Manitoba Hansard — 25 July 2000 (Sitting 70, 37th Legislature, 1st Session)

37-1-70

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

..... . · . .. ·· _., First Session -Thirty-Seventh Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. L No. 70 - 1 :30 p.m., Monday, .July 31, 2000 ISSN 0542-549

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

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

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

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

4605 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, July 31,2000 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Standing Committee on Law Amendments Eighth Report Mr. Doug Martindale (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Eighth Report of the Committee on Law Amendments. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Law Amendments presents the following as its Eighth Report. An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

Your committee met on Tuesday, July 25, 2000, at 6:30 p.m., Wednesday, July 26, 2000, at 6:30 p.m., and Thursday, July 27, 2000, at 2:45 p.m., in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred. At the July 25, 2000, meeting, your committee elected Mr. Reid as Vice-Chairperson. At the July 26, 2000, meeting, your committee elected Mr. Martindale as Chairperson and Mr. Smith (Brandon West) as Vice-Chairperson.

At the July 25, 2000, meeting, your committee agreed, by motion, on a counted vote of Yeas 6, Nays 4, to the following motion: THAT presentations be limited to 15 minutes with a maximum 5 minutes for questions. At the meetings held on July 25 and 26, your committee heard representation on bills as follows: Bill 12- The Public Schools Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques Gerald Huebner- Manitoba As sociation of Christian Homeschools Norbert and Debbie Maertins - Private Citizens Bernd Rist- Private Citizen Abe Janzen -P rivate Citizen Dr. Terry Lewis -P rivate Citizen Marion Hart- Private Citizen Bill 42-The Public Schools Am endment and Consequential Am endments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques et modifications correlatives Theresa Ducharme- People for Equal Partici pation Inc. Rey Toews & Carolyn Duhamel- President, Manitoba As sociation of School Trustees Len Schieman - Rhineland School Division # 18 Fran Frederickson and Val Weiss- Chair, Interlake School Division Bart Michaleski - President, Manitoba Associa tion of School Business Officials Jim Murray and Linda Ross - Chair, Brandon School Division #40 Floyd Martens - Chair, Intermountain School Division Ron G. Plett- Chair, Hanover School Division Dr.

Dave McAndrew- Western School Division #47 Kurt Guenther - Private Citizen Wayne Motheral- President, Assoc iation of Manitoba Municipalities Mary Hudyma - Chair, Dauphin-Ochre School Division Judy Eagle - Flin Flon School Division #46 John Pshebniski - Duck Mountain School Divi sion #34 Gerald Thiessen - Garden Valley School Divi sion Peter Wohlgemut- Rhineland Teachers' As so ciation Ron Friesen - Garden Valley Teachers ' Asso ciation Bryan Harley- Private Citizen

4606 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 Joanne Huberdeau - Birdtail River School Division #38 Val Thomson - Private Citizen Claude Vigier - AEFM Doug Halmarson - Private Citizen David Rondeau- Private Citizen Amy and Peter Buehler- Brandon Teachers' As sociation Harvey Bridgeman -P resident, Mountain Teachers' As sociation Craig Blagden- Midland Teachers' As socia tion An drew Peters -P rivate Citizen Garry Hornun g- Private Citizen Ward Kay -P rivate Citizen Lori Johnson - Chair, Winnipeg School Board Peter Kotyk for Rod Giesbrecht - Private Citizen Bob Fraser- Chair, River East School Division Doug Edmond- President, Manitoba As socia tion of School Superintendents Roy Schellenberg- St.

Boniface School Division Sandra Paterson-Greene for Scott Johnson, St.

James-As siniboia School Division Ruth Ann Furgala and Vivian Leduc how ski - Chair, Evergreen School Division Betty Green and Kelly Decker- Lakeshore School Division #23 Neil Whitley - Rolling River School Division Pam Stinso n- Private Citizen Jan Speelman- President, Manitoba Teachers' Society Ric De/a Cruz - Seven Oaks School Division Wendy Moroz and Howard Holtman - Chair person, As siniboine South School Division Paul Moist- Manitoba Federation of Labour Graham Starmer and Dave An gus - Manitoba and Winni peg Chambers of Commerce Susan Popeski- Seven Oaks Teachers' As so ciation Dan Kelly- Canadian Federation of Inde pendent Business Marijka Spytkowsky- Transcona- Springfield Teacher 's As sociation Chris Pammeter- Private Citizen Victor Vrsnik - Canadian Taxpayers Federation Barry Wittevronge/ -P rivate Citizen Rachel Ouimet for Linda Brezina - St.

Vital Teachers ' As sociation Albert Cerilli- Private Citizen Bob Land- Private Citizen Wendy Land- Private Citizen Henry Pauls- Winnipeg Teachers' As sociation Roland Stankevicius - River East Teachers ' As sociation Darrell Rankin - Communist Party of Canada Diane Zuk- As siniboine South Teachers' As sociation Rudy Peters -P rivate Citizen Ed Hume - Private Citizen Bill 45-The Teachers' Pensions Ame ndment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia pension de retraite des enseignants Jan Speelman and Henry Shyka- Manitoba Teachers' Society Written Submissions: Bill 42-The Public Schools Ame ndment and Consequential Ame ndments Act,· Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques et modifications correlatives Marvin R. An derson - Prairie Spirit School Division No. 50 Susan Boyachek - Rural Municipality of Ethelbert James Bedford, President-Elect- St. Boniface Teachers Ass ociation Your committee has considered: Bill45-The Teachers' Pensions Amendment Ac t,· Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia pension de retraite des enseignants and has agreed to report the same with the following amendment: MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 63.1 (2), as set out in

section 2 of the Bill, be amended by striking out everything before clause {

b) and substituting the following: Purchase of service for past maternity leave 63.1(2} A teacher who was granted a period of maternity leave referred to in subsection (1) and did not elect to make contributions under that subsection for that period may, if she has neither received a refund of her contributions

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4607 nor begun to receive a pension, purchase the service for the period by (

a) filing with the board (

i) before July 3, 2002, if the period of leave was granted before subsection (1) came into force, and (ii) within 18 months after the end of the period of leave, in any other case, an application in a form prescribed by the board; and Your committee has also considered: Bill 12- The Public Schools Ame ndment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques and has agreed to report the same, without amendment, on division. Your committee has also considered: Bill 42-The Public Schools Am endment and Consequential Am endments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les eco/es publiques et modifications correlatives and has agreed, on a counted vote of Yeas 6, Nays 4 to report the same, with the following amendments: MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 97(1), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out the definition of "dispute" and substituting the following: "dispute" means any dispute or difference, or apprehended dispute or difference, between a school board and one or more of the teachers it employs or a bargaining agent acting on behalf of those teachers as to (

a) matters or things affecting or relating to terms or conditions of employment or work done or to be done by the employer or by the teacher or teachers, or (

b) privileges, rights and duties of the school board or the teacher or teachers that are not specifically set out in this Act or The Education Ad ministration Act or in the regulations made under either of those Ac ts. However, it does not include a controversy or difference arising out of the termination or threatened termination of a teacher's contract. (« differend ») MOTION: THAT the definition "teacher" in the proposed subsection 97(1), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by adding "under a written contract in Form 2 of ScheduleD or in any other form approved by the minister under

section 92 and" after "employed by a school board". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 102(2), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be struck out and the following substituted: When Labour Relations Act applies 102(2)

Part VII of The Labour Relations Act applies, with necessary changes, to an arbitration carried out under a final settlement provision referred to in subsection {1), except to the extent of any inconsistency with the final settlement provision. MOTION: THAT item 6 in the proposed

section 103, as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "that were in the statement of matters in dispute before hearings begin" and substituting "during the course of the hearing". MOTION: THAT the proposed

section 107, as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "for the purpose of

section 108". MOTION: THAT subsection 6(3) of the Bill be amended by adding the following at the end of the subsection:

4608 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 For that purpose, any notice to begin collective bargaining given under the former Act respecting the renewal, revision or replacement of such an agreement is deemed to have been given under

section 60 or 61 of The Labour Relations Act. MOTION: THAT the following be added after subsection 6(3) of the Bill : 6(3.1) Notwithstanding subsection (3), arbitra tion proceedings may not be initiated under

Part VIII of The Public Schools Act (as enacted by this Act) until 90 days after this Act comes into force, during which time the parties must bargain collectively in good faith with one another and make every reasonable effort to conclude a collective agreement. MOTION: THAT subsection 7(2) of the Bill be amended by adding ", school superintendents" before "and parents". MOTION: THAT subsection 7(3) of the Bill be amended by adding "school superintendents, " before ''parents". Mr. Martindale: I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg), that the report of the Comm ittee be received.

Motion agreed to. Standing Comm ittee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources Sixth Report Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I beg to pre sent the Sixth Report of the Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources. Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources presents the following as its Sixth Report. An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

Your committee met on Wednesday, July 26, 2000, at 10 a.m., and Wednesday, July 26, 2000, at 6:30 p.m., in Room 254 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred. At the Wednesday, July 26, 2000, at 10 a.m., meeting, your committee elected Ms. Korzeniowski as the Chairperson. At that meeting, Ms. Cerilli moved that presen tations be 15 minutes with 5 minutes for questions. The motion was agreed to. At that meeting, your committee heard representation on bills as follows: Bill 14- The Provincial Railways Am endment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les chemins de fer provinciaux Roger Cameron - Railway As sociation of Canada Gord Peters - Central Manitoba Railway Steven Van Wagenen - Southern Manitoba Railway Don Fyk- Western Rail Coalition Bill 16-The City of Winnipeg Am endment Act (2),· Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Ville de Winni peg Councillor Jae Eadie- City of Winni peg Wayne Motheral and Jerome Mauws Ass ociation of Manitoba Municipalities Bill 31-T he Electronic Commerce and Information, Consumer Protection Am endment and Manitoba Evidence Am endment Act;

Loi sur le commerce et /'information electroniques, modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia protection du consommateur et Ia

Loi sur Ia preuve au Manitoba Brad Fry -M ind Computer Products

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 4609 At the Wednesday, July 26, 2000, at 6:30 p.m., meeting, Ms. Cerilli moved that leave be granted to accept all amendments passed by this committee tonight that were read only by the Chairperson be accepted as if read by the Minister or member. The motion was agreed to. Your committee has considered: Bill 6- The Water Resources Conservation and Protection and Consequential Amend ments Act;

Loi sur Ia conservation et Ia protection des ressources hydriques et modifications correlatives and has agreed to report the same with the following amendment: MOTION: THAT

section 6 be amended (

a) in clause (

a) of the French version, by striking out everything after "a

titre de" and substituting "sous-bassins hydrographiques; "; (

b) by renumbering it as subsection 6(1); and (

c) by adding the following as subsection 6(2): Public consultation re designation of sub-water basins 6(2) Except in circumstances that the minister considers to be of an emergency nature, in the formulation or substantive review of a regulation designating parts of the Manitoba portion of the Hudson Bay drainage basin as sub-water basins, the minister shall provide an opportunity for public consultation regarding the proposed regulation or amendment. Your committee has also considered: Bill 7-The Protection for Persons in Care Act;

Loi sur Ia protection des personnes recevant des so ins and has agreed to report the same, without amendment. Your committee has also considered: Bill 14- The Provincial Railways Am endment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les chemins de fer provinciaux and has agreed to report the same, with the following amendments: MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 33(3), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended in the part before clause (

a) by striking out "may" and substituting "shall". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 34.2(4), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended (

a) in the

section heading, by striking out "180-day" and substituting "60-day"; and {

b) in the subsection, by striking out "180 days" and substituting "60 days". MOTION: THAT

section 4 of the Bill be amended by striking out the proposed subsection 34.2(5). MOTION: THAT the proposed clause 34.2(7)(d), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "60" and substituting "30". MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 34.2(10), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended (

a) in the English version, by striking out the

section heading and substituting "Period for reaching agreement"; and {

b) in the subsection, by striking out "six months" and substituting "90 days". MOTION: THAT

section 4 of the Bill be amended by adding the following after the proposed subsection 34.2(10):

46 10 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 Board may extend period for reaching agreement 34.2(10.1) The board may, on application by the licence holder or the interested person with whom the licence holder is negotiating, extend the period for reaching agreement (

a) by any period that the licence holder and interested person agree on; or (

b) by up to 90 days, if the licence holder and the interested person cannot agree on the length of the extension but the board is satisfied that they are involved in on-going negotiations in good faith that may result in an agreement. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 34.2(11), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "six-month period" and substituting "period for reaching agreement". MOTION: THAT the proposed clauses 34.3(l){

b) and (c), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "six-month period" and substituting ''period for reaching agreement". MOTION: THAT

section 4 of the Bill be amended by adding the following after the proposed subsection 34.3(4): Deposit 34.3(4.1) When the Government of Manitoba or a municipality accepts the offer, it shall provide a deposit to the board of 5% of the net salvage value set out in the offer or $25, 000., whichever is less. Deposit to be held by the board 34.3(4.2) The deposit shall be held by the board for the parties under the deposit conditions set out in the regulations.

Acceptance not binding without deposit 34.3(4.3) If the government or municipality fails to provide the deposit to the board, the accep tance is not binding on the licence holder. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 34.3(5), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "communicates its written acceptance of the offer to the licence holder, " and substituting "accepts the offer in writing and provides the required deposit, ". MOTION: THAT

section 4 of the Bill be amended by adding the following after the proposed subsection 34.3(10): Canadian Transportation Agency as arbitrator 34.3(10.1) The board shall refer an arbitration under subsection (1 0) to the Canadian Trans portation Agency if (a} either of the parties requests that the reference be made to that agency; and {

b) that agency is prepared to accept the reference. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 34.3(11), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended (

a) in clause (b), by striking out "40(4)" and substituting "40(5} "; and {

b) in clause (c), by striking out "40(5)" and substituting "40(6) ". MOTION: THAT

section 5 of the Bill be amended by adding the following after the proposed clause 48(1)(j.1): (j.2) respecting deposits and deposit conditions under subsections 34.3(4.1) to (4.3); MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 34.3(6), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out "90" and substituting "30".

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 46 11 Your Committee has also considered: Bill 16- The City of Winni peg Ame ndment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Ville de Winnipeg and has agreed to report the same with the following amendment: MOTION: THAT the proposed

section 437.1, as set out in clause 2(

a) of the Bill, be amended by adding the following definition in alphabetical order: "The Public Health Act" means The Public Health Act and includes regulations made under that Act. («

Loi sur Ia sante publique ») MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 440(1), as set out in

section 3 of the Bill, be amended by striking out clauses (

a) and (

b) and substituting the following: (

a) persona lly, or by mail in a manner that provides the city with an acknowledgment of receipt; or (

b) if the person cannot be served by one of the methods described in clause (

a) after a reasonable effort has been made, by sending a copy of it to the person 's address, as determined in a manner provided by by-law, by facsimile transmission or any other type of mail or communication that provides confirmation of delivery. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 467(1.2), as set out in

section 4 of the Bill, be amended by striking out clauses (

a) and (

b) and substituting the following: (

a) personally, or by mail in a manner that provides the city with an acknowledgment of receipt; or {

b) if the person cannot be served by one of the methods described in clause (

a) after a reasonable effort has been made, by sending a copy of it to the person's address, as determined in a manner provided by by-law, by facsimile transmission or any other type of mail or communication that provides confirmation of delivery. MOTION: THAT

section 4 of the Bill be renumbered as subsection 4(1), and the following be added as subsection 4(2): 4(2) The following is added after subsection 467(1.2): Deemed date of service 467(1.2.1) An order sent in accordance with clause 1.2(

b) is deemed to have been properly served on the day it is confirmed to have been delivered. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 477(2.1), as set out in subsection 5(2) of the Bill, be amended by striking out clauses (

a) and (

b) and substituting the following: (

a) personally, or by mail in a manner that provides the city with an acknowledgment of receipt; or {

b) if the person cannot be served by one of the methods described in clause (

a) after a reasonable effort has been made, by sending a copy of it to the person 's address, as determined in a manner provided by by-law, by facsimile transmission or any other type of mail or communication that provides confirmation of delivery. MOTION: THAT the proposed subsection 490(2), as set out in

section 12 of the Bill, be amended by striking out clauses (

a) and (

b) and substituting the following: (

a) personally, or by mail in a manner that provides the city with an acknowledgment of receipt; and

4612 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 (

b) if the person cannot be served by one of the methods described in clause (

a) after a reasonable effort has been made, by sending a copy of it to the person 's address, as determined in a manner provided by by-law, by facsimile transmission or any other type of mail or communication that provides confirmation of delivery. Your committee has also considered: Bill 21-The Water Resources Administration Ame ndment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'amenagement hydraulique Bill 29-The Health Sciences Centre Repeal and Con sequential Am endments Act; Loi abrogeant Ia

Loi sur le Centre des sciences de Ia sante et modifications correlatives and has agreed to re port the same, without amendment. Your committee has also considered: Bill 31-The Electronic Commerce and Information, Consumer Protection Ame ndment and Manitoba Evidence Ame ndment Act;

Loi sur le commerce et /'information electroniques, modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia protection du consommateur et Ia

Loi sur Ia preuve au Manitoba and has agreed to re port the same, with the following amendment: MOTION: THAT the following be added after the proposed subclause 18(1)(d)(ii): (iii) prescribing classes of documents for the purpose of clause 13(l)(a); Your committee has also considered: Bill 37-The Miscellaneous Health Statutes Repeal Act; Loi abrogeant diverses lois en matiere de sante and has agreed to re port the same, without amendment. Ms. Korzeniowski: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. Vital (Ms. Allen), that the report of the Committee be received. Motion agreed to. Mr.

Harry Enos (Lakeside): I seek your advice. Is this motion debatable? Mr. Speaker: It is not debatable. Mr. Enos: Okay, I thought I would try. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to table the report to the Legislature, pursuant to

section 63(4) of The Financial Administration Act, relating to supplementary loan and guarantee authority for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2000, as required by

section 52.27(1) of The Legislative Assembly Act. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the loge to my left where we have with us today Mr. Tom Benson, a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. Also I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the gallery where we have with us today Todd and Darlene Babula and their children, Rachel, Wade and Janet, from Petrolia, Ontari o, who are the guests of the Honourable Member for Charleswood (Mrs.

Driedger). On behalf of all honourable members, I also welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD E. Coli Bacteria Government Safety Measures Mr. Harry Eons (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, we are now advised that the residents of Anoia, Balmoral, Tyndall and Garson are all being advised to boil their drinking water before they proceed to use it.

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4613 My question is to the Minister of Conser vation (Mr. Lathlin). What specific measures is his department taking to ensure that residents throughout Manitoba, but in particular through out rural Manitoba, can have some comfort about the safety and security of their drinking water? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, as the Member is aware, Public Health and Conservation undertook their duties when notified of the higher levels of contamination and did notif y residents with the procedures that have been adopted in this province for some time.

With respect to the larger issue, it is obviously of concern to all residents of Manitoba in light of the national coverage with respect to the issue. Mr. Speaker, as the Member is aware, what has happened from Manitoba Health's perspective is we have, and Manitoba Con servation and the Government in general, put in place a water advisory committee that is scheduled to report, that is reviewing all the procedures, all of the processes, all of the testing regulations, et cetera, that have been put in place and were put in place for the past number of years.

It is coming back with recommendations, we are hoping, in September. * (13: 35) In the interim, Mr. Speaker, we have asked the subcommittee, particularly because school is starting in September, to report back, a sub committee that can report back interim measures as soon as possible. We also have the [interjection] I will complete that in the next portion of my question. Mr. Enns: Mr.

Speaker, I am aware that different parts of Manitoba have received unusual amounts of rainfall which no doubt has added to the problems, but it is little comfort to hear from the Minister, from the Government, that they are setting up review committees, checking out processes and procedures. What is needed is some immediate emergency-type reaction on the part of govern ment. Number 1, I would like to know that specific steps, resources have been funnelled to aid and assist the Minister of Conservation (Mr.

Lathlin) to test these wells immediately and have the information resulting from those tests made publicly available to all residents of Manitoba. Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, the Member ought to be aware that we put in place a hotline with respect to Manitoba residents for the first time to advise them about the procedures in place. Resources have been allocated to Conservation and Health.

The Member will be aware that one of the difficulties is the change in regulations that occurred when the Member was a member of Cabinet several years ago, when the funding arrangements with respect to testing of private wells, private testing, changed, and that was one of the issues being reviewed by this committee. In the interim, recommendations have been made. Conservation and Health are monitoring the situation, are making recommendations, are on site when a problem occurs. There is a committee that has been struck that will report in September.

A subcommittee will be reporting in the interim period to deal with specific issues as relates to the water issue, and we are dealing with the issue as it confronts us, I think, in a comprehensive sense. There are short-term issues that we are dealing with and there are long-term issues that have not been dealt with over the past decade that have to be dealt with. Mr. Enns: Mr. Speaker, we are rapidly getting accustomed to this government setting up review committees, setting up hotlines, giving all the appearances of consulting with residents of Manitoba and doing very little about it.

I want to know specifically: Is every school being tested for their water supply before September 1 and our children go back to school? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, we are undertaking those measures. Labour Management Review Committee Labour Legislation Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): On July 17, the Minister of Labour stated to this House: "I will stand in this House and state unequivocally that I have been giving the Member a full, complete

46 14 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 and truthful comment about the Labour Management Review Committee." I quote from a letter of July 20 from the Chair of the LMRC management caucus: It is not accurate for the Minister to state that every element of Bill 44 was sent to the Labour Management Review Committee or to in any way imply that management caucus was given an opportunity to review the provisions of Bill 44. My question to the Minister is: Who is telling the truth? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr.

Speaker, I would suggest that the Member looks at Hansard from last Thursday where we extensively had questions on this particular issue. As I stated on Thursday, and I will restate again, every single element that appears in Bill 44 was sent either as an issue or a specific reference to Bill 26 to the Labour Management Review Committee. There is no element or issue in Bill 44 that did not get sent to the Labour Management Review Committee in one form or another, and there is nothing in Bill 44 that was not sent.

So all of the issues and elements that went to the Labour Management Review Committee came back in a form of recom mendations, either consensus or not, and all of those elements, all of those issues that went over to the Labour Management Review Committee are reflected in Bill 44. Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister for a simple yes or no. Is she accusing the Chair of the Labour Management Review Committee management caucus of being a liar? * (13 :40) Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Speaker, the Labour Management Review Committee is made up of representatives, five representatives from the business community chosen by the business community, five representatives of the labour community chosen by the labour community, and a chair, Professor Wally Fox-Decent. The Labour Management Review Committee is a wonderful concept. It is a wonderful idea. It is a wonderful way to get feedback from both the labour community and the management community. Mr.

Speaker, unlike in 1996 with Bill 26, Bill 44 reflects the thinking, not the unanimity, but the thinking on every issue that was sent to it of the Labour Management Review Committee, membership from the labour community, membership from the business community. I applaud them for the time and the energy and the very good effort that they put into giving recommendations to us so we could reflect many of those recommendations in Bill 44. Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, the Minister still will not answer the question.

My question to the Minister: Is she saying that the Chair of the Labour Management Review Committee management caucus lied in his letter? Ms. Barrett: Mr. Speaker, I am reframing my answer again. There were issues and elements, some reflecting concerns we had with The Labour Relations Act amendments that came in in 19 96 and another area of alternate dispute resolution. We sent a package of issues, a package of ideas, a package of specific concerns we had and asked the Labour Management Review Committee to respond to those.

In that package that was sent over in late May was an attachment that said: We are very concerned about the days lost to strikes and lockouts; we would like the Labour Management Review Committee to take a look at this issue and see if they can come up with some responses. They were unable to come up with a unanimous vision, a unanimous view on this, but the issue of an alternate dispute resolution mechanism, along with issues from Bill 26, were sent to LMRC. Labour Management Review Committee Labour Legislation Mr. Da rren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr.

Speaker, the Minister is right when she says the Labour Management Review Committee is a tremendous or wonderful concept to get feedback, but she is only right if she allows it to work. The point that we make over and over again is, if she wants it to work, she has to allow

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4615 it to have time to consult with its constituents and to debate the issues before it makes presentations. I would ask the Minister: Is it not true that the major proposal in her reform bill or her bill of amendments to this Labour Relations Act was not presented to that committee until the eleventh hour, allowing no time for consultation, no time for discussion and no opportunity for the Labour Management Committee to work and do its job, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr.

Speaker, under any answer that I have given in the House have I ever said that specifics were sent over on this particular area. I said that we sent over specific concerns that we had with Bill 26, and we sent over a statement saying here is another area that we are concerned about, which is the lengthy strikes and lockouts that have cost Manitoba workers and Manitoba businesses and the Manitoba economy untold time lost and productivity lost. What we sent to the Labour Management Review Committee we sent as a package to the Chair.

The Chair then sent that information to all of the representatives, both labour and management. The internal workings of the Labour Management Review Committee are treated by this government-! cannot answer for former governments-with distance. We were not privy to what went on in the discussions in the Labour Management Review Committee, but the issue was there. Mr. Praznik: As a former minister of Labour, I always ask the question: Did they have enough time to discuss it? Mr.

Speaker, I want to ask this minister, given that the management caucus in this committee said very clearly that they did not receive the proposal from Labour until the eleventh hour, with no time to consult, no time to discuss, why, then, did that minister accept those recommendations without sending them back to the Committee to have a proper discussion? * (13: 45) Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Speaker, I will put up against our process our relationship with the Labour Management Review Committee's recommen dations, the way it is reflected in Bill 44, the fact that in 19 96 when Bill 26 was sent to the Labour Management Review Committee, the Labour Management Review Committee had a very short time frame as well. They were able to come up with some consensus positions after a long, hard discussion and debate, I understand. Not one, not a single one of the recom mendations that were, by consensus, achieved in 19 96 by the LMRC found their way into Bill 26.

I will hold up our process against that former government's process any day. Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, since the Premier (Mr. Doer) is so fond of quoting me as Minister of Labour, I would like to remind the Minister that when I was Minister of Labour, I never had a letter sent about me like she has had from the Chair of the management caucus. My question to the Minister of Labour is a simple one. Given that she has now admitted that there was not proper time for consultation, why, then, did she mislead the House in trying to make the public believe that there was proper consultation on that committee? Ms.

Barrett: Mr. Speaker, the reality is that the Labour Management Review Committee was in charge of its own internal operations. It is not my responsibility, nor should it be, because we want to have this be a distant-third-party, as objective as possible, process to give advice to the Minister and recommendations. We under stand the distinction between a third-party arm's length group and government, unlike some instances that I could share of the former government. Mr. Speaker, the Labour Management Review Committee was able to come up with a number of consensus items.

On this particular one they were not, and obviously the management side is not happy. I do not expect unanimity on many issues when it comes to labour relations. I am very pleased with the amount of unanimity, the amount of consensus that was reached in Bill 44 discussions, and that is reflected in the legislation before us.

46 16 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 Labour Management Review Committee Labour Legislation Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, if the Minister were truly interested in proper consultation, she would have ensured that full details went to every member of the Labour Management Committee. I am going to go back to her quote in response to a question from the Member regarding their election commitment to send all pieces of labour legislation to the LMRC.

The Chair of the management caucus of LMRC, in his letter, said, and I quote: Management caucus did not receive the proposals from government or from the Department of Labour, was not given an opportunity to consider the proposals and does not in any way concur with them. Does this minister believe that is con sultation? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, the Labour Management Review Committee is one very important avenue for consultation and for advice, and we did follow our commitment to send every piece of labour legislation to the Labour Management Review Committee.

We are also in consultation and discussion and dialogue, and have been for months, with various members of the labour community and also various organizations within the business community and individuals within the business community. We are having very positive pro ductive consultations as we speak and would like very much to finalize the process by getting one of those other things that Manitoba has and that is the public hearing process where we are able to then hear and discuss and get everyone's opinion out on the floor in front so everyone knows what all the issues are and get more suggestions and ideas.

So we would like very much to send it to the Committee as quickly as possible to hear everyone's perspective. Mr. Loewen: Once again, Mr. Speaker, the Minister's words cannot be reconciled with her actions. My question to the Minister is- * (1 3:50) Mr. Speaker: Order, the Honourable Govern ment House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): It is well known to the Member that supplementary questions require no

preamble. Would you please draw his attention to that rule of this House, this convention? Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader does have a point of order. Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. *** Mr. Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Member to please put his question. Mr. Loewen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask this minister: Does she really believe there was consultation, and if there was, would the Chair of the management caucus of the LMRC have to write her, and I quote: request that you contact the Minister of Labour to address the manner in which this played out before the LMRC and particularly our concerns about not being consulted on these fundamental changes? Is this consultation? Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Speaker, every element, every single element that was sent to the Labour Management Review Committee- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Ms. Barrett: Every element that was sent to the Labour Management Review Committee has found its way into Bill 44. There are no additions or deletions from the topics that were sent. The concern raised by the Chair of the management caucus of the Labour Management Review Committee talks about information that he felt was not given. We gave the same information to the labour caucus, to the management caucus and to the Chair. We gave

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA 4617 the package to the Chair for distribution. There was nothing to prohibit management from coming up, from caucusing at any point during the Labour Management Review Committee process and saying this is the issue that has been raised; do we have any ideas, do we have any suggestions? That was done by the labour caucus; it could have been done by the management caucus. Management caucus's response was there was not enough time, and that is an internal dispute. We sent everything to both sides. Point of Order Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, Beauchesne's 417 : "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate." Mr. Speaker, it is already clear that the Minister of Labour has called the Chair a liar, so I think it is important that, rather than provoking debate and calling the Chair a liar, she should just sit down. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order. Mr. Mackintosh: Well, the Opposition House Leader clearly has no point of order. He does not even have a point.

He is trying to put words in the mouth of a minister, which is entirely inappropriate. But, Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, it was the same opposition that got up and said that the Labour Management Review Committee had not received the issues relating to Bill 44. And today they get up, and they admit that they had received the issues related to Bill 44. That is the kind of allegation that needs a full response from the Minister of this government, and she did so appropriately. Mr. Speaker: Order.

On the point of order raised by the Official Opposition House Leader, I was just about to rise for a length of time, and Beauchesne's does state that answers to questions should be brief and deal with the matter and not provoke debate. But I would like to take this opportunity to draw the attention of all honourable members to the words "liar," "who is telling the truth." We are walking a pretty fine line here. It is being very, very close to being unparliamentary language. I would ask all honourable members to pick and choose their words very, very carefully. *** Mr. Loewen: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the Minister is straightforward. Does she understand that in the English language the sentence: "Every single element of Bill 44" was sent to the Labour Committee differs from the statement: "Every element that was sent"? If she understands, which is accurate? which reflects the truth? * (1 3:55) Ms. Barrett: As I have said before, and I will say again, we sent a package to the Labour Management Review Committee. We sent the entire package, the entire package is what we sent, and what was included in that package were 11 issues related to specific concerns we had with Bill 26.

We also sent a 12th issue which was a concern that we had as government about the cost of extended, protracted labour disputes. We asked Labour Management Review Committee's advice on the 11 specific issues that were of concern from Bill 26 and the one concern, the one more general concern about an alternate dispute resolution mechanism. We asked LMRC to come up with, if they were able to, a recommendation on an alternate dispute resolution mechanism. They were not able to come up with consensus. They did, however, agree that it was an issue that was worthy of concern, and management's position actually was, Mr.

Speaker, they did not need to have a change because the current system was working well enough. But they all had the same information going in, and they all had the same information coming out. Labour Management Review Committee Labour Legislation Mr. Ha rold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Premier, given that he was too shy to mention this in his speech to the Chamber of Commerce, did not put it in the Throne Speech when he wrote the Throne

46 18 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 Speech, did not mention it at the Century Summit, I would ask him now to get involved. Given that the LMRC did not receive all of the information, I think it is time for him to get involved and to do something about this. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Labour Management Review Committee was given the topic of days lost to strike and lockout. They were given that topic and six or seven other topics that have been canvassed. There was-[interjection] Well, the only sandbagging I recall is the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr.

Praznik) bringing in frozen food here to Manitoba and letting war veterans eat that kind of food. Last week when members opposite were asking elements versus proposals versus legislative questions, I talked about the increase in private investment here in Manitoba. I talked about the increase in financial investment here. I would like to take this occasion to congratulate CanWest which, I was informed today, has bought the Victoria News, two Vancouver newspapers, the Calgary Herald, the Edmonton paper, Ottawa papers, Montreal, Halifax, Charlottetown. Congratulations to CanWest, another Manitoba success story.

Labour Relations Act Amendments-Withdrawal Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): What the Premier has not done is tell the business community about these major labour changes that he is bringing in. I would ask the Premier, given this process that was described as wonderful has been gerrymandered, it is time to step back, and I would ask him to do that now. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Minister said last week, I believe on Monday, and I would reiterate again today, that we are listening to Manitobans. We listened to them- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. * (1 4:00) Mr.

Doer: I know it is a foreign concept to members opposite. They can howl all they want, Mr. Speaker. I know it is a foreign concept to members opposite, but we are listening to Manitobans. We want to ensure that the proposals, particularly those to ensure that we can reduce the number of days lost to strike and lockout, are rebalanced in Manitoba but not tilted in Manitoba. I would encourage members opposite to join us in the debate, which is legitimate. I think they will find, in the debate, I believe, a number of proposals in the law- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, a number of proposals did have a consensus from the Labour Management Review Committee. There are proposals in the legislation that do not have a consensus. We are welcoming of advice we receive in this House, advice we receive out of this House, and we will continue to make sure that Manitoba is an optimistic province, some thing the members on this side believe in. Mr. Gilleshammer: The issue is that those elements did not receive consideration because they were not received by the Committee. I would tell you, Mr.

Speaker, that the three major dailies in this province have all written editorials asking the Government to step back from this legislation, legislation which they did not mention to the public of Manitoba during the election, legislation they did not include in the Throne Speech. I would ask the Premier to withdraw- Mr. Speaker: Order, the Honourable Govern ment House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): An interesting speech, Mr. Speaker. I do not know when his 40 minutes are up. Of course Beauchesne's Citation 410 :

Preambles to questions should be brief, and supplementary questions require no

preamble. Mr. Speaker, would you please direct him accordingly.

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4619 Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader does have a point of order. Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. *** Mr. Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Member to please put his question. Mr. Gilleshammer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would ask the Premier (Mr. Doer) if he is prepared to listen to the editorial writers of the three major dailies in this province who have all recognized that you have failed to consult with Manitobans and that you have failed to send these elements to the LMRC. Will you withdraw it now? Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, we are prepared and have been, as I have stated and the Premier has stated.

We have been talking with a number of groups and individuals for months on these issues, not just the Labour Management Review Committee, important though that is, but we have spoken with various groups and individuals in the province, and we are continuing to do so. We have, as I have stated, another really wonderful opportunity in Manitoba, unique in Canada, where we are required to hold public hearings.

We have 30 or more people in organizations who have signed up who want to speak to this issue, who want to speak to the labour relations legislation, who want to say there are good things about it, there are changes that we would like to see made. We are prepared to take this legislation to the public hearing process, hear from Manitobans and listen very carefully to their suggestions and their concerns and the things that they think we have got right in this bill. Standing Committees Public Presentation Process Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Conservation (Mr.

Lathlin). The Committee process in this Legislature is a very important means of getting input from citizens without fear of being influenced or coerced by government. I would ask the Minister: Is it his policy to have political staff call ahead of time those registered to present to committees on bills like Bill 43 in order to suppress dissent and stifle opposition to those, the Government's attempt to kill the Manitoba Environment Council? Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conserva tion): Mr.

Speaker, I have listened to the Member asking questions here in the House for an extended period of time now, and so far I fail to understand why the Honourable Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) does not support our efforts in sustainable development. He just attacks our efforts as we try to implement the- Mr. Speaker: Order, the Honourable Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, Beauchesne's 417: "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate." Mr.

Speaker, the Minister does not have to answer the question if he does not know it, but the Minister should not be provoking debate. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised, I would like to take this opportunity to remind all honourable ministers of Beauchesne's Citation 417: Answers to questions should be brief and deal with the matter raised and not provoke debate. *** Mr. Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Minister of Conservation to please conclude his answer. Mr.

Lathlin: If the Member is truly concerned about the environment, he should support our government's plan to implement one of the most proactive sustainable development strategies in the country.

4620 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 Mr. Gerrard: My supplementary to the Premier. I ask the Premier to confirm that his Executive Council's policy analyst, Jane Gray, called one of the presenters listed to present on Bill 43 explicitly to try to persuade her to support the Government's bumbling environ mental policy. Ron. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member that has been quoted by the Member for River Heights has been involved in increased inspections to ensure manure storage facilities in the province are adequately dealt with.

We are dealing with an independent study on soil sustainability in Manitoba; we are preparing groundwater maps in sensitive areas because they had not been updated in sensitive areas for years. She has been involved in conservation processes for livestock operations which will allow us to deal with water concerns, proximity to neighbours. The applications will go through a cumulative impact study and risk assessment prior to a decision being made, something that did not happen in the past.

We are dealing with a municipal approval process that allows for science at the back end to be dealing with science at the front end. Yes, we expect people on our staff to be listening and discussing issues and advance ments with citizens of Manitoba on a constant basis. Mr. Gerrard: My second supplementary to the Premier. I ask the Premier why he will not be fully open, admit that Jane Gray called Christine Cammon-Sin gh, a member of the Manitoba Environmental Council and the round table, a member who teaches political sustainability at the University of Winnipeg?

Will the Premier not admit that Jane Gray, his assistant, called specifically to try and influence her presentation before Bill 43, a bill which is designed to kill the Manitoba Environmental Council? Mr. Doer: Well, knowing the individual that was presenting her views to the Committee and knowing the individual that had worked with the previous caucus, the Liberal caucus as an intern, and works with us now as a staff member, I know both of them are very committed to the environment. I would not expect that the individual who was presenting could be influenced by any staff of the Legislature.

Public Schools Act Amendments- Home-School Registration Mrs. Joy Smith (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, the NDP party should re-assign its name to the no democracy party. Members opposite and the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) last week were supposed to be listening very carefully to members of the public presenting to committee. Bill 12 was on the agenda last week, with home schoolers' concerns coming to the forefront. A particular concern was centred round the registration of home-schoolers. * (14:10) Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Govern ment House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Ron.

Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): On a point of order. I wonder if the Member came here with a question today, Mr. Speaker. It has been acknowledged by both sides of this House that on a question there can be a

preamble of one carefully drawn sentence. I think she is on No. 3 or No. 4 in terms of sentences. Would you please ask her to put her question. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry on the same point of order? On the point of order raised by the Honourable Government House Leader, he does have a point of order. Beauchesne's Citation 409(2): "A

preamble should not exceed one carefully drawn sentence." * * * Mr. Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Member to please put her question. Mrs. Smith: Mr. Speaker, given that Bill 12 has not even been passed yet and the presentations were given on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of last week, how can the Minister of

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 4621 Education (Mr. Caldwell) justify the fact that registration forms arrived Friday morning at home-schoolers across this province with serious amendments reflecting Bill 12 prior to the Bill even passing? How did this happen? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I will allow the Minister to answer the specifics, but, Mr.

Speaker, I remember, prior to this Legislature changing and amending the Sunday shcpping laws, the police forces and the Prosecution branches of Manitoba were told not to prosecute any store that was open on a Sunday before this Legislature even had the Bill introduced. Mrs. Smith: Mr. Speaker, given that the Premier stood up and talked about something totally different, I would like to address my question to the Minister of Education.

Given the fact that Bill 12 is not passed, and given the fact that parents of home-schoolers are now asked to give out their level of their own personal education, as well as other significant changes to Bill 12, could the Minister of Education please explain why these registrations were mailed out prematurely to home-schoolers, with these significant changes? Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, the Member in her opening remarks to the first question talking about democracy-it is passing strange, of course, that members opposite, with the Monnin inquiry that the people of Manitoba underwent for a number of years, would be talking about democracy in this province. Mr. Speaker, with regard to home-schooling, Bill 12, which went through legislative committee last week, of course there is no change of substance in regard to this bill with regard to the forms for registrations. Last year, registration packages were sent out during the last week of July, the first week of August.

This year they were sent out in the last week of July, and they will be in the first week of August. Mrs. Smith: Given that this minister does not seem to understand that last year we did not have Bill 12 going through with ma jor changes to the home-schoolers' registration, and given that the home-schoolers association- Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Govern ment House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Mackintosh: It is a good thing that we have Beauchesne's here. I know the Member is on a supplementary question, and, of course, Beauchesne's is very clear that supplementary questions require no

preamble. I think, when they are talking about

preamble, they mean long phrases that begin with the word "given" and I think we are on the second "given" now and the second supplementary. Mr. Speaker, would you please ask her to put her question. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the Honourable House Leader, he does have point of order. Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. *** Mr. Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Member to please put her question. Mrs. Smith: Mr. Speaker, how is it that this Minister of Education can defend sending out registrations that have significant changes to them in view of the fact that Bill 12 is not even passed and in view of the fact that the Manitoba association of home-schoolers has sent a letter to the Minister objecting to these significant changes? I would like to ask this minister how he can justify sending out these registrations with these changes without the Bill going through, and I would like to table- Mr.

Speaker: Order, the Honourable Govern ment House Leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Mackintosh: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is almost funny, on her first supplementary question, we did not get up on a

4622 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 point of order. I guess give an inch, take a mile, but we got up on the second supplementary. The Member used the word "given" and extended phrasing, and then she got up after your admonishment and changed it to "in view of the fact that," and then there is some postamble. Would you please ask her to put a simple question. That is what is required under the rules of this House. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): I know that the House Leader does a lot better listening than I have seen his colleagues doing in the committee rooms, Mr.

Speaker, but if he had been listening, I am sure he would have heard that the Honourable Member was just about to table a document. Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised by the Honourable Government House Leader, he does have a point of order. Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. The question had been put. If the Member was continuing to table a document, I would ask her to table the document. *** Mr. Speaker: Please put your question. Mrs. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That is precisely what I was about to do before I was interrupted. I would like to table this letter that indicates the outrage of home-schoolers across Manitoba at not being listened to. Mr. Caldwell: Government members on this side of the House place primary importance on the education of young Manitobans in our school system.

We believe in investing in education across the province, both on the public school side and the post-secondary side. Of course, the challenges in that regard are formidable, given the 10 years of cutbacks implemented across this system by the members opposite. However, we are dedicated in government to investing in education for the economic well-being of the province of Manitoba. Nursing Diploma Program Curriculum Approval Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, the NDP Government announced its two-year diploma nursing program five months ago.

Students are set to begin classes in four weeks and the program has yet to receive the required approval. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Health tell this House when he expects the program to receive final approval from the Manitoba Association of Registered Nurses, considering they have not yet received the curriculum to review? * (14:20) Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question, I think, two or three times during the course of the Estimates debate.

I indicated to the Member that we are in the process of getting approval from MARN with respect to this, but I did indicate to the Member that I am so concerned the members opposite have done everything they can to block this program. I wish they would not have cancelled it three years ago. If they had had a proper nursing program, we would have nurses today. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. Mr. Speaker: I have a ruling for the House. Would it be the will of the House to grant leave for about 30 seconds for the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) to come into the Chamber? [Agreed] Point of Order Mr.

Denis Rocan (Carman): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, we on this side of the House see the dilemma the House is in at this point in time. You have already distributed your ruling. We understand that this ruling is about the Honourable Minister of Health who, unfor tunately, cannot hear these remarks that we are

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 4623 making right now but who in a few moments I know, Sir, will be available to hear these comments. So I believe if you would ask for leave of the House, Sir, I think that we would sit on this for a few moments while you might want to move to Members' Statements and then revert to your ruling because it is already out in the House. Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House to move to Members' Statements and deal with this ruling upon completion of Members' Statements? [Agreed] I thank the Honourable Member for Carman for that advice.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Citizen Patrol Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, on June 20, in spite of pouring rain, 84 people from Shaughnessy, Gilbert Park, Willow Park and Willow Park East communities attended a public meeting at Shaughnessy Park School. The purpose of the meeting was to gauge interest in forming a citizen patrol in their neighbourhood. After listening to the provincial Minister of Justice (Mr.

Mackintosh), Mr.Wyman Sangster from the Department of Justice, City Councillor John Prystanski and City of Winnipeg police officer Cam Jones, those present decided overwhelmingly to make their community a safer place in which to live and become extra eyes and ears for the police by forming a citizen patrol. A second meeting was held on June 29 to choose a steering committee. I want to congratulate everyone who made the effort to attend the meetings and who want to volunteer in order to make their community safer for everyone.

A special thanks goes to those who were elected to lead the citizen patrol: co-ordinator Kim and the team leaders, Robert, Bob, Hank and Andrea. I look forward to volunteering occasionally in the future with Manitoba's newest citizen patrol group, the Shaughnessy Neighbourhood Patrol. Thank you. Agricore Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise tod�y to congratulate Agricore on their newest gram inland terminal.

Last Tuesday, I had the pleasure to participate in the official opening o� t �e terminal which is located southwest of Mehta m my constituency in a small community by the name of Elva. Agricore's newest commitment to the people of Manitoba is very much welcomed. Congratulations to all of the staff that will be working with producers in the area. They are: Dave Dayholos, Danny Morris, Art Brister, Darcy Vancauwenberge, Chad Yeoman, Bruce Fleger, Kelly Fry, Lisa Crepeele, Andy Penner, Kevin Penner and Rob Bodin.

These fine individuals I know will serve the agricultural community very well. * (14:30) Agricore Cooperative Ltd is a farmer-owned co-operative operating on the Great Plains of North America. It provides fully integrated grain and special crops marketing and handling services throughout a prairie-wide network of elevators and processing plants. Created in 1998 by the merger of Alberta Wheat Pool and Manitoba Pool Elevators, Agricore is the leading supplier of crop nutrition and crop protection products in Canada, and one of Canada's largest grain handling and marketing businesses.

As a co-operative, Agricore returns all of its profits to its members. Mr. Spea ker, again, I welcome the newest facility to southwest Manitoba. Viking Landing - lOOOth Anniversary Ms. Linda Asper (Riel): I am pleased to inform the House of a remarkable millennium event. July 27 and 28 were commemorated in Newfoundland as the 1 OOOth anniversary of the landing and establishment of a settlement by Vikings, led by Leif Ericsson, at L'Anse-aux Meadows on the island's northern tip. A number of exciting events to com memorate the occasion are scheduled, including

4624 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 the exhibition Full Circle, Full Contact: Vikings and Skraelings in Newfoundland and Labrador, which relates the initial encounter between the Vikings and the Aboriginal peoples, who, at the time of contact with the Vikings, had lived in Labrador for 9000 years and in Newf oundland for 4500 years. The anniversary features L'Anse-aux Meadows, the first and only authentic site of Viking settlement in North America, now a national historic site and one of 13 world heritage sites in Canada recognized by UNESCO.

Norwegian explorer Helge Ingstadt and Anne Stine found the site in 1960 and led the archeological team which worked there until 1968. Their work has resulted in the unearthing of seven Viking turf houses capable of sheltering 50 to 10 0 people and the restoration of three sod walled buildings. Not only Newf oundland celebrates its Iceland heritage. We in Manitoba are proud of the very important contribution made to Manitoba by citizens of Icelandic descent over the last 125 years.

Manitoba is home to the largest population of people of Icelandic origin in Canada The celebrations in Newfoundland were also an important occasion for our Icelandic communities. Let us JOin Newfoundland by recognizing our shared wealth in our both having a diverse cultural and heritage legacy. I am pleased to bring these significant commemorative events honouring Iceland heritage to the attention of this Legislative Assembly. Thank you. Manitoba Association of School Trustees Mrs.

Joy Smith (Fort Garry): Today I rise to acknowledge the important role the Manitoba Association of School Trustees has in the school system here in the province of Manitoba. I rise to also acknowledge the fact that they have sent a letter, as we all know, complaining about or acknowledging the fact that they were profoundly disappointed at the manner in which they were addressed and treated during our review committee hearings on Bill 42 on July 25, 2000. Mr.

Speaker, the Manitoba Association of School Trustees is the catalyst across the province in putting teachers, students, parents, trustees and principals together in a forum whereby the significant policies of the school divisions across this province are put into place with significant input from the Manitoba Association of School Trustees, working at a local level to ensure that the school divisions give the best possible education to the students in our schools across Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, as we well know in this House, MAST was unable to complete its presentation of its 11 -page brief within the IS -minute time constraint at Committee. The significance of the Manitoba Association of School Trustees' presentation is a significance that will be felt across this province for many years to come. I acknowledge the fact that they were profoundly disappointed that the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) took up the majority of the time and, indeed, the debate over the time limit took longer than it would have taken to complete. Thank you. National Child Benefit Ms.

Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I am very proud that our government is taking many initiatives to address poverty, including increased funding to child care, our Healthy Child Initiative to invest in early years. Recently, our government announced an increase of approximately $18 0 this year and next year in the federal National Child Benefit supplement, which will now flow through to families. This change is effective in July and will end the previous government's policy of clawing back for families on employment and income assistance payments from the National Child Benefit increases.

This change has been welcomed by many in our community who are concerned about poverty, and it continues our government's efforts to address the serious problem of child poverty in Manitoba. The National Child Benefit was introduced as a measure to reduce child poverty in Canada. Unfortunately, in our province, families on income assistance had their income eroded, dollar for dollar, and saw no benefit. This has had a profound effect on children living in Manitoba families on income assistance, and we

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4625 have seen the depths of child poverty in our province grow over the past I 0 years. Our government is committed to reversing this trend of child poverty by ensuring that all families receive the supports they need to live dignified and independent lives. As a first step toward restoring monies previously clawed back from families receiving income assistance, our government is providing increases to the basic benefit for children aged six years and under by $20 per month and increases to school supply budgets of $20 per child.

For children six years and under, this means 49 percent of the totc.l new supplement money from the federal National Child Benefit will flow through to families on social assistance. It means $420 for children six and under will be increased to their income. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Speaker's Ruling Mr. Speaker: Order. As previously agreed, we will deal with the ruling. During Oral Questions on July 24, 2000, I took under advisement a point of order raised by the Honourable Official Opposition House Leader (Mr.

Laurendeau) concerning the words "that is a stupid question" that the Honourable Official Opposition House Leader attributed to the Honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak). The Honourable Minister of Health also spoke to the same point of order. As I did not hear the comments in question, I took the matter under advisement in order to peruse Hansard. On page 4332 of Hansard, the words "That is a stupid question" do appear. However, the words are not attributed to a specific honourable member. In addition, the words did not contain any imputation of motive nor was any unparliamentary language used.

I therefore rule that there is no point of order. Point of Order Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (Interim Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, just after you finished your ruling I heard the Minister of Family Services from his seat, while laughing, say: It is still a stupid question. Mr. Speaker, I would like you to call the Minister of Family Services to order and indicate that is the arrogant attitude of this government that we see on a daily basis in this House. Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker, the Member does not have a point of order.

She cites no reference in Beauchesne's, she cites no infringement of our rules, and she does not have a point of order. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the Honourable Interim Leader of the Official Opposition, I thank both members for their advice. I will take the matter under advisement to peruse Hansard and consult the procedural authorities, and I will report back to the House. * (14:40) ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you please call debate on second readings, Bill 48.

DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 48- The Rural Development Bonds Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Ms. Friesen), Bill 48, The Rural Development Bonds Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les obligations de developpement rural), standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Fort Whyte. Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to put a few words on the record before Bill 48 makes its way to committee. We are very interested in attending the committee process and finding out some information from the Minister and her staff regarding this bill. I will say that in principle we do not have any particular problems with this bill. Certainly expanding the Development Bonds to allow businesses within the city of Winnipeg to access these funds we believe is a reasonable expansion

4626 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 of this program, provided that it is carried out right. Our main concern is going to be in the application. Once again we have a bill before us that does not say much or does not really speak in regard to the application of the intent of this bill. The Minister and her department are aware that within the city of Winnipeg and across the province of Manitoba there are other avenues for entrepreneurs and for businesses to raise capital.

The Crocus Fund is just one of a number of venture capital funds that are available to businesses, whether they are in the infancy stage, start-ups, or whether they are already existing and looking to expand. It is also well known that for the most part a number of those funds are constantly looking for solid investment vehicles. In particular, the Crocus Fund has a substantial amount of capital which has not yet been utilized, I believe. I am not quite as close to it as I was a year ago prior to being elected to this House.

At that time I do know that management of the Crocus Fund was certainly looking far and wide for good opportunities to invest some of the capital that they had on hand, as were the other funds such as the recently started ENSIS Fund. So it is not quite the same situation in the city of Winnipeg as it is in rural Manitoba. The Minister is aware that Rural Development Bonds and the Act are there for a specific purpose, to help business, particularly small business start-ups and expansions in rural Manitoba, come to fruition, a very worthwhile policy.

Implementation of that policy by the previous government, which has led to tremendous diversity and tremendous expansion in our rural economy, something that was long overdue and something which needs to be encouraged as much as possible. I note that while there appears to be possibly a-and it may just be a momentary slowdown in the rural development programs underway at this time as compared to the previous three years. The program is still being undertaken by this government, and they are to be commended for that. It is a very, very important program.

Those of us in the city, those of us who have, for the most part, lived our lives in the city, sometimes forget the importance that the rural economy plays in our well-being. I think it is imperative that the Government continue to find ways to foster business growth in rural Manitoba, because it really provides, in a lot of cases, the opportunity for our young people to see a future in rural Manitoba, to see that they can have hope and opportunity in the areas where they were born or where they were raised, and I think that is very important for the future of this province.

It would be wrong to change the focus of this program from rural development to a heavier emphasis on the city, and that is one of the fears that I have with the introduction of this bill. In business you see from time to time where it is very difficult for one structure, one management structure, one department, one bureaucracy, to successfully manage two programs that, in essence, go in two different directions.

I think it is going to be critical that in the application of the amendments to The Rural Development Bonds Act the Minister and her department ensure there is a continued focus on development in rural Manitoba in an effort to provide the same type of opportunity to individuals, entrepreneurs and businesses in the city of Winnipeg. It is very important that the Department does not lose its focus on what has been accomplished on the rural side of the equation because to do that would be folly.

We cannot, as has been mentioned many times regarding many different situations in this House, have a successful Winnipeg, we cannot have a strong and vibrant economy in Winnipeg unless we have a strong rural economy. The two are very much intertwined and should not and cannot be separated.

We would just also like to state that hopefully some of the changes that have taken place recently in The Securities Act that came out of a study that was prepared by Economic Development Winnipeg in the prior two years, which indicated very strongly that there is need for more access to capital in the province of Manitoba and in the city of Winnipeg. While that is true, I think really what is important and what was said in that briefing to the Government and what was acted on is it is important to get private sector capital into the mix. It is important that we as a community can foster growth,

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4627 primarily through private capital, and that is really what the changes to The Securities Act were meant to accomplish, and I am sure they will. One only has to look at the activity, the stock market activity with start-up companies in Alberta and compare that to Manitoba to understand the tremendous impact and the tremendous positive results that can flow from opportunities for economic expansion. So, on this point, Mr.

Speaker, as I said before, we look forward to getting this bill to committee to discuss with the Minister and some of her departments how they see that businesses and entrepreneurs in the city of Winnipeg will benefit from the application of this bill. I note at the same time that we are seeing a government announcement in the fall regarding the Neighbourhoods Alive! program, which I think in many cases is an admirable program.

It was certainly focussed for the most part at the areas of the city of Winnipeg that need that type of activity, the inner city as well as two other areas in the North that I am sure will benefit from it. I think with regards to that bill, while it does serve a usef ul purpose, it is somewhat unfortunate that the Neighbourhoods Alive! funding is somewhat restricted and, in fact, I am sure just by mere coincidence is restricted to neighbourhoods that currently have elected a member of the Government.

I would hope, in the application of this bill as well, that we see some broader spread to the economic activity that might result, but, as I said before, it will really come with the application and how the program is rolled out.

I am not sure whether the Minister anticipates that there will be round circles in the city of Winnipeg or in various parts of the city of Winnipeg similar to what we see in rural development, which will be some of the impetus for the success of the introduction of this program into the city of Winnipeg. * (14:50) I would also like to say that, while it is important that the focus remain on rural development, it is also important that the right type of economic activity is fostered.

Particu larly with regard to the city of Winnipeg, it needs to be economic activity that will be not only sustainable from an environmental per spective but also sustainable from an economic perspective. Of course the true test is whether private sector investors have the belief that the businesses are in fact realistic and will improve. So, as I have said, we are interested in getting that portion to the committee.

I also have a couple of concerns which will be raised in committee regarding some of the amendments which are being proposed on the basis of allowing the Government to react more on what is recorded in the

preamble as to react on a more timely basis to minimize its exposure on the guarantee. That is certainly something that is laudable, certainly something that I can see that the administration and the Minister, a road they would want to go down. While per se I do not have any particular problem with the wording in the legislation, what will be critical, again, will be in the enactment and how it flows. What could become a problem, if not handled properly, would be the issue of putting roadblocks in the way of business.

Sometimes in these negotiations and these types of issues we have entrepreneurs all across this province who want to act, who want to act quickly. We have to be sure that we are not putting roa dblocks in their way of a bureaucratic nature. While I do not see any indication that that is the case here, we certainly want to flesh that out at the committee stage. Just in closing, we are pleased to pass this bill on to committee.

We are anxious to hear from the Minister and her staff and we are also anxious to hear what the proposed new cap will be on the bonds and in fact how much more funds will be available to incorporate growth in the city of Winnipeg, because I think it would be wrong just to keep the existing caps in place and divert some of the attention from rural Manitoba to the city of Winnipeg. So with those few brief comments, we will look forward to discussing this bill in further detail in committee. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr.

Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 48, The Rural Develop ment Bonds Amendment Act.

4628 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 3I, 2000 Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. House Business Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce that the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources will meet on Tuesday, August I, that is, tomorrow, at I 0 a.m., to consider Bills 35, 43 and now 48. Mr.

Speaker: It has been announced that the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources will meet on Tuesday, August I, 2000, at I 0 a.m., to consider the following bills: Bills 35, 43 and 48. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, I would seek leave of the House to have the Committee of Supply meet in two sections only as the business before the

section in Room 254 has been completed. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House for the Committee of Supply to sit in two sections only as the

section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 has completed the business assigned to it? [Agreed] Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr. Sale), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to. *( I 5: 00) COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) HEALTH Madam Chairperson (Bonnie Korzeniowski): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 255 will now resume con sideration of the Estimates for the Department of Health. Consideration of these Estimates left off on page 9I of the Estimates Book, Resolution 21. 4. Health Services Insurance Fund. The floor is now open for questions. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I have a couple of administrative matters. When we last left this committee, the Member for Emerson (Mr.

Jack Penner) asked when the Committee commenced again on the next day, whether I would have available the individuals from the Department, and it did deal with Emergency Services. I undertook to do so. Of course, we did not reconvene the next day nor the next day nor the next day, I believe. The individual responsible is now away on holidays, and I am loath to bring anyone back from holidays in order to do that. So I sent a note to the Member, unfortunately during Question Period, for the Member for Minnedosa (Mr.

Gilleshammer) outlining that information and then recognized that it was in fact the Member for Emerson who had asked me that. So I would appreciate if perhaps the critic would convey that fact to the Member for Emerson and indicate that I will still endeavour to have that individual and the departmental officials available for a briefing as soon as we can justify that. I would appreciate that. Secondly, for the information of the Member for Charleswood (Mrs.

Driedger), I indicated to the Member for Minnedosa and to the Member for Charleswood that I was going to reply to the issue about physician coverage in Erickson. I did have a private conversation with the Member for Mi nnedosa where I did convey the information to him concerning that. He seems satisfied with respect to the response on that particular matter. I can assure the Member for Charleswood that I think that that issue has been resolved, at least in terms of providing the information that was requested by the Member for Minnedosa with respect to the issue of the Erickson physicians.

I also have a number of issues that I will bring to the attention of the Member for

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4629 Charleswood and other members with respect to queries that have come forward to the Minis ter and to the Department, of which I have indicated I would take as notice and, depending upon the pattern as to when Estimates are completed, I will still endeavour to provide all information to the Member for Charleswood and other members of queries that they made during the course of the Estimates debate. I did deal with the issue of physicia n demand in rural Manitoba.

The Member did ask about physicia n vacancies, and I indicated there were 20 positions posted on the Web site. The Member also asked what Manitoba's position was vis-a-vis speciali sts in the country last year and this year with respect to the status. As of December 19 98, the Canadian Institute for Health Information reported that Manitoba had 88 specialis ts per 10 0 000 population and ranked fourth in Canada and 89 family medicine physicia ns per 10 00 population, with a ranking of six th in Canada. The 1998 CIHI will not be available until September of 2000.

The Member asked the level of doctors remaining at levels. The Colle ge of Physicians and Surgeons indica tes, as of July 1999, there were 2037 fully li censed medical practitioners in Manitoba, Madam Chair. The Member asked the number of doctors per capita, and for the 1998-99 statistics, the physicia n ratio to population of full-time positions was: Brandon, 660; Burntwood, 5560; Central, 210 2; Interlake, 21 88; Marquette, 2550; NOR-MAN, 1948; Parkland, 11 45; South Eastman, 2015; South-Westman, 2669; and Winnipeg, 610 .

The Department advises us, given the number of physicia ns in the province, the population of Manitoba has not changed significantly. The ratio of physicia ns to population is unlikely to have varied from previous statistics. Those were from 1998-99. The Member asked about rural experience for students. Manitoba Health does provide funding to support travel and accommodations for year 3 and 4 undergraduate students to do an elective in rural family practice.

Manitoba Health provides funding to support travel and accommodations during their rural rotation for all family and medicine residents as well as for residents choosing to do rotations in surgery in a rural locale. The Department also funds a summer student rural experience in this program. Up to ten students work with rural physicia ns for ten weeks over the summer. Manitoba also, of course, funds the rural family medicine program in Parklands which trains 6 residents in rural medicine per year. There is a training program for family medicine residents in Parklands.

It is anticipa ted this program can be expanded to support 12 additional residents, and the number of training sites are anticipated to be increased. The Member asked about loans for students. The Department provides funding for 15 loans of $15 ,000 for students in years 3 and 4 of the undergraduate medical education program. In return for this, the student agrees to work in rural Manitoba for one year/loan immedia tely upon lic ensure. The current rural medical program for practising physicia ns includes funding for additional skill training as well as continuing their medical education.

Manitoba has been supporting the rural physicia n program for over a decade, and as I indica ted, we will be announcing shortly a very comprehensive and expanded rural and retention program that is as, and I have said, long given expansive answers during the course of this Estimates debate with respect to an expanded program that will be announced, that will build on all these init iatives and expand a number of these initiatives in this respect. I will also provide the Member with a copy of the, as I indi cated, the action plan with respect to the rural physicia n program. I have a kind of marked up copy here.

If the Member can bear with me, I will not probably have it today, but I will have it for her in the next day or two, if she could appreciate that. The Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach) asked about specialis t shortages in Manitoba. The WRHA reports about 68 specialist vacancies. There are two specialist vacancies in rural areas shown on the rural Web site. The WRHA does some recruiting for rural RHAs. Therefore some of the vacancies reported by the RHAs may exist in rural RHAs. The WRHA is

4630 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 in the final stages of negotiations with the potential candidates for approxima tely I 0 vacancies. I provided the information to the Member for Russell in this regard on the understanding, of course, that he would appreciate the dif ficulty sometimes in terms of negotiation and dealing with these specifics and also recognize that this is the first time this type of information has generally been provided, from my memory. The Member also asked how much funds have been allocated to diabetes and communicable diseases for the year 2001.

It is approximately $600,000. The Member asked about the RHA funding model review process. Manitoba Health is working with representatives from the council of RHA chairs and has established a funding advisory commit tee and a working group.

The steering group memberships consist of a co-chair of the CEO from Central RHA; a co chair of the ADM of internal program divisions of Manitoba Health; the executive director of the Regional Support Services for Manitoba Health, the RHA chair from South Eastman RHA; the chair from regional health authorities of Manitoba; the executive dir ector of the regional health authorities of Manitoba; the chair of the RHA chief financial officer's cou ncil; the executive director of the Health Programs for Manitoba Health; and the director of financial services for Manitoba Health.

The working group membership consists of the co-chair, director of financial reporting; WRHA co-chair; the dir ector of financial services of Manitoba Health; chief financial officer from Parkland RHA; V-P corporate services from Central RHA; director of financial planning from the WRHA; director of com munity health assessment from Manitoba Health; financial consultant of Fin ancial Services from Manitoba Health; consultant from Regional Support Services of Manitoba Health; an epidemiolo gist from Regional Support Services of Manitoba Health. The Member asked about the terms of reference for this group.

The Department of Health is working with representatives of the council of RHA groups in this regard. It is recommending, amongst other things, con siderations to the existing funding model of RHA authorities in Manitoba to deal with a model with a relationship to health needs and outcomes and provide direction and support for the regional allocation working group.

The objectives are to develop guiding principles for the committee in a working group; pre-existing and other funding methodologies for regionalized health systems; to advise in the scope proposed funding methodology and its implem entation; to approve the work plan deliverables; and to provide direction and advice to the Government. The Member asked for access to the last published community needs assessment for RHAs. I am advised the RHAs completed their first comprehensive community health assess ments between 19 97 and 1999.

Subsequent work in the ongoing community health assessment process may have been written up in some follow-ups. Documents are avai lable from RHAs. A contact list will be provided to the honourable members so that copies of reports can be accessed. I will provide it, again not today because it requires me ripping off pages, at a later date to the Member. The Member asked a simi lar request with respect to the RHA regional plans. The RHAs were to submit their 2001 -2002 regional plans to the Minis ter of Health in June, which consis t of a strategic and operational plan.

They are also available from the RHAs, of which the same contact list can be provided to the Member. The Member asked about whether responses have been sent to one Terry Hnatiuk with respect to a query. A reply has been sent out as of last week. There have been some delays in terms of correspondence from the Minis ter's office, not as much as in the past. I will not go down that road, but we are trying to upgrade and update more immedia te responses from the department, particularly as we move to a more responsive based system.

The Member asked for inf ormation with respect to organizational changes as a result of

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 463 1 the regional health authorities. I have flow charts, the most recent flow charts of the organizational structure with respect to the Member's query. We have copies of this which we can provide. We can provide copies to the members. I am now tabling copies of the RHA contacts, three copies, that I indi cated to the Member.

I am also ta bling copies of the organizational structure of which I am, hopefully, tabling three copies for the members. * (15:10 ) Whoever requested a breakdown of the number of patients with respect to hip and knee replacement, a separate breakdown of patients waiting for hip procedures and knee procedures is currently not available. The Winnipeg Regional Health Authority surgery team is in the process of building a data base that will produce this information. Willis deCormier for ortho pedics is collecting data from each orthopedic surgeon.

Hi storical data indica te that annually approxima tely 45 percent of the total number of joint replacements performed are hip replace ments and 55 percent are knee replacements. The Member asked for the salary scale for a nurse 4 in relation to midwives. The salary scale for a nurse 4, step 1, is $42,970; step 2, $44,56 1; step 3, $46,15 4; step 4, $47,891; step 5, $49,880; step 6, $5 1, 811; step 7, $53,9 18; step 8, $56 ,112 . For nurse 5, step 1 is $5 1 ,694; step 2, $55,487; step 3, $57,768; step 4, $60,047; step 5, $62,507.

I understand that the salary range for the clin ical nurse specialist, nurse 5, was used as a benchmark for establishing the salary range for midwives. The arrangement was negotiated specifically with the Midwives Association of Manitoba. The Member requested comparison of the cost of tuition for the baccalaureate program and the new diploma nursing program. The tuition for the new diploma program is approximately $3,000 a year, which would be $6,000 for the entire program. I am advised that tuition for the baccalaureate program is $3,015 , which, over four years, is $3,0 15 times four.

The Member for Steinbach (Mr. Jim Penner) requested the number of patients on dialysis in southeastern Manitoba. The WRHA provincial dialysis program has confirmed there are nine hemodialysis patients and six peritoneal patients whose address at diagnosis was within the boundaries of the South Westman Regional Health Authority. In other words, of the two levels, the 15 who have an address, it has not been investigated at this point where these patients are currently residing. As the Member is aware, hemodialysis is provided at 12 sites in Manitoba: Health Sciences Centre, St.

Bonif ace Hospital, Brandon Regional Health Centre, and local centres located in Dauphin, Flin Flon, Morden, Pine Falls, Portage, The Pas, Thompson, Ashern, and Selkirk. All adults in Manitoba on peritoneal dialysis attend a clinic at St. Bonif ace Hospital, which is responsible for and delivery of service and supplies for all adults in the province receiving this type of commitment. The Member asked for the breast feeding service at Women's Hospital. Funding has been extended to the Health Sciences Centre vision fund for the continuation of the Women's Hospit al breast feeding program.

A proposal for comprehensive in-hospit al and community program to support breast feeding has been included in the 2001 -2002 health plan submission of the Win nipeg Regional Health Authority. So it has been extended until an overall look at the whole program and a continuation in that context can be secured. Mr. Chomiak: At this point that deals with a number of issues raised by the Member and other members. Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I would lik e to thank the Minis ter very much. I do appreciate receiving the inf ormation.

I have colleagues here with me today that actually have some questions they would like to now pose to the Minis ter. Mr. Gary Filmon (Tuxedo): I think that the Minis ter is very well skilled in responding to questions now, so I will just ask him if in fact the issue that I am raising has already been dealt with. You can interrupt me and direct me to the answer. I have been contacted several times by people involved with a proposal by the Southeast

4632 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 Resource Council to build an Aboriginal personal care home on the site of the former Nazarene College on Lee Boulevard in Fort Garry. My understanding is that the chair of the Southeast Resource Council at that time Chief Louis Young, wrote to the Premier, Mr. Doer, on the 1st of February with copies to the Min ister and Minis ter Robinson and several other Minis ters requesting a meeting to have them become aware of this proposal. There have not been any replies, I understand, to that letter.

I know that our government had been dealing with various of the proponents and that we looked favourably upon the proposal that was followed up by the new chair of the Southeast Resource Council, Chief Sheldon Kent, on June 15 , with a letter dir ectly to the Minis ter with copies to Premier Doer, Minis ter Robinson, Mr. Lathlin, et cetera. Again no response.

It is my understanding from having read in the Winnipeg Free Press about the proposal to have the Fir st Nations people become very much involved in the provision or at least the admini stration of a lot of their health care services, that this proposal fits emin ently well with that intent, that the proposal has the support of all sorts of leaders in the community including Grand Chief Bushie, former Grand Chief Fontaine, Mary Richard, Wayne Helgason and many others of the leadership of the Fir st Nations and Aboriginal community. The proposal is for 12 0 beds with the possibly of expanding another I 00 beds.

They clearly have the abil ity to provide their I 0 percent share of the cost. The proposal is a long way along the road to being able to be qualified, I would say, by the government. I guess my question is: Why are they unable to receive any response from the government, and, secondly, is this part of the capital program that was announced last week by the Mi nister? Mr. Chomiak: With respect to the proposal, the Member mig ht be aware that there have been other proposals with respect to Aboriginal personal care homes to be constructed within the city of Winnipeg.

What we have asked the WRHA to do is we have asked them to set up a subcommittee. They have set up a sub commit tee, in fact, that is reviewing the various proposals with respect to personal care homes, obviously with respect to Aboriginal services and an Aboriginal personal care home or homes specifically for review by the Department. I am in a little bit of a dif ficult position. I do understand they have been in contact with the Capital Planning branch, as well as the WRHA in this regard.

I am not in a position today to give specific responses about that specific proposal nor other capital proposals other than that I am given to understand that they have been contacted by the department and by the WRHA in this regard. With respect to capital proposals specifically, it is our intention in the next several weeks to contact all of the various authorities with respect to the approvals in that regard. At the very latest we are anticipating by the early fall to have completed the process of contacting all of the various regional health authorities with respect to proposals.

With respect to the idea and the concept of an Aboriginal personal care home situated within the city of Winnipeg, I can indi cate that we are favourably inclined in that regard. Mr. Filmon: Given that my understanding is that the design is fairly well along the way to completion, that as well it is a 23-month construction timetable, I am wondering why there is no sense of urgency being exhibited by the Government on the issue, given that this group is very well along the way to being able to deliver a personal care home sooner, perhaps, than others mig ht be.

I recognize that there has been some minor contact by the Department just to, as I understand it, keep them at bay. There was a request on the 1st of February for a meeting with mi nisters. It was followed up again on the 15 th of June for a meeting with minis ters. I recognize that once we are in session it is more dif ficult for the Minister. But when groups take the init iative and do all of this spadework to put themselves in a position to fulfil what they believe to be the requirements that government is putting forward, you can understand the frustration that these people are feeling.

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4633 * (15 :20) Mr. Chomiak: I appreciate the comments and I understand their frustration. I hope that we can remedy that very shortly. Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Madam Chair person, it is a while ago that I asked the Minis ter two specific questions. I think that it was going to come out at the tabling of the capitals, the budget that you were putting out specific to Salem Home in Winkler and Tabor in Morden.

Now, these were both projects that were announced last year and I believe they were also in the desig n stage, if the Minis ter could indica te to me where they are at and also to the communities so that they can continue with their planning. Mr. Chomi ak: Madam Chairperson, simila rly, as I indi cated both to the Member for Tuxedo (Mr.

Filmon) and last week during the course of the Estimates debate, we embarked on a li ttle bit of a dif ferent process with respect to capital this year for several reasons, firstly, because of the transitional nature of the Government, and, secondly, because of the fact that last year's capital and the previous year's capital were fairly extensive. We wanted to review all of the capital needs requirements. The Department has done probably the biggest assessment, I am given to understand, they have ever done of all of the capital needs and requirements.

We also wanted to embark on a dif ferent process, returning somewhat to the process that had been followed in the early 1990s with respect to approvals of projects at the various levels. I appreciate the Member's questions with respect to those particular locations, deal with homes that were previously approved. We are in a situation now where we wanted to stick with a specific process. Last week we announced publicly projects that we are actually going to tender. We did make announcements with respect to the rest of the projects.

Over the next several weeks we will be contacting each individual RHA and outlining the status of each of their projects. As tempting as it mig ht be and as much as I would like just to maintain the integrity of the process, I cannot give a specific response other than that we are well famil iar with those projects. That has been com municated to the RHAs. We will be getting back to them about this particular status of those projects. Mr. Dyck: I just wanted to reiterate the fact that there are about 45 people waiting right now. They are waiting placement.

Right now they are in the hospital and will need to find a place to stay. I would appreciate an answer to that, and a positive one, as soon as possible. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): My first question deals with an issue which I know the Min ister has spoken of frequently. That is the need to look at where cost savings occur in health admini stration. I know that the Minis ter has moved to consoli date the two RHAs in Winnipeg. My questions are: (

a) how are you doing in looking at admini strative across the whole system, across the whole province; and (

b) I wonder whether you could provide for each of the RHAs the admini strative costs and the total costs and the percentage that is going to adminis tration. Mr. Chomiak: As the Member recalls, we have discussed this issue during the course of these Estimates with respect to the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, and the cost savings that were assessed at somewhere in the neighbourhood of $800,000 with respect to allocated savings in that regard.

I also indica ted that, during the course of the Estimates, we are also doing a review of all of the various health authorities and have asked for a breakdown specifically on administ rative costs and allocations in that area. We are also undertaking a number of measures. There were suggestions from members opposite about various procedures to adopt with respect to a review of the health authorities and regionali zations per se. Several members recommended, for example, a wholesale review at this point, which is a valid suggestion, of the regional health authorities.

For purposes of continuity and trying to lessen the ongoing nature of constant change in the system, I sort of chose for adminis trative reasons not to go down that

4634 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 course, although at some point that is not necessari ly ruled out. We have undertaken a review of all the financial situations. I have asked for specific information precisely on the lines that the Member has suggested. I do not have that information at this point. I think when I am in a position I could probably share some of that information with the Member once that process is complete.

The Member probably is aware as well from discussions that occurred during the course of these Estimates debate that we are also in a process of reviewing the financial systems and the financial funding of RHAs in general. It has been an ongoing process that began last year. Mr. Gerrard: I thank the Minis ter, and I would appreciate receiving that inf ormation when it is avai lable. Certainly, as I travel around the province in some but not all areas, admini strative costs come up again and again.

It would seem to me that, if indeed the Minis ter is able to carry through on his efforts to have a system which works with less adminis trative overhead, we should be able to compare spending, for instance, last year with this year, in various regional health authorities for admini stration, and have an estimate of the proportion of health care costs by region which go toward administ rative expenses.

The one area where I note, when we are looking at the departmental Estimates for Adminis tration and Fin ance, there is really a very small reduction this year of about $4,000, from about $7,038, 000 down to $7,034,000, is for admini stration. I noted with interest at the time of the amalgamation of the regional health authorities that Dr. Brian Post) indica ted that he felt there could be some reduction in the administ rative at Manitoba Health. I would like the Minis ter to comment. Mr.

Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, in fact the issue that Doctor Postl made reference to is an issue that I have made reference to myself. It is a difficult task for the regional health authorities. They are constantly criticized for having high admini strative costs, and some of us do it centrally, and then they point to the Department of Health and say, well, you are making commensurate kinds of changes in that regard.

Having said that, I hope that all members appreciate that what has happened at Manitoba Health and the regions is, as we have moved from centraliz ation to regionalization, there has been a dramatic shift in resources from the Department of Health to the regional health authorities. Li terally hundreds of positions have moved. The Department of Health is a relatively extremely scaled-down version of what was a Department of Health several years ago. That transition is sti ll not complete.

Clearly the regional iz ation process that was put in place is a matter of continuing development. * (15: 30) can indica te it is an interesting administ rative and policy development question. There are some areas, for example, at the Department of Health where I would think I would like to have additional resources to carry province-wide programs, and we do not. There are some areas where there are perhaps programs that are still being administered or carried out by the Department of Health that mig ht be more appropriate in the regions. We are sti ll looking at that entire process.

I can tell you in terms of a policy and admini strative sense that it is my sense, I mean, the people at the Department of Health that I deal with on a daily and weekly basis work extraordinarily long periods of time and work extraordinarily hard. In some cases we have given them tasks that they literally have been unable to deliver for sheer lack of personpower. So the way I have characterized it basically is that because we are in a transition phase from a centralized approach delivery of health programs to a regionalized approach-we are in the early stages, we are still working on this particular process.

It is noteworthy that we have kept positions down and the only hirings have been generally in areas of direct delivery of programs, et cetera, with some rare exceptions. We have been conscious of the need not to expand the operations at the central structure. At the same time, we are cogni zant, and we ought to be cognizant, of how we deal with these issues on a province-wide basis. We ought to be wary of not putting ourselves in a position where we cannot deliver programs and services that the

July 31, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 4635 public expects us to deliver by virtue of overextending the resources and services we have. At this point, I do not have a definitive response to the Member on this. We have recognized the issue. One of the reasons for the choice of the Deputy Minis ter that we now have as the Acting Deputy Minis ter is some expertise in this particular area. Having said that, we are conscious of those. They are initia tives and indications that, in fact, we have made ourselves.

It is interesting, particularly as we have gone through this period of a lot of labour nego tiations in the past few months, how many individuals and many people in the Department of Health have been running extended hours. That is right across the board, actually, in most areas of my experience with the Department of Health. So I think we have to be cautious and prudent in this area, keeping in mind that, as me move towards a regionalized nature, most of the programs are delivered, for the most part, by the regions. Mr.

Gerrard: As the Minis ter is aware, there has been considerable debate on the precise number of nurses that are needed in Manitoba. What I would ask is how does Manitoba compare the number of nurses per capita with other provinces, and how are we doing in being able to provide efficiently the nursing services that are required? Mr. Chom iak: As the Member is aware, we have canvassed this during the course of the Estimates. The per capita, we actually compare relatively favourably.

The Member may not know, personally, a personal comment, I do not like per capita comparisons because I do not think they provide a true picture. That is a personal point of mine, but in terms of per capita, the recent reports show Manitoba on a relative basis, as a relatively high per capita nurse ratio vis -a-vis at least other western provinces. In fact, I will get the specific data again to the Member. In terms of nursing vacancies in programs, we have also canvassed that issue during the course of these Estimates.

One of the frustrations of undertaking a number of programs, you know the scenari o has changed in Manitoba. It is not, well, we are cutting back here, we are cutting back here. It is actually to an air of, well, we are expanding a program here, we are expanding a program here.

One of the dif ficulties with that is it is more dif ficult to expand when the resources, obviously, in terms of nurses, are not available, which is one of the reasons why we took the major step of announcing our nursing recruit ment and retention plan, which is fairly comprehensive, and I have canvassed it during the course of these Estimates quite extensively. In the short term, we are doing everything we can with respect to recruitment and retention.

The two top issues that nurses over and over again said to us, with respect to nursing recruitment and retention, were: (1) bring back the diploma program; (2) provide funding for nurses to get the kind of upgrading and training that other professionals have access to, and that they do not have to have dif ficulty, so that they can have the same kind of access and resources. To that end, we have provided $3 million from the nurse recruitment and retention fund that has been given to the RHAs to provide that kind of information to nurses in order to undertake those activities.

The vacancy ratios have been pro vided, and I will provide them again to the Member. He may not have been in committee at that particular time because of, as I understand, his need to cover other committees. I will attempt to provide that to the Member as soon as possible. Mr.

Gerrard: One of the problems that resulted from the closure of Mi sericordia Hospital was that the plastic surgery program, which had been building up and was becoming a major presence at Mi sericordia, was bringing many of the plastic surgeons there, was able to provide plastic surgery with people working together in a pretty effici ent kind of way, was in essence di spersed around a number of hospitals that, for example, at the Health Sciences Centre, this presented or has presented ma jor problems because, in point of fact, it being a major trauma centre, many of the surgeries got interrupted.

There were patients who waited, in at least one instance, for a week before being able to receive surgery, occupying beds unnecessarily, and so on. I would lik e the Minis ter to provide a little bit of an update on where plastic surgery is and where it is going.

4636 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 31, 2000 Mr. Cbomiak: Madam Chairperson, I am aware of the issues, some of the issues surrounding plastic surgery. I am aware of some of the difficulties. I can indica te that they have been brought to the attention of the WRHA in order to try to deal with. The Member appreciates the complex and conflic ting nature of this particular issue. I guess, while I am not trying to be evasive, I am aware of the issue and the difficulties, and we are trying to address them.

I think probably there are a number of initia tives that we are going to be undertaking to try to come to grips with that particular problem. It has been a long-standing problem. It is based on a variety of difficulties both on the pediatric and the adult end, and it is one of the issues that we are asking the WRHA to come to grips with. * (15: 40) Mr. Gerrard: Next I would like to ask the Mini ster about his plans in terms of the use of information technology in communications throughout the health care system.

I am well aware of the huge problems that were present with both the vision and the execution of what was the SmartHealth program proposal, et cetera. But it is clearly an area which is extraordinarily im portant to get right in health care, to spend wisely to provide the kind of technology and information support to all those who have varying roles in the health care system. It is also an area in which the Manitoba Health, in essence, probably has a particularly important role because in many circumstances we are dealing with communication across regions.

We are dealing with the need not only to be able to communi cate but to have systems which can talk readily to another, whether one is talking about health inf ormation or laboratory services or other things. So I would ask the Minis ter what his vision is in inf ormation technology and telecom munications in telehealth and where he is going. Mr. Cbomiak: Madam Chairperson, we have also had an opportunity to discuss some aspects of this during the course of the Estimates debate. I am going from memory here.

I believe during the course of the Estimates debate I indica ted if one were to look at the technological proposals tha

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-1-70
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 1st hansardpdf 70.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	721e2a8c8c72518d0e70e86bbafd8fedcc9b033a

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