide the required disclosure, the borrower must only repay the funds advanced and may do so at any time without notice or penalty. This bill also provides additional protection for consumers by giving the Consumers' Bureau the power to investigate and mediate complaints about reverse mortgages. We hope and trust that the investigation people will have not only the authority but the education, training and integrity to do this correctly.

While the choice on how to organize one's finances is best left to the individual, it is important that consumers receive the information that they need to assist them in making an informed decision. I recommend this bill and move that we pass it to committee. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Hon. Scott Smith (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, this is all about reverse mortgages, and certainly there is a need for these types of loans out there. Mr. Speaker: Are there any other members wishing to speak because the honourable minister will be closing debate? Mr.

Jim Rondeau (Assiniboia): Mr. Speaker, I would like to put a few brief comments on the record on the reverse mortgages act. I think this is a wonderful act because what it is doing is it is providing full disclosure and information to people so they can make informed financial decisions about their long term well-being. It is also very important because what is happening is that it is making sure that people have the information and the time to make a timely decision.

It provides that we actually have the Consumers' Bureau being able to mediate if there is any difficulty so that if there is a company that is unscrupulous, people do have a way to deal with it. It also allows people to continue their lifestyle. In these days when you have limited access to funds in retirement, what it does is that it does provide people an access to funds so that they can enjoy their later years, have a good standard of living and still remain in their house. They do not have to sell their house. They do not have to move away from where they are comfortable and their neighbours.

They get to stay in their house and maintain their standard of living and have a good standard of living and even travel and enjoy all the efforts that they have had over the years. I think this is great because you are providing seniors with another avenue to maintain a good quality of life within Manitoba and not having to move. Therefore, I strongly support this. I think it is a great act for people to make informed financial decisions. Mr. Speaker: Any other members wishing to speak? * (15:10 ) Mr. Smith: As has been mentioned by my colleague previously, the reverse mortgages certainly have their place.

This bill is about informed decisions. It is about disclosure up front with people who are considering this type of option. Certainly the strengthening of this disclosure clause will make it one of the strongest in Canada on disclosure and information for people considering these loans. The equity in the homes for many of the people is their life savings and certainly with the information provided up front they can make informed decisions on the type of loans that they would like to take out. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

2642 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 15, The Mortgage Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Bill 29- The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: Resume debate of Bill 29, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act (Loi modifant Ia

Loi sur Ia location a usage d'habitation). Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): This was one bill that we may want to talk about a little more. The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act is a proposal by the government of the day to change the time of rent regulation, or what we often call rent controls, from five years for new buildings to fifteen years.

So what I have done in regard to this bill is I have gone to people who are landlords, a couple of people in North Kildonan, some in downtown Winnipeg, and I just asked for a reaction on this bill to see how it would affect the construction of new properties and how it would affect the old buildings. The time of extension to the 15 years is for new buildings for which the following occur after April 9, 2001. The first occupancy permit is issued after April 9, 2001, if one is required by the local government, or the first tenant occupies the first suite after April 9, 200 l.

In introducing the legislation, the minister stated: we want to encourage new construction in Manitoba as well as create new rental accommodations that will address the housing needs of Manitobans. We are comm itted to urban revitalization and the development of quality, affordable housing. There is no doubt that a lack of new construction in private rental housing is an issue throughout Canada. One need only look at occupancy rates to recognize that there is a need for the development of a broad range of housing opportunities, be they apartments, duplexes, townhouses, condomin iums or something similar.

By the Province's own estimates, during the next 15 years, approximately 700 additional rental units will be required each year in Manitoba to house empty-nesters and the new households. The Government maintains that these legislative changes may encourage more contractors to reinvest in Manitoba. If that is the end result of the legislation, then it will have proven beneficial. I commend the minister for finally beginning to look at the issue of rent control. I would be interested to know if this measure signals the start of a larger examination of the role of rent controls in this province.

Rent control has been the subject of considerable debate in Manitoba for more than two decades under both the Progressive Conservative and the NDP administrations. There are many people out there with strong arguments, both for and against the elimination of rent controls. I believe that Winnipeg is the last place in Canada to retain rent controls. As such, a lot of tenants are being disadvantaged because landlords will not make the necessary improvements. Sometimes the buildings get so decrepit that they are taken out of service.

I think that probably there was a time when rent control, during high-inflation times, was pretty significant in protecting the tenants. Today I think it is a disadvantage to the tenants. I think it should be re-examined and restudied to see how we can adjust the rent controls. As far as the issue of changing the exemption from rent controls from five years to fifteen years, I find nothing negative or positive about that issue, but I do feel that we can just pass this bill and see whether or not it will make a difference.

At the same time, I must encourage the government of the day to take a hard look at rent controls. Lis ten to the Mayor of Winnipeg, listen to the people who are building in rural areas and see if we have probably outlived the usefulness of the old laws and rent controls. So, having said that, Mr. Sp eaker, I would recommend that we send this bill to committee. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): I would like to put a few brief remarks on the record about

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2643 this bill, which I support. The first time that I ever came to the Manitoba Legislature was probably in June or July of 19 80. In fact, I came with the Member for St. Boniface (Mr. Seling er), along with a delegation which was speaking in opposition at the committee stage of a bill introduced by the Sterling Lyon government to repeal rent control. We know that that is one of the reasons why they lost government not very long after that.

In fact, I have heard it said by staff to former ministers that one of the reasons that the former Conservative government always said no to getting rid of rent control was that the NDP won 10 seats on that issue in the November 19 81 election, and that is probably true. It is probably why, in spite of intense lobbying by the rental housing business, that the former Filmon government did not get rid of rent control, because it is a very important issue to people who are renters, particularly low-income renters. [interjection] The Member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) is trying to confuse me here.

I was trying to say to him, to all members, that I was part of a delegation trying to stop the Sterling Lyon government from repealing rent control. I was very pleased to go back, I believe it would be in July of 1981, when the Howard Pawley government reintroduced rent control. I was one of the people who presented a brief and spoke to the committee. I actually thought it was kind of fun answering questions from about 10 MLAs on that committee. I was very surprised that about 15 years later the former Minister of Finance, Mr. Manness. remembered me presenting a brief to the committee on rent control.

I would have thought that after the passage of a number of years that he would not have remembered me at all. In fact, I probably looked quite different because I had quite a beard at that time. An Honourable Member: You had long hair then? Mr. Martindale: Well, I did have a beard. My hair was probably longer than it is now, yes. I think Eugene Kostyra was the Minister of Housing at the time who brought in that legislation. We talk about rent control legislation, but we do not strictly have rent control legislation in Manitoba.

We have rent pass-through legislation, because if you read the legislation, if landlords spend money on capital costs, they can pass through those capital costs if they are identifiable, if they are proven, and they should. to their tenants. That is what they do to justify a rent increase. I have helped tenants in the past fight rent increases of up to 40 percent, and the landlords were successful because they were able to justify their costs. Most of those costs are amortized over a fairly short period of time, three to five years, and after those costs are paid off, does the rent go down?

No, it stays at the same plateau, and any new rent increases are on top of that plateau. I have had tenants, including very high income housing on Roslyn Road, who lobbied me when I was the Housing critic for my party, pointing out how these pass-throughs happen and how it is on a new plateau, as I was explaining, and how much money their landlord was making, because if you appeal a rent increase, you get access to all the landlord's figures, right? So they had figured out what the profit margin was.

I have even had landlords tell me that their profit margin was 70 percent on their revenue properties, which seems to me to be a very lucrative business to be in, although I must say that in this particular case it was a slum landlord who was not putting any money back into the property. It is probably a different proposition for people who are decent landlords. I represent a very large number of low income people for whom rent control is very important. I think it provides affordable housing. We are talking about people who do not have alternatives, who cannot afford in many cases decent, af fordable housing.

I think especially for lower income tenants rent control is very important. So I am pleased to speak in favour of this bill and this change that has been made, but particularly in support of rent control in general. *( 1 5:20) Mr. Jim Rondeau (Assiniboia): I am also pleased to put a few words on the record on this bill. I think that this is an excellent bill, because

2644 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 what it does is it allows for people to get some return on the investment that they are making. It also allows them to have a little bit of flexibility as far as the rents that they can actually charge. I would like to speak in favour of rent controls, however. I think rent controls allow decent housing at a good, decent rate of rent. I think what our rent controls do is very important. What it does is it means that people can get increases in their rent, but they have to be justified.

They have to be tied to the landlord actually making improvements to the property. The idea of having non-justifiable rent increases just means that you are putting more and more profit into the landlord's hands. So it is very important that we actually have justifiable rent increases. The reason why we have not had a lot of investment in the province, though, is simple. We have very, very low prices for housing. If it costs $1 20,000 to build an apartment you need approximately $10 ,000 to $1 2,000 for a return on investment.

That would mean that you would need to charge rent in excess of$1 ,000 to $1 ,200 a month in order to make money on the investment. One of the reasons why we have not had a Jot of investment is because a house in Winnipeg costs easily $85,000 to $1 00,000, and, therefore, people can buy a home for the same price as it would cost to rent. Hopefully what this does do, though, is it allows people in a tight rental market to have a chance to build new units.

It is interesting to note that our rent controls are important now because we have a very small vacancy rate, about 2.5% vacancy rate, which means that there is very little rental accommodation available. If we did not have rent controls what we would have is rents being jacked up for seniors and those on fixed incomes. So the rent controls on the older properties become essential.

I am very pleased that we are keeping that part and I am very pleased that we are also allowing landlords the opportunity to increase rents on new buildings and new construction so that they can get return on their investment and get more building in Winnipeg. It is very important also to note why we have such a low vacancy rate. Why we have it is people are moving back to Manitoba again. It is nice to see that our population is increasing, our housing stock is improving. Actually we have a good spirit of optimism.

Part of that optimism, we hope, is to build new apartment blocks, new residential rental units in Winnipeg. I certainly hope some come into Assiniboia. We are looking forward to the impact of this bill. Hon. Scott Smith (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): If there is no one else wishing to speak, I would wish to close debate. Mr. Speaker: Anyone else wish to speak? No other speakers. Mr. Smith: Mr. Spea ker, this bill certainly is evidence of our commitment to development of quality, affordable rental accommodation in Manitoba.

I have met over the period of four months many of the stakeholders in here in Manitoba. Certainly it came back overwhelm ingly that the stakeholders and people involved in the rental market industry certainly do not want to get rid of rent controls here in the province of Manitoba. That was highlighted over and over again. Certainly the Professional Property Managers' Association, which is a large association here in the province, has identified that adjustments at times need to be made. We talked previously about an e-commerce bill and some of the changes that happened within our world.

Certainly this is an ongoing process. It has been very positive for Manitoba. Obviously, the members opposite must have thought it was an awful good process, because there were no changes for a decade. Mr.

Spea ker, certainly to consider looking at what the Professional Property Managers' Association identified as a potential for consideration with me when we had one of our first meetings was that reinvestment in property here in Manitoba-and I might add that certainly throughout Canada, over the last decade, be it a province that has some form of rent regulation, and I can mention that certainly there are a number of provinces through Canada that do have rent regulation, certainly they have identified provinces with or without rent regulation, there has not been a Jot of construction in the last 15 years.

Out of the

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2645 14 6 000 housing starts in Canada in '99, fewer than 5000 were by private rental housing. It is true that there will be 600 to 700 additional units needed here in the province of Manitoba over the next number of years. One thing that was identified very clearly was the lack of new housing starts. CMHC had identified that the rate of return on other investments by many investors, certainly in condominiums, had a far greater and quicker rate of return in some of those investments.

Certainly the financial markets, we know, over the last decade, had a great rate of return. One thing that was identified and one thing that was suggested is to give the developers on new construction the ability to go in for the long term. We have done that with this change. It has certainly taken away any impediment for consideration on change, a new construction, certainly 15 years.

In fact, somewhere in the period of I 0 to 12 years was recognized by CMHC as a good long-term strategy for investors having the ability of markets and the market changes that certainly around a decade was what was suggested by CMHC. Fifteen years, we believe that this certainly will enable and give evidence to developers that we have lessened that certainly we would like to have new construction here in Manitoba. There have been consultations and certainly a great deal of movement by this Government in listening and consulting with people out in the marketplace.

We believe this is a positive change in the process to move ahead and get some quality af fordable rental housing here in the province of Manitoba. I thank you for being able to put those comments onto the record. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question bef ore the House is second reading of Bill 29, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? An Honourable Member: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Bill 30- The Securities Amendment Act Mr.

Speaker: To resume debate on Bill 30, The Securities Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les valeurs mobilieres), standing in the name of the honourable Member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau), is it the will of the House for the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for St. Norbert? Stand? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: That has been denied. The honourable Member for Steinbach, to speak to the bill. Mr. Jim Penner (Steinbach): Bill 30, The Securities Amendment Act, harmonizes securities legislation with other Canadian jurisdictions in numerous ways.

As such, as a small province, a small population province, we would be found to be more in line with what is happening in the rest of Canada. The Manitoba Securities Commission is a special operating agency of the Government, which is responsible for the regulation of securities, markets and enforcement of The Securities Act. The commission's mandate is to act in the public interest to protect Manitoba investors and to facilitate the raising of capital while maintaining fairness and integrity in the securities marketplace.

Due to the increasingly global nature of business transactions, securities commissions across the country must work together in order to ensure that investors are protected. This bill will make the task easier by harmonizing Manitoba's Securities Act with the securities legislation in other provinces. The global nature of business transactions has also resulted in more and more transactions being conducted electronically. This bill responds to the increased usage of new technology by facilitating electronic registrations and filing.

Although investment decisions are best left to the individual, it is important that investors have all the information that they need in order to make informed choices. By clarifying

2646 LEGISLA TIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANI TOBA June 5, 200 1 certain provisiOns of the act and increasing penalties for non-compliance, this bill will ensure that issuers who are regulated under the act will take their obligations seriously. I commend the minister for attempting to modernize the language in the legisla tion thereby making the legislation easier to understand and more responsive to the needs of Manitobans.

I think legislation of this nature has to be continually reviewed and probably should have a grandfather clause so that it comes up for review in a defined number of years, maybe three years, maybe five years, so that the bill will continue to meet the demands of the day. Although the update here probably meets the demand of 200 1 to a large extent, it may not be suitable in a few years, and we should have a provision in there to continually upgrade and update The Securities Act. With those remarks, Mr. Spea ker, I would recommend that this bill go to committee. *( 15 :30) Mr.

Spea ker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is second reading of Bill 30, The Securities Amendment Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. SECOND READINGS Bill 40- The Podiatrists Act Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the minister of highways and transportation, that Bill 40, The Podiatrists Act;

Loi sur les podiatres, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Chomi ak: Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the House some general information about the new podiatry act that is now before this House. This legislation replaces the outdated chiropody act and begins the process of providing a wider range of foot care services. As with most areas of the health system, the practice of podiatry has changed. The proposed legislation will acknowledge and include the range of services that podiatrists provide in many other jurisdictions.

This bill will improve foot care services that podiatrists will be able to provide to Manitoba and aid in keeping highly skilled podiatrists practising in Manitoba. Mr. Spea ker, as a result of this legislation, regulations will be developed to allow qualified podiatrists to perform minor surgical procedures on the foot under local anesthetic and prescribe certain drugs. The regulation will be developed in consultation with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba, the Manitoba Pharmaceutical Association and Manitoba Health. Mr.

Speaker, this is in keeping with other acts and other changes in the provision of health care services in a variety of areas, most notably, for example, the recent proclamation of The Midwifery Act. The college of podiatrists of Manitoba will be established to administer the act. The legislation will ensure that at least one-third of the members of the governing council and committees of the college will be members of the public. The complaints and discipline process for podiatrists is also updated and strengthened. Mr.

Spea ker, I would also like to outline for the honourable members other key aspects of this bill. The practice of podiatry, the new de fin it ion changes the description of the practice of chiropody to the practice of podiatry. It will allow qualified podiatrists to perform minor surgical procedures on the tissues of the foot under a local anesthetic and, as I indicated earlier, to provide certain drugs set out in regulation. Included practices: this position enables the college to establish a category of podiatrist who will be able to perform surgical procedures on

June 5, 2001 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2647 the bones or tendons of the foot. The parameters regarding drug prescriptions, diagnostic testing and surgical procedures will be set out as well in regulations. These regulations will be developed in consultation with the College of Physicians and Surgeons in Manitoba and the Manitoba Pharmaceutical Association. Of course this legislation entails a change of name. The name of the regulatory body will be changed from the Manitoba Association of Chiropodists to the college of podiatrists of Manitoba.

This change will make it easier for the public to identify the body responsible for regulating podiatrists and will emphasize the overriding duty of the college to act in the public interest and not engage in professional promotion activities that conflict with this duty. The duty of the college in this regard and overall is to act in the public interest, and it will be clearly stated in the act.

As I indicated earlier, public representation on the governing body of the college and on disciplinary committees will be increased to at least one-third, as recommended by the Manitoba Law Reform Commission in its report in 19 94. I am advised that all honourable members should know that the public representatives will be recruited and selected by a standing committee of the college. With respect to committees, Mr. Spea ker, a standing committee will be established to assess the credentials of podiatrists applying for surgical privileges. There will be an updated complaints and discipline process.

The complaints and discipline process will be consistent with the recent innovations and changes that we have made to professional legislation, most notably The Medical Act, The Midwifery Act and the physiotherapy and nursing legislation. A wider range of possible dispositions of complaints will be available, including informal resolution and a mediation process. An appeal from inquiry to Court of Appeal is offered. A member's appeal and inquiry panel will be directed to the Court of Appeal rather than the Court of Queen's Bench.

The experience, I am advised, in other provinces and other professions is indicated that in many cases a person who is unsuccessful in an appeal to a lower court will make a further appeal to a higher court. This change will lessen the burden on the member, the college and the courts, and, I can presume, will amount to more speedy disposition of the matter and conclude the matter in the interests of all sooner rather than later. The issue of continuing competence is one of increasing importance across the entire system.

The college will have increased ability to monitor the continuing competence of its members, including the authority to establish continuing competence programs and to appoint practice auditors to review the operation of a podiatry practice. Well, finally, Mr. Spea ker, the annual report will be required. The college will be required to submit an annual report to the Minister of Health.

It must include information on the structure of the college, its committees, details on the number of applicants for registration, the number of complaints and their disposition, the number of members disciplined, the reason for the discipline and the sanction imposed. Such a requirement was recommended by the Manitoba Law Reform Commission and is common, I am advised, in other jurisdictions, in other provinces, where health professions legislation has recently been updated. So, Mr.

Speaker, I commend this bill to members of the House who I know will have a variety of comments and advice to offer on this particular legislation. I look forward to the continuing discussion on this particular act. Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I move, seconded by the Member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. * (1 5:40) Bill 25-- The Health Services Insurance Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale), that Bill 25, The Health

2648 LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MAN ITOBA June 5, 200 1 Services Insurance Amendment and Conse quential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'assurance-maladie et modifications cor relatives, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of introducing this piece of legislation on behalf of the Government, and I am honoured to have the opportunity of explaining to members of the House and to the public some of the reasoning behind this particular legislation and outline for the public the reasons and the advantages with this particular amendment. There has been and there continues to be a variety of strategies dealing with the future of medicare.

During the late 19 90s, when members opposite formed government or were government, they attempted to deal with issues concerning private clinics and more specifically private hospitals through legislative amendment. What they did at the time, Mr. Spea ker, is amend this very act, amend The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act to designate certain surgical centres and certain facilities as designated centres under the act and permitted the payment of a contractual arrangement that was entered into between those centres and the Government of Manitoba to provide service.

This was done in response to the issue of privatized health care. This was done in response to violations of the Canada Health Act. This was done to deal with issues concerning potential erosion of the universal health care system. At the time, the Minister of Health, the present Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik), indicated that members opposite were not in favour of private hospitals and that members opposite were attempting to build up capacity in the public system in order to not have to deal with issues of privatized health care. I note that, Mr.

Speaker, because I think it bears discussion concerning what we have heard from the members on the opposite side of the House at present. What we have done in this legislation is we have taken The Health Services Assurance Amendment Act and closed some loopholes that deal with third-party payment and the ability for individuals to get around perhaps legislation dealing with insured services. What we have also done, Mr. Sp eaker, is ensure that surgical facilities will not perform as a matter of course procedures requtrtng overnight stays and thereby function as a private hospital.

We have had since the 19 20s in Manitoba a private hospital act that required the approval of the Minister of Health in order to operate a private hospital. Members opposite supported that proposal up until recently. Now I am not certain. I hear varying claims from members opposite with respect to their position, but what we decided to do is to deal with the issue of potential loopholes in the private hospital legislation. What we have done is we have changed some of the

definitions concerning definition of "private hospital." Essentially, what we have tried to do is to put into legislation what is common practice and what until recently I thought was a general consensus amongst all political parties but which now, I understand, is not supported by members opposite, that is that we do not want private hospitals in Manitoba for a variety of reasons, quite clearly. The provision of overnight stays is not, in our view, good health care. We have heard the arguments from members opposite that they want hotel rooms to be utilized in overnight stays.

We have heard demands for a need to have overnight stays, regular overnight stays. Mr. Speaker, it is a dangerous path if members opposite want to take us down the road of operating private hospitals. What we are trying to do is adhere to and to expand the capacity in our system to do day surgeries. Clearly, in an evolving health care system, if we look at the statistics, it was only several years ago that the volume of day surgeries increased greater than those surgeries done requiring overnight stays, and the trend is towards more day outpatient surgeries.

The most recent CIHI report, to which members oppos ite have referred, indicates that provinces in a changing health care system ought to put more attention and more resources into those types of services. So, Mr. Speaker, we are trying to support the trend towards more day surgeries, but we are

June 5, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2649 not going to go down the path of increasing capacities and going to the private hospital route. Hospital surgeries ought to be done, overnight surgeries, higher acuity type surgeries ought to be done in facilities that are appropriate for those surgeries. Day surgeries should be done and could be done offsite from the acute care sector and ought to be done in day surgery centres.

But to cross over and to start, as members opposite suggest, doing high-level acute care in day surgery centres is a dangerous practice and is not one that is recommended by anybody in the health care field that I know of, Mr. Speaker. It certainly is not recommended by the College of Physicians and Surgeons. It certainly is not recommended by all of the officials at the various health regions that we have talked to. So what we have done is we have tried to ensure that the provisions for private hospitals are consistent with what we believe is and what I think the consensus is, the provision of good health care.

You know, Mr. Speaker, The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act, if one looks at the entire act, it gives responsibility for the provision of services and the overall allocation of services to the Minister of Health and to the Department of Health to designate and to make allocations in those resources. A universal health care system that does not have the ability to control the types of services would not last very long.

Indeed, as I have said on many occasions in this House, when I met with fellow Health ministers, regardless of political stripe, across the country, they indicated that the provision of private hospitals was one of the more difficult issues facing all jurisdictions, and it is very clear why, what it can do to a health care system. The provision of private hospitals could very easily result and has resulted, in some cases, in a two-tier health care system where if you had the ability to pay for the service you went on one waiting list, but otherwise you went on another waiting list, Mr. Spe aker.

It is very clear from all of the evidence that when you operate a private system beside a public system, a report done in Manitoba, a report done in Alberta, reviews done by the New England Journal of Medicine all indicate that waiting lists go up when you operate a private beside a public and that it does not improve the situation. That is what studies show, Mr.

Speaker. * (15: 50) So the amendments to this act do nothing more than update and clarify the existing legislation and close some potential loopholes that have been suggested as difficulties and that can create difficulties in terms of the application of our universal health care system. Specifically, Mr. Speaker, the act looks at a variety of changes, a definition of outpatient, to update the definition, a definition of a surgical facility, to, again, update and to clearly delineate what a surgical service is in a surgical facility.

It updates it, and it provides a definition that is more appropriate to the services that are offered now, rather than the former definition that was left blank. We also in this act deal with payments to ensure-and it has happened in other jurisdictions; we do not want it to happen in Manitoba-that third-party payments are prohibited, so that third parties cannot be used to get around the legislation.

Additional powers are operated with respect to the ability to examine and find out information with respect to the act and to obtain information, as well as some what I would term administrative changes that deal with the issue of ensuring that the Department of Health is advised of actions concerning some claims that are taken, that permit the Department of Health to become involved in those kinds of actions which are largely administrative changes that required update, as well, with the act. So what we have, Mr. Spea ker, I think is a very clear statement by the Government of Manitoba that (

a) we wanted to update and we do not want private hospitals to be proliferating in Manitoba; (

b) we wanted to ensure that the integrity of the medicare system is preserved by virtue of ensuring that methods that have been used in some jurisdictions to get around the medicare payments are not utilized and are prohibited; and (

c) to provide for better clarification and

definitions as to what constitutes a surgical centre or surgical facility and surgical procedures.

2650 LEGI SLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 5, 200 1 So I find it passing strange, Mr. Speaker, I find it very strange the virulent opposition that we are hearing from members opposite. It is not dissimilar to legislation that was brought forward by members opposite. All it is is a clarification of legislation and a clear statement, I must admit, that we do not want private hospitals in Manitoba. Now, I recognize that there are different options and different approaches that ought to be discussed and ought to be looked at with respect to the provision of health care.

I have said on many occasions that when members opposite only state the mantra, the manta being private, private, private, they do a disservice to the system, that there is more to improving the system than the mantra I hear from members opposite, which is private, private, private, private. I hear that from members opposite, and that is all I hear from members opposite, no other options. We are saying in Manitoba, Mr. Spea ker, that we are taking different approaches.

We are looking at taking a private surgical facility and moving it into the public sector, providing the same kinds of services but being able to do more services, provide for more services, improve the quality of service and reduce waiting lists. What do member opposite say? Private, private, private. Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair We say that we do not think it is appropriate to have overnight stays in surgical facilities. They are not designed for overnight stays, but members opposite want overnight stays, want private hospitals, private, private, private. You know, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, no matter which direction or which way we go in the health care system, I hear the continuing mantra of private, private, private. Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think there are other alternatives and other approaches that can be innovative, and that is what we are trying to do in Manitoba. We are trying to do a made-in Manitoba solution to this situation. I said on many occasions that the Alberta experience is Bill 11 . The Ontario experience is the private, private, private. They are pursuing that path. In Manitoba, we have taken the middle ground.

We are taking the private, moulding it into the public system. We are maintaining some of the private facilities and some of the private functions, and we still have the public functions provided to the hospitals. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I do not know what the furor is from members opposite, except that they seem to be ideologically bound, ideologically bound to their private mantra. We on this side have a pragmatic approach. We are trying to be innovative, but all I hear is the response of private, private, private. We are in a situation not dissimilar to when the former government was in the same situation.

A number of entities want to come into a province and open up services. On the face of it there is appeal to that. I think we ought to utilize those services when we can, but there are some larger issues at stake here. Firstly, we have studies that show private operating beside public results in longer waiting lists. Second is the issue of private versus public. You know those people who come in here to do these services do not want to do the complex services. They do not want to take on the expensive services. They do not want to do the services that are of a huge cost and expense.

No, they want to do the fast throughput, high volume, high profit margin services. Then when they do that they say, good heavens, look how efficient we are. We are only spending X dollars and we are able to do this amount of service, and you in the public system, you, are more expensive and are more cum bersome. That just does not cut it, Mr. Deputy Spea ker. That is one of the reasons why we are trying an innovative approach and we are approaching this matter from a pragmatic viewpoint.

We are approaching this matter by virtue of saying in Manitoba we are going to have a pragmatic approach, an approach that will see an increase of service. I think one of the problems members opposite have is they are not even speaking to the bill. When they review this bill they are not speaking to the bill. Generally, they are speaking to a conception they have, an obsession with a particular viewpoint, and they cannot seem to get off that track. What this tri

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-2-41
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 2nd hansardpdf 41.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	5406905d22429e97e21ffba3ff87b1eb318691b8

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