Manitoba Committee Hansard — Social and Economic Development Committee, Sitting 2 (40th Legislature, 2nd Session)

40-2-sed2

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Fortieth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development Chairperson Mr. Thomas Nevakshonoff Constituency of Interlake Vol. LXV No. 2 - 6 p.m., Tuesday, July 2, 2013 ISSN 1708-6698

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Fortieth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital NDP ALLUM, James Fort Garry-Riverview NDP ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley NDP ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson NDP BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli NDP BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park NDP BRAUN, Erna Rossmere NDP BRIESE, Stuart Agassiz PC CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East NDP CHIEF, Kevin, Hon. Point Douglas NDP CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan NDP CROTHERS, Deanne St.

James NDP CULLEN, Cliff Spruce Woods PC DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk NDP DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FRIESEN, Cameron Morden-Winkler PC GAUDREAU, Dave St. Norbert NDP GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Liberal GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach PC GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC HOWARD, Jennifer, Hon. Fort Rouge NDP IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Richmond NDP JHA, Bidhu Radisson NDP KOSTYSHYN, Ron, Hon. Swan River NDP LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. Dawson Trail NDP MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns NDP MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden PC MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Flor, Hon. Logan NDP MARCELINO, Ted Tyndall Park NDP MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel NDP MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East PC NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake NDP OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River NDP PALLISTER, Brian Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PETTERSEN, Clarence Flin Flon NDP REID, Daryl, Hon. Transcona NDP ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Kewatinook NDP RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia NDP ROWAT, Leanne Riding Mountain PC SARAN, Mohinder The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron St. Paul PC SELBY, Erin, Hon. Southdale NDP SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Verendrye PC STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo PC STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin NDP SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto NDP WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas NDP WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WIGHT, Melanie Burrows NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC Vacant Morris

61 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Tuesday, July 2, 2013 TIME – 6 p.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Tom Nevakshonoff (Interlake) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. D ave Gaudrea u (St. Norbert) ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Mr. Lemieux, Hon. Ms. Oswald, Hon. Mr. Struthers Ms. Blady, Mrs. Driedger, Messrs. Gaudreau, Goertzen, Nevakshonoff, Pettersen, Schuler, Smook APPEARING: Hon. Jon Gerrard, MLA for River Heights PUBLIC PRESENTERS: Mr. Philip Zubrycki, private citizen Mr. Rod DeLaroque, private citizen Mr.

Shannon Martin, private citizen Mr. Joseph Giesbrecht, private citizen Mr. Ron Larsen, private citizen Mr. Paulo Cordeiro, private citizen Mr. David M. Sanders, private citizen Ms. Janine Carmichael, Canadian Federation of Independent Business Mr. Emmanuel Trawon, private citizen Mr. Michael Bailey, private citizen Mr. Tom Paulley, private citizen Mr. Maurice Lacy, private citizen Mr. Ray Garnett, private citizen Mr. Shaun Horan, private citizen Mr. Sam Katz, City of Winnipeg Mr. Bob Preston, private citizen Mr. Cyril Keeper, private citizen Mr.

John Lambkin, private citizen WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Doug Dobrowolski, Association of Manitoba Municipalities Matt Henderson, private citizen Florence Horan, private citizen MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Bill 20 –The Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act (Various Acts Amended) * * * Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. Good evening. Will the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development please come to order. Our first item of business is the election of a Vice-Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Hon.

T heresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Yes, I'd like to nominate Dave Gaudreau as the Vice-Chair. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Gaudreau has been nominated. Are there any other nominations? Hearing no other nominations, Mr. Gaudreau , you are elected Vice-Chairperson. This meeting has been called to consider Bill 20, The Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act, (Various Acts Amended).

As per agreement of the House dated June 20th, we had planned to hear from 30 of the presenters registered to speak to Bil l 20 tonight; however, we have had a couple of cance llations, and so we now have 28 people scheduled for tonight . And you have the list of those presenters before you, which is also posted at the entrance of the room. On the topic of determining the orde r of public presentations, I will note that we do have out-of-town presenters in attendance marked with an asterisks on the list. With this in consideration, in what order does the committee wish to hear presentations? Mr.

Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): In accordance with tradition of the committee, I would suggest we have out-of-town presenters heard first. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Goertzen has said. Is that agreeable to the committee? [Agreed] We also have a request from Mr. Philip Zubrycki, who is in a wheelchair, and also has other, I think, respiratory issues, and would like to present

62 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 first. Would that be agreeable to the committee as well? [Agreed] I would also like to remind members of the committee that, in accordance with the agreement mentioned before, the committee may also by leave decide to hear from presenters in addition to those scheduled for tonight's hearing. Public presentation guidelines: Before we proceed with presentations, we do have a number of other items and points of information to consider.

For the information of all presenters, while written versions of presentations are not required, if you are going to accompany your presentation with written materials, we ask that you provide 20 copies. If you need help with photocopying, please ask our staff. As well, I'd like to inform presenters that, in accordance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allotted for presentations, with another five minutes allowed for questions from committee members.

Also, in accordanc e with the rules agreed in the House for the meetings hearing from presenters on Bill 20, if a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, they will be dropped to the bottom of the list of tonight's presenters. If the presenter is not in atte ndance when their name is called a second time tonight, they will be dropped to the bottom of the global list of presenters.

Written submissions: The following written submissions on Bill 20 have been received and distributed to committee members: Doug Dobrowolski, president, Association of Manitoba Municipalities; Matt Henderson ; Florence Horan. Does the committee agree to have these documents appear in the Hansard transcript of this meeting? [Agreed] Speaking in committee: Prior to proceeding with public presentations, I would like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in committee. The proceedings of our meetings are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript.

Each time someone wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a presenter, I first have to say the person's name. This is the signal for the Hansard recorder to turn microphones on and off. Thank you for your patience. We will now proceed with public presentations. I now call Mr. Philip Zubrycki, private citizen. Mr. Zubrycki, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir? Mr. Philip Zubrycki (Private Citizen): No, Sir. Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed when ready. * (18:10) Mr. Zubrycki : Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am a private citize n who is here to speak towards the 1 per cent PST.

I'll try not to be too verbose and take up too much time, but it seems to be very controversial. The thing is, you know, you can fool some people all the time, and all the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. I'm sure you've all heard that before. I'm sure you've heard of socialism in all its gory glory. Karl Marx wrote the bible and Machiavelli wrote the I–tactics. Well, you don't have to be a politician or a political science to understand what's going on here – political scientist. However, I'm not here to bore you with those kind of things.

I would just like to say that MPI has over $2 billion in assets as well as the motor vehicle licen sing registration. The –Hydro has been raped and the stabilization account has been drained. Things like that have happened. Now, what I see happening is, it's much the same as when you have a credit card and you overextend yourself and you keep paying the minimum balances. And eventually it catches up and the interest ends up being more than what your original debt was. I think that's what's happening here in Manitoba.

The finance charges, the interest rate on what's been borrowed is higher than what the original budget is. So we're double–the budget is double what it should be. I am on a fixed income. I was retired in 2000, I taught school for 22 years and I was –worked for the Manitoba Telephone System for 14. I worked for 36 years in this province. I'm on a fixed income, fixed in 2000. My dollars that I made in 2000 are now worth 67 cents, approximately.

The one percentage point will certainly hurt me and other low -income people, people on social assistance, people who are retired and don't have a pension, people who are –these kind of people can't afford the 1 per cent; they don't have the 1 per cent to be throwing around.

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 63 I live–I'm a single person and I live in my own house that I own, cost me just as much for taxes as if there was two or three of us living there; cost me just as much for taxes for hydro; cost me just as much for water and electricity. But I don't get any rebates on that. Now the –according to the Bank of Canada official site, the rate of inflation 2000 -2013 was 29.61 per cent. The annual average rate was 200 0– excuse me–2.02 per cent.

So a hundred dollars –just to show you how drastic inflation is, a hundred dollars in 1914, you'd need $2,084.75 today to equal a hundred- dollar buying power in 1914. To equal a hundred- dollars buying power in 2000, today you would need $129.61. Now, I did some quick calculations on the Bank of Canada investment calculator, and if I'd put a thousand dollars into a GIC –right now the average GIC is 1.6. If I put it in there for five years, at the end of five years I would have $980.

So investing in safe, secure things are not exactly the way out of this for the–a private individual, and I don't think it is the way out for the government either. I think you have to do some creative financing and start watching your pennies. And, although I will agree that in a country as rich as Canada, no one should starve, no one should go without shelter and no one should go without medical care, no matter what their circumstances. Thank you, very much, for your attention. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Zubrycki. The floor is now open for questions. Hon.

Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance ): Well, Philip, I just want to thank you for coming in. I know you made an extra, special effort to get here, and I appreciate that and I appreciate the ad vice you've given to us tonight. So thank you very much. Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Thank you, very much, Mr. Zubrycki, for being here and for sharing your comments with us. I'd like to ask you a question. How do you feel about the NDP raising the PST, yesterday, while there are still 200 people like yourself that have not had a chance yet to come here and state your views about this legislation? Mr.

Zubrycki: Philip Zubrycki. I'll quote Prime Minister Chrétien who, when there was a raise in Parliament and they asked him if he was going to take the raise and he said, yes, because he obeys the law, and he –well, it's the law that he gets the raise. He forgot to mention that he made the law. And I don't think anyone in Canada is above the law, but this government seems to be applying that kind of principle to themselves. Mrs. Driedger: Do you think the NDP government should reverse their decision to raise the PST? Mr.

Zubrycki: I would say, yes, but the thing is, I realize they're in a financial dither and I don't know what they're going to do instead. It might be worse. Mrs. Driedger: Because the NDP basically pushed the law through yesterday, or pushed the PST through yesterday–the law hasn't been passed; they haven't called a referendum, which is supposed to happen with the current law. They're ignoring 200 presenters that have not yet had a chance to state their opinion, so, therefore, they're really not following the process that is before us. What message is that sending, do you think, to ordinary Manitobans? Mr.

Zubrycki: Well, I would think, as I said before, no one is above the law. However, I think their disrespect for the law is to be a reflection on everybody, so no wonder we've got the highest crime rate in Manitoba. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Thank you, Mr. Zubrycki, for coming here and presenting. Just a question on the referendum itself. We were legally required to have a referendum. In fact, that's still the law on the books now. Are you of the opinion we should've had that referendum? Mr.

Zubrycki: Yes, I definitely think they should've had the referendum, although the outcome may have been obvious, but the thing is they shill –still should've conformed with the law. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, Mr. Zubrycki, I thank you for your presentation. I now call Mr. Nestor Molina, private citizen. Mr. Nestor Molina. Mr. Molina's name will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Call Mr. Martin Howard, private citizen. Mr. Martin Howard. His name will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Mr. Rod DeLaroque, private citizen. Rod DeLaroque. Mr.

DeLaroque, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir?

64 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 Mr. Rod DeLaroque (Private Citizen): No, Sir. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing none, you may proceed. Mr. DeLaroque: First off, I'd like to thank members of the Liberals and PCs for fighting for taxpayers. It's a hard job. I know what it is because the ones on the opposite side of you are more like a dictatorship than anything democratic, and I don't care what's in their name. I've lived in this province all my life. I've run a small business for the last 25 years, and every time we turn around, this government is taxing us somewhere and it's killing us.

And I happened to phone in to COJOB call-in show, asked Mr. Selinger, said, listen. I'm a small business. Every time I turn around, my gas is going up for service trucks. My licence is going up. Now my insurance is now taxed, thanks to this, people. I said my –what are we supposed to do? My mother's 86 years old. She likes to live in her own house, and if we weren't coming in and helping her with what she's got for her nurse's pension and the rest of her CPP, she wouldn't make it. And you know what his response to me was? He told me, you got a small business in Manitoba. You don't pay taxes.

Now, to tell you the truth, if I'd have crawled through the phone, something would've happened. Don't tell me that I don't pay taxes. Eve ry time I go into the gas station, every time I turn around, every piece of tool that I put in my shop is taxed. Don't tell me I don't pay taxes. * (18:20) This is getting to the point where this is a mess. This is a mess, set –this is a mess, built by this – people on this side of the room. As much as you people want to sit here and turn around and blame the Filmon government for 15 years ago, you cannot blame people for when you have been in power 14 years for this.

You know, you–it's absolutely appalling. I was at the rally here in the Parliament buildings. I have never been to a political rally in my life, but I was at that one, because I burnt and I've had enough and your vote tax is another thing. If you people cannot fundraise on yourself, if you're too lazy to fundraise on yourself, stay out of my pocket. I will support a party that I decide to support. Don't tax me. You know, you've –the amount of money that was done, you–this PST is supposed to go for infrastructure, fine.

How come in your whole thing, there's $200 million but there's only $60 million into infrastructure. Where's the rest of it going to go? It's going to go into a black hole called general revenue. Is it not? You know, you–flood mitigation. You guys–you want to know a perfect example and I didn't realize it until two weeks ago. I went and did a service call up at Oak Point, Manitoba, right on Lake Manitoba. Went up, asked the farmer there, I said, what's the lake doing? He said, oh, it's way back. But in 2011 you people went up, put a dike all the way around Oak Point.

That road, the main road, was probably up another four or five feet. Okay, why wasn't it left there? But he –Eddie tells me no, lake's way down, but he says, go back out there, he says, drive down, he says, they just to re it all out and I'm going well, why did they tear the road out; it was a dike. You built it, you gravelled it as a road, why did they tear it out? All the people in Oak Point have no idea why it was tore out, but you spent more money sending another crew in there to tear the road out and put it back where it was before.

It makes no financial sense to me, because what happens if you have a flood again. Now, you got to go back up there, spend thousands of dollars with these people with these huge sand bags to try and protect that town when you already had a dike that was built there and could have stayed there for a hundred years and nobody up there would have bothered it. I cannot understand the waste of the money in this government.

There is –you have –every year you've put more money into health care but we seem to have more pencil pushers and a whole office buildings full of people that are sucking six- figure salaries off this–off that money, plus benefits that we're paying for. And none of that money ever gets into front -line service. Get your act together, start cutting some of this stuff that you don't need and stay out of my pocket because I'm maxed out and so are a lot of the seniors in this.

You know, I don't know whether any of you people on this s ide of the room have seniors on a fixed income but I know a whole bunch and they're having a tough time. It is –you know, I have a little bit of red hair in here and I'm trying to stay calm but this burnt me. I cannot believe what this is. You know, I've been in here–I'm on ground that's been in my family 114 years and you know what, I have no idea what you're going to tax next year but really I – now I got to start considering. I can pull wrenches, I can pull and I can go into Saskatchewan and I can

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 65 make a heck of a lot better money, pay a lot less taxes but I got roots in this country that I'd like to stay here, but you people are making it, to the point, where Saskatchewan is starting to look pretty good. Even if I have to leave my mom and my family, I got to start really crunching numbers in the bottom line because this isn't going to work. You've taxed us to the death. Enough is enough. Start finding ways to cut some of the bureaucratic fat that is in this government. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation.

Floor's open for questions. Mr. Struthers: I'll just thank you for coming in, Mr. DeLaroque. I'm glad you came in and met with us and gave us the advice that you did. Mrs. Driedger: Thank you, Mr. DeLaroque. What burns you the most out of everything that's happened with the PST raise? Is there something in particular that you find most offensive? Mr. DeLaroque: You're just going to shove it down my throat illegally. It's unwarranted , to top off . There's lots of fat in th is government you can shave off and not do 1 per cent on everybody. Especially seniors, it's–that's what burns me.

If I did what you guys did, I'd be in jail. Mrs. Driedger: How do you feel about the NDP raising the PST before hearing from all 200 speakers that have signed up to speak to this bill? Mr. DeLaroque: It reminds me of only one thing: 1960s Communist Russia. Mrs. Driedger: Do you think the NDP should reverse their decision to raise the PST? Mr. DeLaroque: Put it to a vote, and let the people in this province decide. That's the law. Put it to a vote. If you're too gutless to put it to a vote, which is exactly what they're d oing–now you get this. You force it down people's throats, and it's unwarranted. Mr.

Dennis Smook (La Verendrye) : Mr. DeLaroque, as a small business owner, do you find, in the last number of years, that your income is going down and down? I know the gover nment has said they have lowered your threshold for taxes, but do you find at the end of the year there's no money left to pay taxes, because of everything that's been happening to you as a small business? Mr. DeLaroque: Everything I go to do is going up. I can't even –I do commercial safeties in my shop.

Every time I go and pick up safeties and books from this government, they've gone up, but they don't let me put my price up to do a car safety. That car safety is set by you at $55. Now those–just the papers alone are almost 10 bucks a set. Well, now I'm working for 45 bucks. You won't let me put my price up on all those safeties, but, every time I go for them, the price has gone up. Every time I go–every time I've got to buy tools –going to here –now I'm goi ng 8 per cent up. Every time I fill my service trucks with gas, boom, it's going up.

You know, I can't send it–put all that extra cost back to my customers; you can't. Mr. Chairperson: I'll come back to you, Mr. Smook. Mr. Gerrard: That–just a little bit more about your business–that price that you get or what you earn from a safety, that's been the same for quite a number of years. Mr. DeLaroque: Yes, it's been the same for a long time. Mr. Gerrard: Is that since the NDP came into power? Mr. DeLaroque: I've been doing safety since –when was it?–'95, so it was probably –but they've set that– like a normal amount of safety, according to these guys, it's 55 bucks.

Okay, now I don't know how people are doing it in Winnipeg. Because most –I'm going to–I've got a labour rate of 65 bucks an hour out of town. Okay, I've already lost 10 bucks because there I've got to buy the sheets, so now I'm down to 45 bucks. It takes you –if you're going to do a real safety, it's going to take you on an automobile at least an hour or more. So I don't know how these guys in Winnipeg doing $105 an hour are doing a safety, because you’re losing money. You know, you can't do that.

But it’s setup –the only way you can try to make it –your money back is when you go to the customer and say , listen, we need to do this and we need to do this and we need to do this to safety it. Then you can recoup what you lost, but I can't recoup everything. Mr. Goertzen: Mr.

DeLaroque, you made a good point about –I would hate to see you leave the province and see your business leave the province, but I don't think the government understands how mobile business actually is and that businesses can actually leave, and I think that they're relying on the fact that business people might be inclined to stay because of family or those sort of reasons.

66 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 Can you speak a bit more about how you might have to come to the decision to leave the province if, in fact, you aren't able to continue to make a reasonable living for the amount of time and money you're putting into your business? Mr. DeLaroque: I would–you know, I would love to–I'm born and bred in this province. You know, like I said, I –my family's been on the same ground for 114 years. But you–there gets to be a point where you start crunching numbers and, you know, my mom's 86. She's in the yard right beside me.

We're basically looking after her because she's living by herself and, really, right now she's the only, you know, she's the only thing that's really keeping me here. Like, if something happened to her, you know, she's 86, if something happened and I've got to start crunching numbers, I'm better off to go to Saskatchewan. You know, I can–I got 30 years as a diesel mechanic; I can go pull wrenches anywhere I want, but my home is here. I'd love to stay her e, but, when you start crunching numbers, it's –sooner or later it's not going to add up, and I have no idea what they're going to tax next year. * (18:30) Mr.

Chairperson: Okay, time for this presentation has expired. Thank you very much, Mr. DeLaroque. Call Mr. Shannon Martin, private citizen. Mr. Martin, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir? Mr. Shannon Martin (Private Citizen): No, I don't. Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed. Mr. Martin: Good evening. My name is Shannon Martin. I'm here this evening as a private citizen. I always appreciate being part of the democratic process or at least part of the illusion perpetuated by today's NDP.

I struggled as to what to say this evening regarding Bill 20, the broken election promise and fiscal mismanagement act, because, let's be honest, the PST was increased yesterday. I mean, we're simply going through the motions here, and so are the other 199 people behind me.

When first introduced in 1995, balanced budget legislation was described by the NDP as, and I quote, a cynical pre-election ploy, a political gimmick, that no government needs balanced budget legislation, one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation, a bill that is destined to make Manitoba the laughing stock of the financial management world. Now, despite all those comments, today's NDP made another election commitment, one of their so-called five core commitments to, quote, maintain balanced budget legislation.

So fundamental was this commitment to the people of Manitoba, they told us: Keep this card; we'll keep our promise. It's worth commenting on the number of times various NDP MLAs have stood up in the Legislature in the last decade- plus touting the line: A promise made is a promise kept. Or the other golden oldie: We weren't elected to raise taxes. Do I talk about how, during the 2011 election, the MLA for St. Boniface, your Premier (Mr. Selinger), admonished those that suggested you would raise the PST as, quote, ridiculous idea and total nonsense?

Do I point out that former Finance minister – NDP Finance minister –publicly stated, in reference to increasing the sales tax, and I quote: With the global recession causing so much economic uncertainty for Manitoba families, we don't think it makes sense to impose new sales taxes. We are not prepared to risk the economic recovery by undermining Manitoba's growing consumer confidence. I never thought I would lament the loss of Ms. Wowchuk as our Finance minister.

Perhaps I should reference that, when the federal government removed the Wheat Board monopoly without an accompanying plebiscite, something they actually campaigned multiple times on, the then- minister of Agriculture and current Finance Minister was so enraged that he stood at the steps of the Legislature to denounce it as, quote, heavy handed, regressive and antidemocratic.

So disturbed was the Finance –or the minister of Agriculture by this affront on democracy, that he transferred approximately $80,000 from general revenues to his comrades at the Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board so they could fight the good fight. This most recent and 'blasant' disregard for balanced budget legislation should not come as a surprise. Considering taking balanced budget legislation out to the woodshed to beat into submission has become a bit of a pastime for today's NDP.

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 67 In 2008, you removed the requirement to balance the budget annually, replacing it with the requirement to balance over a four -year average. In 2009, you suspended the requirement to make annual minimum debt re payments. In 2010, you eliminated the need to balance the provincial budget and eliminate penalties that were imposed on Cabinet ministers for not balancing it. In 2013, well, we know what you've done.

You've hiked the PST by 14 per cent, pushed back the promised return to balanced budgets by a few more years and 'redursed' –reduced the penalty on Cabinet ministers for posting successive budgets –or posting successive deficits. Do Manitobans even realize that you've increased the PST by approximately one -half billion dollars in the last decade through multiple PST expansions and hikes? I wonder if we will see that on one of your brochures. I believe Manitobans are starting to wake up to the fiscal reality facing us.

A few months ago the Bank of Canada was again warning Canadians that interest rate hikes are on the horizon. While most of us look at interest rate hikes in terms of our own mortgages or loans, the government of Manitoba looks at it very differently. A 1 per cent increase in the interest rate ad ds approximately $20 million to the Province's carrying costs over an annual basis. Yet the NDP blame global uncertainty and say that they need wiggle room. The NDP like to point to the string of balanced budgets and the decreasing level of net debt to G DP as a testament to their fiscal prowess.

But, as they post seven successive deficit budgets and the highest debt-to-GDP ratio seen in Manitoba in over a decade, they can't wipe their hands fast enough of responsibility. You see, if things are good in M anitoba, well, they're good because we're led by the NDP. If things aren't good in Manitoba, well, it's because those other provinces aren't led by the NDP, or I assume that's what they tell themselves at Cabinet meetings.

Less than half of the cash the P rovince expects to raise from the sales tax hike this year will be spent on infrastructure, despite a pledge that every dollar will be spent on flood proofing and building bridges and roads. The 2013 budget calls for the P rovince to spend $1.8 billion on i nfrastructure, up $80 million from last year. This increased spending represents 40 per cent of the expected haul from the sales tax hike. The other 60 per cent simply goes into that black hole of general revenues.

So much for the Finance Minister's clai m, and I quote: That every dollar that goes into this plan will be spent on Manitoba's critical infrastructure needs. While the NDP may, for the most part, parrot the standard lines, I must give some credit to the MLA for Fort Rouge who acknowledged that she, quote , knows that it's going to mean that families are going to have to pay more for the things that are important to them. And while acknowledgement is nice, action is nicer. In conclusion, the NDP have, with the bill, advised Manitobans that they find democracy a bit of an inconvenience.

Despite being elected on core commitment to keep balanced budget legislation, today's NDP have consistently shown their disdain for any of its accountability provisions. Whether it's scrapping repayment provisions or ignoring balancing requirements, the NDP have done everything in their power to water down legislation that was once viewed as a model. However, never has this disdain for accountability been more evident than the decision to hike the PST to 8 per cent , while ignoring the referendum provisions as mandated by law.

After years of breaking the spirit of the referendum provisions by expanding the PST on multiple occasions, the NDP have given up all pretence of fiscal responsibility and have grabbed on to taxpayers' wallets with both hands. The NDP frame their budget as, quote: focused on what matters most to families. I would never suggest that I speak for most Manitobans or the people of Morris, but, in this instance, I can speak for myself, and I can tell you that this budget is not focused on the needs of my family.

Increasing my family's PST burden by an estimated $6,000 in the next decade is not offset, as the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) tries to suggest, with a $250 increase in the basic personal tax exemption, something that will reduce my income tax next year by at most $27. According to the provincial budget, a middle-income family of five will actually pay more personal income tax this year than last year. Of course, this is the same Fina nce Minister who describes a tax cut as, quote: robbing the provincial treasury.

Politics should be more about –should be about conviction, about believing in what you say and,

68 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 more importantly, in what you do. If increasing the PST to 8 per cent is the r ight choice for building a better Manitoba, then, instead of forcing Manitobans to accept it through electoral muscle, convince us. Allow voters the right under the law to utilize a referendum provision that exists to either agree or disagree with you. Funny how we can hold a general provincial election, put forward dozens of divergent ideas, hold multiple debates, all in the course of approximately one month.

But, when it comes to a referendum on a single issue, we are told that there's no time. We all know what bunk that argument is considering it's been two and a half months since the budget was first introduced before the PST was hiked. Of course, our collective calls for a referendum are ignored, and we are told that it's too expensive, too time -consuming, and it's for infrastructure or mom's apple pie. And we needn't worry because it's time-limited; it will automatically be reduced on June 30th, 2023, because the same NDP government who breaks the law today will ensure that it's followed tomorrow.

Instead of waiving a referendum provision on the balanced budget legislation, we would be better off waving good- bye to 14 years of mediocrit y and ineptitude, as brought to you by today's NDP. It's never been more evident that Manitobans don't need balanced budget legislation. Manitobans need a balanced budget government. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Martin. Floor is open for questions. Mr. Struthers: Thank you very much, Shannon, for coming in. It's been a while since I've seen you, so thanks for coming in. Mrs. Driedger: Thank you, Mr. Martin.

Were you aware that last year the NDP siphoned away $320 million from the infra structure budget? They're trying to convince everybody right now that they need this PST hike because of desperately needed infrastructure money, and yet last year they siphoned away $320 million from infrastructure and they refuse–the Minister of Finance (Mr. Struthers) has refused to tell us where they put that money. Are you surprised to hear that? Mr. Martin : Am I surprised? No.

Nor am I surprised that the government last year increased the gasoline tax by $50 million, increased the vehicle registration fees by $20 million, and extended the PST for another $100 million, all again in the name of infrastructure. That's another almost $170 million that's supposed to go to the infrastructure pie. * (18:40) Mrs.

Driedger: And would you be surprised to know that when we ask the Minister of Finance where he intended to spend the 277 in new PST money, that he actually refused to provide a specific list of those projects, but said to us, wait, at the end of a year, after we do the spending, we'll tell you where we spent it? Well, after it goes into general revenue, I guess we can quite imagine how they'll cherry-pick and decide where that $277 million will be spent. Are you surprised at all by his refusal to provide us with that information? Mr. Martin: I'm n ot surprised by anything this government does anymore.

I'll be honest, though, I'll give you credit, Finance Minister; the PST hike did surprise me. But other than that, in the last 14 years, there's little that's been done by this government that surprised me. I mean, a lot of the announcements we see have been reannouncements or items that have been in the works for several months, if not several years. I'm not discussing or debating the importance of those announcements; it's where the funds are drawn from and in the legitimacy of taking those funds when the law says you simply can't. Mrs.

Driedger: Why do you think the government doesn't want to provide us a list, a specific list, of where these infrastructure –where the PST money's going in all this supposed infrastructure that they're going to be spending it on? Why do you think the government is refusing to provide us with that kind of information? Mr. Martin: The impression I'm left with, from what I read and the interviews and journalists asking the same questions, this is very much a cocktail napkin infrastructure. I mean, everything this government seems to be announcing is last minute.

I would imagine that they simply don't have an idea where a lot of the funds are going. And it's fly-by-the-night spending. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, give us your view on why they're–this government is raising the PST. Mr. Martin: The simplest answer is we have a government that can't live within its own means. I mean, successive budget after budget has shown

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 69 every–overspending. I mean, they talk a good talk. I mean, back in 2009- 2010, I still remember Minister Chomiak coming out and talking about the belt-tightening exercises and former Premier Doer about counting every nickel. But, sure, they counted every nickel, but then they turned around and spent every nickel. I mean, they talk a good talk about restraint, but they never follow through on it; and their own budget numbers show that.

I mean, even a couple of budgets ago, when they said, you know, we're going to hold the line at, you know, keeping spending at around, you know, 3 per cent; it never materialized. They continually overspend and show an aversion to actually making the choices to hold the line on some of those departmental spending and hold on some of their pet projects. Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Martin, do you suspect that the $277 million that they're taking in from the PST hike could be used as a NDP slush fund so that they could position themselves well for the next election? Mr.

Martin: I would suggest that, not only can it be, that it is being used as a slush fund. And you're going to see a lot more announcements, and I would suggest it's probably one reason why the by -election isn't being called, so that we don't turn off the tap on announcements by this government. Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Martin, what do you think–the way the government is handling all of this, what do you think this says to young people and kids out there that might be seeing how this government is handling this issue and, you know, the manipulation of it? What does that say to children? Mr.

Martin: What this government is saying to not just children but Manitobans in general is that being elected official isn't an honourable profession, that you can say anything to get el ected as long as you get elected, and that is the bottom line. It's more important to take power at any cost as opposed to take power or gain power through legitimate means. It's about making–it's a government that shows that you can make any promise as l ong as it plays well to the crowd and then, after the election's held, make any excuse in relation to that promise, or broken promise in this case. Mr.

Chairperson: Time for questions and answers has expired. Mr. Martin, I thank you for your presentation. Call Mr. Joseph Giesbrecht, private citizen. Mr. Giesbrecht, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir? Mr. Joseph Giesbrecht (Private Citizen): I do not. Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed. Mr. Giesbrecht: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. I thank you for this opportunity to speak to you all. I'm obviously opposed to Bill 20 for two reasons:

(1) It's a financial and creatively bankrupt option; (2) it's an ethical and moral bankrupt option.

(1) The financial, creati ve bankrupt option: You promised that you would end the deficit spending by 2014–next year. It's not going to happen. You promised not to raise taxes and here we are into the second year, second round of major tax increases, last year increasing the base and this year increasing the tax itself. Where does this leave us? Well, it feels like we're just spinning wheels and the deficit still remains. It's frustrating. You deficit -spent in good times or took from the kitty. You deficit -spent in the recent bad times of the recession –understandable.

Now you tell us the Manitoba economy is strong, and yet we're still deficit spending. You back that up by saying, well, we must deficit -spend because the future of the economic uncertainty –that we must deficit-spend. So, when we actually go into a recession again, what are we going to do while we're still deficit spending? The Manitoba advantage is swiftly slipping through our hands as housing costs, fuel, food, everything is increasing drastically, while wages have not kept pace. If you're lucky, they've kept pace with inflation. And, to top it off, taxes keep rising.

You forced the hands of municipalities to raise taxes, a provincial entity. You forced the hands of school bodies to raise taxes, another provincial entity. You forced the hand of Hydro, another provincial entity, to raise rates, a.k.a. taxes, and they keep raising for the next decade, minimum. And now the Province itself continues to raise taxes. There comes a breaking point, if we have not reached it yet. You cannot keep raising taxes without accountability to follow. I grew up in a poor family. Sometimes all we had was Kraft Dinner for supper.

More than once I took a marker to my shoes to make them look new again, cover up the big patch. I grew up with

70 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 recycling, reusing, repurposing before it was fashionable to do so, because it was the practical and affordable thing to do. My shirt actually is –I like my shirt, but the buttons keep popping off, so I keep reusing them because I like my shirt. Why throw it away? My father grew up in a poor family. When his parents decided to return to Canada in the '60s, they came with nothing but the clothes on their back. Literally, my father came to Manitoba barefoot. His ancestors made the long trek from Holland to Prussia to Russia and finally to Canada.

Due to the survival, they learnt to be resourceful, frugal and living within their means, all the while caring for those around them. My great -grandfather and his father and his father were the orphan director of the church in the – in Manitoba here and in Russia. They balanced frugality and compassion. On my mother's side, my great -grandmother escaped with their lives from Russia through the Soviet advances in the 1920s. Her siblings were not so lucky. Some ended up dying in cattle cars as they were rerouted, put back onto cattle cars and froze to death on their way to Moscow.

Some died in Siberia, never to be heard from again. My great -grandparents and her –my great -grandmother and her parents left Russia and cam e here with nothing. Through all these hardships, my family consistently tried to live within their means. Why do I tell you this? Because you, the NDP, claim to be the party of the poor and the oppressed. Yet you do not share the same values of my famil y, some of the poor and oppressed. My family heritage has passed down to me some very important values in my opinion, they being: (1) a strong work ethic.

Work hard, work honest, don't expect handouts, but be gracious and ever so thankful when you do a get a hand up. And, also, personally help those around you.

(2) Living within our means. Some call this being frugal; some call it being cheap. Pay only what you can afford, focusing on essentials first, like food, shelter, your health. Cutting out wants from needs in time of necessity. So I bring all these personal anecdotes back to you, the government. This sudden rush to raise the PST, the lack of deficit reduction, leaves me with the conclusion that this government's work ethic is lacking or slothful.

O therwise, how can a diligent and dutiful working government go from promising not taxes –not raising taxes and slaying the deficit next year to constant, major tax increases and, all the while, the deficit remains unevaded? * (18:50) This government is living beyond its means. You keep saying we need to raise taxes to support critical infrastructure. This is nothing but political posturing and, dare I say, lies. It is very frustrating as a frugal Manitoban to see our money frittered aw ay on non-critical items. Our society always wants and wants and wants.

Somewhere the line between need and want have been blurred. One very simple example that has been bothering me for a while is splash parks. Please tell me, since when have splash par ks become critical infrastructure? They are nice things to have, don't get me wrong, but they're definitely not critical infrastructure. My grandparents, my parents and myself have all survived without splash parks. My daughter and her cousins enjoyed Cana da Day yesterday splashing away with nothing but the sprinkler.

With that cheap sprinkler, using their imaginations, they will have had just as much fun, if not more, than an expensive splash park. This is just one example of frivolous spending we cannot afford. You threaten us saying that, without tax increases, critical infrastructure and front -line services will be cut. You're telling us there is no savings found within the government budget.

You go out and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on one splash park here and one splash park there, and then have the audacity to say that front -line services and critical infrastructure are at risk if we do not swallow these tax increases. I call out your bluff, and I call you to account right here and right n ow. Like we do not know how to manage our finances as individuals and families, we are told to spend within our means. If need be, cut back on non- essentials.

We’ve all heard of the latte factor, I’m sure, where, if we just cut back on one latte a week or a day, we can repurpose that money to pay down debt or get our finances back in order. Well, splash parks are the Province’s latte, and I’m sure there is –in this province there can do–we can do without new splash parks for the time being, and I know there are many, many more latte factors that this Province can cut back on until we’re back into the financial straight and narrow and can actually afford these projects. You are, in fact, not focusing on what matters most.

This brings me to point two: the ethi cal and moral bankrupt option. Mr. Selinger insinuated that a

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 71 tax increase would not happen, and multiple NDPs, MLAs promised it would not happen. Suddenly, there is panic and emergency to increase taxes. Again, this leads Manitobans and myself to conclude that this government does not know how to budget or plan long term. This threatens our province –our viability as a province, as we must all incur debt repayment. What shall we do when interest rates begin to rise? With all that’s being said, why has the Province denied our right to a referendum? We are now into day two of this illegal tax increase.

You have increased a major tax without a referendum. This is not an ordinary tax increase where you can increase proactively before the bill is passed into law . You have not struck down the referendum requirement for this tax increase, as you’re still only at committee stage right here. Therefore, this government is breaking the law. Moreover, it is showing contempt for Manitobans by trying to remove this right to vote. We as Manitobans have very few chances to voice our rights: one being a general election and the other being a referendum.

You have now denied, or attempting to deny us, our right to a referendum. How dare you–how dare you? On one hand, you are fighting the federal government over the Canadian Wheat Board referendum debacle or writing into law the requirement for referendum to sell Hydro. Is that a joke now? Then, on this other hand, you’re contradicting yourself and stripping us of that same referendum right. This shows you are morally void and you can no longer carry with authority the right to call yourselves defenders of democracy. You should remove the D from the NDP.

You have lost all credibility, in my eyes, as a responsible government. If you are so sure that this tax increase is the right way to go, and Manitobans believe this or you believe Manitobans believe this– Mr. Chairperson: One minute, Mr. Giesbrecht. Mr. Giesbrecht: –I now ask you, with all sincerity, either rescind this tax inc rease or at least show respect for Manitobans and bring this to a rightful referendum vote. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Giesbrecht. The floor is now open for questions. Mr. Struthers: Yes, thank you, Mr. Giesbrecht. I thought your presentation was very thoughtful.

I do take your point about the difference between needs and wants. We do have a lot of needs out there. I’m sure every Manitoban can agree that there are infrastructure projects that need to have the funding of the Province and of the –our partners in the–in Ottawa. We do need to fund those. Where–what’s your advice to me on where we would find the money to actually participate in funding the needs of society, things like roads and hospitals? Mr. Giesbrecht: Oh, sorry. Did you not increase gas tax last year? Where did that go? That’s– Mr. Chairperson: Minister Struthers. Mr.

Struthers : Yes, The Gas Tax Accountability Act says that all that money, every nickel, goes back into roads and bridges into–in the province. So that is there and that's where that money went. But I think you understand my point, and that is that we do need to continue with infrastructure. We need to work with our other partners in other levels of government. We need, as every government in the–every jurisdic tion in the country needs to find sources of revenue in which to do that. I was just wondering where you think would be fair for us to find that revenue. Mr.

Giesbrecht: Going back, I don't think we need to find extra revenue. I think we can cut back on non- essential services such as multi-hundred-thousand-dollar splash parks. They're not essential. They're nice to have, but they're not essential. I think there's many items like that. I'm sorry, I'm not privy to all the budget, and I have another job a nd life and everything else, so I don't know all the ins and outs of all the little details, but if–that's just one little example. I know there's many, many more examples of non- essential items that we can cut back on for now until we have our books in order. Mr.

Goertzen: Thank you, Mr. Giesbrecht, for your presentation. I appreciated it you bringing sort of personal touch about your family and your own values. Mention that you're the father of a young daughter. Can you talk a little bit about how you' re concerned about her future, about –with uncontrolled spending and spending that doesn't seem to have priorities? Can you just talk about it from a father's

72 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 perspective what your concern is for your daughter in the future? Mr. Giesbrecht: Well, I mean, we've set up a fund for–to help my daughter go to school. It's not very much. We've also taken responsibility to set up a little account for her. So she goes around, she does her chores and she puts that money –she gets half of that, she can spend that; the other half goes into savings. We're teaching her responsibility from the get-go. This government is kind of worrisome because it's ultimately her and her children.

It won't really affect me as much now, but it will be her and her children because one day there's a reckoning coming where they're going to have to pay this debt or the debt repayment is going to be significantly larger and it's going to have an impact on her life. Mrs. Driedger: Thank you, Mr. Giesbrecht. You have spoken very, very eloquently as a young man here in Manitoba, as a young father. What do you feel in terms of hope for the future if this PST goes through and stays out there, if the NDP don't rescind it? What does this do, do you think, for Manitoba and future generations? Mr.

Giesbrecht: In one word, demoralizing. It really is demoralizing. It's frustrating and demoralizing in general. Not just for young but everybody. Talked to my whole family, all my friends. It's like, huh, whatever. They're frustrated with paying more taxes and not seeing anything significant in return for that. Mrs. Driedger: Do you think that more young people–like, your age, you're much more mobile than, you know, past generations. Do you think that we might be seeing more people deciding to look for greener pastures where they can keep more of their hard-earned money? Mr. Giesbrecht: Absolutely.

If it were not for all my family being here in Manitoba, we would have moved, either Saskatchewan, Alberta or who knows. Like–but my family's here. My wife's family is here. At least for the time being, until my daughter's grown up, we're staying here, but for people that are more mobile, don't have those family ties, absolutely. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, thank you for your presentation.

I think you've made a pretty strong point about moral and ethical bankruptcy, and I think you were referring in part to the fact that this government fought for one referendum and, on the other side, has got rid of this referendum and that that really is very bad judgment from a moral and ethical point of view. Is that right? Mr. Giesbrecht: Absolutely. That was one point, the moral. One was that we were lied to specifically in the election regarding no tax increase. So lying there, and then the contradiction in referendum and democratic rights and by removing our referendum rights here. Mr.

Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Giesbrecht. Now call Mr. Ron Larsen, private citizen. Mr. Larsen, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir? Mr. Ron Larsen (Private Citizen): No, I do not, sir. Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed. * (19:00) Mr. Larsen: Thank you. I'd like to thank the committee for hearing me out. Well, I realize I am wasting my time speaking here. As you have clearly pointed out, you don't care what Manitobans have to say, because you're going to push this tax increase through no matter w hat. I have to wonder how far this Province is from going bankrupt.

Obviously, you are desperate for this extra infusion of cash. For whatever the spin it is this week is how it will be spent. I don’t believe anything this government has to say, and how c an I? It’s one lie after another. I’m sure if I went to my boss and said, boss, I’m a lousy money manager, so I must take another 500 a month from you, I would be shown the door. Remember, you work for us, but your arrogance doesn’t show that. You have t urned it around so we work for you so you can take more money from our pockets, food off our tables, create more hardships for families that are already taxed to the max.

There was a time when governments taxed so that they could do what needed to be done . Deliver necessary services. And now you tax and tax and tax until we can’t pay anymore and then you wring a little more blood from the stone. You are pathetic. There is a law in place that says we get to vote before any taxes are raised. You say you are putting money where Manitoba families have told they want it, but now you override the referendum. So you don’t really want to hear what Manitoba families have to say.

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 73 I moved out of Winnipeg years ago because crime was getting out of hand. Now I’m looki ng at leaving the province because the crimes of government are getting out of hand. And I’m not the only one. I encourage young people to leave because the dictatorship here cares not about you or your family. Two years is a long time to try to survive being overtaxed and, yes, maybe things will start to improve in two years, after you are voted out. But can they wait for that? The way I see it, as a taxpayer, I’m your boss, you work for Manitobans.

I, for one, demand your resignation. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, sir. The floor is open for questions. Mr. Struthers: Yes, thanks, Mr. Larsen, for coming to the Legislature and presenting to us tonight. Mrs. Driedger: Thank you very much, Mr. Larsen. How do you feel that the NDP are raising the PST before you and everybody else, 200 others, that have taken time to sign up for this, and the NDP have–or can’t be bothered to listen to all of you first as they should with the process and instead have put through the PST, and now you’re all coming here to present your views, but the deed is done.

How does that make you feel as a Manitoban? Mr. Larsen: It makes me feel like I don’t count. NDP is very rude and arrogant. They just don’t care. You’ll do what you want to do. Mrs. Driedger: Do you, Mr. Larsen, think that this is going to affect the number of people that might consider looking to move elsewhere? Mr. Larsen: Absolutely. One hundred per cent. I know many. Mrs. Driedger: Can you tell us what you are hearing out there from the people that you, you know, are friends with or your family members. What are you hearing from other people? The NDP don’t seem to be hearing it or listening to it.

Can you tell them what you’re hearing out there they need to hear and so that they pay attention to what all of you are saying here? Mr. Larsen: I don’t care for the Roughriders, but we may move there. It’s not worth it staying here. It’s not affordable. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, thank you for your presentation. And just to give people here a little bit of an impression, maybe you can tell us what work you do and how the impact is of the PST and the way this government is behaving. Mr. Larsen: I work three different jobs now. I try to keep up, try to pay your guys’ taxes. It’s not easy and getting nowhere.

I can’t put money away. I don’t have a gold-plated pension. Nothing. I’ll never retire. I’ll always work until I die. Mr. Ron Schuler ( St. Paul): You know, I want to thank you for coming to committee. We’ve had several individuals who I suspect–have you ever had the opportunity to present to a legislative committee like this before? Mr. Larsen: No, as you can tell by my shaky voice, probably. Mr.

Schuler: You know what, to you and several other individuals who I suspect t his was your first opportunity, you know it takes a lot of courage to come here, sit in front of professional politicians and speak from the heart and say what you feel. And your impact on your life and, you know what, it goes a long way for us.

Look at the whites of the eyes of taxpayers and hear you say honestly what you feel and, to all of those before you, and perhaps those who are still coming, we really appreciate when middle class citizens come here and give their impression of what’s happening, and I just want to thank you on behalf of the committee for doing that and having the courage. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, sir, I thank you for your presentation. That concludes our list of out -of-town presenters. Going back to the top of the list, I call Claire Cooper, private citizen.

Claire Cooper will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Call Cathy Cook, private citizen. Ms. Cook will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Call Paulo Cordeiro, private citizen. [interjection] Pardon me? Okay, somebody went to the washroom. Well, they should identify themselves with the staff at the back of the room when they return and if it's one of those individuals –well, as I said, if she will inform our staff at the back of the room. As for now, we will carry on, though. Paulo Cordeiro. Mr. Cordeiro, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir?

74 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 Mr. Paulo Cordeiro (Private Citizen): Yes, I do. Mr. Chairperson: Our Chamber staff will distribute them for you. You may proceed when ready, sir. Mr. Cordeiro: Okay. I've come here today to stand up against an injustice the NDP government is trying to perpetrate against all Manitobans. How can you break the law by raising the PST without a referendum? How can you say that you will not raise taxes during an election, only to do so soon after? Would it not have been better to just cut spending? So why am I here?

I've asked myself this question because, despite what I will say here today, it will not stop this illegal tax increase. So, with that said, I want to know why it wasn't enough to have risen the fuel tax, increased Autopac registration fee, applied a provincial sales tax on insurance products and spa treatments. I also want to know why the income tax paid by many Manitobans is still not enough to fund this province's expenditures. From Mr. Selinger, I want to know why he lied to the people of Manitoba when he made the promise during the election not to raise any taxes.

From my MLA for Burrows, Melanie Wight, I want to know why she is voting with this liar. I want to know why $186-million tax and fee increase last year is still not enough for this government to work with. I also want to know why my rights as a voter are being denied by the NDP government. I furthermore want to know why I must now tell my children to make a life outside this province. I want to know why I have to head to the United States to shop to make ends meet. Can you now take a few minutes to answer my concerns? Thanks. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. The floor is open for questions. Mr.

Struthers: I want to thank you, Mr. Cordeiro, for coming into the Legislature and talking with us and giving us your advice tonight. I appreciate that. Mrs. Driedger: I suspect, Mr. C ordeiro, that you're not going to get many answers from this government tonight because we've been asking these same questions, as the opposition, for the last couple of months, and we are getting nowhere. In fact, the government seems to be deaf to this particular issue. How do you feel? I mean, you have come here with some great questions.

You obviously are feeling some emotion when you talk about your children perhaps moving away from you, that the environment here in Manitoba is just not where they can excel and make a great living. And the comments you made are really excellent. And you've said some great things. * (19:10) I guess I'm just wondering, you know, you're feeling, and many people have, that the NDP government lied to them. How does that make you feel, as a Manitoban, when you know that your government will say anything to get elected? Mr. Cordeiro: I just feel I can't trust the politicians any more, of any party, unfortunately.

I did suspect, going into this election that the best outcome for Manitobans was a minority government, because that keeps your feet to the fire. Unfortunately, Manitobans didn't think t hat they were going to raise the PST; I did because I know Mr. Asper had recommended that 9 per cent increase, and that's coming, unfortunately, if this government stays in power. And, who knows, the sky's the limit from there. But, based on all that, I'm taking steps right now, to stop investing in this province, tell my children to, you know, make a life for yourselves elsewhere.

You got to understand that, in Saskatchewan, my income level, I would be saving about $3,500 in taxes and I think Alberta's a bout $4,000, something like that. And I'm definitely certain that they don't have a lot more expenses than we do. And Alberta, yes, they have the housing, but our housing is going nuts. So, yes, I'm strongly recommending that my kids look elsewhere. And lo ok–and, you know, move west, because right now it seems that's the place to go. How can Saskatchewan be at 8 per cent at one point and lower their PST to 5 per cent and you guys are going the other way? That's absurd, you know.

I made the decision to come here based on tax, and I chose wrong. I really did. Mr. Goertzen: First of all, thank you for coming. You made a number of points that concern me. It concerns me that you might ask your kids to go somewheres else. It bothers me to hear that. It concerns me that you have more scepticism for the political system now, overall, and that concerns me, too. And I think it's unfortunate, but I don't think it's unreflective of what a lot of people probably feel these days.

And we'll certainly do our best on this side to earn your trust, but I want to answer one question for you because I don't think the

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 75 government is going to answer any of the questions that you raised. But you'd asked why are you here. You're here because you're brave and there's a lot of other Manitobans who might not have the time, might be uncomfortable to come here in this kind of a forum and speak to MLAs. They might not think it makes a difference, but I want you to know you're representing thousands of people.

And you've come here becaus e you have the ability, you express yourself well and don't think it was a waste of time because you touched a lot of people, I know, on this side of the table and you're representing a lot of people who couldn't come here for a lot of different reasons. So thank you very much for being here tonight. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for coming and for talking so well to the members of the committee and asking some good, pointed questions, which the government has been very reluctant to answer.

Perhaps I could ask you to tell us a little bit more about your children and what ages they are at, and, oh– Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Cordeiro. Mr. Cordeiro: So I have four children; three girls and a boy. One is 16 and I'm telling her, you know what, you have to prepare, maybe , to move out and look for a better place, where it's more reasonable to live, keep more of your money to spend the way you want to, not the way the government wants to. And then I have a 13- year-old, and, again, I'm also laying the foundation there, tel ling her, you know, you can't trust politicians, unfortunately.

Once they be–get into power, and they have the majority, that's it, they'll never listen to you. As you can– where's the leader? Where's Mr. Selinger? He's not here. So he doesn't care. And, so–and I have –sorry– so she's 9 years old, and, again, there you can't say much, right? They don't understand. And then the boy's 4 years old, and, again, he's not going to know. But I –yes, I see a bad situation for them. You know, like I said, I made a dec ision to come to this province because of the tax situation.

Saskatchewan, at the time, was 8 per cent; they are now a lot better than us, and that is an option, to go look there. And, in fact, this summer we'll be heading west and asking questions and see ing how it really is in those provinces, and not what I'm told by the NDP government. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Cordeiro. Call Mr. Robert Wonder, private citizen. Robert Wonder. His name will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Mr. Jason Thompson. Jason Thompson will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. William McCartney, private citizen. Mr.

McCartney's name will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. David M. Sanders, private citizen. Mr. Sanders, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir? Mr. David M. Sanders (Private Citizen): Yes, Sir. Mr. Chairperson: Our Chamber staff will distribute them. You may proceed. Mr. Sanders: Mr. Chair, my name is David Sanders, and I am appearing as a private citizen in support of the enactment of Bill 20. I served the Manitoba government as a senior civil servant for some 18 years, during the last century.

But since my service predated the election of all of the present members of the Legislature except the Honourable Steve Ashton, I'd like to take a moment to introduce myself. I've had the privilege of working for four successive provincial government administrations, led by Walter Weir, Ed Schreyer, Sterling Lyon, Howard Pawley; and I've served 12 d ifferent ministers responsible for Health and Social Services, Mines and Natural Resources, Urban Affairs, Housing Renewal Corporation, Municipal Affairs, Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Provincial Land Use Committee of Cabinet and Emergency Measures Organization.

I served as assistant deputy minister of Planning for the Department of Municipal Affairs, and I twice served as deputy minister of Urban Affairs. I do have a master's degree in political studies and economics, half an MBA plus a law degree. I'm a practis ing lawyer for pro bono cases, been a certified management consultant, a commercial real estate agent, and for the past 18 years, I've conducted property and business tax assessment appeals for almost every major commercial and institutional property owner in this city, plus many more in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta.

And I've designed and taught post -graduate courses in city planning,

76 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 political studies, public administration and natural resources management, and certificate courses in public sector management and [inaudible]. So I'm somewhat familiar with the content in which this bill is placed before you. I am a lifelong Winnipegger and a Manitoban by birth, by upbringing and by choice.

And based on my extensive training and experience in the public sector, in private businesses and in many community organizations in this province, I am firmly convinced that our responsible government institutions can and should serve as the primary means for organizing ourselves to meet the varied needs of our diverse communities in for ensuring that all of our citizens, now and in the future, have access to those facilities, services and experiences which will enhance the quality of life we all wish to enjoy.

And that is why I believe that I and most of o ur fellow citizens are prepared to pay more taxes in order to finance a full array of public service and programs as required to secure sustainable prosperity and opportunity for all. Indeed, that's why we Manitobans continue to elect New Democratic governments to lead us. Opponents of Bill 20 say it strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. There is no such democratic right.

I was privileged to assist Premier Sterling Lyon and Attorney General Gerry Mercier and to participate personally in the extensive inter - governmental constitutional negotiations of 1980-81, when the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was defined.

And it includes the following democratic rights of citizens: point 3, every citizen of Ca nada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a Legislative Assembly, and to be qualified for membership therein. * (19:20) That’s the democratic right, and I believe it is the duly elected and sustained government, which has not only the right but the heavy responsibility to determine when tax –major tax increases are necessary and just as the duly elected government has both t he right and responsibility to incur expenditures and to borrow funds as it deems necessary on our behalf.

Opponents of Bill 20 say that, through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax known as the PST by 1 point without the legally required referendum. On the contrary, through Bill 20, the government is enabling a legal increase in the retail sales tax without holding a referendum.

And I would like to point out when the Progressive Conservative government enacted the original Balanced Budget, Debt Repayment and Taxpayer Protection Act in 1995, in an attempt to restrict and limit the powers and resources available to future governments, which might have a broader view of the proper role of the provincial government, 'sectual'–section 12 of that act still made specific provision for the amendment, repeal, override or suspension of operation of that act requiring only that the new bill be referred at the committee stage, to a standing committee of the Legislative Assembly which provides the opportunity for representation by members of the public with at least seven days ' notice.

So, as contemplated by the Progressive Conservative government in 1995, here we are at standing committee, hearing public representations before the current version of that legislation is amended–entirely legal and above board as foreseen 18 years ago. And for those who are upset that the increased tax has been imposed on July 1st, before Bill 20 is passed, they ought to know that there’s absolute ly nothing unusual about the ' imposation' of taxation once it has been announced but before the actual legislation is formally approved. And, with respect to the retail sales tax in particular,

section 29(2) of the present act permits regulations to be ma de retroactive in order to implement a tax included in a budget presented to the Legislative Assembly, as here, or an amendment to the act, as here. And Canadian –federal and provincial–governments do this all the time. Now opponents of Bill 20 say an incr ease in the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Well, that’s a matter of opinion, which is certainly open to debate, and it is a matter of choice.

Our provincial retail sales tax equal to 8 per cent or more is deemed acceptable in all but three other provinces of Canada at this time. BS –BC and Saskatchewan are at 7 per cent now, and, while Alberta still has no sales tax, dealing with its present flood disaster will change everything there: expenditures, deficits, borrowing made, even tax rates.

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 77 When Duff Roblin’s Progressive Conservative government introduced the retail sales tax in Manitoba in 1964, it set the rate at 5 per cent, which, at that time, was higher than any other province in the country. The present Manitoba government estimates that the 1 per cent increase in PST here in 2013 will cost the average family about $25 a month or $300 per year; that’s the price of a cup of coffee per day, I suppose. It’s significant, but hardly harmful for Manitoba families.

What would be really harmful for Manitoba families, in my opinion, would be for the government to slash $500 million annually from the budgets for hospitals, Medicare, Pharmacare, schools, post-secondary education and training, child and family services, p ersonal care homes, law enforcement and corrections, highways and transportation, parks and recreation, culture and heritage 'fatiliges'–facilities and services, Aboriginal and northern development, agriculture development, water services and stewardship, environmental protection, energy and economic development initiatives, affordable housing, labour and employment services, and all the other public goods and services, which we Manitobans have learned to provide for ourselves and our neighbours through our collective efforts.

I have seen such budget slashing before personally. When the Progressive Conservative government of 1977- 81 implemented the policy, quote, acute protracted constraint, closed quote. And I watched it again when the Progressive Conservative government of 1988- 99 adopted an austerity policy, which was aimed especially at nurses and teachers. Frankly, I don’t want to see that movie again.

Instead, for now, Bill 20 extends the end of the present economic recovery period from 2014 to 2016 to allow more time for growth and 'recoverment' revenues and improvements in government efficiencies to enable the reduction of the annual deficit. Now, with respect to the 1 point in the PST, Bill 20 requires that for the next 10 years, 2 points or 25 per cent of the 8 per cent total retail sales tax be spent on the Building Manitoba Fund and other public infrastructure.

The Association of Manitoba Municipalities and the mayor of the city of Winnipeg have been demanding that the Province give them 2 points of the existing 7 per cent retail sales tax to spend on municipal infrastructure. The municipal leaders didn't say whether they wanted the Province to slash its own expenditures by $275 million or else increase its annual operating deficit for that amount, but those would have been the options. The municipal officials certainly weren't averse to accepting more sales tax revenues, and since 1 point of the retail sales tax revenue is already– Mr. Chairperson: One minute, sir. Mr.

Sanders: –committed to prov iding grants to municipalities, Bill 20 does, in fact, respond to the request. Frankly, and you'll hear later, I'm sure, but I would ask you to read the balance of my statement. I am concerned, then, where Winnipeg complains loudly about the cost of repl acing municipal infrastructure, even when he proudly states that Winnipeg has the lowest municipal property taxes among all of Canada's largest cities. It has a very healthy fiscal stabilization reserve fund equal to 8 per cent of its annual tax -supported expenditures, and its net debt per capita is only $1,400 per year.

As a Winnipeg citizen and taxpayer, I would prefer that my city government first levy reasonable property taxes and implement a capital project financing plan– Mr. Chairperson: Order, sir. Thank you for your presentation. The floor is open for questions. Ms. Oswald: I was wondering if it would be the will of the committee to have this presentation appear in Hansard in its entirety as has been the case for some other citizens who weren't quite able to finish in their 10 minutes. Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Oswald has said. Is that agreeable to the committee? [Agreed] Madam/Mr.

Chairperson Re: Bill 20 The Manitoba Building and Renewal Funding and Fiscal Management Act (Various Acts Amended) My name is David Sanders, and I am appearing as a private citizen in support of the enactment of Bill 20. I served the Manitoba Government as a senior civil servant for some 18 years during the last century, but since my service predated the election of all of the present members of the Legislature except the Honourable Steve Ashton, I would like to take a moment to introduce myself.

78 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 I have had the privilege of working for four successive provincial government administrations, led by Walter Weir, Ed Schreyer, Ster ling Lyon, and Howard Pawley. I have served 12 different ministers responsible for Health and Social Services, Mines and Natural Resources, Urban Affairs, the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation, Municipal Affairs, Justice and Constitutional Affairs, the Provincial Land Use Committee of Cabinet, and the Emergency Measures Organization.

I served as Assistant Deputy Minister (Planning) for the Department of Municipal Affairs, and twice served as Deputy Minister of Urban Affairs. I have a Master's degree in Political Studies and Economics, half an MBA, plus a law degree. I am a practicing lawyer for pro bono cases. I have been a Certified Management Consultant, and a commercial real estate agent. For the past 18 years I have conducted property and business tax assessment appeals for almost every major commercial and institutional property owner in this City, plus many more in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

I have designed and taught post -graduate courses in city planning, political studies, public administration and natural resources management, and certificate courses in public sector management and purchasing management. So I am somewhat familiar with the context in which this Bill is placed before you. I am a lifelong Winnipegger and Manitoban, by birth, by upbringing, and by choice.

Based on my extensive training and experience, in the public sector, in private businesses, and in many community organizations in this Province, I am firmly convinced that our responsible government institutions can and should serve as the primary means for organizing ourselves to meet the varied needs of our diverse communities, and for ensuring that all of our citizens, now and in the future, have access to those facilities, services and experiences which will enhance the quality of life we all wish to enjoy.

That is why I believe that I and most of our fellow citizens are prepared to pay more in taxes in order to finance a full array of public services and programs, as required to secure sustainable prosperity and opportunity for all. That is why we Manitobans continue to elect New Democratic Governments to lead us. Opponents of Bill 20 say it strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary.

There is no such "democratic right." I was privileged to assist Premier Sterling Lyon and Attorney-General Gerry Mercier and to participate personally in the extensive intergovernmental constitutional negotiations of 1980- 81, when the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was defined, to include the following: Democratic rights of citizens 3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

I believe it is the duly elected a nd sustained government which has not only the right, but the heavy responsibility, to determine when major tax increases are necessary. Just as the duly elected government has both the right and the responsibility to incur expenditures, and to borrow funds as it deems necessary, on our behalf. Opponents of Bill 20 say that, through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

On the contrary, through Bill 20, the Government is enabling a "legal" increase in the retail sales tax without holding a referendum. I would like to point out that when the Progressive Conservative Government enacted the original Manitoba Balanced Budget, Debt Repayment and Taxpayer Protection Act in 1995, in an attempt to restrict and limit the powers and resources available to future governments which might have a broader view of the proper role of the Provincial Government,

section 12 of that Act still made specific provision for t he amendment, repeal, override and suspension of operation of that Act, requiring only that the new Bill be referred at the committee stage to a standing committee of the Legislative Assembly which provides the opportunity for representations by members of the public, with at least seven days' notice. Well, as contemplated by the Progressive Conservative Government in 1995, here we are, at standing committee hearing public representations, before the current version of that legislation is amended.

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 79 Entirely legal, and above board, as foreseen 18 years ago. For those upset that the increase tax has been imposed on July 1st, before Bill 20 is passed, they ought to know that there is absolutely nothing unusual about the imposition of taxation once it has been announced, but before the actual legislation is formally approved. With respect to the Retail Sales Tax in particular,

Section 29(2) of the present Act permits regulations to be made retroactive in order to implement a tax included in budget present to the Legislative Assembly, or an amendment to that Act. Canadian federal and provincial governments do this all the time. Opponents of Bill 20 say an increase of the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Well, that is a matter of opinion, which is certainly open to debate. It is a matter of choice. A provincial retail sales tax equal to 8% or more is deemed acceptable in all but three other provinces of Canada at this time.

BC and Saskatchewan are at 7% now, and while Alberta still has no s ales tax, dealing with its present flood disaster will change everything there – expenditures, deficits, borrowing, maybe even tax rates. When Duff Roblin's Progressive Conservative Government introduced the retail sales tax in Manitoba in 1964, it set the rate at 5%, higher than any other province at that time. The present Manitoba Government estimates that the 1% increase in the PST here in 2013 will cost the average family about $25 per month, or $300 per full year.

That's the price of a cup of coffee pe r day, I suppose – significant, but hardly "harmful" for Manitoba families.

What would be really harmful for Manitoba families would be for the Government to slash $500 million annually from the budgets for hospitals, medicare, pharmacare, schools, post -secondary education and training, child and family services, personal care homes, law enforcement and corrections, highways and transportation, parks and recreation, cultural and heritage facilities and services, aboriginal and northern development, agricul ture development, water services and stewardship, environmental protection, energy and economic development initiatives, affordable housing, labour and employment services, and all the other public goods and services which we Manitobans have learned to provide for ourselves and our neighbours through our collective efforts.

I have seen such budget slashing before personally, when the Progressive Conservative Government of 1977-81 implemented a policy of "acute protracted constraint." And I watched it again when the Progressive Conservative Government of 1988- 1999 adopted an austerity policy which was aimed especially at nurses and teachers. Frankly, I don't want to see that movie again. Instead, Bill 20 extends the end of the present "economic recovery perio d" from 2014 to 2016, to allow more time for growth in government revenues and improvements in government efficiencies to enable the reduction of the annual deficit.

With respect to the one point increase in the PST, Bill 20 requires that for the next 10 years, two points or 25% of the 8% total Retail Sales Tax revenue be spent on the Building Manitoba Fund and other public infrastructure. The Association of Manitoba Municipalities and the Mayor of the City of Winnipeg have been demanding that the Province give them two points of the existing 7% Retail Sales Tax to spend on municipal infrastructure.

The municipal leaders didn't say whether they wanted the Province to slash its own expenditures by $275 million, or else increase its annual operating deficit by that amount – but those would have been options. The municipal officials certainly weren't averse to accepting more sales tax revenues. Since one point of the Retail Sales Tax revenue is already committed to providing grants to municipalities and local capital projects through the Building Manitoba Fund, per

section 8(

b) of The Municipal Taxation and Funding Act, Bill 20 does in fact respond to the municipalities' request for a greater share of provincial tax revenues. Annual expenditures from the Buildi ng Manitoba Fund, for municipal grants and local capital projects, must be no less than 1/7 of the Retail Sales Tax Revenue, per

section 8(

b) of the Municipal Taxation and Funding Act. So the estimated full year increase of $275 million will mean at least another $40 million per year, on top of the existing 1% of Retail Sales Tax already dedicated to the Building Manitoba Fund. At the same time, I have to wonder why the Province should bear the fiscal and political pain of bailing out the Mayor of Winnipeg, who complains loudly

80 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 about the cost of replacing municipal infrastructure, even while he proudly states that: • Winnipeg has the lowest municipal property taxes among all of Canada' s large cities -- $1,536 for an average home assessed at $233,800 in 2013. • Winnipeg maintains a very healthy Fiscal Stabilization Reserve Fund equal to at least 8% of its annual tax-supported expenditures. • Winnipeg's Net Debt Per Capita was only $1,400 in 1995, it dropped to $700 when City Hydro was sold to Manitoba Hydro, and it has only recently crept back up to $1,400 per capita this year. • Winnipeg maintains an excellent tax rating, Aa1 with Moody's.

Recently the Mayor literally doubled his requested budget for the Southwest Rapid Transit Corridor Phase 2 and related projects, and demanded that the Province expand its share of the costs to cover off the reduced level of federal funding now available only through acceptance of the federal Conservative Party's ideologically mandated Public-Private-Partnership project system. Which the City just bought its way out of in the case of the brand new Winnipeg Police Service's South District Station.

As a Winnipeg citizen and taxpayer, I would prefer that my City Government first levy reasonable property taxes and implement a capital proj ect financing plan which involves borrowing at reasonable interest rates, and repayment over the economic life of the public assets acquired and rehabilitated. Only then will the City be able to make credible requests for additional federal and provincial funding. Finally, I understood that some of the Provincial Sales Tax revenues will be devoted to flood control works and protection.

I know a little bit about the importance of such public services and infrastructure, having once served as Executive Secretary of the Manitoba Water Commission, and later as the EMO ADM responsible for the 1979 Red River Valley flood fighting and evacuation operations. Most Winnipeggers probably don't appreciate the foresight and determination of Premier Duff Roblin and the water resources engineers who built the Red River Floodway, and Premier Gary Doer and the Floodway Authority who expanded it after 2005.

The same foresight and determination needs to continue to be applied throughout the vulnerable areas of Manitoba now. If we all need to pay more taxes, so be it. As a proud Manitoban and New Democrat, I believe we are all in this together. Thank you, David M. Sanders, M.A., LL.B. Fort Whyte Provincial Constituency Mr. Goertzen: Yes, it's worth noting since it's being put into Hansard, I believe that the Saskatchewan PST is 5 per cent. His reference said 7 per cent. Just as a correction for the record. Also, I appreciate the presentation. Thank you for coming.

I –that's–we appreciate everybody who's coming to committee tonight. We've heard from a number of people who –young fathers, people living with disabilities, just tonight, and we've heard from many others last week, struggling, who would disagree with your assertion that it's not harmful to them. Now, I don't know your economic circumstances. For me, it might not be as painful, but I've heard from a lot of people who are telling us here at committee that it is painful for them, that it is hard. And I suspect we're going to hear from a lot more who say it is painful. Do y ou disagree with them?

Do you think they don't know their own financial wherewithal? Do you think they're not up on their own finances? Or why would so many people be coming from so many different walks of life who are saying this PST increase will be harmful, but you're suggesting that they are all wrong. Mr. Sanders: I'm not suggesting that they're all wrong, and I'm sure that they understand their financial position, and they are talking about having to pay more provincial sales tax when they are having a hard time making ends meet. I understand that.

I also believe that the programs and services, which they benefit from, to a large degree, would hurt them more, if you will, if they were slashed rather than what is a relatively minor change in their consumption tax [inaudible] families. And I say that, I have six children and 12 grandchildren, some of which are here and some are elsewhere, and some of them have to count their pennies, too, and I certainly have in the past. But, on balance, I believe that i t's appropriate to raise additional taxes and maintain the level of funding and services which we've come to

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 81 expect and to need for the growing population of this province. * (19:30) Mr. Struthers: Yes, thank you, Mr. Sanders. Thanks for coming to the Legislature tonight. I appreciate the advice you've brought to us. I thought you did a very good job of analysing what a 1 per cent across-the-board cut would do, which has been proposed by the Conservative leader in our province. I'd be interested to know who would pay–who would suffer most in a situation where there are deep cuts like that across government services?

Wouldn't that, too, be the people who, right now, have low incomes and depend mostly on those services? Mr. Sanders: Depending on how the gove rnment cut budgets, the government did the typical thing, which has happened federally and which happened previously provincially, it's an across -the-board cut of the larger departments which means, generally, front-line workers providing front -line servic es to people such as those who are making presentations here tonight. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, just clarification on one point. Thank you for your presentation.

You had mentioned that the City of Winnipeg is buying back its involvement in a recent P3 project. Are you implying that the City might do the same thing with the rapid transit project if it were a P3 program? Mr.

Sanders: Not that they would buy it back, but rather that is a serious shortcoming of the federal program to insist that the only way in which the federal funding is now available is if you agree to follow that particular mech anism for planning and financing projects, which, in the case of the City of Winnipeg, as it's turned out to be, the case of the south Winnipeg district police station and current interest rates, not a good deal. And yet no option is provided under the f ederal program, and, worse, the federal program involves a further cutback in the federal share.

It is one of the many reasons why there is a squeeze on provincial governments in order to finance their infrastructure and the very substantial assistance whi ch is provided to municipal and school boards throughout the province. Mr. Goertzen: In terms of your presentation as well, I understand, Mr.

Sanders, that you're either a lawyer or trained as a lawyer, the issue that's been raised to us is a concern by s ome of your colleagues in the legal profession is that the current legislation indicates that government –no government shall introduce a bill that increases the provincial sales tax and a couple of other taxes without holding a referendum, so there are res trictions on it even introducing such a bill.

Now we agree government can change the law, but government can't introduce a bill that increases the PST before it changes the law, and that is the crux of the matter for many within –who look at this legally. Have you looked at that provision? Mr. Sanders: I have not looked at the particular points you make and my copy of the act is back at my chair. Mr. Chairperson: That concludes questions. Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Sanders. Now call John Birt, private citizen. John Birt will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Mr. Lyle Misura, private citizen.

Lyle Misura will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Mr. Bill Moore, private citizen. Bill Moore will be dropped to the bottom of tonight's list. Ms. Janine Carmichael, Manitoba director , Canadian Federation of Independent Business. Ms. Carmichael, do you have any written materials for the committee? Ms. Janine Carmichael (Canadian Federation of Independent Business): I do, yes. Mr. Chairperson: Our Chamber staff will distribute them. You may begin. Ms. Carmichael: Good evening. Thank you so much for the opportunity to present to you this evening. My name is Janine Carmichael.

I'm the Manitoba director of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. We represent 4,800 small - and medium-sized companies in Manitoba, 109,000 across the country, and all of our members are independently owned and operated companies, and we exist so that small companies have a voice in government decisions. We know you hear from unions; we know you hear from big companies. CFIB exists to give small business owners a voice. I've been with CFIB for the past 10 years, and in that time I have never seen an issue engage our members like this one. Since the budget, we have had loads of calls, loads of emails.

I've received over 300 faxes into the office from small business owners.

82 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 My colleagues are district managers who meet with our members and renew everyone face to face every year. They've never seen anything like it either. And it's the same thing. They're upset. They're frustrated and they wanted to know what we were going to do about it. And so we've rolled up our sleeves and we've been trying to fight for small business owners too. We were part of the group that hosted the rally at the Legislature. Almost 600 Manitobans came out because they wanted to have a voice, because there was no referendum to give them a vote.

We joined with other business and taxpayer groups, and we wrote to the Premier (Mr. Se linger) and we asked him to withdraw the bill and work with us on cost restraint ideas. We've done lots of media, columns; in fact, you might have seen today our president and CEO in the National Post weighed in on what's happening in Manitoba. At CFIB our positions are set by our members. We survey them regularly and we aggregate it and use it to lobby government. So, following the budget, we surveyed our members. In just a couple of days we got 500 responses, but we knew it wasn't just business owners who were mad.

Their customers were mad; their employees were mad. So we took another step and we hired Angus Reid to do a public opinion poll of 500 Manitobans, and I'd like to use the bulk of my time today to share with you some of those highlights which is what's in your package. Seventy-four per cent of Manitobans in that public opinion poll believe the provincial government should have a referendum before hiking the PST. Ninety -three per cent of small businesses agree. Seventy -two per cent of Manitobans said: If given the vote, I would say, no, don’t support an increase to the PST.

Ninety -two per cent of small businesses agree. And 81 per cent of Manitobans said that the Manitoba government should reduce its own spending before asking taxpayers to pay e ven more. So I pulled out a few comments from our members that I thought you might be interested. From this construction member in Lakeside, he said, all levels of government need to drive efficiency in order to lower spending and increase services. This is simply a way of life in business, and governments need to start behaving in the same way. The biggest cost is payroll and it needs to be trimmed. This retail member in St.

Boniface said, when comparing a government employee wage and benefits, they already make a heck of a lot more than me. Maybe they can take a cut before they make me take another one. From this professional service company in Fort Richmond, they said, they should start seriously looking at wages, benefits and pensions in the public sector to more closely match what's happening in the private sector. From a manufacturing member in Portage, he said, eliminate waste, improve the bottom line just like we do in our business.

From a retail member in River Heights, they should bring public sector wages and benefits in line with those in the private sector. But, getting back to the results, 81 per cent of Manitobans are not confident that the revenue raised from this hike is going to even go to infrastructure spending and flood prevention. Ninety-six per cent of small business owners said so. And here's an interesting one. Ninety per cent of Manitobans are not confident that this hike is even going to be temporary. Ninety-eight per cent of small businesses agree. On the survey to our membe rs, we asked a few additional questions.

Eighty -nine per cent said that they thought this increase to the PST would be somewhat negative or very negative to their business. Here's a few examples: 82 per cent looked at the negative impact on Manitoba's comp etitive- ness. Seventy-four per cent said, it's going to lower my customer's purchasing power and affect my sales. Seventy-four per cent talked about higher input costs for the things they need to buy into their business. Fifty-seven per cent: it's going to encourage more cross-border shopping. Forty -four per cent talked about the time and the money to implement the change.

So, on that piece, you might think it's just a button on a cash register, but for many small businesses it's much more. It means updati ng their website, their advertising, their flyers, their customer records. It means learning transitional rules. It means educating customers. And I got to tell you, we were still getting calls from business owners the week before last who said, what are my obligations? I don't understand what I'm supposed to do. So they were put in a real position of uncertainty.

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 83 On the survey to our members, we included one additional question that's very rare, and we said: Would you like your individual responses and comments and name and address submitted to the Premier (Mr. Selinger), the Finance Minister and to this committee that's reviewing the bill? And half of them said yes. I couldn't believe it. So I am so proud today to also be making 200– over 200 written submissions from CFIB members across the province. * (19:40) But last week we took one step further.

We took this list and we sorted it by all the MLAs and we personally delivered a package to each of you. And that would have had a letter from myself; it wo uld have had that

summary document; it would have the survey responses from businesses in your constituency, and the comments that we received from businesses in your constituency. And, except for a few, every MLA received such an individualized package. Here are some of the comments, though, I wanted to share: When does it stop? They already started taxing our industry, beauty salons and spas, last July. That already increased prices, and now this is even more, and it’s not going to us. It just means we have to keep our prices even lower to keep the clients. That was a personal service company in Wolseley.

From this business in Logan, they said: We’re already maxed out paying taxes and levies. From this hospitality member in Thompson, he said: Very sad . As a small business owner, I could see myself going out of business. From an insurance company in Tuxedo, it says: Seems I heard the income tax was a temporary measure when it was first introduced too. And from a retail member in Spruce Woods: Governments must find ways to decrease their own spending instead of increasing our tax bill. We are a business 15 minutes north of the border, and this will drive people further south.

So, please, on behalf of our small business members, on their customers and their employees, my ask is very clear: I ask that you please withdraw Bill 20. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you. The floor is open for questions. Mr. Struthers: Yes, thank you very much, Janine, not only for coming here tonight, but I do want to thank you and your group for coming in to speak with me before the budget and then after and the conversations that we’ve had before and since Budget 2013. I appreciate that advice. I take your point in terms of being mindful of our own spending.

We’ve followed up on some of the suggestions that you’ve made to me to accomplish that, so I thank you for it. I do want to get to your take on–a number of years, 14 years in a row where we have looked at ways to decrease the tax burden on small business in Manitoba. Our–whether it’s business or property or personal, it comes to about $1.4 billion over that period in terms of tax relief; on the business side, in excess of $400 million itself. When we became government, the rate was at 8 per cent for your members; we’ve reduced that to zero per cent.

Give me a sense of what that means both for your small business members and what that means for support for the provincial economy and to keep it growing forward. Ms. Carmichael: Those tax measures were welcome, and I was there at the press conference with your predecessor, Minister Wowchuk, when that rate finally got to zero. And, at CFIB, our role is to commend good policy, and so w e gave you due credit for that, but it’s also to criticize bad policy. And I got to say, Minister, that what we’re hearing from members about this piece–it’s not just the what; it’s the how, the lack of the referendum.

And that piece also is what is really making business owners frustrated. Mrs. Driedger: Thank you, Ms. Carmichael. The survey that you did and the results in here are actually fairly dramatic in terms of the positions people in the public took and businesses took as well in terms of their, I guess, opposition to the PST and the issue of the referendum. These are fairly significant statistics. Were you surprised at how strongly people felt about this? Floor Comment: No, I wasn't– Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Carmichael. Ms. Carmichael : –as I said, si nce the budget our phone was ringing off the hook.

And the emails kept coming in and they were sometimes not from

84 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 members–people just wanting to call us and talk about that. So I wasn’t surprised, but I think what’s really interesting is just to see, as a small business lobby group, it is not just small business owners who are concerned, and we’ve provided some clear data here that Manitobans are too. They’re on the same side, and they really want the government to withdraw Bill 20. Mrs.

Driedger: There is a spa and salon in Winnipeg that has seen a loss of 35 per cent of their business because of last year’s expansion of the PST to those services, and they’re very, very concerned as to what this PST hike will now do to them. And they’re trying very hard to, you know, make a living and employ people. What are some of the general themes you’re hearing from businesses in terms of job losses or business closures or people going someplace else to shop? What are businesses really concerned about? Ms.

Carmichael: R eally, in that data there, they’re concerned about what this means for Manitoba’s competitiveness. Eighty -two per cent of them –that was the top thing: about what does this say about Manitoba? So that was a big one, but, of course, for business owners it’s raising their own price of doing business, too, for everything they’re bringing in. Fifty-seven per cent said this is encouraging cross-border shopping, so absolutely a lot of these themes are coming up from our members. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for your presentation–very clear.

One of the things which I think has not been brought out enough is that for many small business they pay PST on the inputs as well as the –have to charge the PST on what they sell, so it’s really a double hit. Can you explain that a little bit more? Ms. Carmichael: Absolutely. When businesses are making the purchases that they need, the labour and the supplies that they need to build their products and services, they have to pay PST on that. And, under our system, there isn’t input ta x credits for that like perhaps in other provinces.

And then you’re right: Then on the flip side, we have this competitiveness element where customers may be purchasing less. We see that particularly with salons. That’s something where perhaps you could go seven weeks or eight weeks instead and those things add up. So now that business has had higher costs to bring in the shampoos and all the rest that they have paid, but they may face those lost sales on the other end. So you’re absolutely right; it can re ally hit them from both ends. Mr. Chairperson: Time for the presentation has expired. Thank you, Mrs. Carmichael. Mr.

Goertzen: Can there be leave of the committee to have similar to what the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) requested on the previous presenter, to have the results of the survey listed in Hansard as part of the presentation, not the specific graph form, of course, but the questions and then the resulting answers? Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Goertzen has said. What is the will of the committee? [Agreed] PST Hike in Manitoba: The views of Manitoba residents and small-business owners June 2013 CFIB policy positions are set by our members through regular surveys in a one member -one vote system.

Given our commitment to grassroots direction, we deci ded that if the provincial government would not hold a referendum on the increase to the Provincial Sales Tax (PST) announced in the 2013/14 budget, as the current law requires, then CFIB would. We hired Angus Reid Public Opinion to do a poll of 500 Manitobans. The questions asked were the sa me as those we put to our small -business members in a separate member survey that yielded another 457 responses. The

preamble to both surveys was the following: In its latest budget the Manitoba government announced a temporary increase to the Provincial Sales Tax (PST) from 7 to 8 per cent effective July 1, 2013, with the tax revenues raised dedicated to infrastructure spending and flood prevention. Normally, any increase to the PST would require Manitobans' approval through a referendum. In this case, however, the government has introduced legislation (Bill 20) to waive its requirement to hold a referendum first. Here are the details on margin of error for both surveys: On May 1 and May 2, 2013, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 501 randomly selected Manitoba adults who are Angus

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 85 Reid Forum panelists. The margin of error –which measures sampling variability–is +/- 4.5%, 19 times out of 20. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of Manitoba. CFIB conducted a web- only survey of its Manitoba members from April 30 to May 6, 2013. A total of 457 independently owned and operated firms participated in the survey. The margin of error is +/- 4.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The results of the surveys are available on the following pages. Should the provincial government hold a referendum before raising the PST from seven to eight per cent? General Public: Yes, 74%; No, 18%; Don't know, 8% Small Business: Yes, 93%; No, 4%; Don't know, 3% 74 per cent of Manitobans believe the provincial government should hold a referendum before raising the PST from seven to eight per cent; 93 per cent of small businesses agree. Should the provincial government raise the PST from seven to eight per cent?

General Public: No, 72%; Yes, 19%; Don't know, 10% Small Business: No, 92%; Yes, 4%; Don't know, 4% 72 per cent of Manitobans belie ve the provincial government should not raise the PST from seven to eight per cent; 92 per cent of small businesses agree. What impact will an increase in the PST rate from seven to eight per cent have on your business?

Small Business: Very negative, 46%; Somewhat negative, 43%; Don't know, 3%; Somewhat positive, <1%; Very positive, 2%; No impact, 6% 89 per cent of Manitoba small -business owners believe the PST increase from seven to eight per cent will have a somewhat or very negative impact on their business. Specifically, what are the harmful aspects of this increase in the PST for your business?

Small Business: Affects Manitoba's overall competitiveness negatively, 82%; Lowers my customers' purchasing power, 74%; Raises input costs, 74%; Encourages cros s border shopping, 57%; Time and cost of implementing changes, 44%; Other, 13%; None that I can think of, 2% 82 per cent of small -business owners are concerned about the negative impact a PST hike from seven to eight per cent will have on Manitoba's overal l competitiveness. Tax revenues raised from the additional point in the PST would be dedicated towards infrastructure spending as well as flood prevention.

How confident are you the tax revenue raised from the PST hike will go to infrastructure spending and flood prevention? General Public: Not confident at all, 48%; Not very confident, 33%; Somewhat confident, 15%; Very confident, 3%; Don't know, 1% Small Business: Not confident at all, 81%; Not very confident, 15%; Somewhat confident, 2%; Very confident, <1%; Don't know, 2% 81 per cent of Manitobans are not confident the revenue raised from the PST hike will go to infrastructure spending and flood prevention; 96 per cent of small businesses agree.

The increase to the PST rate would be a temporary measure that expires after 10 years. How confident are you that the increase in the PST will expire in 10 years? General Public: Not confident at all, 67%; Not very confident, 23%; Somewhat confident, 7%; Very confident, 2%; Don't know, 2% Small Business: Not co nfident at all, 90%; Not very confident, 8%; Somewhat confident, 1%; Don't know, 1% 90 per cent of Manitobans are not confident the PST hike will be temporary; 98 per cent of small businesses agree. Do you agree or disagree that the Manitoba government sho uld reduce its own spending before raising taxes?

General Public: Agree, 81%; Disagree, 9%; Don't know, 10% Small Business: Agree, 98%; Disagree, 1%; Don't know, 2%

86 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 2, 2013 81 per cent of Manitobans agree that the Manitoba government should reduce its own spendin g before raising taxes; 98 per cent of small businesses agree. Mr. Chairperson: Emmanuel Trawon, private citizen. Mr. Trawon, do you have any written materials for the committee, sir? Mr. Emmanuel Trawon (Private Citizen): I have none, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairperson: None? You may proceed. Mr. Trawon: Good evening, everybody, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. And you may notice that I am wearing a shirt and shorts and sandals.

And I just –so I hope you don’t feel disrespected for the way I’m wearing what I’m wearing, but, just in case, I have brought my shoes and my dress there, if I am not allowed to speak if I’m not properly dressed up. So, good evening, everybody. I hope you have enjoyed celebrating Canada Day. This year, this Canada Day will b e remembered when this government raised the PST for the working families. And I read in the paper that NDP House leader, Honourable Jennifer Howard, who had admitted that this will be hard for Manitobans, for the working family Manitobans.

This will be re membered that this government has trampled and disrespected democracy by not allowing us to vote for this increase. I was here yesterday joining thousands of Manitobans to form the living flag, and I’m proud to be a Canadian. In this event, one of the MLA s said that Canada is one of the best places in the world where we have democracy, where people respect the rule of law. And yet this government, the NDP government, stripped us of that democratic right and did not respect the law. And you can justify all you want why you needed to expand in–the coverage and increase the PST.

At the end of the day, you should and you ought to respect democracy and the rule of law. And yet, by proceeding with whatever you want, you have trampled democracy, you have disrespected us Manitobans. You may not like the law but you should, you ought to obey it. Otherwise, you disrespected democracy. And you have disrespected Manitobans. And, at the end of the day, can you look at the mirror and ask yourselves, have I done the right thing for Manitobans?

Would Manitoba be a better place to live for the next generation? * (19:50) And I was [inaudible] yesterday, and I asked my friend because one of the side mirrors of his vehicle is gone, and I asked him, why you don't fix your car? Fix your car, man. But he said, I'd rather –and he told me, he said, I'd rather put food on the table than fix that mirror. And here is my story.

We used to be homeowners, and we were saving for our retirement, and we were trying to live within our means to make our financial obligations: mortgage payments, hydro bills, water bills, house insurance, life insurance, Internet and cables and others. But the recession came. We were hard hit financially. The company that I had been working with for many years lost a lot of customers, big customers. They lost it to the south of the border. Some of my coworkers were laid off.

I was a few of the more fortunate ones that still have the job, but a pay increase stopped coming every year, before this, we were getting a fair wage increase. A number of pink slips have been handed down and the company cannot afford to keep all the remaining ones and my paycheque is still the same. And we could not keep up with our financial obligations. We were behind in some payments. A nd these are just the basic obligations to keep a house, to keep heating the house, to put food on the table. And we have to make a tough decision or we will face the inevitable filing of bankruptcy. We sold our house.

We paid most of our debt and we tried to live within our means, so not to incur a lot of debt. But it has been difficult for us, but we have to make those difficult decisions. And why I am saying this to this government, to the NDP, like, sometimes when revenue is down, you need to make tough decisions, whether it's popular or not, you have to– you have to live within your means, you need to cut corners. And another thing, stop blaming the previous government. You have been in power for more than 10 years. Grow up. Take responsibility of those problems that you have in hand.

And if you cannot address these problems and continue to blame the previous government, then you are not fit to be in government. And if you cannot take responsibility, then get out of governing and allow the other party to sort out the mess. And my admonition to the party in opposition; do not let it go, keep this fight going, bring this to where the people are. You need to do town hall meetings in Winnipeg. You need to inform them and explain to them the facts of this in crease, the lies of

July 2, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 87 this government, their disrespect to them. You need to do everything. You need to be more visible to the Winnipeggers. Go to their fiestas, attend their parties, barbecues, galas, festivals. And lastly, we don't owe anything. I came here, in Canada, 17 years ago. I came with a skill. I'm educated, and so many of the members of the visible minority–I can only speak for the Filipinos, and we came here with skills and education. And with hard work and perseverance we improved our lives, a nd we don't owe this government anything.

So, at the end of the day, I would like to repeat, can you look at the mirror and ask yourselves, have I done the right thing for Manitobans? Will Manitoba be a better place to live for the next generation? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Trawon. Floor is open for questions. Mr. Struthers: Yes, first of all, don’t apologize for wearing a T -shirt and shorts and sandals in a room that’s as hot as this one. The rest of us are only envious that we’re not doing the same. I also want to thank you for coming here tonight and giving us your advice here at your building. So thank you very much.

Mrs. Driedger: Thank you, Mr. Trawon. Do you feel disrespected at all that the NDP have raised the P ST yesterday before 200 Manitobans had a chance to come here and speak before this committee on this legislation? Mr. Trawon: The law says that you cann

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-2-sed2
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 2nd hansardpdf sed2.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6353ba1b32eb9dde26038ddf48ccc83221e9ca0b

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