Manitoba Hansard — 30 April 2002 (Sitting 23, 37th Legislature, 3rd Session)

37-3-23

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Thirty-Seventh Legislat ure of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LII No. 23- 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, April 30, 2002

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

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

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

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

887 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, April30, 2002 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Budget Enabling Legislation Mr. Harry Eons (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, rise on a matter of privilege. I realize that matters of privilege are serious, and I ask the Speaker's patience as I lay out a prima facie case. My matter deals specifically with the Mini ster of Finance (Mr. Selinger) and the First Minist er (Mr.

Doer), who through their actions are in contempt of the House by providing budgetary papers and. an accompanying advertis ing campaign to the media, members of the Legislative Assembly and the citizens of Manitoba, without including the provision that announcements made in Budget 2002 are subject to the review, debate and acceptance of ena bling legislation, specific to the transf er of $288 million from Manitoba Hydro to the general operating fund of the Province of Manitoba and that this constitutes a breach of the privileges of the members of this House, and that this matter be referred to the committee of this House.

Mr. Speaker, not only has inf ormation been presented to the public prior to the necessary enabling legislation to allow for this course of action, the Minis ter of Finance has issued advertising prior to the House completing its debate on the Budget and presupposing the decision that the House may very well give its consent to the direction they have proposed.

Yesterday, April 29, the First Minister, in response to the need for legislation to allow for the transf er of $288 million from Manitoba Hydro, stated, and I quote: "It was fully disclosed as a matter that required legislation in the Budget presentation by the Min ister of Fina nce." Further, Mr. Speaker, during that same Question Period, the Mini ster of Finance stated, and I quote: "The Budget Address clearly said that we would amend The Manitoba Hydro Act in order to access some of the $37 1 million of extra reven ue." I wish to table, Mr.

Speaker, for your edification, the appropriate documents with respect to what I have just indicated. Subsequent to this, Mr. Speaker, I and my staff have had the opportunity to review the comments of the First Mini ster (Mr. Doer) and the Finance Minist er (Mr. Selinger), to review all documents related to Budget 2002, inc luding Estimates of Revenue, Estimates of Expenditure, Budget Speech, Budget Papers, Manitoba Advantage, and the Budget brief, 10 separate Manitoba government news releases dated April 22, 2002, as well as a transcript from the ongoing Budget 2002 advertising campaign on television and radio.

In direct contrad iction to the statements offered yesterday by both the First Mini ster and the Min ister of Finance indicating that the Budget Address clearly said that the Government would amend The Manitoba Hydro Act to raid the $288 million, no such reference could be found. * (13 :35) Mr. Speaker, I further wish to table some additional material that supports the statements I have just made. Not only is no such reference to be found, the Government has the audacity to include the $288-million raid on Manitoba Hydro in its estimates of revenue and medium term fiscal forecasts.

Such actions constit ute a breach of the rights and privileges of all members. To use the words of Speaker Fraser, I quote: We are a parliamentary democracy, not a so-called executive democracy, not a so-called administrative democracy.

888 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 I refer the Speaker to a similar situation that occurred on September 25, 19 89, during the debate in the House of Commons. The Leader of the Opposition, the then-Right Honourable John Turner, rose on a question of privilege related to ads that the government had put out on the GST prior to the passage of the necess ary legislation as if the legislation had indeed been passed. Today's situation, I argue, Mr. Speaker, is no different.

We have Budget documents and related advertising put up by the Government, paid for by the taxpayers, which talk as if legislation dealing with significant Crown restructuring and an unprecedented $288-million raid on Manitoba Hydro, including a $1 50-million raid to balance last year's books, has indeed been passed or at least is not even required. I refer to a further ruling by Speaker Stockwell of the Ontario Legislature dated January 22, 19 97.

In his ruling, Speaker Stockwell states that similar actions that occurred in Ontario, and I quote: Convey the impression that the passage of the requisite legislation was not necessary, or was a foregone conclusion, or that the Assembly and the Legislature had a pro forma tangential role, even inferior role, in the legislative lawmaking process, and in doing so they appear to diminish the respect that is due this House. Mr. Speaker, let me remind the First Mini ster, as painf ul as it may be to him, about the 19 88 Budget.

That previous NDP govern ment, of which the First Mini ster was part, took the role of the members of this House for granted, including their own. That Budget was defeated. That government was defeated. The previous NDP government saw the Legislative Assembly as a rubber stamp, a mere formality and of no true consequence. They were wrong then. They are wrong now.

I would like to refer back to the ruling by Speaker Stockwell: The actions taken by the First Minister, by the first Min ister of Finance, convey the impression that the passage of the requisite legislation was not necessary, or was a foregone conclusion, or that the Assembly and the Legislature had a pro forma tangenti al, even inf erior role in the legislative lawmaking pro- cess. In doing so, they appear to diminish the respect that is due this House. I move, seconded by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray), that this House censure the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) and the Premier (Mr.

Doer) for their disregard for the traditions and practices of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba and their contempt for the people of Manitoba. * (13: 40) Mr. Speaker: Before recogn1zm g any other member to speak, I would remind the House that contributions at this time by honourable mem bers are to be limited to strictly relevant comments as to whether the alleged matter of privilege has been raised at the earliest oppor tunity and whether a prima facie case has been established. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): It will not take long on my part, Mr.

Speaker, to deal with the two issues that have to be dealt with. First of all, in terms of timing, members opposite know full well that the Budget was intro duced and that there have been public statements made on this Budget now for going on nine days. This has not been raised at the earliest opportunity. What they are doing is of course looking somehow to lift some issue from the Budget, a budget that is being received very well by the people of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, just to deal with the second issue to cover that off, there was a ruling given in this House just last week by yourself citing the decisions of earlier Speakers. It is absolutely clear. It is not a question now in this House that statements made outside the House by a member may not be used as the basis for a question of privilege. I just refer to Hansard, page 77 1, and there you go on citing earlier Speakers reiter ating that very fundamental principle.

I just want to add that what has taken place in terms of the pronouncements and the public relations with respect to this Budget is in fact a tradition that has been followed. There has been nothing different that has been done in terms of announc ing to Manitobans that a budget has been introduced. I am confident that people who

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 889 watch these matters know full well that budgets have to be approved by the Legislative Assembly in several ways, and the first approval is a motion that is before this House that the House approve in general the budgetary policy of the Government.

The reason Manitobans generally know that that approval is necessa ry is because there have been instances in this country where there has been a defeat of that motion, and, therefore, a matter of confidence has been declared by governments and there have been governments defeated, including not more than I think about 13 years ago in this province. Further, and I think it has been said many times to my recollection-I stand to be corrected, but as I recall it has been said several times that the issue of the use of Hydro dollars from export sales would be the subject of legislation before this House.

Of course, it is well known that the Budget is accompanied by legislation which goes through the Estimates process that takes up at least 240 hours of this Legislature's time. This is trite inf ormation for members opposite, and for them to suggest that something extraordinary was done here in terms of inf ormation to the public is just unbelievable. The Budget is a proposal to the members of this House. We do expect nonetheless that given the strength of that Budget proposal, it wi11 be soundly supported by the members of this Chamber. Thank you. Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, I rise on a point of privilege to support my honourable member from Lakeside with the same point of privilege. I find it interesting that what we are finding ourselves-the honourable minister mentioned that we have been debating the Budget for some nine days. Well, the fact of life is that we are raising a point of privilege on the basis of questions that were raised in this Chamber yesterday, a very serious issue. This is not about hiding behind the skirts out in the hallway. This is about what is said in this Chamber.

This is about a very serious issue, and I find it interesting that what was advertised and said out in the public, is that, and it said right here that profits from U.S. hydro exports wi11 partly offset economic uncertainty in the federal accounting error. This is advertising that is put out into the public. Well, clearly, the question asked: What is the parliamentary democratic process all about?

If the members opposite are taking the approach that this is an issue that has already been determined, it is pretty clear that the Doer government is not listening to anybody. * (13: 45) For example, the Minis ter of Finance (Mr. Seling er) said in this Chamber, that the members of management of Manitoba Hydro found out about this raid on the Crown corporation the same day as everybody else in Manitoba, the day that he stood in his place and read the Budget.

I find that inter esting, that the management of Manitoba Hydro would not have been ap proached about the raid of $288 million, $15 0 million which was used to balance the books from last year. Yet, apparen tly, according to the Doer government's advertising, profits from U.S. hydro exports will partly offset economic uncertainty in a federal accounting error. Mr. Speaker, that is the height of arrogance.

It is the height of arrogance because they are just making an assumption that nobody cares, that nobody is going to listen, that they are not going to ask anybody that these decisions are made at the Cabinet table. We feel on this side of the House that this is a very, very serious issue. It is unpr ecedented that the Doer govern ment is going in to raid a Crown corporation, and they are doing it before the legislation has even been tabled in this House. We sat in this Chamber in the last session, we listened to a Throne Speech from the Doer government .

There was no mention in that Throne Speech about we are looking at changing The Manitoba Hydro Act. There was no talk about any changes to The Manitoba Hydro Act so they could go in and raid a Crown corporation. Well, Mr. Speaker, there are tremendous opportunities to go before the Public Utilities Board, because I remind members opposite, the Public Utilities Board is a third-party, arms length group of experts that can hear all sides of

890 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 the argument and decide what is right, decide what is right for the people of Manitoba. But no, the Doer government says, we are not going to do that. In fact, they appeared to show contempt for this Legislative Assembly by saying: Well, it is already passed because we are going to take the profits; not because they will not admit to Manitobans that they cannot balance their books, not that they have a spending problem, but they are going to come in and do something that is unpr ecedented.

They are going to take something that Manitobans hold very precious: Manitoba Hydro. Something that is owned by the Manitoba Hydro ratepayers and they are going to go in, change the legislation to raid it, spend the money. It has already been spent. If you listen to what they are saying about the Budget, the cheque has been written, and we have not even seen the legislation. Mr.

Speaker, I find it very inter esting, very interesting in a process that the Doer government brings in a budget and in that Budget they make no mention at all, as was asked yesterday, there was no discussion whatsoever about the full disclosure of changing any legislation of any sort. Yet the cheque has been written for last year. I believe that if you look at what a parliamentary democracy is about, it should be about an exchange of ideas, and it should be a debate of those ideas. Nobody has any difficulty with debating different ideas.

They clearly have a spending problem, and the way they go after their spending problem is to go into changed legislation to raid a Crown corporation. That is how they manage their side of the House. We on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, would respect what this process is all about. We have asked: Take this to the Public Utilities Board, take it in front of Manitobans. What have we been told? No, we are not going to do that. * (13:50) Why is that, that they are afraid to take it before Manitobans? It is the arrogance that they have already made the decision, that the cheque has been written.

They have proceeded along the lines of what they have said in their advertising, that they are going to take the profits and they are going to pay this off and that, apparently, is no big deal. I think, when you look at what the fundamentals of democracy, and I will even quote-I am very fascinated that-one of the debates that took place over this kind of precedent in the House of Commons, and I think it is very interesting that the federal government was doing something very similar to what the Doer government is doing. The question was brought forward to the Speaker of the House of Commons in Ottawa.

One of the members of the House of Commons known as Mr. Ed Broadbent, Ed Broadbent, the Leader of the New Democratic Party said, and I quote: If all of these changes that the government asserts in its advertising are going to take place with consid erable detail outlined in the advertise ments put in the papers, what, we ask, is the relevance of any hearings? That was Mr. Broadbent's comment, Mr. Speaker.

He simply was asking if the government has already decided that they have written the cheque, that it is a done deal, that they are going to ask tomorrow for a vote on a budget that includes legislation that this Chamber has not even seen, then that ultimately is the height of arrogance . It is high-handed manipulation. It shows absolute contempt for the Legislature. I thoroughly and wholeheartedly endorse what the member from Lakeside has said.

I believe that what we have seen with this Government's approach, to take a high-handed arrogant attack on the Legislature, I think is a disdain to what this Legislature is about, and I believe is a disservice to all of Manitobans. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Before I recognize the next speaker, when there is more than one speaker on any matter, I have been following the Oppo sition, Government, Opposition, Government, to be fair to the whole House. When I recognized the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray), I had noticed the Member for River Heights (Mr.

Gerrard) and I did not see a member on this side of the House. But to follow that normal tradition, I would have

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 891 to go from Opposition to Govemment and then to the Opposition. So I will recognize the honoura ble First Mini ster. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Just to be brief, Mr. Speaker, every year that I have been in this Chamber, statute tax law amendment acts are brought in to incorporate and implement the decisions that were made in the Budget. We have had the experience sometimes in the past in opposition of voting against the Budg et and voting for some of the tax reductions that are contained within. This is not abno mml. Mr.

Speaker, members opposite may vote for the merger of Manitoba Hydro and vote against the Budget, or may vote for a practice that has been put in place in every other province in Canada and that is contained within the Budget and then vote against something else in the Budget. . ' Mr. Speaker, to now pretend that this does not exist, I would refer members opposite- An Honourable Member: Point of order. Mr. Doer: Well, they are just interfe ring. They do not want to hear it. Point of Order Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr.

Speaker, on a point of order, this House has always accepted the word of members opposite when they make statements in this House. On a number of occasions, questions have been asked to the Premier (Mr. Doer) about whether or not the Hydro raid was a tax on Manitobans, to which the Premier replied no. Today he is ackno wledging that, in fact, it is. * (13:55) Mr. Speaker: Order.

May I remind the House that privilege is a very, very serious matter, and before I recognize the honourable Govemment House Leader, I would like to remind all honourable members, when rising on a point of order, it is to point out to the Speaker a breach of the rules or a departure from normal practices of the House, not to be used for debate. This privilege is a very serious matter. The honourab le Govemment House Leader? No? On the point of order raised by the honourable Member for Russell, there was no point of order. It was a dispute over the facts. * * * Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, there have been financial measures taken before this Budget has been passed. One of the most notable ones is that we announ ced, I believe on March 15, that the ESL, the second tax on property tax and education, would be reduced for the first time in generations by $10 million. Was that a breach of privilege? Was that a breach of precedence? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. May I remind the House once more that a matter of privilege is a very, very serious matter.

I would ask the co-operation of all honourable members for the members who have the floor to be heard because I have to hear the words that are spoken . Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So there have been standard practices before contained within budgetary motions. The fundamental issue here, a budget until it is passed is a proposed budget. The Budget, if it is defeated tomorrow, is a matter of confidence, and then we will have a provincial election. Whether it was Joe Clark in 1979 or other govemments , as the member opposite has pointed out, a budget is a matter of confidence.

All the documents and all the materials contained within the budgetary practices of a particular govemment in every Legislature in Canada, whether it is with a majority or minority or in any other situation, is a document that has to be passed by a majority in the Legislature in order to proceed under the budgetary motions, and then there are other subsequent acts in a budget that must be passed under separate motions or laws. Mr. Speaker, let me give a couple of other examples.

I recall, in 1993, on May 1, members opposite, and I would have thought the Leader of the Opposition would remember this one, gas was increased by 1 cent per litre in April of 1993, and the act was passed quite a bit later.

892 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 The law was also increased to have baby supplies, safety equipment, personal hygiene supplies-by the way, we have removed that in this Budget. [interjection] Perhaps they can finish because !-perhaps you could let the- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. * (14:00) Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The statute, the law amendment, was amended on July 27, 1993, to deal with budget measures which increased taxes.

Of course, members opposite said that they did not increase taxes in that budget; they just added this item, that item and another item and called it a decrease, including gasoline tax. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, there is another precedent. In 1989, former Finance Minister Manness brought in a budget. They brought in legislation which was brought in on December 31, 1989, months after the Budget was brought in, because they wanted to go back and claw back a surplus that was left at the end of 1988. So they took the surplus of $55 million; they did not want to show that on a former government's books.

They created a deficit of $150 million, and, with a new act of the Legislature for The Fiscal Stabilization Act, created a Fiscal Stabilization Act of $200 million. They do not have a point of order. This issue is not a point of order; it is a point of politics. Even on the point of politics, they are speaking out of both sides of their mouths. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I wish to make some comments on the matter raised by the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns ). There are two issues before the Legis lature at this point. The first question is whether this was raised at the first opportunity.

Although this is matters which derive from the Budget, it really was not until Question Period yesterday that this matter became clear. Indeed- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, it shows the extent to which the Government had, in fact, tried to hide this and disguise it, that it did not become clear until yesterday. Now I think that one might argue the point as to whether it could have been raised immediately after Question Period yesterday, but in point of fact this is a very serious charge.

I think in fairness to the Member for Lakeside, one must acknowledge that to be absolutely sure of the facts and to make sure that there was a prima facie case here, it was necessary to do substantial research overnight. So I think that this is consistent, at least, with the proposition that this was raised at the first opportunity. The second matter that I believe we need to address, and I would like to provide you some advice on, Mr. Speaker, is the question of the seriousness of this and the precedent.

I think that there is an important distinguishing factor when one is looking at budget, whether one is looking at measures which relate to last year's budget or measures which relate to the current fiscal year's budget. Quite clearly, in many instances there have been legislation and changes made which look at the coming year's budget, and that is a standard kind of legislative practice, in order to have changes introduced at budget time dealing with the coming year's budget but to have measures which deal with last year's budget and last fiscal year. I think, Mr.

Speaker, it is important to note that when the Budget was tabled, last fiscal year had already been completed. So it was not as if we still had some of last fiscal year to go, that in fact this was past history and the budget for the fiscal year which had already passed. So, when you look at precedent, it is quite important that you look at precedents which relate to the previous fiscal year.

The second aspect of this which I think is important is whether it is a minor legislative change or in fact whether the legislation which is proposed at the time of the Budget in fact reverses the direct intent of the legislation which existed. The legislation which existed during all of last fiscal year would have directly and quite clearly prohibited the actions that this Govern ment is proposing to take. So this legislation,

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 893 which the Government has not even brought forward yet, and what is happening here is a very unusual circumstance that we are dealing with a retroactive measure after the fiscal year is completed which is necessary from the Govern ment's point of view but has to directly counteract a measure which was designed to prevent the circumstances which were in the Budget and the type of legislation that this Government had produced.

I think we could have accepted it had it been for the coming fiscal year as a legitimate approach, but to do it in the past fiscal year, Mr. Speaker, is inappropriate and unacceptable. I would add one more thing. If this was a small amount of money, we might, under those circumstances, be a little more tolerant, but clearly for $150 million the proportion on the size relative to the whole Budget makes this a major issue and one which must be dealt with with great seriousness. So I would suggest, Mr.

Speaker, that this was a matter which at least is consistent with being raised at the first opportunity and a matter which is clearly of great seriousness and which needs to be considered now and considered very carefully by yourself and ruled on by yourself. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): On the question of timeliness, the Hansard for April 24, Question Period, clearly shows that I indicated we would take responsibility for these decisions in front of this House and we would go to the Legislature for approval of any decisions we made. That was in response to a demand from the Member for Minnedosa (Mr.

Gilleshammer) to take it to the PUB. We said we would take it to the Legislature, so that was six days ago. We made our intentions extremely clear, what we would do. So that addresses the question of timeliness. Our information was on the record during Question Period and our intentions were clear.

Now, on the second matter, whether there is any kind of precedent for this kind of behaviour, in the budget of 1989, the then-Minister of Finance, Clayton Manness, said in reference to an exceptional revenue situation and a surplus in the previous budget year by a fom1er govern ment, he said very clearly: We could have used all the exceptional revenue for long-term debt or deficit reduction in '88 and '89. Indeed we could have shown an overall budgetary surplus in '88- 89. However, we recognized the exceptional nature of this revenue and have chosen to apply it toward longer term fiscal objectives.

There fore, today I am announcing the Government's intention to establish a fiscal stabilization fund of $200 million of the exceptional revenue received in '88 and '89. So he took the $55-million surplus from the previous year, passed by legislation of a former government, he created a $145-million deficit retroactively, and he used the 55 and the 145 to set up a fiscal stabilization fund by legislation nine months after this had occurred on a go forward basis. That is right on point of the issue we are addressing today.

We have an example here very clearly where we are proposing legislation to address the fiscal uncertainty related to the federal accounting error that we heard about in January of 2002, information we did not have at the time that we passed the last Budget. I think that that puts the whole situation in perspective. Also in this Budget Address we talked about some further amalgamation of RHAs, which likely will require legislation. We talked about the education support levy, which will require legislation.

We talked about amalgamation of school divisions, which will require legislation, and we talked about the merger of Winnipeg Hydro into Manitoba Hydro, which will require legislation. There is clearly nothing unusual about the measures we have taken in this Budget. All of them will be dealt with before the session ends by legislation, and the Budget will go forward with the commitments made. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, I do have some new information on this very serious matter.

Firstly, I would like to table with the House some further documentation that will support the argument that this is the first available

894 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 opportunity, as it clearly indicates in the re sponses to questions during yesterday's Question Period that both the First Minister (Mr. Doer) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) clearly indicated that this information was fully disclosed, and I will emphasize the word "fully," as a matter that required legislation in the Budget presentation by the Minister of Finance, which, of course, you will see from the tabled documents that it does not.

It has, I think, been shown and demonstrated that this is the first opportunity that the Opposition has had and the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) has had to raise this matter before the House. I think enough has been said on that issue. With regard to the prima facie case, I think this case clearly follows a pattern that has been set by this Government that started with the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) when he was admonished by the Auditor for making a payment with regard to the TRAF when clearly it was ahead of the passing of the necessary legislation.

That the Auditor brought to the attention of this House and to the Minister of Education in a very, very direct way. Since then, we have seen the Minister of Education deal with funds to the Agassiz School Board, which have been sent for one reason and used for another with his full knowledge. We have seen his dealings with not only the Morris-Macdonald School Division not add up to what they say they are; in addition, the Transcona-Springfield School Division is going to take him to court in the very near future to demonstrate their belief that he was not forthright. Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Mr.

Mackintosh: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the member is talking about education policy issues, nothing related to the issues that were raised on the so-called matter of privilege. He should be addressing, in a very strict way, whether there is a prima facie case. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Mackintosh), when dealing with a matter of privilege, it is to bring to the Speaker's attention at the earliest possible opportunity, and whether it is a prima facie case. So I would ask the co operation of all honourable members that have the floor. *** Mr.

Loewen: Mr. Speaker, with regard to the prima facie case, it is very important for this House to recognize that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) is also the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro, and as his responsibility is for Manitoba Hydro, he has the responsibility of approving and signing off on their financial statements. That has to be placed alongside with this very, very real and very serious power to be the sole authority to tax people of the province of Manitoba. I am pleased that the Premier (Mr.

Doer) has indicated for the record today that in fact he is looking at this matter as a matter of taxation. In his role as the Minister responsible for Hydro, the minister some time in March signed off on the third-quarter statement of Manitoba Hydro, the statement that dealt with their financial situation up until December 31, 2001. Nowhere in that statement was there any indication that there would be a payment of $150 million to the Government of the province of Manitoba. That was as late as his signing off on that statement in March.

This does not follow through with the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants' recommendations on third-quarter statements which, although they are not audited, should clearly indicate all financial activities that the corporation is involved in. So by the minister's failure to go back and restate or ask the corporation that he is responsible for to restate their third-quarter financial statements, he is also showing contempt for this Legislature and to the people of Manitoba. So, Mr. Speaker, in addition, I will raise one further point.

We have indicated clearly in this House that the minister is in a very, very difficult situation, being that he is not only the Minister of Finance but the minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro who, for the first time in the history of Manitoba, has turned the ratepayers of Manitoba Hydro directly into taxpayers. I believe all those facts point to the prima facie

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 895 case, and I thank you for the opportunity to raise those issues. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, as far as the first opportunity, I think our members have made that quite clear that this is the first opportunity since yesterday's Question Period when the First Minister (Mr. Doer) and the Finance Minister (Mr. Selinger) finally answered a question in this House.

As far as the prima facie case, I do believe my colleagues have made the case on this side, but I would like to touch on just a couple of other issues that we might have just passed over. I want to make sure we reinforce. All too often, this autocratic government seems to think that they can tum around and make the decisions without the input of the public. We have asked for this issue to go before the Public Utilities Board, but, no, this Government says they will send it before a committee of this House. Well, why are they making a farce of this House then? Why are they sending it to a committee?

They have already made their decision. That is what they have said. This Premier has sat in the House and said he has made the decision. Why do we need the legislation? Why do we need a bill? Why do we need this Legislature? Why were we elected if this Premier can stand there and just say I will pass this bill? He might be government, but governments in the past have learned, when things go to committee and bills go to com mittee, that sometimes there is a second thought that they could possibly make some changes.

But this Government has firmly made the decision that they are going to pay for last year's spending habits. That is last year's. That is last year's spending habits, $150 million. That is more than some departments. Agriculture is $120 million. One hundred and fifty million dollars is what they are having Hydro pay for this year, more than the entire portfolio for Agriculture. I mean, Mr. Speaker, you can pay for how many departments of Culture, which are at $50 million. Give me a break. How can this Government stand there and pass legislation this year to correct their spending habits for last year?

And they have the audacity to not even mention it, not even to mention it when they are doing the release of their Budget. This First Minister has the audacity to say by passing the Budget it gives him the right to do it. He has not got that right. That right belongs to this Legislature, and the people of Manitoba have to be heard. It is about time this Government listens. Mr. Speaker: Order. A matter of privilege is a serious concern. I am going to take this matter under advisement to consult the authorities, and I will return to the House with a ruling. * * * Mr. Murray: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to apologize if I made some comments in the House that might have offended some, and I would like to extend that apology to all members. Mr. Speaker: I thank the honourable member for that comment. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I would like to table the following reports, all of which have previously been distributed: A Review of the Policy Development Capacity.

Within Government Departments, November 2001; the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board, Quarterly Report for the nine months ended December 31, 2001; the Office of the Provincial Auditor Report, February 2002, Value-for Money Audits, Keewatin Community College, Investment in Information Technology; and the Audit of the Public Accounts for the year ended March 31, 2001.

As well, I would like to table these reports, all of which again have been previously distributed: Office of the Provincial Auditor, An Examination of School Board Governance in Manitoba Annual Report for the year ended March 31, 2000; Office of the Provincial Auditor, Investigation of an Adult Learning Centre Annual Report ending September 2001 ; Public Accounts, Volumes 1, 2 and 3 Annual Report for the year ended March 31, 2000;

896 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 Office of the Provincial Auditor, Operations of the Office Annual Report for the year ended March 31, 2000 and the year ended March 31, 2001. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Estimates order for this session. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us today Mr. Cole Summers from the city of Winnipeg. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Manitoba Hydro Act Amendments Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Yesterday I asked the Premier to admit that he does not have the authority required to raid Manitoba Hydro to cover his deficit from last year. The Premier stated: "It was fully disclosed as a matter that required legislation in the Budget presentation by the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger)." Later, the Minister of Finance stood in his place and said: "The Budget Address clearly said that we would amend The Manitoba Hydro Act in order to access some of the $371 million." I would like to ask the Premier if he could indicate what page number of the Budget Speech was this disclosure made on. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): We had this discussion last year in this Legislature on the issue of rate reductions. There was a similar debate on rate reductions. There was a similar request from members opposite to send it to the PUB.

Eventually they not only opposed it, they opposed it and they eventually voted for it after some criticism. We believe that this is a very sensible idea. The documents in the House, the

summary documents, the information documents contain a considerable reference to the issue of Hydro surplus from U.S. sales. The documents contain the whole impact on Hydro. The Budget contains a fuller treatment of that by saying that the practices used and utilized in other provinces, Mr. Speaker, this should not have been a big mystery for members opposite. Even groups in the business community, for example, the Business Council of Manitoba, was urging us to look at the option of a Hydro dividend in tougher times. Rate Increase Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, the fact is, Mr.

Speaker, you can find no mention in the Budget documents of the Government bringing in legislation to raid Manitoba Hydro profits for $288 million. I ask the Premier if they also failed to include the fact that Hydro rates would increase because of their raid of Manitoba Hydro. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether members opposite are aware of this, but the provincial-federal error identified by the federal government made I 00 percent by- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the federal error goes back to 1993.

Ask us what page number that was in, in the 1999 Budget, the year 2000 Budget, the 2001 Budget. When I hear members oppo site, some members opposite talking about retroactive considerations when we have been told retroactively this province may have to pay back $700 million, it requires this Government to be as prudent as possible in the treatment of this information. We found this out on the last day in January.

Because of the uncertainty of the federal error, because of the uncertainty of the economic decline in Canada which is now going up, we thought that with $220 million projected profits in the year 2001-2002, Manitoba Hydro taking some of that export revenues in that same year where the revenue was gained, allowed us for the second year in a row not to take any money out of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund. We think that is prudent. We think it is good for us to bridge the uncertainty of the past to the

April 3{}, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 897 optimism of today and tomorrow, and we �hink that most Manitobans, including the Busmess Council, think it is a sensible idea. Mr. Murray: Well, Mr. Speaker, this Government, the Doer government and this Premier have misled Manitobans on a number of occasions and revealed during that time their hidden agenda. For example, there was never any mention that they were going to raid Autopac for $30 million, no word of that. No word at all of bringing in labour legislation that would close businesses, no mention of that.

Now we find they are raiding Manitoba Hydro for their profits for the simple reason to cover their spending problem. I will ask the Premier: Will he guarantee Manitobans that Hydro rates will not increase? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, last year the Manitoba Hydro section, not the Centra Gas section members opposite will know about Centra Gas the Hydro

section with the export sales is projected to make $230 million. When y� u subtract the $1 0-million loss from Centra Gas m their operations last year, the net projected surplus is $220 million. Mr. Speaker, the majority of the money to deal with the uncertainty is being asked for from Hydro under the page in the Budget. An Honourable Member: What page? Mr. Doer: Page 20. The amount in the Budget goes back-the majority of the money goes back to last year. I want to guarantee to the House that we are not going to retroactively increase rates last year to deal with this proposed change, Mr. Speaker.

Secondly- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: There is another revenue payment to the Government, Mr. Speaker, similar to five other provinces. Obviously, there is no rate application before the PUB, and Manitoba Hydro is before the PUB as we speak on the whole issue of cost production and has been there for the last-[inter jection] Well, Mr. Speaker, if they want to yell us down, do not ask for any answers. Manitoba Hydro Budget Decision-Board Awareness Mr.

Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Last week when the Minister of Finance was asked when Manitoba Hydro had been informed that they would be required to cont� bute � 288 million to the general revenue of thts provmce, he stated that Manitoba Hydro is treated like every other citizen of Manitoba in that they get the information when the Budget is released in the Legislature. Mr. Speaker, can the minister confirm that the board and management had no knowledge of and no input into this Budget decision? Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, all decisions with respect to the Budget are made by the Cabinet, and that is how we do our budgets in this province. * (14:30) Minister of Finance Conflict of Interest Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Given that the Minister of Finance was desperate for cash for last year and for this year, does he not see that he has a clear conflict of interest in that no one except him was representing Mani toba Hydro when this decision was made? Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I fully answered that question last time it was asked.

I only point out to the member opposite that when the previous NDP government built Limestone, the intention was very clear, that the profits from export sales into the United States market would be for the entire benefit of all Manitobans. It was only 12 years later that the former Premier cottoned onto the same idea and promised it in the last election. Manitoba Hydro Public Utilities Board Review Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has clearly shut

898 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 out the board and the executive of Manitoba Hydro. Does he not see that with this conflict of interest this should be examined by a third party like the Public Utilities Board? The Manitoba Society of Seniors, the Manitoba Consumers' Association are calling for that. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): It was just a few moments ago that the members opposite were complaining that we had not made it clear that the legislation would be coming before this Chamber right here.

We have made it very clear that legislation will come before this Legislature, that this legislation will be properly debated in this Chamber at the committee level where citizens will have a full opportunity to make their views known. We will follow the normal practice of any budget where legislation will follow that implements the measures announced in the Budget. That is what we will do again this year. Budget Manitoba Hydro Profits Mr.

John Loewen (Fort Whyte): In a desperate attempt to cover off last year's deficit, the Minister of Finance has forced the Minister responsible for Hydro to demand that Hydro borrow $288 million to fund the Doer govern ment's deficits. This is akin to using your credit card to make a mortgage payment. How much more debt will Manitoba Hydro have to take on to help the Doer government pay off last year's deficit? Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): First of all, there is a factual error that is being frequently repeated in this Chamber. At no time was there a deficit predicted in last year's '0 1-02 Budget.

At no time was that contemplated. There were full and ample resources to deal with that. Then we came into a federal accounting error. We made some prudent decisions to protect the operating budget and the balanced budget legis lation requirements on a go-forward basis. So we have taken prudent decisions to ensure there is no deficit. All our quarterly reports indicated that there would not be a deficit. Mr.

Loewen: I would like to ask the Finance Minister if he could tell us: Who at the Cabinet table stood up for the ratepayers of Manitoba Hydro while for the first time in the history of this province the ratepayers were turned into taxpayers? Or was everyone at the Cabinet table more concerned about the 20% salary loss they would suffer if the Doer government did not raid Manitoba Hydro? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, it was just last year that we introduced into this Chamber legislation that will require a referendum of the people of Manitoba before there was any attempt to privatize Manitoba Hydro.

It is this Government that has stood up to protect Crown corporations as organizations that serve all the citizens of Manitoba. Manitoba Hydro Rate Increase Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, how can this minister guarantee that electricity rates will not increase when prior to learning of the Doer government's decision to raid Hydro for $288 million, prior to that, knowing of that decision, Hydro was already forecasting a rate increase of 6.1 percent in electricity between the years 2003 and 2007? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Hydro in their forecasts always make prudent projections on a go-forward basis. You can see from the forecasted net revenues from 1997 to 2001, they always forecasted very prudently and the actuals exceeded that by $371 million. That amount of money is the basis upon which we feel that it is appropriate to take a transfer for the citizens of Manitoba. Let us not forget that this was done on the basis of a project that was put in place by a previous NDP government specifi cally to generate export profits for the benefit of the people of Manitoba.

We are following through on that important legacy. Regional Health Authorities Amalgamation Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): My question is for the Minister of Health. We have recently seen the announcement of a poorly thought out and somewhat tepid amalgamation of two RHAs in western Manitoba, Marquette and South-

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 899 Westman. I wonder if the Minister of Health would indicate: Did he have further plans for amalgamation? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): am a bit perplexed because I thought the member was asking questions of his counterpart last week for us not to do that. I have difficulty with that. On the one hand, they want us to spend more on a bunch of services. On the other hand, when we try to do administrative changes, they are critical of it.

The decision with respect to Marquette and South-Westman was a decision made as a result of a lot of input and advice from the public with respect to dealing with administrative issues. Mr. Cummings: wonder if this minister would like to table with the House or indicate to the public what studies or what analysis he has had to support the amalgamations that might provide better patient care. Mr. Chomiak: It is very clear that the public has said to us as a government, to all governments, to try to put as much resources into direct patient care as we can.

That is why we are training more nurses, we have put in a bursary program for doctors, we are training more rural doctors, we are training more occupational therapists, we are training more physiotherapists, we are training more lab technicians, we are training more doctors, to get more resources into frontline workers and, where we can, to deal with administrative inefficiencies and to streamline administration, and we are following that advice. Mr. Cummings: The mmtster is avoiding answering both questions. I ask him very clearly: Did he have further plans for amalgamation? Mr.

Chomiak: We as a government will look at any administrative changes that we can put in place that will help provide for getting more resources to patient care. We made announce ments this year with respect to amalgamations which comprise the two rural RHAs of Marquette and South-Westman. Several years ago, we combined two urban-in the city of Winnipeg-health authorities that had been put in place, double administration, by the previous government. We combined those. I do not antici pate any further amalgamations. Regional Health Authorities Amalgamation Mr.

Leonard Derkach (Russell): In the dying hours prior to the Budget, the Minister of Health, through his department, held a conference call with rural RHAs to indicate to them that five regional health authorities would be amalga mated in the Budget. On the day of the Budget, another conference call was held through the minister's office, or through his department, that indeed a change had been made and that not five but only two of the RHAs would be merged.

I would like to ask the minister: What caused him to change his mind on the day of the Budget and to politically gerrymander the amalgamation that had been announced to the RHAs just days before to only limit it to the merger of two rural RHAs in the province? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): There was no change of mind on the day of the Budget insofar as the Budget was already produced, firstly. Secondly, I do not know what practice members opposite followed with respect to what they did, but we did not, and will not, gerrymander. Mr. Derkach: Mr.

Speaker, according to the rural health authorities, the Minister of Health, through his department, on April 19 held a conference call with all RHAs indicating to them that five RHAs would be merged. On the 22nd of April, the day of the Budget- Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Govern ment House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I am just wondering if we can get a question out of the member. * (14:40) Mr.

Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, Beauchesne Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

900 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002

preamble. I would ask the honourable member to please put his question. * * * Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister why he is indicating to the House that indeed no change was made when on the day of the Budget, April 22, there was a call made to rural RHAs from the Department of Health indicating to them that a change had been made that not five but only two of the mergers would occur, and it had been previously announced on April 19. Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated previously, on many occasions in my con sultation process and at our meetings around the province, we were putting everything on the table with respect to this Budget because we knew there were some difficult choices that had to be made. We knew that we did not want to go down the road of the previous government of slashing beds, slashing nurses, slashing doctors, stopping doctor programs and stopping nurses' programs, and that we were putting everything on the table and we were looking at everything.

Ultimately, we made a determination with respect to a number of issues that were included in the Budget. Mr. Derkach: Well, Mr. Speaker, will he finally admit then that this was indeed a purely political decision made on the day of the Budget, or on that weekend, that instead of merging five rural health authorities, as he had announced on the 19th to the rural health authorities, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) and the Premier (Mr. Doer) all got together and decided politically to only merge two health authorities on the west side of the province? Mr.

Chomiak: As I have said on many occasions in the House, you know, the member stood up-I believe it was the Member for Gladstone or whatever, who stood up recently and said when you-[interjection] Ste. Rose, Mr. Speaker- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Member for Ste. Rose. On a point of order? [interjection] The honourable Minister of Health, to please continue. Mr. Chomiak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe it was the Member for Ste. Rose (Mr.

Cummings) who rose in this House several weeks ago and asked if I had attended the Marquette board meeting and had discussed with them the possibility of making changes. I advised him at that time that in fact I had done that and I had met with the Marquette board and told them that everything was on the table. Casino Renovations Cost Overruns Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Lotteries Corpora tion. The expansion to Club Regent and McPhillips Street Station was originally esti mated first at about $50 million, then at $66 million.

Two years ago, the Provincial Auditor produced a report which showed that the actual cost was $112 million. Last December, we learned from the minister that the costs had risen again under her administration to $145 million, an increase of $33 million over what was in the Auditor's report. I ask the mmtster: Why was there inadequate disclosure to the Provincial Auditor two years ago? Why was the Provincial Auditor kept in the dark as to what were the real costs, and why have the costs continued to escalate under her administration? Hon.

Diane McGifford (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act): Mr. Speaker, of course there are several questions contained in the member's question, so I will attempt to work my way through them. [interjection} I know the Tory member for River Heights- Mr. Speaker, when the Auditor conducted his report in 2000, and I tabled it in the House on May 15 , 2000, one of the pieces of advice contained in that report was that further in-house work should be conducted by in-house persons. We appointed, Mr. Speaker, an acting CEO of Lotteries.

Under his administration, further research was taken, and that revealed more

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 901 expenditures than the Auditor had originally concluded. Indeed, there were more expen ditures, 145, but those expenditures were not spent under my watch. An Honourable Member: Oh, yes, they were. Ms. McGifford: No, they were not. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, fiscal responsibility is a good Liberal principle. It may not be a New Democratic one.

My supplementary: I ask the minister, in view of the Provincial Auditor's report that public disclosure of casino consolidation costs were incomplete, will the minister agree to table as soon as possible in this Legislature a detailed report of the cost overruns and an explanation for them? Ms. McGifford: Mr. Speaker, that information was public when we had the standing committee last December. Unfortunately, perhaps the member was not there, did not hear this infor mation being disclosed, but it was, publicly. It was there on the table at that standing committee in December of 2001. Mr.

Gerrard: My supplementary to the minister: With the extraordinary continuing increases, I ask the minister to assure this Legis lature that the $145-million figure is the final figure and represents the full and complete costs of the expansion. Can the minister tell us when under her watch the costs will stop going up and up and up and up and up? Ms. McGifford: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is one of those questions which is so fraught with inaccuracy one really wonders whether one should bother answering it at all.

But the cost of $145 million were costs incurred because of expenses made and decisions made by members over there. It had nothing to do with me, and I think that this member should be very careful in what he puts on the record, Mr. Speaker. Healthy Baby Program Milk Program for Expectant Mothers Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Fiin Flon): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Family Services and Housing. Milk is an important building block for healthy babies and mothers.

Can the minister tell this House what steps the Government is taking to make the supply of milk more available to pregnant mothers with low or moderate incomes? Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to answer that question from my honourable colleague from Flin Flon.

In partnership with two private sector firms, Safeway and Parmalat, we have been able to make arrangements so that all women who attend the centres that are set up under the Healthy Baby program will be able to make . use of up to three litres of milk a week during their pregnancy and during the early months after delivery of their baby. I am particularly pleased, Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of northern Manitobans, who in many situations find the price of milk exorbitantly high, that by the use of the UHT, the ultra-high temperature milk that Parmalat processes, milk with a shelf life of over six months will be available in areas that have refrigeration issues. I am delighted to also tell the House that over 4500 Manitoba women have taken advantage of Healthy Baby in their first year, and thousands are attending the sites voluntarily because they care about their children and about their babies. * (14:50 ) Regional Health Authorities Amalgamation Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, I am interested to see that this minister is now proudly proclaiming food vouchers. My question is for the Minister of Health. Following his leadership in reorganization, I

902 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 wonder if he would agree or disagree with the observation from his very own department that does not expect any savings from the amalgamation of Westman and Marquette. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I do not know specifically what analysis the member is talking about with regard to that. {interjection] Well- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The member is referring to information that I have not seen, that he has not forwarded, has not tabled in this House.

The amalgamation of the regions, I have not set a target number on it. I am confident that in fact with the reduction of the number of oppositions, that alone will induce savings in that particular area. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, on a new question. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Ste. Rose, on a new question. Mr. Cummings: Would the minister confirm or deny that the indication has been made that there will be no loss of positions in this amalga mation? Mr. Chomiak: Last week the member was asking me why we did not hire a CEO for Marquette region.

Last week the same member rose and said: Why did you not hire a CEO for Marquette region? Mr. Speaker, by virtue of combining Marquette with South-Westman, we are not going to have hired and then let go another CEO because there will be a CEO position for both regions. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, on a new question. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Ste. Rose, on a new question. Mr. Cummings: Then the minister is indicating that the saving of one CEO salary is the kind of savings that he expects.

My question therefore to this minister: In his leadership of this department is he prepared to table any studies, any infor mation, any guidance that he is following in reorganization of health regions across this province? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, we have had experience with one amalgamation. We took two regions in the city of Winnipeg set up by members opposite, two CEOs, I believe it was six vice-presidents and seven or so executive vice-presidents. We combined the regions and we cut the number of senior administrative people, if memory serves me correctly, in half.

We had an example of it being done in urban Manitoba and it made sense to make an amalgamation in rural Manitoba. Regional Health Authorities Amalgamation Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Mr. Speaker, I can hardly believe what I am hearing from the Minister of Health, that in fact he is going to save Manitobans a great deal of money through the amalgamation of two rural RHAs. On April 19, Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Health, through his department, held a con ference call with all RHAs, and he said to them the following RHAs will be merged in the Budget Address: Marquette Regional Health Authority, South-Westman Regional Health Authority and the Brandon Regional Health Authority, and another merger between South and North-Eastman regional health authorities. Mr. Speaker, on the day of the Budget, through his department, another conference call was held where- Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): We all have an interest in maintaining this as Question Period, not speech period, but of course the honourable member has certainly gone beyond using one carefully drawn sentence as a

preamble. Would you please draw his attention to the rules, Mr. Speaker?

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 903 Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, I would like to take this opportunity to remind all honourable members of Beauchesne's 409(2): A

preamble should not exceed one carefully drawn sentence. I would ask the honourable Member for Russell to please put his question. *** Mr. Derkach: Why did the Minister of Health change his mind on the day of the Budget and politically interfere and change the direction that had been given to the rural RHAs on April 19 ? Mr. Chomiak: One of the principles that we had talked about when we went into this budgetary exercise is that we wanted to see if we could get resources down to patient care as our first priority. I indicated and we indicated publicly and, I believe, the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger) indicated in his consultations that everything was on the table, and I believe the First Minister (Mr. Doer) said it. There were a variety of permutations and a variety of options. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that we looked through a variety of permuta tions, a variety of options, a variety of con figurations across the province of Manitoba and in the city of Winnipeg that we would look at dealing with this year's Budget and dealing with administrative changes.

We ultimately made the decision that we would merge two regions, two that I believe are two of the smallest geographic regions outside of the North, which were Marquette and South Westman. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, how can western Manitobans have any faith or trust in this minister in the decisions he makes when he changes his mind overnight? I want to ask this minister: Which hospitals in rural western Manitoba are in danger of closing as a result of his policies? Mr. Chomiak: During the tenure of that member as a member of Cabinet, 14 00 acute care beds were closed in the province of Manitoba.

Misericordia Hospital was closed in the province of Manitoba. A study was engaged by the Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation to evaluate rural and northern hospitals and a process was undertaken with respect to down sizing hospitals outside of Manitoba when that member was a minister of Cabinet of a previous government. Mr. Derkach: On a new question. Mr. Speaker: The Member for Russell, on a new question. Mr. Derkach: The actions of this minister are despicable in tern1s of being open with the people of rural Manitoba who are in fear of what is going to happen to their health facilities.

I want to ask the Minister of Health why he is relegating western Manitobans to Third World health conditions under his watch. * (1 5:00) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the last budget year prior to the election year, Marquette received a 2.5% increase in the 19 98- 99 Budget. This year they are scheduled to receive a 6.2% increase. If you were to look at Brandon in 19 98-99, they received a 1.7 % grant from the former Conservative government. This year it is proposed to get a 7.6% grant.

Not only that, under this Minister of Health the deficits in the regional health authorities have gone down from $78 million in '98-99, to a proposed $20 million and even lower when we get our final numbers in the year 2001 and 2002. I remember seven times members opposite promised to rebuild Brandon Regional Health Centre to be a strong regional health centre and seven times they broke their word. This Minister of Health has kept his word to southwestern Manitobans. Fort Garry School Division Property Taxes Mrs.

Joy Smith (Fort Garry): After telling the Premier that Fort Garry was facing serious tax increases as a result of the Doer government's decision to force amalgamation of the school

904 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 division out there and to exempt the University of Manitoba from paying municipal and edu cation taxes, the Premier stated the average taxpayer in Fort Garry would save $33 this year with the special levy. Is the Premier telling Fort Garry residents that in spite of forced school amalgamation and in spite of the added tax burden as a result of the removal of the municipal and education taxes from the university, that the taxpayers in Fort Garry can expect their tax bill to be $33 less, or is the Premier just playing with the numbers? Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): I will get the exact numbers from the Fort Garry School Division. The increase in their grant, plus the reduction in the property taxes through the ESL reduction on a $100,000 home in the 1990s, the increase in taxes were 49 percent on the property tax portion of education taxes. We are not perfect, but we are sure a lot lower on taxes than members opposite. The taxes are going down. They are not doubling like they did under the previous government. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Rules Change Private Bills-Bilingual Publication Mr.

Denis Rocan (Carman): Out of courtesy, I would ask the honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Mackintosh) to plug in his

interpretation device. Monsieur le president, il me fait beaucoup de peine d'etre oblige de soulever une question de privilege. Les deputes soulevent parfois Ia soi-disant question de privilege pour des affaires qui pourraient etre reglees par le biais d'une simple explication personnelle ou d'une rectification, soit au cours des debats, soit au cours des travaux de l'Assemblee. La question de privilege devrait rarement etre posee a l'Assemblee. II est preferable de proceder par voie de motion donnant a I'Assemblee le pouvoir d'imposer une reparation ou de remedier a Ia situation.

Certains privileges appartiennent a l'Assemblee et d'autres aux deputes individuellement. Le fait de desobeir volontairement aux ordres et au Reglement de l'Assemblee dans l'exercice des fonctions qui lui sont devolues aux termes de Ia constitution, le fait de proferer des insultes au cours des debats et d'en entraver le deroulement constituent des atteintes aux privileges de l'Assemblee.

Monsieur le president, les deputes de cette Assemblee ont eu !'occasion de recevoir une copie des modifications du Reglement de l'Assemblee legislative du Manitoba qui furent adoptees en Chambre le mardi 23 avril dernier, nous demandant de remplacer certaines pages dans notre livre du Reglement datant du 29 avril 1999.

En examinant ces modifications, j'ai lu le paragraphe 120(1) de ce Reglement qui se lit comme suit: "Quiconque propose !'adoption d'un projet de loi d'interet prive doit faire publier, dans les 12 mois qui precedent Ia presentation de sa petition, un avis en Ia forme prevue a l'annexe A-1, signe par lui-meme ou en son nom et indiquant clairement Ia nature et l'objet de sa petition et de toute disposition speciale qu'il se propose d'inclure dans le projet de loi. Cet avis doit etre publie:

a) dans un numero de Ia Gazette du Manitoba;

b) au moins une fois dans deux semaines differentes pendant Ia periode de 12 mois precitee, dans un journal de langue anglaise ou de langue frans;aise ayant une diffusion generale dans Ia region de Ia province oil resident les personnes ou Ia majorite des personnes que le projet de loi interesse ou touche." A l'alinea 120(1)

b) nous remarquons que )'avis en question doit etre publie dans un journal de langue anglaise ou de langue frans;aise. Cela veut done dire que Ia publication dans les deux Iangues officielles est facultative et non pas obligatoire. Etant donne Ia composition demo graphique de notre province, cela voudrait dire que Ia publication de l'avis susmentionne

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 905 pourrait bien se faire rarement ou meme jamais en fran�ais. Comme vous le savez deja, Ia Loi de 1870 sur le Manitoba prevoit le bilinguisme judiciaire et le bilinguisme legislatif. La Cour supreme du Canada a souligne, a maintes reprises, !'impor tance de ces droits constitutionnels. D'ailleurs, n:!cemment dans le Renvoi relatif a Ia secession du Quebec, Ia Cour supreme a discute des quatres grands piliers ou fondements de Ia constitution du Canada.

II faut souligner que Ia protection des minorites, y compris celle des minorites linguistiques, a ete identifiee par Ia Cour supreme comme un de ces grands piliers. De plus, dans l'arret Beaulac, Ia Cour supreme du Canada a aussi statue que, et je cite: "Les droits linguistiques doivent dans tous les cas recevoir une

interpretation fondee sur leur objet, d'une fa�on compatible avec le maintien et l'epanouissement des collectivites de langue officielle au Canada." Dans notre province, !'article 23 de Ia Loi de 1870 sur le Manitoba et Ia protection qu'elle accorde au bilinguisme legislatif sont des manifestations concretes du noble principe de Ia protection des minorites linguistiques. Monsieur le president, a mon humble avis, l'alinea 120( 1 )

b) du Reglement de l'Assemblee legislative du Manitoba tel que redige a l'heure actuelle n'est conforme ni a la lettre ni a l'esprit de !'article 23 et ne serait done pas compatible non plus avec le maintien et l'epanouissement de Ia minorite francophone du Manitoba. En somme, l'alinea 120(

l) b) du Reglement de l'Assemblee n'est pas a Ia hauteur de !'obligation de Ia province du Manitoba de veiller sur et de proteger les droits constitutionnels de la minorite linguistique. * (15:10) Par consequent, je propose, appuye par le Chef de !'opposition officielle (M.

Murray), Que le president examine cette question et considere tous les faits, y compris le fait que le Reglement n'est pas conforme a notre consti tution et aux droits linguistiques constitutionnels qui s'y trouvent et qui furent si durement acquis par nos aieux; et Que le Comite du Reglement de l'Assemblee soit convoque pour traiter cette question, et en attendant la <:onvocation du Comite du Regle ment, je vous demande, Monsieur le president, de signaler aux deputes que l'alinea 120(1 )

b) n'est pas constitutionnel, et consequemment, qu'il soit considere nul et sans effet. Translation Mr. Speaker, it is with great regret that I am obliged to rise on a matter of privilege. Members sometimes raise so-called questions of privilege on matters which should be dealt with as a personal explanation or corr ection, either in the debates or the proceedings of the House. A question of privil ege ought rarely to come up in the Legislature. It should be dealt with by a motion giving the House power to impose a reparation or apply a remedy.

There are privi leges of the House as well as of members individually. Wilf ul disobedience to Orders and Rules of parliament in the exercise of its constitutional fu nctions, insults and obstructions during debate are breaches of the privil eges of the House. Mr. Speaker, the members of this Assembly had occasion to receive a copy of the changes to the Rules of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba which were adopted in the House on Tuesday, April 23, requesting that we replace certain pages in our book of rules dated April 29, 1999.

In examining these rule changes, I read subrule 120(1) of these rules, which reads as fo llows: "Every petitioner fo r a Private Bill shall publish, within twelve months prior to the presentation of the petition fo r the Private Bill: (

a) in one issue of the Manitoba Gazette; and (

b) at least once in each of two weeks during the twelve month period af orementioned in an issue of a newspaper published in the English langu age or the French language and having a general circulation in the area of the province in which the persons or a majority of the persons, who would be interested in or aff ected by the Private Bill reside;

906 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 a notice, in the fo nn set out in

Schedule 'A-1 ', signed by or on behalf of the petitioner and clearly and distinctly specifYing the nature and object of the petition and any exceptional provision proposed to be inserted in the Bill. " In subrule 120(J)(

b) we note that the notice in question must be published in an English language or French language newspaper. That means, therefo re, that publication in both offi cial languages is optional rather than obliga tory. Given the demographic composition of our province, this would mean that publication of the above-mentioned notice might rarely or even never occur in French. As you already know, The Manitoba Act, 1870 provides fo r judicial and legislative bilingu alism. The Supreme Court of Canada has emphasized on numerous occasions the impor tance of these constitutional rights.

Fur thermore, recently in the Re ference re Secession of Quebec, the Supreme Court discussed the fo ur great pillars or fo undations of the Canadian constitution. It must be emphasized that the protection of minor ities, including that of language minorities, has been identified by the Suprem e Court as one of these great pillars. Furthermore, in the Beaulac decision, the Suprem e Court of Canada also ruled that, and I quote: "Language rights must in all cases be interpreted purposively, in a manner consistent with the preservation and development of official language communities in Canada. " In our province,

section 23 of The Manitoba Act, 187 0 and the protection that it gives to legislative bilingualism are concrete manif esta tions of this noble prin ciple of the protection of language minor ities. Mr. Speaker, in my humble opmwn, subrule 120(J)(

b) of the Rules of the Legislative Assembl y of Manitoba, as it is curren tly drafted, complies with neither the letter nor the spirit of

section 23 and therefo re would not be com patible with the preservation and development of the fr ancophone minority in Manitoba either. In short, subrule 120(J)(

b) of the Rules of the Assembly does not live up to the obligation of the Pro vince of Manitoba to preserve and protect the constitutional rights of its linguistic minority. Theref ore, I move, seconded by the Leader of the Offi cial Opposition (Mr.

Murray), THAT the Speaker examine this matter and consider all the fa cts, including the fa ct that the rule does not comply with our constitution and with the constitutional language rights set out therein and which were won with such diff iculty by our ancestors; and THAT the Committee on the Rules of the House be called to deal with this matter and while awaiting the calling of the Rules Committee, I request that the Members be notified that Sub-rule 120(J)(

b) is unconstitutional and con sequently should be considered void and of no eff ect. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I want to, of course, commend the honour able member for his insight in discovering what appears to be a flaw in the rules that I understand predate the introduction of the motion by consent to change the rules. I think he has been very observant, and he is certainly well versed in what appears to be the clear constitutional, if not the ethical, require ments of how the rules should be construed and applied in Manitoba. Perhaps, Mr.

Speaker, this matter can best be dealt with more immediately even. I look forward to a response from the other side, but to change the word "or" to "and," in other words, require publication in both French and English, in our view, would appear to be the fair way to proceed. We would be prepared, if there was consent of the House, to have that rule changed now, recognizing of course that rule changes are only made by way of consensus. I would think that we could garner that consensus today.

If there are any further implications, the rules committee can deal with it, but I think we should repair this rule and do so now. I say so out of respect for the member and his observations as well as the Constitution. What is imperative for all of us is that we respect the French and English languages as members of this Legislature.

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 907 Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would like to also congratulate the Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) for bringing forward this issue. It did slip by a number of us. I mean, it is not something new, as you heard in the history. This goes back to 19 82. I would ask that the House leader seek leave to introduce the motion that would change the word. We have taken the liberty of drawing up the motion. I believe the minister has a copy of that motion. Hon.

Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): J'aimerais aussi feliciter le depute de Carman pour son observation et sa suggestion pour corriger Ia situation. On est pret a le faire immediatement. Je crois qu'on peut avoir un consensus immediatement et mettre en place une politique qui respecte l'histoire et les droits linguistiques dans cette province. Translation I also would like to congratulate the Member fo r Carman fo r his observation and his suggestion fo r correcting the situation. We are prepared to do it immediately.

I believe that we can have consensus immediately and put into place a policy that respects this province 's history and its language rights. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Monsieur le president, je veux simplement dire que je suis d'accord avec le depute de Cam1an et je suis d'accord avec une modification au Reglement. Translation Mr. Speaker, I simply want to say that I am in agreement with the Member fo r Carman and with a change to the Rules. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, would you canvass the House to determine if there is leave to introduce a motion to correct the shortcoming, the obvious shortcoming in rule 12 0(1) ? Mr.

Speaker: Before dealing with the asking of leave to deal with this issue, Manitoba practice, normal Manitoba practice, dealing with privilege has normally been the Speaker would take it under advisement ; but, because this is an issue that is agreeable to the House, if that is the case, I would like to proceed on that grounds to the motion, without setting a precedent that Mani toba practice, normal Manitoba practice, when dealing with privilege, is nonnally to take it under advisement. So I just wanted to make that clear. Now I would like to ask the House ifthere is agreement.

So is there agreement by the House to deal with the matter as I outlined it? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: There is agreement. Okay. Now to deal with the matter that the honoura ble Government House Leader is seeking unanimous consent to deal with a motion that will be brought forward. Is there unanimous consent? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Okay, that is agreed to. Mr. Laurendeau: Mr. Speaker, move, seconded by the honourable Member for Cam1an (Mr.

Rocan), THAT effective immediately the Rules, Orders and Forms of Proceeding of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba be amended by deleting Sub-rule 12 0(1) and substituting the following: "Notice of application for Private Bill. 12 0.( 1) Every petitioner for a Private Bill shall publish, within twelve months prior to the presentation of the petition for a Private Bill: (

a) in one issue of the Manitoba Gazette; and (

b) at least once in each of two weeks during the twelve month period aforementioned in an issue of a newspaper published in the English language and the French language and having a general circulation in the area of the province in which the persons or a majority of the persons, who would be interested in or affected by the Private Bill reside; a notice, in the form set out in

Schedule A -1 , signed by or on behalf of the petitioner and

908 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 clearly and distinctly specif ying the nature and object of the petition and any exceptional provision proposed to be inserted in the Bill. Mr. Speaker: Before moving the motion, I will recognize the honourable Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan). I have to move the motion. Point of Order Mr. Rocan: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I appreciate having been given the opportunity to second said motion, but I think, in all fairness, in the way this House sometimes operates, it would be more fitting if the honourable Government House Leader (Mr.

Mackintosh) would at least second the motion, give more validity to what we are doing, because in my mind this con stitutional amendment is a pretty big deal. Mr. Speaker: The honourab le Opposition House Leader, I have to deal with the point of order first. Is there agreement of the House for the motion to be seconded by the honourab le Government House Leader? Is there agreement? [Agreed} * * * Mr. Speaker: So the motion will now read: Moved by the honoura ble Member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendea u), seconded by the honourable Attorney General (Mr.

Mackintosh ): THAT effective immediately the Rules, Orders and Forms of Proceeding of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba be amended by deleting Sub-rule 12 0(1) and substituting the following: Notice of application for Private Bill. 12 0.( 1) Every petitioner for a Private Bill shall publish, within twelve months prior to the presentation of the petition for the Private Bill: (

a) in one issue of the Manitoba Gazette; and (

b) at least once in each of two weeks during the twelve month period aforementioned in an issue of a newspaper published in the English language and- An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. the French language and having a general circulation in the area of the pro vince in which the persons or a majority of the persons, who would be interested in or aff ected by the Private Bill reside; a notice, in the fo rm set out in

Schedule A-1, signed by or on behalf of the petitioner and clearly and distinctl y specifYing the nature and object of the petition and any exceptional provision proposed to be inserted in the Bill. " * (15 :20) Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion, please say nay. In my opinion, the Yeas have it. I declare the motion carri ed. *** Mr. Speaker: This should conclude the matter of privilege. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Great Plains Aseptic Processors Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr.

Speaker, I want to rise in the House today to congratulate the Great Plains Aseptic Processors, a new Manitoba company that will use tetrapack technology to operate a commercial liquid food processing and packaging facility for the province of Manitoba. I want to also say that the major investors in this new company, in helping to build or rebuild the food processing plant in Portage la Prairie to accommodate this new business, will be the Province of Manitoba at $7.9 million-and the federal government announcement that the interest, and I quote from the news release: "The

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 909 federal interest portion of the Manitoba Gross Revenue Insurance Plan surplus will be invested in this process at $2.9 million." There will also be an ARDI investment, the Agricultural Research Development Initiative, also estab lished out of the Crow benefit of $1. 3 million, and an $800,000 investment grant in lieu of taxes by the City of Portage Ia Prairie. I think this is an indication that there are those outside of this province that are interested in the processing industry and are willing to help establish an industry.

This would lead me to believe that the processing industry might in fact be well served further by this kind of an advancement of the Province. I want to say to the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) that what she said in the House yesterday in regard to a statement that I had made, and I would like to read the statement, Mr. Speaker, with the House's- Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable member's time has expired. He is asking for leave to continue. Is there leave? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been denied. Early Childhood Educators Ms. Nancy Allan (St.

Vital): I am privileged to stand before the House today and recognize the contribution early childhood educators are making to our province. Early childhood edu cators provide a healthy, safe, and educational environment for children in child care homes and children's centr es. Early childhood educators allow parents to continue their work or education while providing them with peace of mind and the understand ing that their children are safe and healthy under the care of responsible and com mitted individuals.

There can be no true measurement of the great contribution these individuals make to our communities, other than to say, without such services many families would not have the chance to grow and develop socially and economically. Early chi ldhood educators are just that, educators. It is important to remember that these individuals do not simply keep our children safe but provide an important educational service. Early childhood educators help children by giving them the necessary communication and relationship skills that prove so important as they grow older.

Children are taught the importance of co-operation and respect for other children and adults. It is these skills delivered by caring childhood educators that help our children grow up to be responsible, caring and community minded citizens. I would like to congratulate the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr. Sale), who proclaimed April 28 to May 4 the Week of the Early Childhood Educator. This will represent the 11 th year that we as Manitobans celebrate the important work of our child educators.

This annual celebration was originally drafted by the Manitoba Childcare Association's early child hood education committee to address the public awareness of child educators. Since that time childhood educators have participated in numer ous activities to celebrate their contr ibution to our communities. In addition to the yearly celebration of childhood educators, the Manitoba Childcare Association is actively involved in promoting and educating the public about the role that childhood educators play in our cities and towns throughout the province .

Please join me in celebrating and con gratulating this very important week. Rural Forum Organizers Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): I rise today to pay tribute to some people who work with the Government of Manitoba who have continuously for 10 years now put on the Rural Forum.

I want to pay tribute to Ron Riopka and his team of people from Intergovernmental Affairs who have very successfully, for 10 years, put on an outstanding event in Brandon, which brings together small-business people from around the provin ce, small entrep reneurs, youth, and indeed has now extended its invitation and its arms to people outside our jurisdiction. I was very happy to be the first minister responsible for putting on the forum, and indeed I was very proud of what the department has accomplished.

910 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 I would like to also thank the Minis ter of Intergovernmental Affairs (Ms. Friesen), who I think has done a commendable job in carrying through with putting the forum on on an annual basis. I must say that she needs to be commended for the efforts that she has made to ensure that this tradition is carried on. I attended for a few brief moments the minister's consultations with students. I do have to make one objection, that is, to the attitude that I saw displayed by the Min ister of Education (Mr.

Caldwell), who tried to politicize very overtly the issues of education with young people at the forum. I did not hear that from the other ministers. I must commend them for keeping it very, I guess, politically sensitive in terms of their comments that they made to students. I have to admire them for taking the approach that they did. But I have to say that the Minister of Education could take a lesson from the Minis ter of Intergovernmental Affairs, the Minis ter of Advanced Education (Ms. McGifford) or the Minis ter of Tourism (Mr.

Lemieux), who I think conducted themselves very eloquently and professionally at the Rural Forum. Once again, Mr. Speaker, my congratu lations to all of those who are involved in putting on the Rural Forum in Manitoba. Thank you. Make a Difference Community Awards Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, the Lieutenant-Governor's 2002 Make a Difference Community Awards were recent ly announ ced. I was happy to see that among the seven awards presented one went to my constituent Lois Bunny Burke of Flin Flon. Ms. Burke received her award at the 2002 volunteer awards luncheon in Winnipeg on April 25. Ms.

Burke is the general manager for Greenstone CFDC. Ms. Burke is a volunteer par excellence. She has volunteered her time with the Sea Cadets, Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce, Flinty project, Flin Flon Public Library, Flin Flon Creighton bingo, the friendship centre, Children's Wish Foundati on, Flin Flon Museum, Salvation Army, Trout Festival, food bank , Operation Red Nose and a Flin Flon housing committee. Let me add that these awards were launched in 200 I at the International Year of Volunteers.

The awards recognize outstanding Manitoba volunteers , people who unselfishly give of their time and energy in order to build better com munities. The Lieutenant-Governor has stated that, quote: The contri bution of volunteers is undenia ble, and they are rarely recognized for all they do. These awards are intended to acknowl edge and celebrate the efforts that Manitoba volunteers provide to their community. As stated earlier, the Make a Difference Community A wards are presented each year to seven individuals, one from each of the province's seven regions. Ms. Burke was the recipient for our region. Mr.

Speaker, once again, I would like to congratulate Ms. Lois Bunny Burke for her achievements in volunteerism. I know that she will continue to contribute to the Flin Flon Creighton community. * (15: 30) I congratu late all winners of the Lieutenant Governor's 2002 Volunteer Service Awards. Final ly, I would like to thank those who commit their hard work to their community and volunteer not only in the Flin Flon constituency but all across Manitoba. It is through their selfless and dedicated actions that we form the strong communities that we all cherish. Food Development Centre Mr.

Jack Penner (Emerson): I want to continue in saying what I was trying to say before. The minister, I believe, in her statement to the House indicated that I had misled the people of Portage Ia Prairie and the people of Manitoba. I do not think, Mr. Speaker, that the actual script of the press articles really does that. The announc er says Penner says this probably means-prob ably-that Portage will lose its Food Development Centre . My direct quote to the reporter was this: I would suspect that this will move the centre to the University of Manitoba.

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 91 1 I want to say this to the people of Manitoba, that I think this minister owes the people of Manitoba and myself an apology in this House, and that is what I am asking for. I also want to say, on behalf of the racing commission, she said that the racing commission would only lose six jobs. Well, I want to read to you, Mr. Speaker, what they said in a letter to me that same day she made that statemen t: Then there was Ms. W owchuk's statement of six, not five hundred jobs, that have been lost due to the dissolution of this industry. I quote, Mr.

Speaker, from this letter: Unbelievable, this person says. It is amazing how they can just say what they want, and everyone nods in agreement as though they have the facts in writing before their eyes to back up their words. I think this is a clear demonstration of how misleading our minister can be in this House time after time after time. I think that she deserves to stand in this House and also apologize to the Manitoba standardbred racing commission at the same time as she apologizes to the people of Portage la Prairie. Mr.

Speaker: Before moving to Orders of the Day, I would kindly ask all honoura ble mem bers, when making reference, whether they are quoting from a newspaper

article or making reference to any honoura ble member, to please use by constituency or by titles and please not by name . That is just a reminder to all honourable members. ORDERS OF THE DA Y GOVERNMENT BUSINESS ADJOURNED DEBATE (Seventh Day of Debate) Mr. Speaker: To resume debate on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selin ger), that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the Govern ment and the proposed motion of the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray), standing in the name of the honoura ble Member for The Maples, who has 25 minutes remaining. Mr.

Cris Aglugub (The Maples): I will just carry on with where I left off yesterday. I was talking earlier about the initiatives that we have reflected in our envir onmental initiatives. At this point we also introduce a new drinking water quality agency to co-ordinate staff resources related to inspection and monitoring. The last one is the intr oduction of legislation to improve drinking water safety. Also, the Energy Development Initiative will continue to put Manitoba at the forefront of renewa ble energy resource development.

This initiative will include public consultation to move towards a mandate of 10% ethanol in all gasolines sold to further promote the use and production of ethano l. This will reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the trans portation sector while further strength ening and diversify ing Manitoba's agricultural economy. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, this Budget provides support for the concerns of many of my constituents in The Maples, specifically the issues of health, education, immigration, chil dren, family, communi ties, taxes and the environment .

This Budget shows that the NDP government cares about all Manitobans. We have a strong commitment to continuing our social programs that will make Manitoba an attractive place in which to live. The Budget is balanced, and yet maintains the spending on health care and education that will put our province before the rest. Tax relief continues in Manitoba, and an improved Provincial Nominee Program will mean more skilled workers will be coming to our province.

Children, families, and commun i ties long abandoned by the previous governm ent will receive the support they need, and Manitobans will see their environment protected for future genera tions. Mr. Speaker, Budget 2002 is great news for The Maples. Thank you. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (fuxedo): I would like to say that I am very pleased to get up in the Third Session of the Thirty-Seventh Legislature today and put a few words on the record about

912 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 this Budget and about some of the things going on within my community in Tuxedo. First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome our newest colleague to the Manitoba Legislature, the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik); congratulate him on his win in his recent by-election. It was not so long ago where I was in a similar position in a by-election in Manitoba, myself and my leader, the Member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Murray). So we know what it is like to face the public.

We also know what it is like to win the by-elections, and it is very, very pleasing to have him as part of our caucus and , indeed, as the new Member for Lac du Bonnet. So we welcome him, and we look forward to working with him on many issues as they come forward in the Legislature. Mr. Speaker, I would like to also welcome the newest member to my constituency, and it actually happens to be a member of my family. I had the privilege of having a daughter not so long ago on November 21, 2001.

I know that there are some other members in the Legislature who have also had the opportunity to bring new life into the world, and what an incredible experience it is. I just wanted to say that November 21, 2001, represents the one-year anniversary of my being in office, not something that was planned. As we know, these things cannot necessarily be planned, but it is something that happened to happen . So I would like to welcome Victoria Diane Stefanson who was born November 21 and weighed in at a healthy 9 pounds, 1 ounce.

I have to say, quite frank ly, that this has been the most incredible experience of my lif e. Apart from winning a by-election in Tuxedo and en joying the debate in the Manitoba Legislature, this has been one of the most incredible experiences of my lif e. Each day that I wake up in the morning and see her incredible smiling face, it makes you realize what life is all about, Mr. Speaker. So I welcome Victoria Diane to our family, to Tuxedo, and look forward to getting home and picking her up at a reasonable hour today.

I would also like to thank the people of Tuxedo for instilling in me their confidence in my representing them in Tuxedo. I have had a number of opportunities to meet with the electorate and the voters in Tuxedo, and I can tell you I am very proud to represent such a vibrant community. Mr. Speaker, there are a few things going in our community which I would like to take the opportunity to address today first off, and then I would like to put a few comments on the record about the Budget. First of all, I would like to talk about property taxes. Property taxes, Mr.

Speaker, are something that the people in my community are outraged over. As a result of the Doer government's decision to offload the university property taxes onto the backs of the property taxpayers in my community, and as a result of their proposed school board amalgamation, the people in Tuxedo are going to be hit very hard as a result of the decisions and the actions by this Government . I just want to say how disappointed I am in the decision to effectively raise the property taxes in my area.

I recently sent out a franking piece to my community to which I received hundreds of responses on the seriousness of this issue. I can tell you that we will be bringing petitions within the House and making sure that the Doer government is aware of the disappoint ment of the people in my community. Mr. Speaker, another issue which has come up continuously, and continues in my com munity, is the importance of building an under pass at Kenaston and Wilkes. Each day there is incredible traffic buildup in this area.

It does not allow a flow down Kenaston , which is needed for business to continue, for people to get their children to school on time. There are very signi ficant issues, not to mention having poten tial fatalities happen in this area. *( 15: 40) So on behalf of the constituents of Tuxedo, I want to, again, encourage this Government to do the right thing in this area, and that is to build an underpass at Kenaston and Wilkes. Mr. Speaker, I would like to also pay tribute to the men and women of the Second Battalion

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 913 Princess Patricia Canadian Light Inf antry and their role in defending the war against terrorism. In parti cular, I would like to pay tribute to those families who lost their loved ones and to those families whose loved ones were inj ured during their recent mission; in particular, to the families of Sgt. Marc Leger, Cpl. Ainsworth Dyer, Pte. Richard Green and Pte. Nathan Smith, whose families are mourning the loss of these people. I would also like to pay tribute to the families of Cpl. Brian Decaire, Cpl. Rene Paquette and Cpl.

Brett Perry and their families, and I extend my sympathy to their families and to them for being inj ured in this process. As was mentioned and announced not so long ago, the 2PPCLI will be moving out of our community, and I am just very, very happy that the plan is to keep the community in Manitoba. We are very sorry to have to lose this community as it is a very, very important part of our community in Tuxedo. Mr.

Speaker, I would also like to congratulate Deb McRainer [phonetic] and Aaron Friesen [phonetic} for winning this year's Volunteer of the Year Awards and for their outstanding commitment to the Tuxedo com munity. Last week in my constituency office, we had the pleasure of celebrating with Deb {phonetic} and Aaron [phonetic} and their families and close friends for the incredible work that they have done as volunteers in our community.

So as last week being volunteer week, it was appropriate to do so then, and we just celebrate everything that they have done for the community and the outstan ding people that they are. Last week was organ and tissue donation week that I gave a private member's statement in the House on, and I am also pleased to say that I will be intro ducing a private member's bill on this. There are a couple of constituents of mine as well as a friend of mine from high school who, in parti cular, it has affected, and who have given me the opportunity to come forward to try and do something on this issue.

I think it is an extremely important issue, and, again, Helen and Dean Murdock, I want to express my condolences to them for having lost a daughter awaiting a kidney tran splant. I also want to extend my condolences to Carolyn and Joe Graham who lost their daughter not so long ago, who waited the better part of four years, Mr. Speaker, awaiting a trans plant, finally got the transplant and who has since then passed away. Linda and I go way back to high school, and I can tell you she was a vibrant member of our community, and I wish her family my sincere condolence s. We will miss her tragically. Mr.

Speaker, a couple of other things going on in our community; one is the decommis sioning of the Oak Point CN Rail rail line. There have been many meetings in the community over the last several months , and over the last year and a bit, as a matter of fact. I have had the opportun ity to talk to many constituents about this issue. Last week, CN gave a presentation to the community of which there were between 400 and 500 people that showed up. It shows the very seriousness of this issue, and the way that it will affect the people in the River Heights part of the Tuxedo constituency.

I join with them in making sure that their voices are heard in the public hearings which are to come up in July. I encourage, indeed, all the people in the communities of Tuxedo and River Heights that are affected to attend the community hearings, and ensure that their voices are heard. Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair There are so many things going on in the Tuxedo community. Another thing I would like to mention is tomorrow we have a community leaders luncheon. There are a number of issues that we discuss in our community leaders luncheon.

We actually get together with a number of educators, a number of business people, a number of people from the community. This is a chance for us to get together and discuss various issues that are going on in the community, so that we all know what is going on. It is a wonderf ul opportunity for us to share good ideas, and to ask for advice from other members of our community to make sure that we are all on the same page. It is an initiative that I started up in Tuxedo last year.

I am very proud to say that we will be continuing, as more and more people are coming on board and wanting to be a part of this initiative.

914 LEGlSLA TlVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to now address a few things in the Budget. Some of the things that I would like to discuss are not all positive, unf ortunately. First of all, what I would like to do is discuss the area of Advanced Education, as I recently, a few months ago, took over the role of being critic of Advanced Education. I am very pleased to do that on behalf of my colleagues on this side of the Legislature.

I think one of the things when we are thinking about Advanced Education, one of the most important things about this are the students and our young people. What we have to consider in this there has to be some vision for the future of the young people in our province. I do not see anyth ing in this Budget that offers any hope to keep our young people here in Manitoba. It is extremely unf ortunate that for one thing what we have done or what this Government has done has done away with the Manitoba learning tax credit.

This is something that two years ago an average student in Manitoba would have received $322 from the Manitoba learning tax credit. They also would have received $300 from the 10 % tuition reduction. That is $622, on average, per student. Today, they have done away with the $322. So now on average a student only $300. So two years ago those students would have been 10 8 percent better off than they are today.

I ask the minister, and I ask this Government, if they are doing what is right for the students of Manitoba, how can they think that they are doing and that there is any vision for the future of our students in Manitoba if all they are doing is taking money out of their pockets. One of the most important things when it comes to post-secondary education is that there has to be a way to encourage these young people to stay here in Manitoba after they graduate.

It is one thing to keep them here in our education system, and that is very important, but what this Government lacks is any vision for the future to make sure that these young people stay here in Manitoba. * (15 :50) This is something where we on this side of the House do have a vision for the future of our young people in Manitoba. I think time and time again, each opportunity that I have, we need to remind our young people that we on this side of the House do offer a vision and hope for the future.

We want to put money back in their pockets so that they do have the opportunity to stay here and work and live and raise their families right here in Manitoba. One of the things also in this Budget, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and it goes without saying, we have been debating this Budget for the last several days, and I just think it is absolutely unconscionable that this Government would take $15 0 million from Manitoba Hydro in order to balance last year's Budget. That is absolutely shameful. I think that shows absolutely no vision for the future of our province.

Taking money out of Manitoba Hydro; that money should go back to the ratepayers of Manitoba Hydro. It should not go towards the spending spree and spending habits of this Government and paying for the spending habits of this Government. That is absolutely inap propriate. It absolutely shows that there is absolutely no vision and no plan for the future of our province. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to just point out in an

article that was written yesterday in The Winnipeg Sun entitled "Tax Relief? Don't make me laugh," written by Tom Brodbeck yesterday. In the first paragraph it says, and I quote: If you do the math, you'll discover the Doer government raised your taxes by nearly $3 million a year in last week's budget. Those are the facts. I think it is absolutely unconscionable as well that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Seling er) and, indeed, the Premier (Mr. Doer) stand before Manitobans and say that they have reduced taxes. It is just not reality.

I think that we need to get out and make sure that the people of Manitoba understand that this Government is continually misleading the people of Manitoba. So, in conclusion, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to once again thank the constituents of

April 30, 2002 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 915 Tuxedo for their support of me since the by election of November 2000. I look forward to continued debate, particularly in the areas of Hydro and Education, Advanced Education and so on. One thing just before I wrap up, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I want us all to pay atten tion to the increased spending of $250 million in new spending for this Government, Mr. Deputy Speaker, versus the $15 million in tax cuts. I do not see what kind of a balanced approach this Government really has in tern1s of balancing between spending and tax cuts.

Clearly, it shows absolutely no vision for the future. If we want to try and encourage young people to stay here in Manitoba, it is just not the way to do it. One other thing I want to draw attention to in the Budget of this year, when you look under own source revenue and income taxes, I just want to pay attention to the fact that the revenue from corporate income taxes has declined almost 60 percent. We ask ourselves: Why has that declined so much? Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is because people are leaving Manitoba.

Com panies are leaving Manitoba, and when companies leave Manitoba so does the revenue source from the tax dollars that they used to pay here. So, once again, it shows that this Govern ment offers no vision or hope for the future of our province, our young people. I think, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I look forward to continued debate on these and many other issues to come to ensure that we hold this Government accounta ble for their actions. Thank you very much. Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I just want to make a few brief comments about this Budget, the Government's third Budget.

I think it has been difficult for the Opposition to find ways to be critical of the Budget that this Government has brought in. It has been fairly cautious. I think the media has been accurate in saying that there has been a cautious, balanced approach being taken. I think the Opposition wishes that there was more that they could criticize from their perspective, and the only thing that they have really been able to latch on to, so far, is the Hydro dividend. I really think that that is going to be shown to be a losing issue for them. The Business Council of Manitoba said that the Hydro dividend was a good idea.

That is not exactly some radical group. I would think that the Opposition is really flapping in the wind when they are trying to criticize something that the Manitoba Business Council has advocated and is supporting; something that this Govern ment has done that is ensuring that we do not have to do what they are often fearing that we are going to do on this side of the House, which is raise taxes. We are not having to reduce spending in priority areas, and we are not having to run a deficit all because of this Hydro dividend. I think it is a wonderf ul idea.

I compare it to what happened formerly with the previous government where they sold the farm, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They actually sold the Mani toba Telephone System, so they could pay off their "spending habit" and now they are criticizing us for taking from Manitoba Hydro what is essentially profit from their export sales and using that to ensure that the services that Manitobans depend on and rely on and value very much are going to be protected. I know that they are really hurting about that.

I know that they are really sorry that we did not dip into the Fiscal Stabilization Fund, but yet again the Government has not done that. I think it is demonstrating for Manitobans the value of having public Crown corporations. I think one of the reasons that they are going after this issue so desperately is because they realize they have to distinguish themselves on an issue from the right with their support, and they are now going after this very ideological issue of the way they see the Crown corporation dividend.

I think that that may play with their core support or voters, but I think with the majority of Manitobans. We are seeing that they support the dividend that Manitoba Hydro is contributing to this Budget. As I said earlier, even the Manitoba Business Coun cil said that it was a good idea. * (16 :00) I also think that they are grasping at straws in the area of health care. On the one hand, the

916 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 30, 2002 Health critic on the opposite side has said that we cannot go on just with health spending the way it is, and we cannot go on just continuing to increase spending in health care; then, on the other hand, they criticize any time that there are any changes, and cuts are made. I think there is general consensus and common knowledge out there that there is a problem in health care in Canada. I really think a big part of the problem is with the federal government now paying only 14 percent of health care in Manitoba.

I hope that members opposite are talking about that with every constituent that they can, because that is one of the real problems in Canada with respect to our health care funding and our health care system: the fact that the federal budget has a surplus of $13 billion, and they are paying only 13 or 14 percent of our health care costs here in Manitoba. I really want to emphasize, as I think I did the last session, that we have to expand the public debate in our country, and in our province, about health care. We have to start preparing for what we know is coming in health care with an aging population.

We have to make that shift towards more prevention and more of a health care system that is really going to give incentives for health. It is, I would say, a bit of a paradox in our health care system. We want to maintain the tenet of medicare on the one hand: that health care is there when you need it; that when you are sick you are not going to have a financial burden.

But, on the other hand, I think that we have to now start looking at ways that we can build in to deal with incentives for people to be healthy so that we are not having a medical model and a health care system that, in some ways, there is more of an incentive for people only when they are not well. So I think that I will continue to advocate on measures that are looking at the link with environmental health, whether that is in the workplace or whether that is in the commun ity. I am really pleased to see the changes that we are going to bring in on workplace safety legislation.

I think also we really as a community have to get together on how we are going to build in the inf rastructure that will support a healthy community, whether that is the way we organize our workday, so that people have time during the day to be physically active and eat well, so that people have time to cook at home for their family. Recent statistics I read on how much fast food people eat because of the kind of lifestyle we lead, those are the kinds of major macro health issues that we have to address, the way that we organize our communities so that people have recreational and green space.

Those are some of the kinds of issues that I am very interested in. I think that that is the future in health care. That is the direct

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-3-23
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 3rd hansardpdf 23.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	66365d7ce3f2cc208a16e9c71b1ddb181e8b6236

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