Manitoba Hansard — 30 October 1990 (Sitting 14, 35th Legislature, 1st Session)

35-1-14

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 First Session - Thirty-Fifth Leglslature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 39 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XXXIX No.14-1:30 p. m., TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1990 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. Province of Man/lobs ISSN 0542-5492

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

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

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

Liberal NDP NDP Liberal Liberal NDP Liberal NDP PC PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC NDP PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NOP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, October 30, 1990 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table, pursuant to The Regulations Act, a copy of each regulation filed with the Registrar of Regulations since the regulations were tabled in this House in May of last year. I am pleased to table the Annual Report for 1989-90 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. I am pleased to table the Annual Report for 1989-90 of the Manitoba Police Commission.

I am pleased to table the 1989 Annual Report of the Manitoba Human Rights Commission. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions , may I direct the attention of Honourable Members to the Speaker 's Gallery where we have with us today Keri Sobkowich, a Grade 10 student from Fisher Branch, whose art work has been selected to appear in a calendar that has been delivered to your individual caucus rooms. On behalf of all Honourable Members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Apprenticeship Training Government Initiatives Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, the Government, in its Speech from the Throne, talked about the needs to develop skills to meet the new technology and changing technology in the Province of Manitoba . The Government has recently received a report, Partners for Skills Development, that was prepared by 12 business representatives and one labour representative outlining the problem in the apprenticeship area in the Province of Manitoba, outlining the fact that the average age of persons in trades is between 45 and 55 years old, and that there will be a need in our province to recruit a large number of apprentices during the next decade.

The report goes on to state that in the short term, there will be a need for extra and additional resources to meet the challenges of Manitoba in apprenticeship training and skill development in the future. My question is: Why did the Government choose to freeze the budget of the apprenticeship department for the last two years? I would ask the Premier, what is he going to do to meet the recommendations as articulated in the report that the Government received in August of this year? Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, I am indeed pleased with the report that was handed down to my department from the committee that was struck to examine the kinds of skill shortages that there are in this province and the needs for training and to be specific about the kinds of training needs that we have in this province. Mr. Speaker, I would have to indicate that report clearly identified some of the new direction that needs to be taken with regard to skill development in this province.

I would have to say that as a Government, in the throne speech we clearly enunciated that the Workforce 2000 was a direction that we were going to go in, a new direction which would create the many needed skilled types of occupations or skills that are required in much of this province. We look forward to that. Funding Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Well, the new direction is tax breaks for corporations and frozen funding for people and cutbacks in the continuing education programs, Mr. Speaker. That is the new direction of this Government.

The president of the Federation of Labour has met with a number of representatives of the Government and outlined that as a result of the last several budgets we see apprenticeship faced with severe fiscal constraints and fear for the continued existence of policies that this Government and the federal Government have developed that have put the situation in an acute problem. My question to the Premier is: Will he now redirect

532 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 some funds, perhaps $1 million from the Oak Hammock Marsh, perhaps some other money that is going to be given away in tax breaks, to the essential apprenticeship training programs so Manitobans will develop the skills necessary for a changing technological world? *

(1335) Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Once again, to the Leader of the Opposition, if he examined the Budget Address he would have known very clearly that there is a significant amount of money which is going to go toward creating a skilled work force in this province, Mr. Speaker. This is something that cannot happen overnight. Indeed, the STAG Committee Report pointed out that over the last number of years we have not addressed as a province the skill shortages in this province adequately. That is why, Mr.

Speaker, 49 percent of our work force does not have a high school education, because indeed under the former administration those kinds of skill levels were not addressed. We moved to identify the needs in this province where skills are needed to be upgraded and where people are needed to be trained. Mr. Speaker, Workforce 2000 is our way of showing that there is a partnership approach here harnessing the resources of industry , business and the Government to make sure that in the future we do have a properly skilled work force. Affirmative Action Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker , it is cold comfort-two million dollar cutbacks in continuing education, frozen budgets in the apprenticeship branch, yet money given to corporations in tax breaks for training. That is the philosophy of this Government, money to the corporations. We have been informed by the president of the Federation of Labourthatthe apprenticeship branch has been told to abandon any affirmative action programs which will impact on recruits that would be Native and women.

My last question to the Premier is: Would the Premier please investigate this concern from labour as well as change the policy on funding the apprenticeship branch, which has been starved by his Government, and redirect that the branch recruit affirmative action candidates as they have in the past? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice. Multicultural Polley Contradictions Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson): Friday in the House the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld) made statements which encouraged divisiveness in Manitoba society.

Yesterday in the House he refused to retract his comments and escalated them. Today, the Minister saw fit to appear on an open-line radio show and make comments a1bout ethnocultural minorities such as, give to the needy- Mr. Speakell': Order, please. Question, please? Ms. Cerllll: I want to ask the Premier whether or not he considers these actions by his Minister appropriate for a Member of the Government?

Does he continue to condone the fact that his Cabinet Member places his personal opinions ahead of his responsibility to bring the people of the province together and foster tolerance rather than inducing conflict? Hon. Gary IFllmon (Premier): Again we see the priorities of the New Democratic Party, who said in preparing for the budget, and I recall the comments that were made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer), who said when he did not bring in a non-confidence motion after the throne speech it was because the really important issue in this Session was going to be the budget.

They were really going to analyze and review and attack the budget. They have done absolutely none of that. They have not quarreled with our economic policy. They have not quarreled with our deficit level. They have not quarreled with our freezing of taxes. They found nothing about it. We are still only halfway through the !Budget Debate, they have run out of steam, they have run out of gas. They want to talk about all sorts of other things, Mr. Speaker. Well, we know what the priorities are of the New Democratic Party, Mr. Speaker, and the priorities are not the priorities- Point of Order Mr.

Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, Beauchesne's is very clear and the traditions of this House are clear

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 533 that answers should be to the questions that were raised by Honourable Members. The First Minister, in an attempt to deflect from the question, his answer was entering into a debate. If the Premier wishes to debate the comments of the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld), he has the opportunity to in Budget Debate, but should not do so in Question Period. He should deal with the matters raised by the Member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli). Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order.

Beauchesne's is also very clear as to questions being repetitive. That very same question was asked yesterday of the First Minister. A full response was provided by the First Minister yesterday. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the Honourable Member for Thompson, answers to questions should be as brief as possible, should deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate. I should also remind the Honourable Members that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. *

(1340) Multicultural Polley Contradictions Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson): My supplementary question is for the Minister of Energy and Mines. Given the fact that he said, and if you can't be a Canadian first, damn it, don't come to this country- Mr. Speaker: The question. The question, please. Ms. Cerllll: --of the ethnocultural minorities, what is the Minister of Energy and Mines prepared to do to restore the morale of his department and to ensure that all employees in that department will be treated fairly? Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, I do not think I have to restore morale in my department. Morale is high and it will continue to be high. Multlcultural Polley Contradictions Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Radisson, with her final supplementary question. Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson): My final supplementary question is for the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation. What action is this Minister going to take to restore in ethnocultural minorities that she does not agree with the position of her colleague and it will not affect multicultural policy in Manitoba? Hon.

Bonnie Mltchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation): Mr. Speaker, I made it quite evident yesterday in my answers to questions and last night in my debate on the budget what our Government's policy is on multiculturalism . I stand by that as does our Government stand by that. Orders-In-Council Salary Publlcatlon Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.

In the past the First Minister has shown a certain degree of disdain for the people of the province when he has given salary increases of from 8 percent to 24 percent to members of his own staff while at the same time asking all other Manitobans to hold the line. Would the First Minister tell us today why the Orders-in-Council are no longer indicating the salaries of the individuals appointed to positions like executive assistant and special assistant, which has been past practice? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, in the past the Leader of the Liberal Party has misrepresented the issues with respect to Orders-in-Council. Orders-in-Council in which people were given promotions were simply portrayed by her as being raises. When a person was moved from being the head of the policy management group to becoming the secretary of the Treasury Board, she misrepresented that as being simply given a raise rather than being a promotion to an entirely new deputy minister level position.

At the same time, when a person was given another promotion from one level to another position with exceedingly expanded responsibilities, she deliberately misrepresented that to just simply a raise being given. That is the kind of thing that I think is not becoming of the Leader of the Liberal Party, and I think that she ought not to tread into those kinds of situations where she gets the facts wrong and deliberately misrepresents the facts. Mrs. Carstalrs: We have seen people whose Order-in-Council has been withdrawn, who on the original Order-in-Council clearly stated what they

534 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 were being paid. Now, the same Order-in-Council for this individual, in a new position, we have no indication of what this individual is being paid. Why has this Government changed its policy with regard to the publication of salaries in Order-in-Council? *

(1345) Mr. Fllmon: In order to have more flexibility -(interjection)- well, Mr. Speaker, in many cases we are paying executive assistants and special assistants less than had been paid by the previous administration. -(interjection)- If instead of joking and laughing the Members of the Opposition want to listen to the full answer, I will give it to them .

In order to give us more flexibility to ensure that we do not lock into the public payroll people on a long-term basis who cost us a lot of money when they have to be removed from political appointments, as the NOP spent $400,000 of taxpayers' money in severance to people who have been locked in to those kinds of agreements, instead of doing that, we have more flexible contractual agreements that specify what they are entitled to by way of benefits, what they are entitled to by way of severance, what they are entitled to by way of fees and income.

We believe that it is in the better interest of the taxpayer to provide that kind of contractual agreement. We will be happy to give that information to the Leader of the Liberal Party or anybody who-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Mrs. Carstalrs: Mr. Speaker, in order to make the people of Manitoba realize that this Government is an open Government, will the Premier now commit to attaching to the Order-in-Council the contracts which he is giving to these particular individuals so there can be no question as to what they are being paid? Mr.

Fllmon: The Leader of the Opposition does not realize that we need to have Cabinet authority to enter into and negotiate the agreement. Cabinet authority gives us that authority and then we proceed to negotiate the agreement. Mr. Speaker, I will be happy to answer

chapter and verse to the Leader of the Liberal Party and anybody else about what is the remuneration level of anybody who we have in our Government, on our Government payroll. That is open information, open Government, and I will provide it with all enthusiasm. Women's Crisis Shelters Funding Ms. Becky Barrett {Wellington): Mr. Speaker, in the throne speech and in numerous interviews, the Premier and the Minister of Family Services have stated their Government's commitment to services for women and children at risk. In the budget the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) has increased funding for shelters, crisis lines, resource centres second -stage housing by almost 2 percent less tha~ the entire budget average and a full percent less than the rate of inflation. Will the Minister of Family Services confirm that despite the high flown rhetoric, this budget proves that safety for women and children in Manitoba is not a priority for this Government? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Famlly Services): Mr.

Speaker, this morning I had the pleasure and opportunity to visit one of the shelters in Winnipeg and came away with a good feeling that they are providing a service to the women and children of this city and comments that the funding plan that was in existence before--there was really no plan at all. I could tell you there is some appreciation for the fact that we have stabilized funding and that we have increased the funding to shelters by some 4 7 percent over the last two years. Funding - Rural Ms. Becky Bs1rrett {Wellington): Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear about the shelter in Winnipeg.

The Lundar, Erickson and Ashern wife abuse committee has had its funding frozen since '87 and '88, which means that th13y have eliminated their preventative, outreach and ,education programs. Will the Minister of Family Services guarantee funds to ensure that the entire program for the Lundar, Eriksdale and Ashern wife abuse committee will not be forced to close January 1, 1991, as stated this morning by the co-ordinator of the local committee? *

(1350) Hon. Harold tGllleshammer (Minister of Famlly Services): Mr. Speaker, the local committee of course is responsible for the decisions that are made. Some Honourable Members: Oh, ohl Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Minister of Family Services has the floor.

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 535 Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, we are certainly one of the areas where the Lundar, Eriksdale, Ashern committee gets their funding. We are committed to maintaining that funding. We are also prepared to work with that committee to see that we have a good look at their operation. I would state that at the end of the last fiscal year they had a surplus. I think questions have to be asked why they are in a deficit position at this time. Famlly Violence Sentence Lengths Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Mr. Speaker, my final question is to the Minister of Justice.

Yesterday Jack Shapira was given a 16-month sentence for simply asking someone to beat another man. Will the Minister of Justice instruct his Crown attorneys to bring some fairness into our judicial system by demanding stiffer penalties and sentences for men who actually beat, abuse and in some cases murder their female partners? Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I think the Honourable Member and his colleagues are very aware of the position taken by this Justice Department on matters related to violence against women.

I think the Honourable Member will also be made more and more aware of the position my department takes. Positions that we can take have to do with justice issues and have to do with appealing sentences and have to do with an announcement made recently by our Director of Winnipeg Prosecutions about allegations of repeat offenders and how our Crown office is going to be dealing with those and the submissions we make to the judiciary on release provisions for repeaters like that. I appreciate the Honourable Member's concern, but I am already ahead of her on this issue. Palllser Furniture Ltd.

Environmental Testing Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Yesterday, I had the opportunity to ask a question of the Minister of Environment concerning the Palliser Furniture manufacturing plant in Transcona. Considering that daily I receive phone calls and/or letters from some of the residents of Transcona who are concerned about this issue, my question is for the Minister of Environment.

Considering that the toxic fume problem was brought to the attention of the Government many months ago by the affected residents and that the health of these families may be at risk, what is this Minister of Environment doing to allocate staff from his department to conduct plant site and neighbourhood testing to resolve this matter? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr.

Speaker, essentially I answered that question yesterday when I indicated that we would have access to the information being put together by a consultant who has been employed by Palliser to look at specific issues involved within these complaints. There is one thing, Mr. Speaker, that I would like to clarify the record on. Looking at Hansard today, it was pointed out that my words might be construed to indicate that Palliser was not in compliance with their licence. They in fact are in compliance with their licence, and we are looking to further control emissions and discharges from that plant. Mr.

Reid: I am not sure, Mr. Speaker, how the Minister can determine whether or not this plant is in compliance with its licence unless it has had the adequate testing done to determine that. My question is: When will the Minister 's department conduct tests and release the test results to the residents of Transcona and the Members of this House and steps taken to rectify this problem, since the colder weather has caused the fumes to drop into the surrounding neighbourhood and subsequently be drawn into the furnace fresh air intakes, and increase the urgency to resolve this problem now? Mr. Cummings: Mr.

Speaker, that information will be available for public consumption in the very near future. Mr. Reid: Considering that the Palliser Furniture manufacturing plant has hired this private consultant and is under no obligation to release all of its findings, why is the Minister and this Government relying on a private company's service contract with a consulting company for environmental testing of their own emissions to determine whether or not the Palliser plant is meetings its licensing requirements? Mr. Cummings: Mr.

Speaker, I think this line of questioning implies something that concerns me greatly about the attitude to whether or not independent professionals can provide correct information to Government or to industry.

536 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 The fact is that we will be serving the public of this province much better to make sure that we have people who have expertise and the ability to deal with specific items rather than the province consistently gearing up every time we have a question that we need an answer to. *

(1355) CSIS Agreement Medlcal Record Confldentlallty Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Regrettably, I must again raise with the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mccrae) his ineptitude in hastily signing an -(interjection) Every time they publish a review of CSIS, I have to raise this question, Mr. Speaker, to raise with the Minister his ineptitude in hastily signing an agreement with CSIS in June of 1988, just weeks after first becoming a Minister. Manitoba's agreement with CSIS is one of the worst, if not the worst, of the nine that have been signed in this country.

Now, yet again the Security Intelligence Review Committee has expressed serious reservations about CSIS's gathering and use of information on Canadians. My question for the Minister is: Will the Minister now finally come to his senses, admit that he was taken advantage of as a new Minister and renegotiate our agreement with CSIS which puts health records on the fast track in order to protect the right to privacy of Manitobans? Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, it has been two and a half years since the agreement was signed to protect the privacy of Manitobans, the agreement referred to by the Honourable Member. Much water has passed under the bridge since then, including a general election here in the Province of Manitoba. The same old question arises today, and the same old answer prevails. Mr. Edwards: The same reports keep getting published-the tarring CSIS's use of information on Canadians. Mr.

Speaker, again for the same Minister, why do we have an agreement that puts access to health records for CSIS on a fast track when the review committee recommended, and I quote, we recommend that CSIS be required to obtain a federal court warrant before it is given access to medical records, far from requiring a court warrant where our agreement does not even require ministerial approval for the release of medical records of Manitobans to CSIS. Mr.

McCraE1: The agreement entered into was partly because of the interest shown by the Honourable Member and partly because of the interest shown by the form or Leader of the Opposition, but my own interest as vvell is the subject of periodic monitoring by myself personally. I make enquiries about the use that the agreement is being put to and satisfy myself on a periodic basis that the agreement is in no way being abuse,d and in no way are the privacy rights of Manitobans being unreasonably violated. Minister's Position Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): It is nice of the Minister to say, Mr.

Speaker, but black and white speaks louder. The agreement is a very, very bad agreement. Finally, for this Minister, why does the Minister persist in defending this agreement when other Attorneys General across Canada got agreements that do not even include health records? CSIS's domestic operations have been criticized evory year since its inception. The latest review states about information on Canadians-we saw some eases which we cannot discuss for security reasons that gave us concern.

We have not yet seen enough files to judge whether exchanges with other countries about Canadians generally take place in an appropriate fashion. Why does this Minister continue to defend this agreement in the light of all of those factors? Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I wish the Honourable Member would get it straight in his own mind just who it is we are trying to stop here and who it is we are trying to protect.

My job, and I take my job seriously and it is a serious responsibility, is to protect innocent Manitobans from the likes of terrorists who would blow up airplanes and who would place bombs in mailboxes and do other damage to society as a whole and threaten the national security. So my job is to be responsible and to draw a responsible balance between the rights of terrorists and the rights of innocent Manitobans. I stand on the side of innocent Manitobans. *

(1400) October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 537 Resldentlal Tenancies Act Delays Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Housing. Will the Minister admit that under pressure from the Real Estate Board and the property managers, his Government stalled The Residential Tenancies Act, which was scheduled to go to committee January 23 and, similarly under their pressure, withdrew it in March 1990? Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, absolutely not. That Bill will be coming forward to the House. It was not stalled by anyone.

If the Member would have been here at the last Session, he would have seen the type of amendments that his particular Party put forward. There is no way we could have made that Bill work with the types of amendments that they put forward. Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Martlndale: I was here and this caucus had agreed to send itto committee without amendments. Introduction Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): I have a supplementary to the Minister of Housing. Will the Minister assure the House that The Residential Tenancies Act will be reintroduced as soon as possible as promised by the Premier (Mr.

Filmon), in its original form without being gutted due to the lobbyists? Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Minister of Housing): If the individual across the way will look at the Order Paper, he will also maybe go out and talk to his -(interjection) - Mr. Speaker , if the Member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) wants to answer the question , maybe he should get up and answer it. The Member across the way, his tenant groups met with this Minister and my staff throughout the summer sorting out differences between themselves and the landlords, and we are coming forward with a Bill, and I tell you the Member will like it.

Amendments Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): I have a supplementary question. Since the Minister of Housing has said that Bill 13 would have a minimum of changes, which changes of the two dozen changes demanded by the Real Estate Board has he agreed to? If the changes are minor, when will he bring in Bill 13, since his department has had since March to make changes? Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Minister of Housing): Not since March-I just told the individual that I have met over the summer with the different groups . Maybe they would not have done that. Their Government brought forward a draft. They said there was a Bill.

They had two Ministers, Mr. Speaker, who failed to bring forward a Bill. I will bring that forward very, very shortly. Manitoba Telephone System Community Calllng Program Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): My question is for the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System. Last week residents of Selkirk, Lockport, Winnipeg Beach and Oakbank discovered that they were being hit with major increases of 35 percent to 60 percent in phone rates as part of this Minister's plan to boost profits so that the firm can be privatized.

Why will the Minister not agree to order a review of the Community Calling program, which is gouging rural Manitobans? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister responsible for The Manitoba Telephone System Act): Mr. Speaker , I would like to bring the Member up to date on the sequence of events that has occurred over time. In no way are the rural residents being gouged in any fashion with the program that is in place.

The Public Utilities Board held hearings a little over a year ago and ruled on March 31 of 1989 that the ILS program was good for rural Manitoba, in other words putting individual lines into 47,000 homes that have party lines. In addition to that they ruled that there should be an adjacent exchange calling program, because that is what the public was asking for. So they asked MTS to go back and develop an adjacent exchange calling program .

They brought it to the Public Utilities Board who held hearings all throughout Manitoba, and they approved that program as it is being implemented and put in place for rural Manitobans. All of those members that he has represented, here they say they are being gouged, have access to four to five times as many people that they could call for no long distance toll charge, Mr. Speaker. That has been the request of citizens across the Province of Manitoba.

538 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 Jessie Avenue Property Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): To the same Minister, will he order MTS to maintain the five houses on Jessie Avenue in Winnipeg that MTS is allowing to deteriorate so they can then have them demolished for health reasons? Hon. Glen Flndlay (Minister responsible for The Manitoba Telephone System Act): Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the Member's question. I would like him to repeat it, please. Mr.

Dewar: Will he order MTS to maintain the five houses on Jessie Avenue in Winnipeg that MTS is allowing to deteriorate so it can then have them demolished for health reasons? Mr. Findlay: I do not know what the Member is talking about. If he would like to have his question rephrased so that the citizens of this House could understand it, I would appreciate it. Mr. Dewar: The question is: Will the Minister investigate the situation? Mr. Findlay: I will investigate whatever situation he is talking about if he-- Some Honourable Members: Oh, ohl Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Home Care Program North End Winnipeg Services Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St. Johns): Yesterday, I informed the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) in the Budget Debate of a constituent of mine who contacted social workers at a hospital outside of the north end for home care for her father and was told by those workers that if her father had lived in their catchment area some help could have been attained. This, Mr. Speaker, follows case after case that we on this side of the House have brought forward to the Minister showing cutbacks to senior citizens in the north end.

My question to the Minister is: Would this Minister and his Government stop singling out north end residents with home care cutbacks and fully restore this program so that all seniors, regardless of geography, are able to receive the supports they need to live with dignity in their homes and in their communities? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I have been urged to stop something that this Government and this department is not doing. Might I urge, my honourable friend to start being honest. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, that last comment of the Minister of Health is clearly unparliamentary. If the Minister cannot deal with the questions, a very serious question raised by the Member, based on information given to the Member by a resident of the north end of Winnipeg, without stooping to unparliamentary language-stooping, yes, stooping-it is totally uncalled for from the Minister of Health and I would ask that you ask him to withdraw that comment. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would ask the Honourable Minister of Health to withdraw that last comment. Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Speaker, at your request I will withdraw that remark, but will my honourable friend-- Mr. Speaker: Unqualified. Order, please. The Honourable Minister of Health has withdrawn his comments. ••• Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I have said that every time my honourable friend stands up and talks about cutbacks in home care, I have stood up and I have said that there is more budget being spent than ever before in the history of the Province of Manitoba, that the level of service is higher than ever before in the history of the Province of Manitoba.

Yet my honourable friend, the new Health Critic for the official Opposition, insists on saying that that amounts to a cutback. There are many who would question the honesty of that statement. Government Policy Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, I do not know how it is not a cutback when a man who has emphysema, difficulties in catching his breath, quadruple heart by-pass five years ago, extreme pain in his left arm and shoulder joints, difficulty- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. The Honourable Member for St. Johns, kindly put her question now, please. Ms.

Wasylycla-Lels: My question to the Minister of Health is: Is it the policy of this Government to

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 539 squeeze people off home care, which all of these cases prove, to then underspend in home care, which the Minister has admitted in this House last week, and then to come in with a hold-the-line budget- Mr.Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Every time that my honourable friends in the New Democratic Party have raised the issue of an individual case in home care, that case has been investigated. Mr.

Speaker, there are circumstances where the decision for service provision has been maintained with no change and there are instances where an assessment error was made and service was increased. There are also cases that the NOP brought to our attention as a result of a flyer in which individuals checked off home care as an issue, turned those names in to the department for investigation of no complaint, and the individuals were offended and insulted and questioned how their names got to the Department of Health. Now, Mr.

Speaker, any time my honourable friend has a case that she wishes to bring to my attention, have the decency on behalf of her constituent to bring that case by name to me, and I will investigate it and provide her with a response as I have done for two years. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for St. Johns, with her final supplementary question. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Every time we bring a case that- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. This is not a time for debate. I have recognized the Honourable Member for St. Johns with her-the Honourable Government House Leader. Point of Order Hon.

Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, you admonished Members of this House in their

preambles to not put forward an additional statement in a supplementary. Mr. Speaker, there is one Member of this House who continually abuses your ruling. I ask what it is that needs to be done with respect to that one Member, because she continues to flaunt your rulings and indeed your charges to this House? Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, first of all, the Government House Leader should perhaps talk to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), who continuously uses Question Period as a forum for debate and making spurious statements as he just did. I would also ask, Mr.

Speaker, that the Government House Leader withdraw the comments made about the Member for St. Johns. In fact the Minister of Health will probably remember a number of years ago when Larry Desjardins- Mr. Speaker: On that point of order. -(interjection) Order, please; order, please. I have recognized the Honourable Opposition House Leader on the point of order raised by the Government House Leader. I would ask him to keep his remarks relevant to that point of order, please. Mr. Ashton: I now raise it as a separate point of order, thank you. Mr. Speaker: Okay.

On that point of order, I had already dealt with it by telling the Honourable Member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) to kindly put her question, that a supplementary did not require a

preamble. -(interjection)- Order, please. Point of Order Mr. Ashton: On a new point of order, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for your assistance. The Government House Leader just made comments that the Member for St. Johns was an abuser of the Rules. We have precedents in this House. Some of us remember when Larry Desjardins was kicked out of the House for suggesting that the Minister of Health was a frequent abuser of the Rules. That is the exact quote that was used. I would ask that the Government House Leader withdraw that comment. It is not appropriate on a point of order to single out a particular Member.

The process of raising a point of order is to deal with the rules and not to make statements against other Members in this House. So I would ask the Government House Leader to withdraw those unacceptable comments. -(interjection)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. The Honourable Member did not have a point of order there. -(interjection)- Order, please. I would remind all Honourable Members that a point of order should only be raised

540 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 to bring the attention to the Chair and to the House of breaches of the rules or departures from the normal procedures of the House. Now, the Honourable Member for St. Johns has the floor. * * * *

(1410) Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Health if the cutbacks, as we understand them to be, are part of a bigger policy as enunciated by the federal Conservative Prime Minister, who said on October 23, and is quoted in The Province, the Vancouver newspaper, that seniors at 71 years of age should be at home in bed having milk and cookies. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, that may well be a policy that someone other than myself, possibly even the Opposition, might hold. It is not a policy of this Government.

This Government established for the first time a ministerial portfolio and responsibility for seniors. This Government, despite the continued-how do I put this parliamentarily?-accusations, which are false, of cutbacks in the Home Care Program by Members of the New Democratic Party, when the facts are, as I have repeated consistently and for the last two years, we have spent more money. That is not a cutback. The amount of money spent is greater than the rate of inflation each year. More services are provided each year.

The growth in amount of services provided increases, but yet my honourable friends in the Opposition New Democratic Party insist on calling increases above the inflation rate- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Health Care French Language Services Mr. Nell Gaudry (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

The Speech from the Throne indicates that the Government is committed to undertaking no new initiatives to respond to the needs of the multicultural community and to facilitate access by that community to health care services, when that same Government cannot even ensure adequate and professional French language health services at the St. Boniface General Hospital.

Since there is nothing in this budget to indicate that the Government is ready to take action in order to resolve this situation, especially due to the comments recently made toward the French community and the multicultural community by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld), my question to the Premier is: When will the Government make public the content of the report on French language services, health institutions and social services they have had for several months? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): A bientot, M. le president. (Soon, Mr. Speaker.) Mr.

Gaudry: Vendredi soir, M. le president. (Friday evening, Mr. Speaker.) French Language Agreement Progress Report Mr. Nell Gaudry (St. Boniface): Will the First Minister explain to this House what happened to this province that he made on November 4, 1989, at the annual meeting of the Societe franco-manitobaine to underta ke negotiations with the federal Government to try to achieve a master agreement on official languages between Canada and Manitoba? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, considerable discussion, many meetings, a great deal of work has gone into that agreement, and I would hope that progress and outcome will be able to be reported before long. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. SPEAKER'S RULINGS Mr. Speaker:: I have two rulings for the House. On Monday, October 22, 1990, during Oral Questions, I took under advisement a point of order raised by the Honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Manness) respecting the use by the Honourable Member for Flin Ron (Mr.

Storie) of the words: "attempt to mislead this House." I thank the Government and the Opposition House Leaders as well as the Honourable Member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) for their contributions in the House to this point of order. It is very plain that any words that indicate that a Member knowingly or deliberately misled the House are unparliamentary. My ruling on March 14 of this year is quite clear on this point. In my opinion the phrase used by the Honourable Member for Flin Flon, that is: "attempt to mislead," is a direct charge that the Minister in question had

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 541 intentionally or knowingly set out to mislead the House. Therefore, I must rule that the words used are unparliamentary and must ask the Honourable Member for Flin Flon to withdraw them. Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, I recall that there was some discussion over whether I had said "attempt to mislead" rather than just "mislead." If I used the word "attempt" in there, which made it unparliamentary , then I certainly withdraw that. *

(1420) Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Member for Flin Flon. *** Mr. Speaker: On Thursday, October 18, 1990, I took under advisement a point of order raised by the Government House Leader {Mr. Manness) about the content of replies to ministerial statements. In particular, he alleged that the Honourable Member for Wellington {Ms. Barrett) had injected politics into her reply to a ministerial statement, and that this was unacceptable . I thank the three House Leaders for their advice regarding that point of order .

In my ruling of October 24, 1989, on this very point, I stated that a Minister, or any Member, making a non-political statement must be extremely careful to ensure that such statements are truly non-political. I did not indicate that the non-political restrictions applied to minister ial statements and replies thereto. This has never been the practice in Manitoba . Therefore , in order to make the matter perfectly clear, I am now ruling for the record that the content of ministerial statements and replies thereto may be as political as Members choose .

I am also reiterating two other points from that October 1989 ruling:

(1) The subject matter of non -political statements must be completely non-political; and

(2) Ministers wishing to make statements on matters which in any way relate to their ministerial responsibilities must do so under the item Ministerial Statements . I must rule that the Government House Leader {Mr. Manness) did not have a point of order regarding the content of the Honourable Member for Wellington's {Ms. Barrett) reply to the ministerial statement of the Honourable Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation {Mrs. Mitchelson). HANSARD CLARIFICATION Hon.

James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): A very, very serious error occurs at page 507, left-hand column, bottom line in the Hansard for Monday, October 29, 1990, and certainly our dedicated Hansard staff are not responsible for the error. I understated tenfold the size of the public debt in this province, on the back of every man, woman or child. I referred to that burden to be $1 ,100 for every man, woman and child. In fact, the number is $11,000 .00. I thank the Honourable Member for St. Norbert {Mr. Laurendeau) for bringing this to my attention. NON-POLITICAL STATEMENT Hon.

Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): May I have leave to make a non-political statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the Honourable Minister have leave to make a non-political statement? Leave. Mr. Neufeld: Mr. Speaker, earlier this afternoon you recognized Miss Keri Sobkowich in the Speaker's Gallery, and I am proud to have her as my guest today. The calendar which has been delivered to all the caucus rooms today is an example of how our youth see energy, and how important it is. Please refer to the month of June to see Keri's work.

Energy, Mines and Resources Canada prepared the calendar in consultation with the provinces and territories. Keri has just returned from Ottawa , where the young artists were on hand for the unveiling of the calendar. We should all be very proud of her contribution . Keri's question "How can the world take it, or how much can the world take?" is one we must all be prepared to consider. The way we use and produce energy are important components of sustainable development. Mr. Speaker, Keri has done an outstanding job. She was only in Grade 8 when she created this picture.

She is currently in Grade 10 at Fisher Branch Collegiate in Fisher Branch. It is a proud moment to be able to publicly pay tribute to Keri. Her work and that of 11 other young contributors will be on display across Canada. I am confident that it will serve as a message to all of us that we must be more aware of our energy resources and how we use them.

542 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 ORDERS OF THE DAY BUDGET DEBATE Mr. Speaker: On the adjourned debate, fifth day of debate, on the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness}, and the proposed motion of the Honourable Member for River Heights (Mrs. Carstairs}, the amendment-Honourable Minister of Housing. Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Minister of Housing): I am pleased to rise today in support of the budget. However, since I did not participate in the throne speech, I would like to take this opportunity to offer my congratulations to you, Mr.

Speaker, my friend, on your re-election as the presiding officer of this Chamber. Mr. Speaker, over the last two and a half years, you have performed in that capacity very well. I look forward to working with you during the course of this Legislature. Mr. Speaker, I also mention the Pages. I am sure you will be in for a very enlightening experience. It goes by fast, enjoy it. Also our Clerk staff, I thank you for your patience with all the Members for the last several years, and I look forward to your continuing patience the next few years. I would like to congratulate the Honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs.

Dacquay} and the Honourable Member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau} on their election as assistants to yourself, Mr. Speaker. I know they will preform their functions with dedication and diligence. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the residents of Riel for the support and confidence they have once again placed in me as a representative. This was my seventh election municipally and provincially. They have shown their support in sending me as a victor, whether there was one to be elected or whether there were seven to be elected on the ballot.

At these times it is hard to express the deep gratitude I feel from our many friends, new and old, who worked so hard during my campaign in order that I might sit in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker. I thank the canvassers , the phoners, the sign people, the computer people. I guess all of us must thank our families, who take the time out to spend that much important time in delivering what we want and forget about their time commitment to satisfy our wants. Mr. Speaker, I would also at this time show gratitude to our excellent Premier (Mr.

Film on}, who was a fine example of how a Premier should conduct himself during an election. A man with ongoing type of energy, always straight aboveboard and, sure and always, on the high road. I would like to welcome all the new Members of the House from all Parties, Mr. Speaker . I am sure you will find that over the next few years, an experience you will never forget being a Member of the Legislature, although demanding of time and energy, gives you a totally new outlook on Government and process. I wish you all good luck, and I hope you enjoy the experience .

To the new Members, I can just offer one small point of view that I have learned through my municipal and my school board days. It is that every one will have their day in the Chamber; good or bad, you will have your days. You always have to remember that if you do not leave it in this Chamber, you probably will not survive the next election. Most people who are reasonable politicians and ones who I have met through my experience, whether it be at school board or at City Hall, remember that they have to leave it at the table. Mr.

Speak1r, if the Members look around these days, they will see that there are probably only 24 Members left of the 86 that were originally in this Chamber in the year '86. There are 24 of us left. My sincere congratulations to my new colleagues in Cabinet, the Honourable Member for Minnedosa, the new Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshamme r}, and the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, the new Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik}. All of us amund the Cabinet Table welcome you and know you are valuable additions to our Cabinet.

I would like also to congratulate all former Members of the House who have won re-election, in particular the Honourable Member for Concordia (Mr. Doer} and the Honourable for River Heights (Mrs . Carstairs}. I look forward to working together in the House with these two representatives . To the Member for Concordia , I believe he will serve the position well. I hope it is a long tenure as Leader of the Opposition . To the Member for River Heights, I say that maybe people say things that they only want to, they do not think.

To that Member, I know that you will carry that dedication in the House and serve her Liberal Party well. Mr. Speaker, the next four or five years should prove to be a very challenging time for our province

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 543 and country. As the Honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) stated in his budget speech, our country is experiencing a recession. This impacts on all citizens of Canada, including Manitobans. Manitobans will fair better than most Canadians but only if we pull together. It is a time when one must sit back and think about what we, as citizens , can do to make sure our province and country does not sink into a deeper recession or even the ultimate, a depression.

That old saying, ask not what the country can do for you, but what you can do for your country, sure takes on new meaning when you are faced with the economic forecast for the next several years. *

(1430) Mr. Speaker, I know, and we know in this Chamber, that the citizens of Manitoba are reasonable thinking people, and they know the difficulties we face in the next few years. Although Manitoba has many resources and assets, it is the people of Manitoba who make this province such a great place to live. It is the people who make this province strong. The people of Manitoba want a strong economy which provides jobs and therefore money in their pockets.

Yetthe Honourable Member of the Opposition stated in his reply to the throne speech that his Party believes a high paying manufacturing job in our economy is a much better proposition than the low paying service job. May I ask the Honourable Member , what happens down the line if the technological service industries take over from manufacturing? Canada and Manitoba have a wealth of people with superb knowledge in the field of technology and who are more than willing to share their knowledge with other people .

This is why Government implement a skills training strategy known as the Workforce 2000 to address broad , technical changes and innovations ; that is why the Government, in this budget, has given businesses a payroll tax credit of up to 3 percent for employee training. Do the Leaders of the Opposition not believe that employees should have a chance to be part of an employee ownership plan? If the employees were part owners in their business, would this not help prevent plant closings and business liquidations?

The Leaders of the Opposition Parties may not believe this Government cares about people, but the people of Manitoba know this Government cares. In 1988, Mr. Speaker, this Government took a new outlook on Government. In 1988, we came to Government after we witnessed the six and a half years of NDP administration, which did not listen to the people and was running on what was best for them and not the people of Manitoba-a cold, non-caring Government with no manageme nt abilities to boot.

During the NOP administration the people of Manitoba were asked to accept increases in sales tax, an increase in personal income tax. These were to be facts of life. This Government has not increased these taxes. In these tough economic times , we ask only that Manitobans co-operate with the Government and not make ever-increasing demands on the treasury. I am very proud of the competence of which we have been able to achieve during the course of the last two and a half years. I look forward to the next four years as we continue to make Manitoba strong, Mr. Speaker.

Throughout the election campaign this Government provided a platform in order to make Manitoba strong. We, as a political Party, know the value of training our citizens and providing the proper environment in which to create the necessary jobs in order to build a better way of life. All this has to be done with the financial confines which we find ourselves in and done with care. The people of Manitoba want a strong educational system in order to train our young people here at home so able to provide the necessary economic growth for our province, Mr. Speaker. We, this Government, have done this.

This Government has increased the 1988 overall education budget every year. Why in the 1990 budget alone additional funding of $49 million was invested in education and training. This represents an increase of 5.5 percent. This Government has recognized the need for all residents of Manitoba to have access to better educational opportunities and has provided $600,000 toward distant education programming to make education more accessible to northern and rural students by satellite transmissions. Mr.

Speaker, in 1988 the people of Manitoba wanted a Government to help protect and enhance the vital health services which are important to all Manitobans . This Government has responded. Over the last three budgets we have increased spending in health by 9 percent and 7 percent respectively and in 1989 by another $108 million in this budget, which represents a 6.9 percent increase.

544 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 Under the leadership of my colleague the Honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), we increased funding for home care by $43.7 million and we injected $3 .8 million into Manitoba ambulance services, the single largest funding increase since its inception in 1975. This Government allocated $1.5 million toward the first bone marrow transplant program in Manitoba. We have provided $1.2 million in funding to secure the designation by the World Health Organization of the St. Boniface Hospital as an international cancer research centre.

We provided the largest ever health capital construction budget of $246 million this year. In my own ministries, Mr. Speaker, we have also made headway. While the provincial Government is working at controlling its own expenditures during these difficult times, we have made an effort to maintain provincial support to the City of Winnipeg with the progressive billing re the core and capital grants. There is an overall 3.5 increase in financial assistance to the City of Winnipeg.

These fundings include $20,500,000 for unconditional current programs; $17 million for the urban transit operating grant; $425,000 for the final phase of the expanding Handi-Transit Brokerage System; $7,580,000 for a general support grant; $28 million in provincial-municipal tax sharing payment; and $16 million in urban capital projects allocated toward 12 capital projects on an equal cost-sharing basis with the City of Winnipeg. All was outlined in the letter to the city on March 13 at the time outlining all these grants.

We have continued during our process with the City of Winnipeg to increase ongoing funding to the City of Winnipeg. We must mention, however, during our mandate we have continued on with The Forks, a very, very successful program, Mr. Speaker. Anyone who wants to participate and join in with The Forks should maybe take a moment to go down and visit The Forks Market, a very beautiful type of building that people are just crowding to get into, to look through that particular project.

The Forks Market plaza, which was completed last fall, including the skating rink and the pavilion, the digs going on through the area, the National Historic Park that is there for people to enjoy, the proposed wall of time that is there for people, the walkway-someone might like to walk along the way-the Assiniboine walkway that was just officially opened. They will have a chance to participate in the docks along the way, to participate in the boat basin when it is opened next year. They want to join in and go across to the St. Boniface site behind the St.

Boniface Hospital and participate in that particular walkway. We will continue to work with the Forks on their different prowams. We have letters of intent from the Children's Museum that we are hoping to look forward to participating in; we have the hotel built in the Johnson Terminal, the railway museum which they hope that will be involved in the steam plant. Mr. Speaker, the people who are concerned in regard to The Forks program, when they go down to that area will see that there is no overbuilding of that particular site.

The original mandate at The Forks, when the public hearings were held, when they talked about The Forks was to have a meeting place for people to meet, a meeting place that would pay for itself. That will be difficult in time, but because of the overwhelming response and the success of the area, there should be some types of hearings that maybe there has to be some small change in what the original intent of The Forks was. Mr .

Speaker, I signed on behalf of the Government of Manitoba an agreement with the City of Winnipeg and the Shoal Lake Indian Band 40 in order to protect the quality of the city's drinking water for the next EiO years. Included in this agreement was $3 million, which constituted the provincial share of the total package. I want to thank those people who participated in the negotiations, both on the Indian band, Chief Redsky and his people, along with the federal Government and their negotiators and our negotiators who came forward to protect the Winnipeg water supply for, as I said, the next 60 years. •

(1440) This was done through a process of participation by this Minister and by his administration, something that was unable to be supplied by the previous administration who sat around and met with the City of Winnipeg. I sat there many times as a councillor and heard over and over and over again the rhetoric from the other side. The rhetoric that went on from year to year saying, oh, yeah, we are making some arrangement. They were doing absolutely nothing in regard to the Shoal Lake agreement. Again, talk, talk, talk did not produce. Mr. Speaker, it was the Filmon Government who have been working with different areas in regard to

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 545 the Core Area Program. We have continued to work with the core area in the City of Winnipeg. We hear remarks from the other side of the House that we are not providing housing funding, that we are not providing support to the core area. Well, I would vouch my time and my experience, in the 10 years, that the core has been going on with any Member on the other side of the House through my level at the municipal level or at my level of Minister. We have continued with many, many of the programs and will continue through the term of the Core Agreement.

We have been involved in the Exchange District redevelopment, the east yard development, which is known as The Forks, which I talked about; the riverbank enhancement program which has been very, very successful; the neighbourhood and community development programs ; the neighbourhood services; the community facilities and services and housing. I could go on and on with the employment and training program. All someone has to do is just attend one of the school's classes that graduate. I have had the honour of participating in the last three classes in regard to the core area training program, Mr. Speaker.

They will see that this Government , along with the City of Winnipeg and the federal Government, have continued to participate in the core area briefing. Mr. Speaker, if my time allows me, later on I will go back to some of my housing projects that I have participated on in the core, because I have had comments from some of the Members from across the way in regard to housing and core agreement. I know that shortly they will be getting a briefing from the core area management. Mr. August will have given their briefing and maybe that will answer a lot of their concerns.

Maybe when they understand, they will not get up and chirp about things not being done in the core area. Mr. Speaker, it was the Filmon Government who tried to reduce the size of City Council in 1988, and it was the Film on Government who reorganized City Council and administration. The Liberal Party came out in the last election in favour of reducing the size of council, but it is the Filmon Government who will accomplish this feat and reduce the number of councillors to a maximum of 15.

It is unfortunate we do not have people on the other side, in the Opposition side , who do not understand the process of council. If they did they would probably understand the benefits of the reduction of City Council at this time. Maybe during that process of the public hearing, they will have the right to go and learn to understand what goes on at the municipal level. Maybe they will come throughout their own and support such a merit on behalf of this Government. My portfolio in Housing has been very challenging in the last two years and will likely be the same in the future.

The housing market in Canada is suffering a decline and will probably continue to do so for the next while. In Manitoba, even though our starter home costs are the second lowest in the country, our housing market is falling in this recessionary period to the high interest costs and fluctuating dollar. A recession also means the number of dollars allocated for housing programs goes down. Even though our 1989 allocation was down, housing managed to deliver 859 units cost-shared with the federal Government.

Out of those units, at least 50 percent of the units allocated for the Winnipeg area were delivered in the core area. So contrary to the Opposition's belief that we are doing nothing regarding housing in the core are, Housing is doing its share for the inner city. One of the housing programs in any city is the infill housing, Mr. Speaker. That has been brought up by my honourable critic, or previous critic from Westin, who I must say did an admirable job in putting his people forward and addressing them of what was going on with the infill housing and what was going on in the Westin area.

It is unfortunate that Member does not represent that area now, because he was doing it justice. Infill housing was a program designed to rejuvenate the core area by providing new single-family homes for sale on narrow infill lots. However, the infill program has run into difficulty in recent years due to lack of suitability-zoned and reasonably-priced building lots in the inner city. Mr. Speaker, Manitoba Housing has managed, however, to obtain lots in the western area to build infill housing during the last year or so.

However with the difficult times we face right now, we cannot predict what will happen to infill housing in the future. Housing has also looked at the problem of ever increasing senior citizen population. Last spring, along with the federal Government, we here in Manitoba hosted a symposium called Housing

546 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 Older Manitobans Effectively. At this conference , most participants felt that seniors should have more say in their housing and housing should reflect the fact that eventually a senior living in an apartment or a home may have to adjust their accommodation for mobility reasons. Our Government is looking closely at these concerns and will do something about them. Since assuming office, Mr. Speaker , our Government has provided mortgage money for many senior projects.

In fact, most of our projects funded under the non-profit housing program have been senior projects. Housing is also looking into the problem of the vacancy rates in some of older senior projects, which are mainly bachelor units, and will develop a strategy to deal with that situation . Personally, I think this Government has done an admirable job of senior housing, particularly when the times are tough financially.

Manitoba Housing, like everyone else, is feeling the effects of federal cutbacks as our 1990 housing allocation is down due to the unilateral reduction of 15 percent, plus the revised allocation message . Which, by the way, Manitoba along with several of the other provinces met with Minister several times and did not agree and argued with this particular decision by the federal Government. However, Mr.

Speaker, even with this reduction, through revising our delivery strategy to make the most of the federal dollars available, the net impact of the federal reduction in terms of units over the 1990 planned delivery may turn out to be approximately 17 percent. Mr. Speaker, in an

article October 26 by Patrick McKinley, Mr. McKinley states there is an 8 percent reduction in housing programs. The 8 percent reduction is not the provincial program delivery budget, but represents the loss incurred because , and I must say the word land banking. During the early 1970s the federal Government encouraged provinces to prepare for an anticipated housing boom and that then NDP Government decided to bank land. The housing boom came; however, some unfortunate thing happened. The NDP with their lack of business sense missed the boom. Mr.

Speaker, missing that boom, I think that Government is the only one since Christopher Columbus settled on this land to lose money in the realty market over 10 or 15 years. They are the only ones I think since Christopher Columbus settled. (Mr. Marc13I Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) Point of Order Mr. Jerry Storie (Flln Flon): Mr. Acting Speaker, the Minister of Housing is putting information on the record which clearly is not factual. He should consult with the Director of the Canadian Commercial Bank, the Honourable Sterling Lyon, about missing the boat in real estate. The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Laurendeau): Fact is not a point of order, the Honourable Member . *** Mr. Ducharme: If the gentleman across the way suggests that $6 million in land banking losses for this year alone is what you call good business management, no wonder he is on the second row at the back. He probably will never get to the front bench, and he will never be in Government again. I am tired of that particular type of Member, tired of that Member with their loss of type. *

(1450) I repeat, who else would lose money on speculation on land over 10 or 15 years? That type of Governm ent did it. The losses represent the difference of what MHRC has received for the sale of land and the taxes and the carrying charges on this land over the years. There was no reduction in programs. In fact, there is a 3 percent increase in funding to cover increased costs caused by inflation. Mr. Acting Speaker , can you realize what $6 million and you figure if CMHC participates on 75 cents on the dollar, we could have provided this year $24 million more in housing if they had not blown it.

The Opposition Parties talk about our Government's hidden agenda. What about the Opposition scare tactics that they talk about? Scare tactics. Mr. Acting Speaker , during the election, I will read you what this particular Government sent out in July of 1990, coming from the Member for Concordia (Mr. Doer). Here is what he sent out. Recently I met with 80 tenants in one apartment complex who had received rent increases of 6.6 percent to over 9 percent on units. He sent this out to all the apartment owners, still trying to scare up the tactics that they scared in 198'1. Mr.

Acting Speaker, after they came back into power in 1982, their friends, the landlords, they gave them a 9 percent increase without even asking. In

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 547 1983, they gave them an 8 percent increase without even asking. This Government came through with a 4 percent increase when they came back after the rhetoric that this particular Government-9 percent. They hid the facts during the 1981 election , came back and gave them an increase , a landlord and tenant increase, automatically, of 9 percent. Maybe the Member from across the way from Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) was the Housing Minister at that time. That is probably why the landlords got 9 percent. Mr.

Acting Speaker , these types of tactics during the last election did not take down. People do not forget. The Leader of the official Opposition sent out these types of letters implying the official Opposition had a review committee they talked about. They continue to talk about their Landlord and Residential Tenancies Act, how they wanted it so bad, yet they went through two Housing Ministers over a period of many years. Did they produce the Bill, Mr. Acting Speaker? No way did they produce this Bill. An Honourable Member: There was rumour. Mr. Ducharme: Mr. Acting Speaker, there was rumour, that is right.

There was rumour, as the Member from across the way has mentioned . Mr. Acting Speaker, this Minister, during the course of the summer, has met with all the Parties wanting to make representations regarding this Bill, and we have not diminished the integrity of this Bill and this Act. They will see when we produce the Bill, in the upcoming days, that the amendments that we produced are good amendments and it is a workable legislation. Mr. Acting Speaker, the people of Manitoba saw through the scare tactics of the official Opposition. I represent 48 percent apartment owners , 48 percent.

I think it is the second largest representat ion of apartment owners , and they still tried these scary tactics. Well, I would like to-maybe I, instead of criticizing, should be thanking the Members for sending out this garbage in the mail. The garbage-because I increased my majority by threefold. However, they did not forget the type of Government we have had and we had, and they defeated in 1988. When I was going door to door in the last election, all they were saying was NDP, no debt, please, no Doer, please. That is what they were saying at every door. That is what the NDP stood for. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I guess I would say the type of attitude that I got at the doors from the people-they were saying, Gerry, I would not vote NDP, that is a like chicken voting for Colonel Saunders. I would not vote it in, because that is the type of Government that these people had up to 1988. Mr. Acting Speaker, people kept telling me, they remembered the former administration. When 48 percent of your people live in apartment blocks, and even though they receive these type of letters from the official Opposition , the tenants remember.

They realize that The Landlord and Tenant Act, for all Opposition's egotism , had never been changed during their particular administration while they were in public office. Mr. Acting Speaker, last night the Minister responsible for the Status of Women (Mrs. Mitchelson) got up, and she spoke about what Manitobans and what this Government has done in the area of family violence. I am proud of the Act and the role that the Department of Housing was involved in obtaining the new residents for the Osborne House, a Winnipeg crisis centre; and the YWCA Westman Women's Shelter, a Brandon crisis centre.

It is with great pride that I was also involved in obtaining the province's first shelter for abused Native women, which is operated by a Native board. Mr. Acting Speaker, Manitoba Housing has continued its mandate, and we will continue. To the Member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), in regard to Native programs in the core area, we have the first elderly housing project by this Government, containing 30 units, which was developed under the Urban Native program. Also to the Member across the way, the Native Women's transition centre, which was allocated under Manitoba Housing, we are working with.

Finally, there is a 39 unit allocation to the Native Clan Organization to provide temporary hostel living accommodation to Native convicts, who are on parole while they learn to adapt to society-also adapted by this particular Government. Mr. Act ing Speaker , we will continue that mandate. We do not just float words and as by the previous NDP Government, we care and we produce. Mr. Acting Speaker, I guess I should not single out the official Opposition in my reply to the budget speech, but to this day I still cannot figure out what

548 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 the Liberal Party policies were during the last election, and maybe that is why they are at the position they are now. Mr. Acting Speaker, I am not pointing fingers on the Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) because at least he came forward with good constructive criticism when he was critic. -(interjection) -Also he did do some good kicking around last night. I hope the people of Manitoba will find out though, however, under his guide over the next four years. I have heard from the Member for Burrows (Mr.

Martindale) how he is going to solve the housing problems in his remarks to the throne . I also heard from the Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) tell him what he thought of it. Mr. Acting Speaker, we have a Member for Burrows who is now going to put a tax on owner-occupied homes. We have some people in this city, that is their only form of saving. They rely on that as their pension plans when they sell those houses. That Member for Burrows is now going to tax pension plans over and above-on savings that these people have been saving for, for years, Mr. Acting Speaker.

The owner-occupied houses, the largest investment they will ever make, and now he wants to take it away from them. The Member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) got up the other day and talked about debt. He did not call it bad debt, he called it a good debt. I guess a good debt is one that you never have to pay back. That is exactly what they did. They felt that a good debt is one you never have to pay back, and that is what the Member for Elmwood had to say in his remarks. Mr. Acting Speaker, they are coming out loud and clear. When there was only 12 of them, they were a little quieter over there.

Now there are a few more, that true socialist philosophy is starting to come out. Let the people of Manitoba not forget the terrible Government we had in this province for all those years and from that particular Government. Mr. Acting Speaker, there are many achievements which I could list. The point I want to make, however, is that the basis for good Government is not to be able to show how much money you can throw at a problem, like the NDP and Liberals would have us do, but how you can work with people in order to solve the problem within realistic goals, and within a responsible, fiscal framework.

This is the basis upon which the budget speech was produced. This Government is telling the people in Manitoba that we will continue to listen to their concerns, respond in kind, and also be fiscally responsible so that the people living in Manitoba today and in years to come will have the quality of life their ancestors wished for them and which they deserve. *

(1500) There was a question from the Member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) the other day in regard to Native housing . Not only in that particular area in Swan River are we producing approximately 30 units to the Baptist people there and to the town, we are also providing in that particular-and if she would only wait for the Estimates process to come out, she will see that Swan River will be producing nine urban Native, and the urban Native allotment for this particular budget year will be up for this particular year, Mr. Acting Speaker. I will give you some figures.

In Portage, we will propose eight; in the DOC in Brandon, four; Brandon FC, four. I can go on and on in regard to the urban Native. Each year we work with the Native groups. We continue tc:> work with the Native groups. Mr. Acting Speaker, can you tell me how much time I have remaining? Okay, maybe I could give you some information in regard to the housing and put it on record, in the core area. Housing program eight, for the mcord. We have provided two private, 10 private non-profit, and five co-operative housing development projects, assisted, or in development. Four hundred and ten new units created to date.

Total investm,mt contracted or completed in the core area, $22,257,366 including the Core Area lniatiative. Initiative programming, the first Core Area Initiative Agreement and other Government grants. Twenty-four jobs are expected as well as 243 person years of construction employment. Mr. Acting Speaker, in closing I would just like to finish and say that I am just so gratified to the people of southeast of Winnipeg. My Honourable Member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), my Honourable Member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay), my Honourable Member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer) who worked diligently in that southeast

section of Winnipeg; I would like to say that the silent majority out there in suburbia, we thank them for their support in the last election. This includes the low, middle and high income people who reside in the suburbs, who now have said, and they malize that when you are dealing with

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 549 a city issue, you cannot deal how it affects personally in different areas. You deal with what is good for the City of Winnipeg. That has been my track record as long as I have been in public life, and those people in suburbia realize that. But, Mr. Acting Speaker, in closing, boy how sweet it is in the southeast corner of Winnipeg. It is blue, blue, blue and blue. Thank you. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): I listened carefully to the remarks of the Minister of Housing. I listened to his speech and we share some things in common I confess.

One is an interest in urban affairs and in the core area, and also in core area initiative. I was one person who presented a brief to an inner city inquiry. I have not had a chance to read their final report in detail yet, but I can tell you that a number of people made very similar recommendations about the third core area. We would be pleased if this Government would sign a third Core Area Initiative Agreement, but I think there need to be some changes.

I think there needs to be a change from the emphasis on bricks and mortar which got very large sums of money and percentages of money in the first and second core area, and instead an emphasis on programs that would be more people oriented, especially to improve literacy for job training, for social services and for housing. I know that all of those things were included in the first core area and the second core area agreement, but what myself and many others have suggested is that those proportions be changed in the third core area agreement.

I was interested to hear the Minister's remarks on reducing the size of City Council, something that would affect my constituency and the constituency of many other people here. In fact, I will be very interested when the Minister brings in legislation, if he ever does, as to what the position of Members of the Liberal Party would be, especially their city councillors from the inner city, one of whom I have talked to already who is opposed to reducing the number of councillors to 15 councillors. I think we can predict a number of things that would happen if that were to take place.

One is that councillors would become full-time city councillors , and their salary would probably double, so you know, the Liberal and Conservative Party were promoting this policy during the election, and suggesting that it would be a way of saving large sums of money for the City of Winnipeg taxpayers; however, if you cut the council in half, but double their salaries, there would not be any savings at all. The other outcome that is easily predictable, is the suggestion made by the Premier, amongst others, that there be pie-shaped wards. Well, we know what the outcome of that would be.

It would be less representation, less democracy-I am glad to hear one of the Liberal Members saying that he does not like that idea-less democracy for people in the inner city and constituencies like Burrows and Point Douglas, like Broadway, like Wellington, and more representation and more control for suburban people, such as the constituents of the Minister of Housing who was bragging about the suburban support for his Party. That is what the intent, I would allege, and the effect of a reorganized City Council with only 15 wards would be. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I would like to rebut one of the suggestions that the Minister of Housing (Mr. Ducharme) made about units built in the inner city. He suggested that the Opposition Parties said that they were not doing anything. In fact, the Government was doing something. He mentioned the number of units that were built. What we are saying is that we want the Government to do more in the inner city, not less. He also made, I think, a significant comment about seniors and the need for seniors' housing. He was very particular about one suggestion.

He said that seniors need more say in the housing that is provided for them. I commend him for that suggestion, but I would like to recommend that he broaden it and make that suggestion applicable to all tenants, especially tenants in public housing, so that all tenants not just seniors, had more control and more say in the housing in which they live. I would like to thank the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) and the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld) and also the Member for Inkster (Mr.

Lamoureux) for a valuable lesson that they have taught me in the last week regarding the importance of words and how even one sentence can cause one a lot of grief. I am also grateful that a number of Members who are here today were listening to my initial speech and heard my remarks about John Turner making a non-taxable capital gain of $635,000.00. I would like to offer two caveats to my remarks. The Member for Inkster has heard this before. The

550 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 Member for Inkster was on the Liberal task force on housing that toured the country . They invited me to make a presentation on housing which I did. So the Member for Inkster has heard me speak in a little bit more detail on that. He will remember that Paul Martin Jr. who was Chair of that task force asked me questions about my recommendations about taxation on the sale of a principal residence.

He will remember that Paul Martin Jr. said, well, what about people in my constituency in Montreal who have their life savings in their house which we have heard from Members opposite in the last two days, yesterday and today. I said, well, I do not really like concessions, tax concessions , but in this case I would say okay we will exempt the first hundred thousand dollars of capital gains on the sale of a principal residence.

That would probably eliminate everyone in Winnipeg who sells a house, but it would still capture mill ions of dollars of revenue from people who live in Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver. *

(1510) I would also like to say that the context of what I was saying was tax reform and tax fairness. What I wanted to say was that there is an important area of taxation that is frequently overlooked, perhaps not understood, especially by new Members who were elected to the Legislature, and that is tax expenditures. Tax expenditures are monies that the Government could collect, but choose not to. To his credit the Honourable Joe Clark implemented a new report in the federal budget on tax expenditures.

For a number of years the Tax Expenditure Report was published and so you could look at it and you could see how many millions, in fact, billions of dollars were in the tax expenditure accounts that the federal Government chose not to collect. Unfortunately the current Prime Minister has got rid of the tax expenditures account. These tax expenditures amount to billions and billions of dollars which the Government chooses not to collect and they are much greater than tax expenses or budgets of departments.

For example, in housing in 1980 the federal Government spending on housing was as follows: Ownership programs AHOP, RRAP, $152 million; social housing, $396 million; rental housing, $318 million; other including insulation programs, repair programs, community services, administration, $539 million; for a total of $1.4 billion. The largest housing benefits are conferred by tax expenditures especially thE, non-taxation on the sale of a principal residence. In 1980, this amounted to $3.5 billion if sales had been fully taxed. This is more than twice the total of all direct spending on housing. (Mrs.

Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) The provincial Conservatives are opposed apparently to the goods and services tax. The Liberal Party is apparently opposed to the goods and services tax. If the GST were scrapped, where would the Government get their money? The Government would have a number of choices. They could increase other taxes which they are unlikely to do. They could increase the deficit, which Mr. Wilson is unlikely to do. The Globe and Mail yesterday I believe, or today, said that the deficit this year federally would be $30 billion. They could cut programs in spending.

Well, yes, the federal Government is probably likely to do that, or they could offload to the provinces, for example, health and post-secondary education begun by the Liberals, continued by the Conservatives. They could offload in the area of housing, which the Minister o'f Housing (Mr. Ducharme) alluded to in his speech. That has already begun to happen. They could offload in other areas. Would they do that? Yes. Or, and this is their choice, they could bring in substantive changes in tax reform and tax fairness . They could bring back a more progressive income tax system.

They could increase taxes on corporations or they could tax tax expenditures, instead of losing all that money they could capture some of that rnvenue . Why would they want to increase revenue from tax expenditures? According to Linda McQuaig in her excellent book, "Behind Closed Doors," which I would commend to all Members, by the 1980s, tax expenditures were costing Ottawa $36 billion per year, almost 40 percent of Government spending , and in fact more than the annual deficit.

If Wilson chose to capture this revenue, that he is not capturing from tax expenditures , he could have had a balanced budget every year since he became the Minister of Finance, but he chose not to. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to remind Honourable Mombers of the context of my original illustration example of John Turner's non-taxation

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 551 sale of a principal residence a $635,000 tax free capital gain, and contrast this once again with someone on provincial social assistance, who has a work incentive of $50 a month. They can earn $50 without losing anything. They can earn more than that, but it is deducted dollar for dollar from their cheque, in effect, a 100 percent tax rate. Why am I talking about this? Because I believe in fairness in taxation, because if you examine the priorities of the Minister of Finance {Mr.

Manness) in his budget you see that there is a lack of fairness in taxation, and also because I believe in a society that should share and that we as individuals should share. I believe that if there are any poor among us, and there are, that we must not harden our hearts or close our fist to those in need, but we must be open handed and give people enough for their needs. When we give, we must give with an open heart. In our complex society we can do so by individual charity.

We can do so by supporting organized charities or by Government tax transfers, or more importantly by systemic and structural change including tax reform. Why should we do this? People in our constituencies in the inner city are the people who need a society that shares and need us as a Government to make reforms for more equitable taxation and sharing. Consider, for example, the number of people who are homeless. In the International Year of Homelessness a survey was done by the Canadian Council for Social Development and they identified 14,000 shelter spaces in January 1987 per night.

This figure does not reflect people who were turned away by shelters, people who squatted in empty or disused buildings, those who slept outdoors, or individuals or families who stayed in motels at the expense of municipal social services. The Canadian Council and Social Development also estimated that 250,000 different people passed through shelters in 1986, or we could look at children in poverty. Those are the people who are in need that I am suggesting that we as a society should be more generous with. Nine hundred and thirteen thousand children in Canada live below the poverty line.

They are amongst the 560,000 who rely on food banks to provide their basic nutrition. They form Canada's single largest group of poor peopl~hildren , the single largest group of food bank users. If we get to a more local example in that of the inner city of Winnipeg, there are now excellent statistics that are out by the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg on the use of food banks in Winnipeg, who those users are and what their incomes are. The use of emergency food is confined to renter households with income under $21,000.00. I took

part in one of those surveys, and I can tell you what the results are. If you look at it in terms of a graph, as income goes up-and they graded it from less than $7,000 to less than $14,000 to less than $21,000 of income-the use of food banks drops dramatically. So that after $21,000 per year income-this survey was about two years ag~there are almost no people using food banks. Within this group, predominantly single males with incomes under $7,000 used emergency food outlets. The second most vulnerable group was low-income families with children. The former are more likely to receive meals.

The latter prefer food kits. The overall rate of use of emergency food outlets in Winnipeg was calculated to be 1.7 percent. However, amongst at risk households, the rate was 7.3 percent. Of these, 34 percent are families with children under 18. I believe these statistics are appalling. It is important to note that these data are based on Winnipeg Harvest outlets only. Other emergency food suppliers such as the Salvation Army and churches that supply food on an emergency basis were not surveyed. Therefore, the figures quoted above are probably underestimates.

Madam Deputy Speaker, what is the impact of the Conservative budget on the people in Burrows? Who are the people in Burrows that I serve? Well, they are a higher than average percentage of people who are seniors. There is a large number of people who are on social assistance. There is a large number of people who are working people, union people. There are very few professional people. These are the people-the poor, the elderly, the single-parent families, recipients of social assistance, people working at minimum wage-who are least able to cope with recession and Government cutbacks.

What do we see in the Minister of Finance's budget? We see that in Housing, the general administration budget has been cut from $5.018 million to $4.886 million , a cut of 9 percent. Transferred to MHRC, also a small change. The

552 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 actual budget, if you compare the actual 1989-90 to the Estimates for '90-91 , there is a 9 percent cut in the budget of the Minister of Hous ing (Mr . Ducharme). If we look at Canada-Manitoba Core Area Agreements, we see cutbacks. Inner city education initiative, cutback in funding; post-secondary adult and continuing ed. and training, cutbacks; post-secondary career development, adult and continuing education, cutbacks; literacy programs, cutbacks; special skills training, cutbacks; Workforce 2000 job training for tomorrow, cutbacks.

These are the programs that the Minister of Housing was talking about just a few minutes ago, saying that he went to their graduation ceremonies and he was proud to be there. These are the programs that are being cut back, the people who are the most vulnerable in our society. Programs that would benefit them are being cut back. *

(1520) The income supplement programs, 55 Plus and CRISP, cutbacks; youth programs, cutbacks; continuing care , the program delivery got an increase of 1.9 percent. The equipment and supply portion received an actual cut. What does this mean for people in Burrows? It means that more people in Burrows will not receive home care or people will be cut off. Since the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) is here, I would like to tell him a story about a senior citizen I have assisted over the last few years. When she first became sick she was 85 years old. Her health was deteriorating.

She was admitted to the hospital, diagnosed as suffering from malnutrition. She was in the hospital for three months; while she was there she gained 17 pounds. In the subsequent year, year and a half, she was in and out of the hospital approximately three times and then home care was arranged. Now she is getting home care seven days a week. I do not know of anybody who is getting home care seven days a week, except this friend that I help.

However, I think this is a good way for the Government to spend their money, if you consider that when she was in the hospital for three months the Government was spending $900 a day to keep her in the hospital, admitted for malnutrition. Now she is getting home care; perhaps they are paying six dollars an hour or seven dollars an hour, I am not sure, for a home care worker two hours a day, three hours a day, and subsequently her admissions to hospital have gone way down. She goes to the hospital now for two or three days or a couple of weoks at the most.

I think there are millions of dollars to be saved if the Government would rearrange their priorities and put more money into home care and less money into keeping patients like her in the hospital. -(interjection)·· Well, I am suggesting a way to the Government benches of saving money. Are you not interested in listening to ways to save money? The result is that my neighbour is much stronger. My neighbour is in much better health, she has not been back to the hospital as frequently, when she goes it is for shorter stays. The first time she went to the hospital it cost $81,000 of the taxpayers' money.

Home care is much, much cheaper, and why is this Government cutting back? Do they not believe in preventive programs? 55 Plus and CRISP have been cut back 7 percent. Perhaps the Government will say this is because of a lower take-up rate. Well, they could increase it, they could increase it by advertising. That would not be my first choice, but they could advertise the program so that people are aware of it. For example, the rent increases that the Minister loves to talk about, the 3 percent and the 4 perce nt rent increases.

There is no reason why the Government could not have similar advertising on programs like CRISP and 55 Plus, so that those people who are eligible are aware that the programs are there and will apply for them. I have a better idea. Why does this Government not inform pe<>ple who qualify through the income tax form? The federal Government informs people about all kinds of programs through the income tax returns and through old age security cheques. Why does the provincial Government not inform people of programs that they qualify for?

Give them the name of the program, the eligibility criteria and a phone number, and an address for applying for them. There are many constituents in Burrows who are not aware of these programs, and I find that out when I canvass. I find people who are saying they are having tmuble paying the rent, and they are going to have to move. I say, have you heard about this rent supplement program? No, we have not heard about that rent supplement program. It gives

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 553 -(interjection)- I know that is my job as MLA, but the Government also has a responsibility to inform people about programs that are there for everyone who is eligible. In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think this Government suffers from a problem which I would call perimeteritis. That is, they cannot see inside the perimeter -(interjection) - or north of the Assiniboine, as my colleague suggests. I would like to recommend that this Government govern in the interests of all Manitobans, including the residents of Burrows and the entire inner city.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I regret to say that even though this budget has cutbacks in numerous areas, it will affect my constituents. We have fear of what is going to happen in the next budget. We fear the next budget will be even worse, and in spite of the fact that we are into a recession, we see a lack of programs, a lack of policy and a lack of initiative to deal with the recession and the effects on people. We hope that will improve, but we are not hopeful, given the ideological bent of this Government. Thank you. Hon.

Albert Drledger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Deputy Speaker, once again it is a pleasure to participate in the Budget Debate. I have had the opportunity to speak to quite a few of these and participate in a lot of them. I can recall sitting in Opposition quite a few years ago when the then Government, the NDP Government brought down a budget, when they brought in the payroll tax at that time. We knew they were in financial straits because of thei r uncontrolled spending and lack of planning at that time.

We figured that they would have to raise the sales tax possibly and other measures of taxation, and they did. They thought it was a great coup at the time when they brought in the 2.5 percent payroll tax. We are still suffering with that one. Those kind of budgets that came down at that time created a lot of interest. There was a lot of fire at that time. The debates were hectic; definite views were taken from both sides of Government. The Liberals were non-existent at that time. We had one Member there for years off and on, but it was basically the NDP and the Conservative.

That were basically at it all the time. The last two and a half years, of course, we had a bit of a twist thrown in when all of a sudden the Liberals surfaced with 20 Members and that, of course, has taken its natural course the other way again. That was a flash in the pan, but I can recall many of the debates that have taken place. On the Throne Speech Debate everybody is sort of testing the waters especially with the new Legislature, new Members. Everybody is relatively nice and complimenting the constituents and people who are elected and have new positions.

In the Budget Debate we get more into the meat of the matter and get a little bit more serious about some of these things. That is what I find sort of different in this particular debate, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the fact that there seems to be no fire from the Opposition in terms of what to attack. If you go out into the public and listen to the public there is very little concern out there about what happened with the budget. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have to then accept the fact that people are relatively pleased with what we have done.

I think -(interjection)- and second shoe, my foot, under the circumstances I find it very interesting-I used to have a lot more fire when I was in Opposition . It was easier to shoot, you know. The targets were big and lovely at that time. I do not get quite that exuberant anymore in my debate about these things. I try to keep on the higher road if possible , but I have to throw in the odd shot here and there just to indicate to Members of the House the lack of enthusiasm that they seem to have for it. We happened to have a quorum count yesterday.

I will not belabour that, but if anybody wants to read the Hansard it will indicate exactly what kind of lively participation there was from the Members opposite. It is not parliamentary to make reference to people that are or were not in the House, but I encourage · all Members to read that. I would like to think that possibly the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) took some of his people into the woodshed and we have more participation in the House today. The only problem that the Leader of the Opposition has is he cannot get fire into his troops in terms of attacking the budget.

That is understandable, because the general reaction, as I repeat again, out there from the public is positive. It is a non-issue. I have seen many budgets where there were major issues. Even at a time when supposedly we are on the verge of a recession, that things are tough, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) outlined the reduction in revenues and alluded to the fact there might have to be some belt

554 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 tightening going on, everybody seems to have accepted this. In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, I have been out talking to people and some of their first comments were, you are not tough enough, you should have tightened up more . You are still spending too much. I will tell you something. I am very proud of the budget that was brought down by our Minister of Finance.

I know that the process we have gone through in each department by looking very carefully at the possibility of being responsible in terms of our expenditures-and I find it interesting the previous speaker indicated that there were reductions here, reductions there. I have found in the last few days of debate that they have been desperately looking where has there been a reduction? They have never asked why there is a reduction, or if there is a change in the programming, and I think it would be irresponsible if we just carte blanche used the same programs. *

(1530) I think there is an evaluation system that has to take place, and we have gone through that. We have gone through that on this side in preparing the Estimates, and I think we have been very responsible. That is why it is very hard for the Members opposite to attack the budget as it has come down. It will be very interesting to see, once we get into the Estimate process, exactly what kind of response we get from them, when we can explain and detail, where we are not constrained by time and Question Period, when we can go into detail and explain exactly what we are doing and why we are doing it.

I think it will be an enlightening experience for many of the newcomers . I am sure it will be enlightening to many newcomers. I just want to indicate one of the things-just listening to the previous speaker who made all kinds of comments about cutbacks, and we should spend more here, we should spend more. That was the impression we got. I had the privilege of opening a seniors unit in the Town of Steinbach a little while ago. There were approximately 150 seniors there-a lovely complex that we were opening up. I had the opportunity to make some remarks at that time.

When going down there, I was thinking about some comments to make. The one thing that came to mind, in order to know where you are going, you have to know where you come from. Then I thought back 20, 30 years ago when-and I think I made reference to this to some degree in my throne spe,ech-the fact that let us just consider what our parents, our seniors had, 20, 30 years ago.

I can recall 40, 50 years ago, where children at that time had to look after their parents because there was no pension programs, there was no hospitalization, there was no seniors housing, and I think it is proper that we look to perfection to try and improve things all the time, which is being done. When you really want to take it in proper perspective, you have to look over the longer period of time and se1 exactly what kind of services we are providing as Government. I think it is phenomenal.

I would think my area in a smaller community, and I would hope it would affect the seniors in the city the same way, that they have never had it so good. They have never had it so good, and they admit that. I think that shows positive action on behalf of the provincial Government. It just happens that our philosophy , in terms of what we are doing, is different than the NDPs. I will not make reference to the Liberals because we are always trying to figure out where they are at exactly, because they had their crack at trying to crowd into the middle ground somewhere along the line, and got devastated by that.

It is very unfortunate. Madam Deputy Speaker, from the time that I got involved in politics in '77, the lines were very definite between the NDP and the Conservatives, and even that has melded to some degree. It has melded a lot more than we maybe care to admit, but the different philosophy is still there, and that comes out in the debate. That is why we have these debates. As the Minister of Finance {Mr . Manness) indicated, I think that it is scary why people are losing their confidence in politicians of all Parties. They feel we are not accountable, we are not being truthful.

When the Minister of Finance indicated that we were paying interest to the tune of $551 million a year on debt that the province has accumulated, that makes me sick to my stomach, for the simple reason, I have a capital program, Madam Deputy Speaker, a Capital Construction Program on highways-and I want to get into that after a whil~f $107 million. If I could ever lay my hands on the interest that we are paying on debt for one

October 30, 1990 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 555 year, can you imagine what the roads would look like? Or if the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) could get that money into his hands for one year, or any one of these departments, can you imagine what we could do with that kind of money? That money is lost money. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have been a farmer and a businessman, and I have had debt. The worse thing that always bothered me was paying interest on borrowed money, and I think a lot of people feel that way.

I do not mind paying the capital amount, but it is the interest that always hurts so much because that money is gone. In many cases it is like paying rent. Once you have done it, it is gone. You have nothing for it. I think when we talk of different philosophies-and it still comes out especially with some of the new Members speaking on the throne speech and on the budget speech. They talk of spending, spending. You know, spend more, do not cut anywhere, and that is the difference very often.

What we have done in the two and a half years, and I think this is why the people of Manitoba in the last election gave us a majority, not a big one, but they gave us a majority because they felt comfortable in terms of how we handle the fiscal responsibilities of Government. The challenge is there for us definitely, but the one philosophy that always came forward from the NOP was that if things are tough, spend Government money, spend public money. That is why we are in that kind of trouble.

Another reason why I believe, Madam Deputy Speaker, that there is not much fire in the Opposition in terms of the budget, is they have been looking for all kinds of other issues to try and attack because obviously they are not scoring on the budgetary matters. We had the case the other day where-and you know I take this with a grain of salt and enjoy it to some degree-when the Minister of Northern Affai rs (Mr. Downey) made an unwarranted comment, and subsequently, you know, apologizing withdrew that comment, but that was the issue of the Day.

All of Question Period was tied up pretty well the next day on that issue. We had the same thing when the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld) made a personal comment and we spent Question Period, almost over a Question Period, on that issue. To me, it signals that they have no real issues to attack the Government on. Certainly, they do not have any issues on the budgetary matter that-the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) has a few questions from time to time on the budget, but they are very limited, the questions that we have had on the budget since the budget came down, but understandable.

I mean, if there is nothing to shoot at you look for other targets. Now I am want to go back a little bit. I just want to make further reference to the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey), the Minister responsible for Seniors, that in the two and a half years that he has been in that position-and I have a close working relationship with him through my northern airports, through the roads, so the Minister of Northern Affairs and myself have been working closely on many projects jointly with the communities up north.

I dare say that there has not been a Minister responsible for Native and Northern Affairs who has done more for the people in the North as the present Minister of Native and Northern Affairs. I dare anybody to challenge that if you look at the record that he has. If you ask the people truthfully up north they admit that. They admit that this Government and this Minister have been very responsible in terms of responding to the needs of the North and he has done a tremendous job.

I say if they want to shoot at him, most Members know the Minister of Northern and Native Affairs, he is a pretty hard target to hit as well. He will look after himself. I do not have to necessarily defend him, but I wanted to put it on the record that he has done a commendable job. I want to go back to the budgetary matters, and I want to talk about my Department of Highways and Transportation to some degree, and maybe touch on Government Services. I am hoping, Madam Deputy Speaker, that when it comes to the Estimates process that we will have a chance to maybe go through Government Services this year.

Last year that department plus others had to be passed carte blanche because there was no time left. We had spent almost a record time in the Estimates of Highways last year. I certainly enjoyed that. We covered just about every pothole in the country going through the Estimates. Just a little bit of history of the Highways Department's budget. When we lost Government in 1981, the Capital Construction Program at that time, the carry-over budget-the first budget for the then NOP under Howard Pawley-was $100 million. Year after year after that, it dropped down to the point where when we took Government in '88, the

556 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 30, 1990 capital expenditure on Highways was $83 million, not increased, but that has gone down to that. With the freeze that they had on with the civil servants, we could not even lay off people when they did not have work. That was a fallacy of something like that, but it was in keeping with the then thinking of the then Premier, Mr. Pawley, because I have had the opportunity to talk to Ministers that were responsible for the department during those years. They are not in the Legislature now. I am not talking about the Member for Dauphin (Mr.

Plohman), but others before them, who indicated to me how they had to fight to even have a capital program on highways, because the Premier at that time felt that was not a priority, was prepared to take and have no capital program for construction . *

(1540) That is why I am pleased that our Government has seen the socioeconomic impact of a good road infrastructure in the province . What we did the first year when we took Government, we brought the capital program from $83 million to $95 million. Subsequent to that, we moved it up to $102 million. In this current year, we have it up to $106.5 million with $500,000 of it being moved over to the Parks Department, my colleague from Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), to do roads within the parks system, so we are moving it up in the right direction.

I personally, of course, with a bias would like to have more money to be spent there because when you consider that, as I indicated in my throne speech, we are an exporter of transportation services, it is a very important part of our economic system. In order to have that continue that way we have to have a good road system. We are moving in that direction. I indicate and I hope you know that nobody gets excited because you give a personal comment as my colleague, the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld) did.

I feel that we should be spending more monies there, but that is a challenge that I have together with my colleagues to establish their priorities. It is surprising when I hear the questions that get shot across the Chamber here to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) about cutbacks. Everybody seems to have a hangup about that. If anybody availed themselves of this 1990 Manitoba Budget Highlights and if you look in there, it says 1990 Program Highlights-$148 million of additional funding for health programs, $148 million. That is additional money.

My tot al program in capital construction is $107 million, $48 million more for Family Services, $46 million to assist the farm community, $37 million extra for Education and Training programs, and the criticisms come. That is why I hope that the new Members will take their time and go through the Estimate process when the time comes and look where this money is going. It is easy to say something has been reduced. You know you have to know what the shift is and what the total picture is.

In that respect, I do not know who drafts some of the questions that the new Members bring forward, but there is room for a little bit better strategy in that and to know where you are coming from in many of these things. Anyway, Madam Deputy Speaker, I deviated a little bit there from my highway interests. I want to indicate some of the challenges that will be coming forward and why I think we will have to look at possibly spending more money.

I certainly am very supportive of the National Highway Program and hope that we can get financial participation from the federal Government which collects a big portion of money off the highway system and puts very little of it back. That is a different debate that we will be entering into with them. When you consider the fact that rail line abandonment is a thing that is very real to the people in rural Manitoba, and as these lines get abandoned that we have a transference of traffic from rail to municipal and provincial roads, the challenge of building up those roads is definitely there.

The cost nowadays of road construction is escalating, and certainly the high fuel prices right now are going to have a dramatic impact on that department especially. I had actually in mind, Madam Deputy Speaker, to make reference to some of the lean years under the NDP and the road construction industry, how they have prioritized their roads already with the cut budget it seemed. I say this to the Member for Dauphin who was then Minister responsible for Highways, how he prioritized his roads. I think he flew by the seat of his pants and l

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-1-14
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 1st hansardpdf 14.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6a86ed4098463c30448a92d63537b7e6ede917ae

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