LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 28 May, 1986. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon. M. Philli ps: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Standing and Sp ecial Commit tees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , as members are aware, the Western Premiers' Conference begins tomorrow in Swan River. The agenda was announc ed last week. The first item is agriculture and renewable resources.

The second is trade,and The third is western development, diversification and empl oyment. Agriculture is at the top of the agenda for this conference - and that is where it should be. A year ago, the West ern Premiers, at Manitoba's suggestion, began a concerted effort to get th e agricultu ral situation onto the national agenda - and to place it high on that agenda. Canadians in other parts of the countr y now under stand better just how important a healthy farm community is to their own well-being and to the entire national economy .

Since that time, we have seen action by the Federal Government and by Provincial Governments. Just last week, our own Budget announced details of several initiatives in the agricultural sector. But - there are limits on what individual governments can do on their own - particularly small provinces such as Manitoba, with limited financial resources. The root causes of the farm crisis go well beyond our jurisdiction. The bulk of the problems are national and international in scope - particularly a devastating commodity price war between the United States and the European Economic Commun ity.

These circums tances make it even more essential that all governments co-operate wherever we can. Farmers across the west are naturally concerned about the cutbacks in federal agricultural programs recommended in the Nielsen Report. Obviously, we want to discuss Nielsen and the need for the Gov ernment of Canada to live up to its res ponsibilities, but we also want to talk about positive approaches for working better with the Federal Govern ment. I am sure we would all support stepped-up federal efforts to mediate in the international grain export war.

Obviously , an accord is needed to restrict practices such as predatory pricing and massive export subsidies. And, we continue to believe that domestic income stabi lization programs have to be strengthened. The Western Premiers have talked about this problem in 369 the past and our concerns haven't yet been addressed in a satisfactory way. Clear ly, what we need is a comprehensive national farm recovery policy which inclu des adequate immediate action and measures to ensure viability and greater stability for Canadian farmers over the long term. The second item on our agenda in Swan River is trade.

Next Monday night, the First Ministers will be meeting in Ottawa to di scuss the Cana da-U .S. trade negotiations. it's no secret that the provinces have been growing increasingly concerned about an apparent reluctance on the part of the Federal Government to fulfill its November 1985 commitment to "full provincial participation" in the negotiation process. But now, in light of the events of the last few days, I am hopeful that the Prime Minister will recognize just how essential a united, consensus position on trade will be to protecting Canada's interests. We have to stand together .

Last summe r, we in Manitoba felt the impact of U.S. protec tionism at the state level through im port restrictions on hogs. Now, B.C. has been hurt - and additional measures are being threatened. lt is more important than ever that we get the provincial participation issue resolved, and get on with the job of working out the mandate for our trade negotiators - as well as satisfactory arrangements for ratifica tion, if and when a new trade agreement is worked out. The third item on our agenda, West ern Development, Diversification and Employment - covers a wide range of issues.

Last year, for example, West ern Premiers released strong statements on such related issues as transportation, investment, and the need for national tax refor m. We also expressed serious concern about the negative economic and budgetary impact, especially for smaller provinces like Manitoba, of federal transfer payment cutb acks for He alth and Post-Secondary Education - concerns which we repeated at the Annual Premiers' Conference in Newf oundland, and at the First Ministers' meeting in Halifax in November .

I expect those issues to come up again, and we will probably also deal with several other matters, including training and telecommunications. I think the time is right for us to have a wide-ranging, general di scussion of western devel opment opportunities over the medium term. We stern Canada is still far too vulnerable to the "boom and bust" cycles associated with over-reliance on single industries and single resources.

Manitoba is relatively fortunate in that we have a more stable, a more balanced economy than those of our western neighbours, but we are also relatively small, and we can be just as vulnerable to the impact of international market conditions and insensitive national policies. lt has no w been 13 years since the Federal Gov ernment committed itself to working with wes tern

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 provinces to achieve greater diversification in Western Canada. The Prime Minister of the Day called the one­ and-only We stern Economic Opportunities Conference in the summer of 1973, and, for a while, some positive steps were being undertaken on a joint basis by federal­ provincial governments. But that co-operative approach wasn't followed up in a systematic way. The momentum was lost, and now, I think, we must find other ways of restoring that momentum.

I think that another "Western Economic Summit" - involving the Prime Minister and the Premiers of the four western provinces - may be an ideal time, and a time that we should undertake one again. I will certainly be exploring that and other proposals with my colleagues in Swan River. Thank you, Madam Speaker . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I thank the First Minister for his statement on the impending Western Premiers' Conference in Swan River.

There are a number of items that he has put forward in his statement that I think bear comment ary, because it seems as though the Premier is intent on following the same path that he has been following for many months, if not years, of trying to force off all of his problems on Ottawa and trying to talk co-operation, yet practice confrontation. lt see ms to me, Madam Speaker , that all of the things he says here don't stand the test of truth when we look at them in the light of day, to see that he has suggested that his admin istration has taken such a forceful action in agriculture, in attempting to solve the problems of agriculture and to compare that to the real action that has been taken in the Budget that was just released last Thursday evening by the Minister of Finance.

Madam Speak er, he talks about the initiatives, the major initiatives that have been taken - significant new initiatives that his admi nistration has taken - in the field of agriculture, yet all we see is loan money for the farmers who are troubled, beleaguered, and already drowning in a sea of debt. He is offering them more loan money, Madam Speak er.

My colleague, the Member for Arthur, later today will be making the significant com parisions between what this admin istration has chosen as its priorities with respect to agriculture and what is necessarily needed, Madam Speaker , by the people in agriculture today. But the Premier goes further in his statement and he suggests that the root causes of the farm prices go well beyond our jurisdiction, suggesting that they ought to be solved by action in Ottawa.

Well, Madam Speaker , I would hope that he is going to this conference, not only to speak, but to listen, to listen to the Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, to find out what they have done for their agriculture sector. Because, Madam Speaker , what he will find out is that those two provinces have not just said that this is a problem that Ottawa has to solve. Those two provinces have taken the respo nsibil ity to offer significant initiatives on their own to their farmers.

I suggest that he listen and learn that Alberta has put 370 forward a special assistance program for this year alone in excess of $200 mi ll ion to its farm ers; tha t Saskatchewan has put forward a special assistance program, over and above its normal budget for this year alone, to its farmers of in excess of $10 0 million.

He will find that they are taking initiatives to reduce the burden on cost of the farmers of Alberta and Saskatchewan and to leave them in a much more com petitive position than the farmers of Manitoba because of the inaction and the totally inept handling of the farm crisis in Manitoba by this administration, Madam Speak er. Madam Speaker , he talks in terms of full provincial participation in the discussions on trade.

I have asked him on a number of occasions whether he would not have a committee of this Legislature go throughout the province and listen to the people of Manitoba and, indeed, the significant interest groups in Manitoba, before going forward to Ottawa with our position on free trade. Madam Speaker , he will not do that; he will not take that initiative and he will not extend the same courtesy to the people and the significant interest groups of Manitoba that he is asking the Federal Government to extend to him.

But I compliment the Federal Government for including the the provinces, for allowing this Premier to be involved in the setting of trade policy with respect to the country as a whole, and Manitoba in particul ar. Madam Speaker , he refers to the various indications that we've had of concerns with respect to trade in this countr y, the limits that are being put forward with respect to cedar shakes today, with respect to hogs last year.

Those are examples of why we need to have better trade relations with our American neighbour s, better opportunities to expand the markets for our products, not only across the countr y, but in Manitoba in particul ar. Those significant requirements, on the part of Manitoba producers, will result in more markets and more opportunities for them; and Manitoba, I would hope, is going to be arguing that Manitoba should have those incr eased market opportunities for its producers.

I would hope that that's part of the position he'll be taking, but we don't know what position he'll be taking, Madam Speaker , because he has not allowed that position to be aired publicly here in Manitoba prior to going. Madam Speaker , throughout this statement, the Premier has referred to more co-operative relations with the federal administration, but he begins by talking about the cutbacks of Health and Post-Secondary Education support from Ottawa.

I remind you, Madam Speak er, that in fact that is a total misrepr esentation and a total dishonest statement because, in fact, those cutbacks are inc reases in support from Ottawa that this administration has received and will be receiving in the future. You must begin, Madam Speaker, I would hope, by being honest, by being honest with the people that you expect to co-operate with you and to work co-operatively towards solutions that are important to the people of Manitoba. So I thank the First Minister for that statement and I suggest to him, Madam Speaker , that he begin by getting his own House in order.

He begin by laying some credibility for the statements he's going to make in Swan River and in Ottawa by telling the people of Manitoba the truth about how little he really has done

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 for agriculture, and telling them the truth about the transfer payment issue, and just the fact that Manitoba has received more money and will be receiving more money from Ottawa. When he begins with that base of truth, then perhaps we can have more co-operative relations with our neighbours. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of the Environment. HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to table, Madam Speaker, the Annual Report of the Manitoba Environmental Council. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Northern Affairs. HON. H.

HARAPIAK: I'd like to table the Annual Report of the Communi ties Economic Deve lopment Fund for the year ending 1984-85. MADAM SPEAKER: No tices of Mo tion ... Introduction of Bills . . . INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before we move to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have 30 students of Grade 11 standing from the Nellie McCiung Collegiate under the direction of Mrs. Mueller , and this school is located in the constituency of the Ho nour able Mem ber for Pembina. We have 21 students of Grade 5 standing from the Rockwood School.

These students are under the direction of Miss Audrey Mclnt yre and the school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for River Heights. On behalf of all the mem bers, may I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS Child abuse MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier .

Ye sterday I asked the Premier , and I believe, as well, the Acting Minister of Communi ty Services, about the 20 chi ldren who were identified as living in circum stances that put them at high risk of physical abuse, that identification having been acknowledged by the Minister of Commu nity Services and Corre ctions, as well as professionals in the field. Can he now assure the House that the 20 children who had been identified as living in these high-risk situations have now been removed from these home s and placed in safe circums tances? MADAM SPEAK ER: The Honourable Mini ster of Health. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House that I've received this information 371 I took as notice yesterda y.

Of these 22 children, 12 childr en are currently in foster homes; one is in the custody of grandparents on the order of a court; one is in care of grandparents under agency supervisio n; two children are with parents - they've been abused by relatives who were babysitting, the two families are und er su pervision in Winnip eg ; two childr en with mothers who have separated from fathers who were the abusers - all under supervision of the agencies, and the father under a restr aining order from the court; one child living with a 19 -year-old mother, and mother is on extended family and is at work training program at this time; one home with parents and the agency supervising - no current serious concern; one family requir es follow-up, not seen as high risk, visit today is assured; final ly, one case is transferred to a Child and Family Service.

I'm saying that there's also the negotiating - I think that was another question that was asked at the time. A continge ncy plan, in case of a strike, is being considered and I might say that the negotiating is progressing fairly well, satisfactory at this time. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speak er, given the statements by Dr.

Charles Fer guson, the Clini cal Director of the Child Protect ion Centre, with respect to the fact that an infant's life would be at risk if it were returned home, and a social worker is trying to return it to this situation, can the Minister inform the House whether he has investigated that situation and whether or not he will intervene to ensure that that child is not returned to that high-risk situation? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker, that is being looked at at this time by officials and we should have a report fairly soon. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker , given the predictions by Dr.

Ferguson that more of the 34 infant children, who he is aware of and who are at risk, and whom I believe to be all under the age of 15 months, infants, that more of these children will die unless the present child welfare system is changed; is the Minister prepared to take charge and to make some of those changes that have been rec ommended, changes that we have advocated on this side of the House for the past number of years? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I believe that some of the concerns - I think that this has been somewhat exaggerated . I am not saying that it is not a real conce rn.

There have been some changes and, because of the interest of the govern ment, these are known. The same thing as abuse for the spouses now, and also with the seniors. A few years ago these were not known and the department and the Minister is taking this very seriously and doing every thing possible to protect these children. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, would the Minister inform the House as to why half of these childr en who have been referred to, these 34 at-risk children, by Dr.

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 Ferguson, have now been return ed to their homes and again are in danger in homes where they were subjected to this abuse, and are not being checked or monitored, and not sufficient resources are available to do that. Why does the government have this policy of requiring social workers to return these children to the se high­ risk situations? HON. L. DESJARDINS: There is a conflict of information. I just gave the information that, of the 22 children that had been abused, the concern that we have. I explained exactly where they were.

I think that it is clear that every effort is being done to protect these children. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker , I would ask, is the Minister of Health then giving the House his assurance, on behalf of the government , that these 20 at-risk situations , which were re ferred to on t he weekend, and now it appears from Dr. Ferguson that there are 34 infants under 15 months at risk , that all of these children are in safe situations ; is he giving us that assurance? HON. L DESJARDINS: I am certainly not going to to try to play God .

I am saying that everything that is being done , everything reas onable is being done to protect these children, and then the Minister will be discussing this with the doctor. I think it would be much better if these things were brought to the attent ion of the peop le responsi ble, instead of going to the media. We have conflicting information at this time. Home Economics Directorate - status of MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you , Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker , my question is for the Minister of Health .

Recently, the department undertook to eliminate the Home Economics Directorate from the Department of Health. That action ran into considerable opposition from the community at large that uses those services, and it was subsequently put under review by the government . My question to the Minister of Health is: at what stage is the review as to the future of the Home Economics Directorate, what stage is it at ; and is it still an operative wing of government , wherein the Home Economics Directorate can still participate fully with the recipient groups that use their services?

MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker, it was always stated that the expertise would be provided to the people in the field . The decision was made to remove them from the Department of Health . There are some Home Ee. that will remain, of course , that are dealing with nutrition, and they belong in the department; others, it was felt , it was more of a community service or some of the work was done in Agriculture.

The staff are still with the department at thi s time . 372 There is a study being made by the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Community Services , and the Minister responsible for the Status of Women, and a decision will be done fairly soon . There has been an assurance that the expertise will be given to the people in the field. Now I'm not saying that it will be to the satisfaction of everybody . This is being done at this time and , as soon as there is somethin g new, it will be announced . MR. D.

ORCHARD: Then, can I take from the Minister's answer that , pending this review and decision as to where to locate the Home Economics Directorate, they are continuing to function in their normal way and able to carry out their responsibilities of providing support services to various groups throughout Manitoba? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I see no change in the staff. I thi nk there are six people concerned in the Department of Health. There has been no change, and there won't be any change until a final decision is done, until that study by the thre e Ministers that I mentioned is approved . Tabling of Letter MR. D.

ORCHARD: Mad am Speaker, my question is to the Premier . I am in receipt of the letter from a concerned individua l, and I will quote an operative paragraph as my

preamble , Madam Speaker, and table the letter . This is a lett er to the Premier . "The annual workshop for the 28 Field Home Economists in Health and Agriculture is to tak e place in Brandon starting June 3rd . This is the major prog ram planning and training event for the coming year.

The four specialists" - which we have been disc ussing with the Minister of Health right now - "affe cted have been told not to attend this important event." Following the Minister's answer that nothing is changed within the Department of the Home Economics Directorate, can the Premier answer why these people have been refused attendance to a meeting which plans their activities for the next fiscal year? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker , if that decision was made, it was made by the staff in the departmen t.

Let me say that , to attend any meetings at any time, the staff of any department has to get the proper permission. So I can check in to see what the reason was for that. Ther e was no instruction for the staff, for these people to stay there, and I'll find out more about it and give the information to the House . MR. D.

ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, my question to the Premier : will the Premier attempt to get the act together within his Cabinet Committee of the Minister of the Status of Women, the Minister of Health , the Minister of Agriculture so that the staff in the depar tment know what this government intend s to happen with the Home Economics Directo rate? On the one hand , we have the Minister of Health saying their functions can continue on; and, on the other hand, we have them being refused to attend an important planning conference. Will the Premier get

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 control of his Cabinet Ministers and allow these people to function as they are being paid? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker, the First Minister and the Ministers are in control. I just finished explaining what the situation is and, when a decision is made, it will be announc ed to the House. I might say that, in the time of my honourable friend, how many home ec workers did we have. That wasn't even considered a service. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet on a point of order. MR. C. BAKER: No, a question. Thank you, Madam Speak er.

MADAM SPEAKER: The honourable member was interrupting the Honourable Minister of Health. The Honourable Minister of Health . . . Sorry, the Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

My supplementary then for the Minister of Health is: in view of the fact that he has now blamed staff within the Department of Health for the decision to refuse attendance by the Home Economics Directorate at the Brandon mee ting, will he, as Minister of Health, pass the word to those respo nsible staff who made this erroneous dec ision, and allow those home economists to attend the conference in Brandon, as they have in the past? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker, first of all, let me say that I am not blaming staff. I am saying a decision was made by staff. I didn't know anything about ...

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Do you want the answer, or are you going to give me the answer also? The first time I heard about it was tod ay. I'm going to check to see the reason why. The point that I made, that it's not automatic that people could go to any convention or anything. If they work for the depart ment, they might be needed in the depar tment. Free Trade MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. Mr.

Premier, in that your Conferences, both this weekend and next week, are going to deal with the most critical issue of free trade affect ing Canada and, in particul ar, this province, can we be assured that, like Quebec, Ontario and Saskatchewan, you have set up expertise within your office to give you all sides of the free trade issue? 373 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, there had been a number of initiatives that the Member for River Heights may not be aware of.

Within the Depart ment of the Minister resp onsible for Industry, Trade and Te chn olo gy, there have been a series of meetings through the Economic Advisory Council with various constituent groups within the province, exchanging information and receiving information. Secondly , there has been the tabling of a report which, I understand, is in the Leg islative Libra ry, by Professor Barbour pertai ning to the impl ications of free trade insofar as the Province of Manitoba - no deletions there from either, Madam Speaker, all paragraphs included in that report.

In addition, Madam Speaker, there is continuing monitoring insofar as Manitoba is concerned as to potential impl ications of agreements that might be arrived at between the United States and Canada, and their particular impact upon the Province of Manitoba. MRS. S. CARST AIRS: A supplementary question, Madam Speaker, does the Premier not think it important that, because of the magnitude of this particular issue, that he in fact have an adviser at all times to be working just in this specific field? HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, we do have advisers in respect to the issues pertai ning to free trade within the Department of Industry, Trade and Te chnology that have been directly advising both the Minister and myself in regard to the free trade discussions.

I think what the Member for River Heights is ref erring to is the need for the province to appoint an individual to represe nt Manitoba insofar as the negotiations are concern ed, which may includ e provincial represe ntation around the table or may not, depending upon the consequenc es of the discussions that will take place Monday evening involving the Prime Minister and the Premiers of Canada. The member is right, we have not appointed a negotiator to represent Manitoba around whatever the final formalization of the discussions will be. Gasoline prices MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Riel. MR. G.

DUCHARME: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to Consumer and Corporate Affairs Min ister . During the elec tion, there was an announcement on February 12 , 19 86: "NDP promises lower gas prices for Manitobans." The Consumer and Corporate Affairs Minister announced on April 11 , 1986 that an interim report of Costas Ni cola ou, a commis sioner appointed under The Trade Practices Act, recommended that the retail price of gasoline in Ma nitoba be regulated. Cabinet chose not to do so at that time." Could the Minister advise us when we will receive that interim report?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, I am deligh ted that one honourable member over there now has shown some interest in that question. I'll be happy to furnish him with a copy of the report as soon as I can get one from my office for him. MR. G. DUCHARME: A supplement, Madam Speaker. I was also referr e d to a final report, can the Minister tell us when he expect s the final report to be completed? HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, I'm not in a position to give . . . I don't think that was a funny question, I think it deserves a serious answer.

Madam Speaker, I continue to hear mem bers deriding my opportunity to provide a concise and serious answer to a very important question. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, just yesterday I met with Dr. Costas Nicolaou to review with him the parameters for the complete study and I have an assurance tha t the study can be completed in approximately six months - that's an approximate time frame - and I have provided Dr. Nicolaou with instructions to proceed.

As soon as that report has been received and considered by government, of course, it will be made public as well. Grasshopper Infestation MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. C. BAKER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My que stion is to the Minister of Agriculture. In the recent heat wave that we've had across the west, would he tell us what his department is going to be doing about the potential severe grasshopper threat? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker , I thank the honourable member for the question.

In view of the warm weather that we've experienced, I can report that grasshoppers are hatching in the province and our staff are out in the field doing the monitoring that is necessary.

As we ll, we will continue to have the student assistance that we've had in the past; and we have, throughout the winter months, been working with the municipalities, as we did last year, to try and make sure that a co-ordinated effort , in the event that the heat wave does continue and the out break is severe, that we will be able to be on top of the situation to provide the kind of co-ordi nated approach we did last year, in the control of grasshoppers. Manfor Annual Report MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. 374 MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker .

I have a que stion for the Minister respons ible for Manfor. Could the Minister indicate when we will receive a copy of the Annual Report of the Manfor organization? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker, I believe I will be able to table that report within the next two weeks. White Spur Drain MR. J. DOWNEY: I thank the Minister for that answer, Madam Speaker . I have another question to the Minister responsible for Water Resources. There is a major drainage project being proposed just across the US-Manitoba boundary, on the Souris River, called the White Spur Drain.

A meeting was held last week, I believe in Bismarck, Madam Speaker, to received objections. Has the Minister, on behalf of the people of Manitoba, made represe ntation to the United States on that proposed drain? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Natural Resources. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, I would like to take that specific question as notice. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Madam Speaker, when he takes the que stion as notice, would he also make an assessment of the impact that it may have, both environmentally and quantity of water which may be put on to the farmers and the people in the Souris River basin in Manitoba, when he's looking into that matter? HON. L. HARAPIAK: I will take that as notice as well. Thank you. Small Business Loans Fund MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. E. CONNERY: Ye s, to the Minister for Business Development and Tourism.

In the Budget Address, it was announced that there would be a $50 million Small Business Loan Fund, $10 million for this year, a very pathetic amount for the industry. lt is also not clear if it is an interest rate reduction or a lending of last resort. Can the Minister give us the criteria for the fund? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Housing. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Thank you, Madam Speak er. I don't think that the business community is going to think that this benefit that's going to be made

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 available to them is pathetic, I think they're going to welcome it. lt's one of the things that demonstrates this province's recognition that small business is one of the most important factors and tools for this economy. Madam Speaker, we are presently in the process of sett ing up some meetings to have some discussion with representatives of the small business community so that we can get some feedback and information from them on things that they need and recommendations they're going to make. When we have done that, we will be making announcements about the program. MR. E.

CONNERY: The amount of money is going to make sure that the small business stays small. Can the Minister tell us who is going to admi nister the fund? HON. M. HEMP HILL: Ma dam Speaker, I think I indicated that when we have com pleted this level of consultation we will be announcing all matters relative to handling of the fund. They'll all be announced at the same time. A MEMBER: That's what you said about Main Street. Nuclear Waste Repository MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for lnks ter. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have a question for the First Minister.

Back in the earlier part of this year, the First Minister had a couple of mee tings with th e Governor of Minnesota and also of North Dakota in regard to the potential dev elopment of nuclear waste storage facilities within the Red River basin in Minnesota. Has the Min ister received any word at all, today or in the recent past, from Washington in regard to their proposal of the Department of Energy to build nuclear waste repositories in Minnesota? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I thank the Honourable Member for lnk ster for that question, which is very timely in view of information just received from the offices of the Governor of Minnesota, Governor Perpich, who has indicated to us that the United States Department of Energy will be announcing today that the second nuclear waste repository program will be indefinitely suspended. This is indeed good news for Manitobans and I think each and every member in this Chamber can take pleasure in the fact that such announ cement will be made today. lt is in the interest of Manitobans.

I would like at this time to thank all Manitobans that joined together to express their opposition to the proposals to locate such a repository in the Red River basin. Also, Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the leade rship of the Right Honour able Joe Clark, who co­ operated with the Manitoba Government in expressing opposition to this move. 375 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnk ster, with a supplementar y. MR. D. SCOTT: On a supple mentary question, I'd first like to cong ratulate the First Minister and also the Minister of Environment on their efforts. MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question. MR.

D. SCOTT: On a supplementary question, can the First Minister assure the people of Manitoba, as well, that within our boundaries we at no time will, under his jurisdiction and leadersh ip, ever permit the storage of nuclear waste underground in Manitoba? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, as I've indicated on previous occasions, and again state, that this government will oppose any effort from any source to establish any storage facilities that would be utilized for the purpose of storing a nuclear waste repositories in Manitoba.

Rural Municipalities - funding to MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Ve rendrye. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Minister of Finance, in his Budget Address, announc ed a program to assist rural Manitoba commun ities in replacement of deter iorating infrastructure. My question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs is, what level of funding will be provided for the 1986-87 period? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Municipal Affairs. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

As you are aware, that. program has been announc ed in the province at the present time, has hir ed a consultant to deter mine the nature of that particular program. The funding for that will follow once the guidelines for the program have been determined. MR. H. PANKRATZ: My supplementary question is, what amount of funding is in the Budget for the 1986- 87 seaso n? HON. J. BUCKLAS CHUK: Those fund s th at are available for the development of ru ral Ma nitoba projects, as been funded through the Department of Municipal Affairs, will be dealt with during the time of the Estimates.

The members opposite will have ample time at that time to discuss previous programs and programs that are antici pated for the improvement of rural Manitoba. Lotteries MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Charleswood. MR. J. ERNST: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 I have a question for the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation. In light of the rapid growth in lottery revenues and the concerns expressed by the public about how lottery profits are expended, does the Minister intend to table the Report of the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation, presently on our desk today, before a Legislative Commit tee of the House? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Lotteries . HON. J.

WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank the member for his question and, as he indicated, he has received a report and will, no doubt, be studying that report very thoroughly. In terms of the process for Estimates, we are in th e process of developing the best option for considering lotteries in the Estimates process and I will be able to inform the member very soon, In the near future. MR. J. ERNST: Madam Speaker, I have a second question for the same Minister. I'd like to quote from the Winnipeg Free Press of May 8, 1986, from a column from Mr. Carr, dealing with lotteries.

I quote the Minister saying, "The respon sibility of gov ernment is to make sure that it is done fairly , that nobody is ripped off, and that the process is open to public scrutiny." Now, in light of the Minister's answer that she's not going to table it before a comm ittee, Madam Speaker, is she in tact not saying they are not telling the truth to the Free Press? MADAM SPEAKER: Order please.

Beauchesne Citation 362, for the member's information, says that "it is the Members's duty to ascertain the truth of any statement" from a newspaper report "before he brings it to the attention of the House." Forgiven loans MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker . My question is for the Minister of Finance. Order­ in-Council 351 details a list of businesses who had loans deemed uncollectible by the government, and thus, having been written off.

Seven businesses are listed out of a total of 168,481 that have been written off - they take into account 41,000 of that amount. The remainder of 127,413 is unidentified as to which companies and which busine sses had their loans written off. I wonder if the Minister could provide us with a list of those companies and organizations that had their loans written off? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: I can review the information with respect to that Order-in-Council.

As I re call, that relates to the uncollectible loans under the Inter est Rate Reduction Program, and I would just ask him if that was Order-in-council 351/85 or '86? MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , 351 of '86 and I'll just table it for the Minister if he would like it to fac ilitate his responding. 376 Nuclear Waste Repository MR. G.

FILMON: A further question, I wonder if, in view of the announc ement the Premier has made today with respect to the welcome news about the indefinite defe rral of plans for the nuclear waste repository in the central region of the United States, I wonder if that now means the government will be able to close its information office on that topic? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I think that is a very reasonable assu mp tion, as long as at the conclusion of today we can rest , fully satisfied that this is in fact the end of the proposals, as has been indicated to us.

MR. G. FILMON: Does that indicate that the Premier is uncertain that this had indeed been indefinitely cancelled? HON. H. PAWLEY: I indic ated a few moments ago that the information conveyed to us by the office of the Governor of the State of Minnesota, Governor Perpich, by the way, a very fine democrat, Madam Speaker, a very progressive democrat - who we have enjoyed a very cordial relationship - was to the effect that that announcement would be made this afternoon.

I welcome that indication of announcement and, of course, I will want, as all members will want, to read care fully the announcement and the copy of said as soon as we can. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, I wonder if the First Minister could indic ate how much will be saved as a result of the closure of that office? HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I think it's important, before we jump to over-hasty conclusions, as I indicated, that we re-read the exact terms of the ann oucement. lt is my hope, as a result of that announcement, that obviously the monies that are provided for will be saved, but we will be reading the announcement which is being made this afternoon with interest. CRISP Program MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Finance. HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Madam Speaker, a few days ago I took, as notice, a que stion from the Honourable Member for Gl adstone with regard to the costs antic ipated this year for the enhancement to the CRISP program. At that time, I indicated I thought it was about $2 million. lt's estimated at $2.5 million. Liability insurance coverage MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon We st. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker, I would just like to carry on with a question asked earlier in this Session

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 by the Honourable Member for Riel and direct a question to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. The question has to do with the res olution passed by the council of the City of Brandon respecting the inc rease in the cost of liability insurance.

Madam Speaker, in view of the fact that boat rental operators in thi s province are facing horrendous incr eases in liability insurance rates, and that threatens their businesses and access to their busine sses by their customers who, for the most part, are tou rsts; and, in view of the fact tha t the Federal Min ister of the Environment and the Federal Minister of Justice are taking this matter seriously and they recognize the urgency of the situation and are looking at the options open to them, will the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs now take this matter seriously and consider the options that are available to him and report back to this House?

MADAM SPEAKER : The Hon ourable Mi nister of Labour . HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, I thank the honourable member for the question, however I reject the premise in the question that this government and this Minister does not take some serious concern about the issue of the very significant rise in costs of insurance in this count ry. That is not fact. We are concerned about that but, as I indicated earli er, it's not a matter where there's a simp le solution to it. There have been suggestions made that government intervened, capping liabil ity.

That's one course of action that someone may think is appropriate but, of cou rse, that affects the rights of others as well. We are looking at that question. We will have to consider - (Interject ion) - We ll, one of the honourable members says how long? I don't thin k mem bers opposite want snap decisions made by govern ment. They want consultation; they want consideration. I think they want considered action on the part of government and that will be our cou rse of act ion. MR. J.

McCRAE: Madam Speaker, I would be the first to agree with you that the question period is not the place to debate this issue and the Minister seems to want to debate it no w. My question - I am asking a question, Madam Speaker - and that question is, has the Minister instructed his officials to begin the process of studying this situation and maybe carrying on a debate within the departm ent so that the Min ister can report something concr ete to this House?

For instance, has he asked his officials to examine the possi bi lity of es tablishing a fund to protect policyholders in the event an insurance company should collapse? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Min ister of Consumer and Corpor ate Affairs. HON. A. MACKLING: I know the honourable memb er the other night was criticizing this administration for a significant budgetary deficit and now I hear him talking about our providing a very significant fund. 3n MADAM SPEAKER: Order , please.

Obviously the Honourable Minister would like to answer the question and if the Honourable Minister would like to answer the question, he should not provoke debate. The Honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, I will merely reply in tone and in content similar to the que stion put. Obviously the member expects that we should enunciate polic y in answer to questions from him. That is not the course of action of this government. We will look at issues; we will deve lop policies and we will announce them in due course. MR. J.

McCRAE: Madam Speaker, the Mi nister's answer still reflects an intention to do these things. The question, Madam Speaker, was has this process begun? I don't want to know what they might do six months down the road or a year down the road, Madam Speaker. The question was very simple, has the process begun? If this Minister can't answer , maybe the Minister of Tourism can answer because it has a very serious impact on the industry for which he is responsible. Another option that might be available, and I wonder if the Minister . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Does the Honourable Member have a question?

This is not a time for debate. MR. J. McCRAE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Is the Minister's department also intending, at some point in the future, or has the department already be gun looking into the possibility of legislating standards for dete rmining liability and amounts awarded by the court? HON. A. MACKLING: I could answer, yes, to all of what the honourable member said because all of the options, as I indi cated earlier , all of the options open to government will be considered. Letter of Bill McKay -response to MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Native Affairs. I ask the Minister if he has responded to a person by the name of Mr. Bill McKay in regard to a request to do something about a cheque which he received, and has not got payment for for services he has given through the Winn ipeg Council. Has he responded to that letter? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mini ster respon sible for Native Affairs. HON. E. HARPER: I will take that as notice because I have some information on that and I'll bring it forward in a couple of days or so. MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired.

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 The Honour able Member for Tho1npson. MR. S. ASHTON: I would like to ask leave of the House to make a non-politic al statement. (Agreed) NON-POLI TICAL STATEMENT MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Today marks the 25th Anniversary of the founding of Amnesty International. As members of this House will be aware, Amnesty International is an independent, impartial, non-political organization working for the protection of basic human rights throughout the world.

Of course, as mem bers of this House will also be aware, one of its most recent campaigns has been for the abolition of torture throughout the world. An indication of the stature of the organization is the fact that it was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977. I would note, for members of this Ho use, that it was founded by a British lawyer , Peter Benenson, in 1961 and now involves thousands of people in literally doze ns of countries throughout the world. In fact, there are more than 500 people who are supporters of Amnesty International and active in that organization here in Manitoba.

I'm sure I speak for all mem bers of this House in commanding Am nesty International for its fine work over these past 25 years and wishing it many more success ful years to come. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I move, seconded by the Member for Sturgeon Creek, THAT under Rule 27, the ordinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public impor tance, namely , the crisis in the child care and protection system. MOTION presented.

MADAM SPEAKER: Under Rule 27 (1), I have received proper notice from the honourable member that he intended to make this motion and the honourable member has five minutes to explain his arguments in favour of the urgency of his motion. MR. G.

MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I appreciate that under Beauchesne, a matter of this type must be so pressing that public inter est will suffer if it is not given immediate attention; that urgency means urgency of debate when the ordinary opportunit ies provided by the rules of the House do not permit the subject to be brought on early enough and public interest demands a discussion take place immedia tely.

Madam Speaker, what could be more urgent for this House to discuss than the fact that children are dying in homes where the agencies know those homes pose high risks, and when we learned today of predictions from child care experts that more are to come, Madam Speaker, unless the system is changed. lt is a matter, Madam Speaker, that must be discussed immediately. The Honourable Minster of Health, Madam Speaker, cited some statistics but gave this Ho use no assurances. 378 The information he gave to this House is information that he got from the Department of Com mun ity Services, Madam Speaker.

The information that we get from that department on this whole issue has always been wrong. This is a department that has mismanaged this whole issue for a number of years now, Madam Speaker. They recently cited statistics, for example, with respect to child abuse. There are other, more important statistics, Madam Speaker. The Childrens Hospital cites statistics for the Child Protect ion Centre of 796 cases of child abuse for 1985, com pared to the statistics brought forward by the Community Services Department.

I have a letter, Madam Speaker, from the Minister of Community Services from last fall, dated October 30, 1985, where I criticize this very policy and she wrote back indicating: "As to my polic y, as you should know, we are trying to give child care workers the option of putting resources into the home and working with families to keep the famil ies togeth er, but this in no way," and that is underlined, "implies that children are kept in families when there is a danger of abuse." Madam Speaker, we learned last week , and the Minister took the question as notice on Monday - the Minister of Community Services, not the Acting Minister - as to why did the Northwest Agency not know that the two-and-a-half year old who was killed last week was within their boundaries.

There was a complete lack of commun ication between the agencies, Ma dam Speaker. We learned that there are 20 children in high-risk situations on the weekend through Dr. Eric Ellis, a child psychologist in the child care field. We learned today, Madam Speaker, that there are 34 high-risk infants at Children's Hospital. We learned that a social worker is trying to return an infant to parents even though the doctor, Dr. Ferguson, is telling them this baby will be killed if she is returned. Madam Speaker, I point out to members of the House that the 34 high-risk infants that are referred to by Dr.

Ferguson are infants under 15 months, and those are only at the Children's Hospital. Those are the only ones they have knowledge of. There are many more obviously , Madam Speaker, who have not been brought forward. We learned, Madam Speaker, that more of these childr en on this list, the ones that they know of, will die unless practices in the child welfare system are changed, changes which we have been advocat ing for a numb er of times. We have advocated a centralized specialized child abuse team with enough resources to deal with this extremely impo rtant problem, Madam Speaker.

We are talking about healthy happy babies born into this world who are subsequently maimed and left physically or mentally disabled, Madam Speaker . Surely to goodness, this should be the highest priority for government funding. This is the practice that must be changed, Madam Speaker. lt hasn't been changed despite efforts we have made over a number of years to have it changed. The Acting Minister still gets what I suggest is incorrect information from that department, Madam Speaker. This is a matter that urgently requi res debate in this Legislature.

There could be no matter more urgent than this, I suggest to you, Madam Speaker, and I therefore suggest to you that the motion before you is in order. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader.

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 HON. J. COWAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I listened carefully to the comments of the Honourable Member for St. Norbert and must mention that it was my unders tanding that when a mem ber rises to speak for five minutes on the matter, the member is rising to speak to the urgency of the matter and not to the matter itself, which he did not do. What we do have in fact is a serious situation . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The member has five minutes to state his case. May I please hear his case? HON. J.

COWAN: What we do have here is a serious situation, certainly; but it is a situation which is being dealt with by the government in a serious and a competent manner.

What the mem ber has done, by asking for a debate on matters of ur gent pu blic importance, is suggested that there is not an opportunity now before the House for him or his colleagues to speak to this particular issue because the motion itself, and it's important to review not only the motion but the purpose of it, the rules governing it and the provisions for it, is to set aside the ordinary business of the House to discuss a matter of urgent public importance. Firstly, the matter must be so pres sing, as the member indic ated, that the public interest will suffer if it is not given immediate atte ntion.

Indeed, the matter before us is an urgent one and an important matter and the government is now, right now, and in fact for some time has been dealing with the issue outlined on a priority basis. T he Acting Minister stood up today, and the Minister has stood up on other occasions, indicating that it is a concern and we are acting on it on that matter in that way. The Minister of Health today, as a matter of fact, listed a number of specific act ions that are already under way. So while the matter is pres sing, the public inter est is being considered and is being acted upon by the government.

The suggested se tting aside of the ordinary business of the House would do little to add to what is already being done by this government to respond to this serious situation. I believe we are doing a good job in doing that. The rules governing the sett ing aside of the ordin ary business are quite clear. The urgency of the debate does not refer to the matter itself, which the Member for St. Norbert should know, but rather to whether or not the ordinary business of the House would allow for an early review of the matter during the normal activities of this Legislature.

Of course, now being in the middle of the Budget Debate, there is ample opportunity for mem bers oppo site to debate the issue. There was ample opportunity for members opposite to discuss the issue, to ask questions during the question period, but they saw fit to ask questions about a whole series of other issues, even although they were given full and compl ete answers by the Acting Minister. So there are many opportunities provided for in the normally scheduled activities to discuss the matter. The Member for St. Norbert, I understand, has not taken

part in the Budget Debate. He can do so follo wing the Minister of Labour finishing his remarks.

There are many other ample opportunities available to them. 379 So in suggesting that the motion to set aside the ordinary business of the House be considered out of order , I want it to be clear that it is not because members on this side do not believe this to be a pressing issue, do not believe this to be an important issue, do not believe this to be an issue of public concern; but we believe fully that the Mi nister responsible, th e department responsible, and the gover nment, indeed, is acting on this issue in the manner in which it should be, and we are suggesting that the debate be ruled out of order because the Mem ber for St.

Norbert has not in any way in his remarks suggested that there are not other ample opportunities for him to make his comments known, which we would be pleased to hear and listen to. Hopefu lly, he can add, through his advice, some suggestions and comments that we may want to take into consideration. But he has that opportunity to do so, I hope he will do so during the Budget Debate and, for that reas on, Madam Speaker, I would suggest that this motion is in fact out of order. SPEAKER'S RULING MADAM SPEAKER: Order please.

As mem bers have referred to, according to Beauchesne Citation 286, "The specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, ... " - and I'll skip part of this rule and go to - ". . . must be so pressing that public interest will suffer if it is not given immediate attent ion." And Beauchesne Citation 287 states: " 'U rgency' within this rule does not apply to the matter itself, but means 'ur gency of debate' when the ordina ry opportuniti es provided by the rules of the Hous e do not permit the subject to be brought on early enough and public interest demands that discussion take place immedia tely.

" Consequen tly, there are two major conditions to be satisfied and I am satisfied that there is no other ordinary opportun ity, becau se: 1. The Budget Debate is relatively restricted in terms of relevance; and 2. There is no certain knowledge as to exactly when the Estimates of the Department of Communi ty Services will be before the Commit tee of Supply. am satisfied that the matter is so pressing that public inter est will suffer. Therefore, I find the Member's motion is in order and of urgent public importance. Shall the debate proceed? All those in favour, say aye. All those opposed, say nay.

Under the rules of a matter of urgent publi c importance, each member has 10 minutes in which to discuss the issue. The Honou rable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I am pleased to be able to address this subject matter, this very most important subject matter. The whole issue of child care, child protection and child abuse has been before this Legislature for a number of years. From time to time now, we have seen this issue surface brie fly. We continually have expressed concerns that go back, for example, to the moratorium on the adoption of Native chil dren wher ein th is

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 government, through its policies, wer_, going to prohibit the Pitzel family from continuing to care for a child in that situation; a decision that was approved by less than a quorum of the former Children's Aid Board appointed by this government. We expressed concerns then, but the government had a concern about keeping that child within the Native communi ty that overlooked the best interests of that child. Other issues have come up from time to time, Madam Speaker, when the whole matter of the disintegration of the Children's Aid Society was put forward by this gover nment.

We said at that time that by breaking up the specialized child abuse unit that the Children's Aid Society had and going to this regional system, there were measures that were going to have to be taken to deal with this whole problem of child abuse, and they were not taking it. What happened was that the government went into a system of generic social workers. They cut out the specialists in child abuse and specialists in other areas that dealt with adoptions or foster homes, but most important to this debate, they cut out the specialists in child abuse.

We have learned that there is a lack of training for child abuse workers. Madam Speaker , there simply has to be specialized people dealing with this particular subject. They all have good intentions, I'm positive of that; I'm not critical of the people who work within the system; they all have good intentions, but not all of them like to do that kind of work or are trained and qualified to do that kind of work. lt's now turning up in the comments that we read today from Dr. Ferguson again. That is the main area, Madam Speaker .

If this deb ate does one thing, if it can persuade the government that they simply have to turn to a system of specializ ed child abuse workers with the resources, Madam Speaker, to properly care for the childr en that are known to be in these high-risk situations, then this debate - (Interjection) - The Minister for Hig hways says, spend more. That's exactly what I'm saying, Madam Speaker, spend more. Why should this not be one of the highest priorities of our citizens?

Society will support the government, I am positive of that. lt's just a matter of re-est ablishing some priorities within their existing spending levels. If this debate will just do that, it will encourage the government to create and approve those special ized child abuse workers, to give them the resources to do the job. All reports are that many of the workers, and particularly the workers in the nort hwest in the central areas of the city, do not have the resources to do the job; that's mainly where the largest number of problems are. They're the people who need the assistance to do the job.

There is, I think, Madam Speaker, a block in the Minister of Community Service's department. I must say that with respect to the Assistant Deputy Minister in that department, Mrs. Aleda Turn bull appears to have certain fixed views and attitudes and simply will not listen to the people who work in the field: the child care workers, the Child Protection Centre, the doctors, Dr. Ferguson, Dr. McRae, Dr. Ellis, all of the people who see these children and have to deal with the effects of what has happened to these children.

That appears to be, to me, looking in from the outside, Madam Speaker , and speaking to people who work all over in this field, one of the main blocks to changes within the 380 system, changes which Dr. Ferguson is reported in the newspaper as saying today - that more children on this list of his 34 high-risk situations will die unless practices in the child care welfare system are changed. Madam Speaker , to the government's credit, a number of the changes that they have made in the system are supported.

Frankly, in my discussions with people who work in that field, the whole question of regionalization of services is not seen to be that bad an idea as long as you give it the resources to do the job. But they have not been given the resources to do the job.

So, we have a situation that we saw last week where a two and a half year old girl was murd ered, regrettably and unfortuna tely , who was not known by the Northwest Family Services to be within the bounda ries of that agen cy, although she was referred there by the central agen cy. lt was known that that situa tion was a hi gh-r isk situati on. lt was being investigated with respect to teenagers living in the home. If anything points out the need for this centralized, special ized unit of child abuse workers to deal overall in the total city, then that is a case for that.

Madam Speaker, how many childr en have died in this province within the last six or seven months as the result of abus e or neglect? I received some information today that there are seven deaths in the last six months since the Ruby Adriaenssens murder - not counting her - that one infant is in hospital, brain dead, and that case is under police investigation which prevents me from making some comments that would indic ate that there was a situation there that was known to be or should have been known to be a high-risk situation because of previous instances. Madam Speaker, we have those reports. We have Dr.

Ellis' comments about 20 high-risk children. We have 34 high -risk infants today under 15 months referred to by Dr. Ferguson. We have an instance where Dr. Ferguson has to intervene and he doesn't know what the result is, whether that child has been returned to the home where it suffered risk. That points up the concerns about the child abuse policies and programs and management. Surely, a social worker acting on her /his own view of the government policy of apparently trying to keep families together in their homes shouldn't be making that kind of decision on his/her own.

This was supposed to be a decision made by a group of experts, the child care workers, the doctors, the psychiatrists, the psychologists, etc. The rules that the government has set up are not being foll owed if a social worker on his/her own initiative is re turning a child to a high-risk home situation without the consent of the gr oup of pro fess ionals who are suppo sed to be reviewing each of these individual cases . Madam Speaker , all of these questions have been raised just in the last five days, and this isn't it.

These are issues that have arisen over the past two or three years on this particular subject . I'm not going to say that the government hasn't tried to do some thing in this field, they have tried to do some thing in this field, but this area of child abuse appears to need correct ion. lt needs more tra ining, more resources, more centraliza tion, more specialization in order to solve these important problems. lt should be a matter of priority for government spending that if these resources are required in this area, the people working in this field have 50-60 caseloads, and to deal with one of

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 these abused children cases, Madam Speaker, in a lot of the cases, you're dealing with childr en who have been partially abused already, who require daily care. You're trying to tell me I have little time left, Madam Speaker. Thank you. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. The Honourable Minister of Employment Services whom I saw second. HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, I would like to join in the debate. I want to reiterate what our House Leader has stated. That is that we certainly share the concerns of th e Ho nourable Memb er for St.

Norb ert and memb ers of the Opposition with regard to a very important and a very serious issue, a very regrettable issue, a problem that exists in our society today. MR. G. MERCIER: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I know it gets warm in here and, if it's a consensus MADAM SPEAKER: The . . . MR. G. MERCIER: Just on a point of order, Madam Speaker, with respect to this ungodly noise that we have in the House. If it's the will of all the members to have it, I won't oppose it, but it makes it very difficult for anyone to hear a speaker. Perhaps it should be turned off.

MADAM SPEAKER: Perhaps I could just explain before the Honourable Minister begins, the usual practice is to have the air conditioner on on the opposite side of the person who's speaking. But if tha t is too incon venient for members, we can dispense with it unl ess I get an indication that people are getting unco mfortable. The Honourable Government House Leader, is that satisfactory? HON. J. CO WAN: Ye s, we would agree with the Opposition in this regard, and perhaps we can give some further discussion at another time to the issue as to how we keep the Chamber . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Right.

In that case, we'll turn the air conditioners off and, if honourable members want to bring it to my attention later, we . A MEMBER: We 'll bring it. MADAM SPEAKER: As long as it doesn't generate heat and confusion according to the rules. The Honourable Minister of Emplo yment Services. HON. L. EVANS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I was saying earlier , I agree with the concerns exp ressed by the honourable mem bers opposite, particularly the Honourable Member for St.

Norbert, and I echo the comments and statement made by our House Leader, that we on this side are very concerned about the problem of child abuse. lt's a very serious issue, and indeed some of the events that have occurred in the past while are indeed very regrettable. 381 But I would observe that, in many ways, this is a problem that pervades society not only here but increasingly in other parts of Canada, in other parts of the world. In other words, I think we're seeing a phenomena of increased violence in our society. That indeed is regrettable. I can't exp lain why there is an incr ease in violence.

There are many reaso ns, many answers one could come up with, but I think that is an observation that is valid. In today's society , we have an increase in violence, and we see it in this particular area as well. lt is indeed regrettable. I would say, government would indeed like to have more mone y, more resources for many pr ograms including this program, but I would like to remind the honourable member that the government has taken a number of initiatives over the last several years to be more responsive to the needs of children, to the needs of families throughout the Province of Manitoba.

In fact, I would suspect that, if we made a comparison, you'll find that Manitoba has taken more initiatives to deal with problems of the family, to deal with children's matters, childr en who are having difficulty in whichever way and child abuse included, more than any other province in terms of all the important social programs that we put in place to support famil ies and to look after the welfare of childr en where necessary.

I can only refer to - and I don't have all the figures with me, but we have provided more resources to various agencies, more financial support to various agencies to assist in this regard. Indeed I was very pleased to hear the Honourable Member for St. Norbert agree with our thrust of de centralization of the agencies. I thought I heard him say that - (I nterjection) - but you agreed with the idea of dece ntralization because the point - (I nterject ion) - yes, right.

Because the point is that the dec entralization was intended to provide agencies that would be more responsive to the community needs and to be more in tune with famili es in the area. In fact, there is an elabo rate procedure for broadly­ based comm ittees to the boards of directors of those agencies. There is a proced ure for democratic elections to those boards. Indeed I understand there are various advisory groups around Winnipeg and indeed elsewhere in the province who are in place to assist the agency carry out its resp onsibiliti es. Indeed more resources have been given to the hospitals.

Instructions have been given through the education system and indeed through the medical system to be on the alert for any cases of child abuse. I would suspect, to some degree, the child abuse that we have reported today is a function of a better system of detect ion than was in place a few years back. I think there is some truth to that. MR. F. JOHNSTON: But nothing done about it. HON. L. EVANS: We ll I would not agree with the Member for Sturgeon Creek that nothing has been done about it. The fact is that a lot is being done.

As a matter of fact, Madam Speaker, in order for governments to act properly, governments must study problems and how to dev elop a better system of response. I must say that we have studied it, and we've act ed.

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 I would refer mem bers also to ihe work of Judge Kimelman who has given us a lot of advice which we have accepted in large measure and put into pla ce in large measure. Indeed, I suppose you might argue, we haven't acted on all the suggestions, but I understand many of the suggestions that the judge has made are actively being considered for implementation. But the point is, Madam Speaker, that we have looked at these questions relating to child abuse very carefully, and we have taken action.

We have had more support from Native organizations in the province than ever before and getting cooperation of Native groups, not only in Winnipeg but throughout the Province of Manitoba. Indeed, this government has signed the tr ipartite agreement with the Federal Government and with the Nativ e organizations so that we could es tablish services right on the reserves. Indeed a massive move has been made in that respect and I think, to a large measure, that has had a great deal of success. We have a long way to go indeed.

I would like to say also, when you discuss the matter of dealing with children in cases of difficulty such as this, cases of abuse, it does come down very often to a matter of judgment, judgment on the part of the agen cy, judgment on the part of the doctor perhaps, judgment on the part of the social worker . A lot of this and how you deal with the childr en in need, childr en who need some care and assistance is a matter of the approach of the individual involved, the official involv ed and the group involv ed.

Very often, you do get conflicts of view as to exactly how you should proceed with looking after one particular case. But hopeful ly, with good staff, we do get people that can exercise this judgment. I see my light is flashing. I'm not sure how much time I have, just two or three minutes, so I would like to conclude my remarks by referring very specifically to the fact that we are providing more resources in the area of child and family support. If the Member for St.

Norbert cares to examine the Estimates, Page 34, there is an appropriation under Child and Family Services and, specifically , looking at child and family support, the budget is being increased from $45.334 million to $50.334 million, quite a substantial percentage increase. A good deal of that is going directly to maintenance of childr en and also to external agencies. The increase to external agencies is going up approximately from 16.9 million to 20.5 million.

As I said earlier, Madam Speaker, there are other supports that are being provided, including my own department where we are making a greater eff ort than ever before to help particularly single-parent famili es and to help other families in need through our economic security system, our social security system, and indeed helping breadwinners to get out and obtain work in the labour force. So I say to the honourable member in conclusion, obviously we have great concerns.

We are doing things and the Estimates have provided the Minister with the funds, with the necessary dollars to provide increasing resources in the field generally of child and family support. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. 382 MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank you for letting us have this opportunity to discuss this urgent matter. There is no doubt in the minds of all of us, I am certain, that this is a matter which has to be discussed, and because of recent happenings it is urgent that we do discuss this particular area.

When we read in the paper today that there were an extra 34 children in the Health Sciences Centre which were in a dangerous situation and that one of them was reported as to be put into the situation again, out of which she had come where she had been abused, of course then we knew that something had to be done and it had to be done right away in order to prevent situations such as that.

I think we should maybe take a look at why we are in the situation that we are in at the present time and decentralization certainly plays a big role in the reason why that particular department has the problems it has at the present time. I know that it is difficult to get these organizations to operate when you set up a new agency, but this is now more than two years and there is absolutely no excuse for them to not operate efficiently .

Now what certainly is needed is one very strong central agency which could co-ordinate all the other agencies, and in that way you could also move away some of your high-priced help that you have out there administering these agencies. You could really cut down on a lot of administration and you would have money to look after situations such as this. You have spent millions and millions of dollar s on administration by organizing these six agencies. Now that money ought to go to the children who are placed in situations such as this.

So it is time that the Premier took a good look at this particular department and make certain that something is done, that we get more value out of the monies which are being spent and that we do not run into this type of situation where we find that children are left without proper protect ion, without proper care. This agency I am talking about certainly is needed at this particular time. I think when we take a look at what is happening in other cities - Toronto, which is a much, much larger city than what Winnipeg is - have only one agen cy.

One agency looks after the entire City of Toronto and they're doing a good job. We used to have a rea sonably good job done in Winnipeg when we had one agency looking after the problems of the Children's Aid Society . They were doing a good job. There were some difficulties there, yes, but those difficulties could have been resolved with very little trouble and we would not have had to disrupt the entire department. But now we have a situation that we have and I suppose we have to make the best of the situation as it is.

So that still means that we will need one very strong central agency to co-ordinate the other six agencies. I think it is absolutely appalling when you read the story of the father of this two-and-a-half year old girl that was killed as a result of sexual abuse, that he had been drawing this to the attention of one of the agencies. Now it just so happened that the girl had been placed in a different agency and the message did not get through to that other agency that this girl was in danger. Now this unfortunate happening could have been prevented. Now how many more of these situations do

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 we have? How many more of these situations are we going to tolerate? We have to take action on this right now and I would charge the Premier with the re sponsibi lity of se eing to it that the particular department does take the proper act ion that is required in order to get this situation under control. Thank you. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Urban Affairs. HON. G. DOER: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

There's absolutely no question in anybody's mind in this House that it was a terribly tragic situation with the death of the child last week and there's no question of the fact that the agency allegedly was not aware of the child being placed in that area, is very serious and a situation that we can all look at and must look at and analyze.

I've discussed that situation informally with members of the board, with members of the staff and they are greatly concerned about the situation. ' But I also recall having worked in child welfare and worked with many of the children at risk, that we often had situations where one agency or one branch of the former Children's Aid Society didn't know what the other branch was doing; where the one group of social workers didn't know what the other group was doing; where the Children's Aid Society didn't know what the We lfare Department of the city was doing; where the We lfare Department of the city didn't know exactly what the provincial health situation was going to do.

We 've got to keep improving the situation and communi cation. The police very often lose very critical pieces of information from precinct to precinct that could help us in terms of child abuse and child protection and for years we've been going through this debate of centralized versus decentralized child welfare services and child abuse services.

The police them selves, at one point, left all members of the police responsible for child abuse, then they went to a central child abuse unit - I'm not sure of the current status where they've decentral ized that again to all members of the Juvenile Branch - certainly I think the fact that they've trained as many of their members through the cadet training, etc., in child abuse as a key component, means that all members of the police force are aware of this issue. Similarly with the child welfare agencies.

I know that the training does go on in terms of child abuse. 1 know in each of these six agencies in the City of Winnipeg child abuse is a top priority. I remember at a time when the Children's Aid Society of Winnipeg was broken up into regions and they too had considerable problems, even though they were under one administration, so they came back in one area and had one central ized child abuse unit, part of which eventually ended up at the Children's Hospital of Winnipeg and working with Dr. Ferguson.

We can debate the central versus decentral ad nauseam and I think it's an important debate and I'm glad we're having it this afternoon.

But I think we have to deal with the broader issues in child abuse and never forget the broader issues of child abuse, the causes, all the ways in which we can get to early detect ion, not only through the Provincial Government or the Provincial Government agencies, but all mem bers of our city that work with children at risk or potentially at risk. 383 We have to improve our dete ction in the schools when you know one child is abused, you've got to get to the other children that may be younger because that situation is very serious.

We 've got to continue, and I know we've started that over the years, not just in a political way - I know the members opposite started that - we are continuing it and we're trying to improve that but we must get at the root causes. Ye sterday we had a debate and the Member for Charleswood was opposed to the training in the Core area.

That's a legitimate debate and, yes, it costs a lot of money, but if there are 250 people or 300 people placed out of the Core area training program that were before - many of which were at risk - if there's 350 of those people who are trained and having jobs and their self-esteem changes and their whole dignity changes and the whole attitude of their family changes, we may get less abuse and that's costly, there's no que stion about it. But we have to start changing the cycles that produce the abuse.

We have to get at the causes of abuse, and at the same time we have to do a better job when abuse does take place. The argument about homes and non-homes, or leaving people in their homes or taking them out of homes - it's again a very difficult judgment deci sion, a very difficult judgment decision. I recall, Madam Speaker, when the philosophy was to grab, at first, second or third option, and how many files have the members opposite read that have been dealing with child welfare?

Have many files have you read where children have been taken from their home and placed in 29, 30, 31 foster homes before they turned 12 or 13 years old? There's never been any attempt to make it work at home. They've been in 30-40 foster homes; they commit violent crimes against other people; they commit violent crimes against themselves and you read that file and we say, "God, why didn't we try to make it work at home? If we look at the house they came from, it's a heck of a lot better than the homes we place them in." And that is a judgment decision, not an easy decis ion.

We should never place a child in a place of risk where in fact they are going to be abused to the point of which certainly that child last week in that home took place; but at the same time, it's not an easy issue of when and why and how a child is taken from their home and what supports are produced in terms of the alternative placements. Judge Kimelman - I remember many of these children; there were 80 of them in 19 79 at the Manitoba Youth Centre locked up, many of them 13, 14 years old. We had the highest numb er of children locked up in the country on a per capita basis.

We had Drury Street full of child welfare cases, many of them under 14 years old, and if you look at the pattern, they were taken from their homes at a very early point. I'd like to know what the long-term success was. Judge Kimelman recommended that we move our Children's Aid Societies into reg ions of Winnipeg and increase the resources. Those things have happened. The Children's Aid Societies or the Child Welfare Agencies of Winnipeg are closer to the commun ity. They have good quality staff and the numb er of staff has improved. The member mentions the situation in Toronto.

One must recall that in the City of Toronto that, yes, they

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 do have one Children's Aid Society , but they have another Children's Aid Society in Mississauga; they have another Children 's Aid Society in another borough , because they wanted to keep the agencies as close as possible to many of the communities. The members opposite mentioned the whole area of spending . I read their document, in fact, last night, and they recommended 6 percent spending , and this year we're recommending 10 percent spend ing, but we can get into that debate about how much we're spending . That's rather partisan and rather a game.

We have to build on the experience we have; we must improve the quality of services that we have, but I believe the agencies, the expertise, debate and the tragic circumstances, unfortunately, will help us make our agencies better for the children at risk. Let's not fall into the trap of believing it's central versus decentral or home versus not pulling it away from home. It's a very complicated and tough issue and we've got to continue to improve collectively in this Legislature and in the services we deliver for the childre n at risk. Thank you very much, Madam Speake r.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Just listening to the remarks made by the Minister of Urban Affairs, one can understand why we have problems today. He's talking about a central versus a decentral situation . That's not the issue that brought this debate before the House today . It's abuse of children, how they're handled and where they end up, and should they be turned back to the situation, in theory, they were removed to be protected from. We're not talking about who lost files; we're not talking about some bureaucratic snafu.

We are talking about a very narrow specific area of community's concern, and that concern has no political bounds . If the government thinks they have solved the proble m by simply creating six separate agencies to handle child problems, then they are sadly mistaken. I'm sorry that the Member for Brandon East is not here to hear my comments, but I was ...

I'm sorry , I should not have made reference to the Minister , but the key in all of this was that I was an appointed member to the Children's Aid Board from City Council and was a member of that board for its last three-and-a-half years when it was in existence . You know, the Council of the Children' s Aid Board had the same problems dealing with very sensitive and difficult issues. The Minister of the Day, the Member for Brandon East , sat and was very pious in his statements as they emanated from Broadway.

With every child problem, when every death occurred, he was the first to say, "Your system is failing; your syste m doesn't work . We have a better system. The system should be a community response system; it should be a community sensitivity system ." That's great. They redesigned the system . It's out there and it's working in the communi ty. We're not talking about the amount of additional funds that have to be allocated to this particular problem area .

What we're talking about is a co-ordinated, effective approach to a very important problem. 384 The Minister made reference to the amount of additi onal funds that were being spent today. We are spending more today than we did in previo us years. Of what value is that to the child abuse system? Of what value is that to a child at risk? What we have is a system that is spread across the city. It is identi fying more children at risk, but the system has broken down, once the at-risk situation has been discovered.

The Minister indicated he had put more resources into the hospitals to deal with this specific problem, yet when you read the comments in the press, it is the very hospital, it is the professionals in the field who are complaining that the government is not allowing them to do their job. So it's not the question of it putting on huge additional amounts of money to buy more social workers . Granted, we may need a little more money in certain areas, but in a Budget of $4 billion, I don't think small sums, allocated in this particular area, is that significant that we can't find them.

We can find them for other contracts, for special employment, but we can't find them for this specific area; but what it needs is a co-ordinated working group that will work toward this particular goal. It's to preserve the children who have been found at risk. Reference is made to the police abuse unit . As a lawyer, I've had clients who have been involved with this particular unit and let me tell you that unit works effectively and is very sensitive to the needs of all people who are invo lved in these circumstances; yet they are frustrated with the system because it isn't working.

They are doing only part of the job, but to be successful they have to be part of a whole picture that will be successful and help the children. It's not. The Minister also made reference to the Judge Kimelman Report or reports and what work they have done in making his recommendations come into fruition . I believe this morning, Madam Speak er, Judge Kimelman was on CBC Radio condemning the government for failure to initiate one of the key proposals in his report, a child advocate, one who would take the interests of the child over all others.

He says that his whole set of recommendations in the reports were built on that one specific cornerstone, yet we have the very author of that report condemning the governm ent for their absolute failure to address the most important issue. When we ask the question of the Minister responsible for this department, both in this House and when I was asking in Estimates last year, she advised that she had a committee studying this problem .

We don't need committees studying the problem; we need peop le working together to solve the problem and the Minister has failed to bring abou t the effective means of dealing with this problem. The resources are there; the people are there. All it requires is leadership and it's not being provided. In fact, it's being discouraged. Madam Speaker, when a child is removed from a difficult situation, and that is the first response of most professionals, we want to be able to have an inventory, or at least a resource base in our community, where that child can be housed and taken care of.

I would agree with the Minister of Urban Affairs that it would be far better to try and put the child back into the family setting than into some totally strange home . But

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 it is often that family setting that creates the problem or the relat ed family problem and it isn't to the advantage of returning the child back to that situation . A week ago, I had the privilege of seeing a one or one-and-a-h alf year old child who had been born norma l, but because of the abuse that child had received, that child is now going to be a permanent ward of the community in a special car e home. We believe it's the St. Amant Centre . That child was put back into the situation where it was initially remove d from.

If we can't solve this problem of child abuse and we've recognized it, we know it's a major problem out there, what else are we to do? What good are we to do? We're letting down society . Now we can spend all kinds of money on this particula r situation, but unless we get leadership, cooperation and coordinatio n of the people who are in this field and a priority given by everyone with all the resources , then we're never going to have a solution to this prob lem. Tha nk you. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights . MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

If there was a massive accident at the middle of Portage and Main and it requ ired a number of ambulances , doctors and attenda nts, and a number of police, no one would question the cost. If we had a riot at Stony Mou ntain and had to send in enormous numbers of staff, no one would ask at the time of the emergency : what is it going to cos t? Madam Speaker , we have an emergency in Manitoba because we have people who , unfortunately through economic circumstances or because they don't have parenting skills in many cases, choose to abuse their children .

We have situations in our schools in which teachers abuse children. We have examples almost every day of children who have been sexually abused. It is hard , I think, for each and every one of us to understand the full ramifications of what that kind of abuse means. When my daughter Cathy was in Grade 5, she exper ienced a form of mental abuse . I had a child who would bang her head against the wall and tell her mother and father how stupid she was . This child has just been accepted at Harvard University at the age of 17. This child was the victim of mental abuse .

I have had students who couldn't sit down because they had been beaten so badly. I have watched other childre n with black eyes. I myself was sexually abus ed as a child . No one can tell me that there isn't enough money to deal with child abuse. The question is: how are we going to deal with it? What we have seen in the last year or so, is that the facilities that we have are not working. I don 't think it has been caused by decentralization , but I do think it has been caused by a failure to have a special unit which in fact can meet the needs of the abused child .

I think the abused child needs very highly skilled and trained people, and those are not available in a decentralized program . Other community services, other child welfare services can be provided within that system, and perh aps better than they were being provided for before . Don't allow us to permit children 385 to fall thro ugh the cracks because we have changed the system and have failed to recognize the need s. As to the question of whether children should be removed from homes. Members, it sure ly is a very simple answer .

If it is the need to protect a child or the need to protect parental rights, surely we come down on the side of the child who has no one to speak for them. If we have found that conditions appear to be unacceptable, is that not enough? Do we need to have proof? Do we need to see the welts? Do we need to see the bashed-in head? Let us reach out to each child within our society, accept our responsibility as adults and do whatever is necessary to be done . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-Genera l. HON. R.

PENNER: Madam Speaker , no one can be oblivious to the tragedy surrounding the death of any child under any circumstances . No one can be oblivious to such tragedies wherever they occur , however they occur.

I think we have to recognize that collectively as a society and collectively as a government, as a Legislature, we have a responsibility , wheth er we are dealing with a particular institution that has been identified in this debate or we're dealing for example with the highway system where , regretta bly, far more deaths of children occur in a year than within the system that has been made the subje ct of this emergency debate or in any other institution.

Whether the deaths that we are concerned about occur in foster homes or similar inst itutional or quasi-institutional sett ings or where , as a matter of fact , regrettably more of these deaths occur in the homes of natural parents who haven't hitherto been identified as at risk .

What we do know from each one of the instances I have cited is that no matter how much is spent in terms of resources, there will be cases which fall through the cracks of the system , whether it is the highway safety system , whether it's the child welfare system , whether it's the general societal system and every such case that falls through the cracks for whatever reason is a tragedy and must be a cause of some reflection and the cause of some considerat ion .

But recognizing that is not the same as saying, therefore the answer is somehow or another to holus­ bolus condemn the system we have or simply to say throw more money at that system . I was pleased to note that in what I consider to be a very responsible speech , the Member for St. Norbert did say that there are many good elements in the system we have. I think that it is important to identify them and I'll speak very briefly about them. Then it's important to see where there are areas that can be improv ed and undoubtedly there are .

But, for example , for the Member for River Heights to say - and I'm just using this as an example - that: (

a) we have an emergency; and (

b) there is a failure to have a special unit. Manitoba is identified as the leading province with respect to the development of such special units . It took place as much under the leadership of the former Attorney-General as it did in this administration . We have in fact such units in the Health Sciences Centre , in St. Boniface, in Dauphin, in Brandon and perhaps in one or two other places and these are multi-disciplinOry units in which doctors

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 like Dr. Ferguson and the social workers and paramedics and specialists in the area including generic social workers, i.e. social workers who have specialized in that area, are grouped and they make use of the child abuse registry system which we have in this province, which again is the best in Canada. All of this data is inputted, all of the data that we can possibly get is inputted so that the moment there is a cross-reference indicating an at-risk situation, action is taken.

But there is human error that steps in, and we may have been faced with such a case in the case that gives rise to this debate. We have to consider it and consider what to do about it. But I do want to mention this, that in terms of resources, some 12, 14 months ago, the then Minister of Educat ion, the Memb er for Lo gan, myself, the Minister for Health and the Minister of Community Services announced a new networking program using as a front line the schools and teachers in the schools.

From that time, adding this to the network that we had, there has been an identification of more childr en at risk than was previously the case. So we are getting an early warning system. We are strengthen ing our early warning system. Perhaps there is more that can be done in that area because that probably is the best defe nce.

But even with that, we are still going to have deaths of this kind not only in homes that are identified as being at risk but in those almost intractable situations where the deaths take place either at the hands of strangers or in the homes of natural parents who haven't hitherto been identified as an at-risk family. Let's recognize that. The fact of the matter is what we have to deal with is hard and relevant data. We have to avoid, in dealing with this, making it a partisan issue, a political issue, and using the emotional aura which inevitably surrounds it in order to score political points.

As far as I am aware, and I'm prepared to bring more data to the House tomorrow or whene ver, as the Minister of Community Services said in this House earlier this week, there has been a period of approximately two years in which there have been no such deaths; then, in a short period of time, there has been one death that we know of, possibly two. In fact, I just met with the Director of Prosecutions, Wayne Myshk owsky , on another ma tter, put that question to him; that was his information to me.

I have asked him to double-check it and, if the information doesn 't come to me during the course of this debate, I will have it. But to the best of my knowledge, in fact that is the case, not that the death of that one child isn't that which should give us pause and warrant a discussion of this kind, which may turn out to be one of the best discussions we've had in this House, but that we shouldn't use it to say that the system is all wrong and we should simply find some more money and some more resources. We've put more resources in what I call the early warning system.

We have deve loped in the prosecution end a supremely competent, and recognized across the country as such, Crown Prosecutor. We have added to her staff so that she can do more work in the prosecu tion of identified child abuse cases. We've done that.

We have entered into an agreement with the Federal Government - would you give me a two-minute sign when I'm about there, please? - (Int erjec tion) - that's three minutes, fine. 386 We have, as members know, because I announced this not so long ago, entered into an agreement with the Federal Government with respect to being able to videotape the evidence of the victim of child abuse or child sexual abuse so that we can better work with that child and get to know more about the situation, get to know more about what to do with the situation. it's not that we have been standing still, rest ing on past achievements, past acc omplish ments.

We know that there are many more things to be done, and let it not be said that we don't. Let us, in the course of this debate, or in the course of the Estimates, identify those areas on the basis of hard and relevant data which can be improved. In that way, this debate will have served a far more useful purpose than the mere making of political points. Whatever we do, let's not use this debate for that narrow and unworthy purpose. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Madam Speaker, I join in this debate to ask some questions and put some comments forward because I think it is time that society paid a lot more attention to really we're going. I think that we have to fairly lay the blame where it should be blamed, and I don't think we have to make it a partisan issue, but we have to lay it with the government who have allowed the escalat ion, who have not been able to cope with not only this issue in our society but many, Madam Speaker. I compliment my colleague, the Member for St.

Norbert, who has finally been able to bring to the attention of this government this major concern of his and of our caucus. If the record stands correct, that I have, Madam Speaker , and I'm sure it is, that last November my colleague, the Member for St. Norbert, wrote a letter to the Minister who is resp onsible for this whole area and, to this date, has not received a response dealing with this important issue. As well, I understand that there was a challenge or there was the opportunity to debate with my colleague from St.

Norbert twice, once in January and once in Februar y, but because of election fever and an election in the air, she was unable to accommodate such an impo rtant debate. Madam Speaker, one can only lay at the feet of this government the res ponsibility for the situation that it has escalated to. Madam Speaker, I have some questions. This is in the City of Winnipeg that this has been identified. What about the rest of the province? What about our communities in the North? What of communities in the west and the south, Madam Speaker, where almost half the population live?

Is it as deplorable there as it is in the City of Winnipeg? Is it out of control there as much as it is in the City of Winnipeg, Madam Speaker? Because, if it is, then we have a far greater problem on our hands than what we have been hearing about from the Minister of Health today who tried to cover up for his colleague who is, unfortu nately, out of the province when such major issues occur. Madam Speaker, it is urgent, and I am extremely pleased that we have had the opportunity to put on the record some of our thoughts. Madam Speaker, as

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 a parent and as an individual who has been very much involved in a close family life all my life, I really regret that we have such a society that we have those individuals who are abused in the way in which they are, but I think it's even a bigger regret that we have a government who have not been able to deal with it and deal with it in a responsible way.

Madam Speaker, I would rec ommend, because we have had a little bit of spare time as legislators - last week, we had to adjourn the House early because the government had not organ ized the affairs of the government to deal with it - I would request, Madam Speaker, that consideration be given that the First Minister of this province establish a comm ittee of the Legislature. Ye s, spend a little bit of time as legislators on this matter; set up a comm ittee of the Legislature to look at this whole problem of child abuse throughout the province. Let's bring witnesses; let's not make it only a partisan issue.

Let us not, as he indicated yesterday, let's prove to the people of Manitoba that he is a humanitarian. I could refer to some of the comments that he put in his Budget. Madam Speaker, I think that's a positive suggest ion. I think that a commi ttee of the Legislature, of the members of this House, to have witnesses come forward and to make positive recommendations so that the government could adopt them to try - we won't elimina te it, Madam Speaker.

I'm not that naive that we could elimi nate this most unfortunate situation in our society, but maybe we could make it better for one of those 34 chi ldren that are identified in high-risk groups. Maybe we could make it better for two of those individuals, Madam Speaker , and if that's what we could do, then let's proceed to do it. lt is not a matter of monetary shortage, Madam Speaker . You know, we all spend our time when individuals get sick of that dreaded disease, cancer, we all get a tremendous heart-throb and really feel badly, and I do. I have lost family due to those diseases.

This, I think, Madam Speaker, in the infancy of life, not to give tho se people an opportun ity, those children an opportunity to maximize and to take advantage of this country of ours, this province of ours, is a disgrace. 1 think that we, the legislators of this province, should take some time through a special comm ittee to do it.

I think it's one of again, Madam Speaker, being honest with ourselves, and I think that the government should be honest with the people of Manitoba and proceed to take the necessary action and correct the problem, one which they have been given the re sponsibili ty to do through a majority in this Legislature. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Health. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Thank you, Madam Speak er.

I think that abuse, be it child abuse, spouse abuse, or the abuse of the elders is probably one of the most difficult things to detect, one of the most to prove and certainly one of the most difficult to deal with. Not too long ago, when we were talking about child abuse, we were talking about battered babies. Things have changed and we know that there's much more than that now. We know that there is an area of - The Badgley Report in 19 84 stated that one in two 387 females had been abused, and one in three men.

Now, that's a pretty tall order, that's pretty difficult, and I would not dare to think for a minute that there's one person in this House who is not interested and doe sn't care about this concern that we all have. (Mr. Deputy Speaker, C. Santos, is in the Chair) But I think that it is completely wrong - and most of the members to their credit - I believe that they try to shy away from the partisan approach; and the Memb er for St. No rbert , not so much when he introduced that but when he spoke to this thing.

The Mem bers for Rhineland and Arthur, of course, were very partisan but I don't think they'v e been that effective. lt would be folly and it would be ridiculous to think that you can take anybody, any segment of society , and say it's your fault. Look at how difficu lt it is to detect when you're talking about abuse in the home with the people that are supposed to give love to that baby, the parents, or somebody very close to them, the day care, the schools, the hospitals anywhere; it could be big brother.

So if there is this kind of abuse, can we say, it's you government that is responsible for that, and you must cure everyt hing. I don't think you'll ever cure it, but that doe sn't mean we shouldn't. We should never stop trying. I think we've got to redouble our efforts all the time to try to deal with this. But if a government, any government, is foolish enough to think that they can eradicate this problem in society alone, there will be compl ete failure. I think central izat ion was exactly that to work with the community because it is a problem of the commun ity. lt is there.

You must talk about identifying first of all. Somebody said awhile ago, one of the speakers - I think it was the Member for Arthur - say there's double the abuse than there was before. This is asinine, this is ridiculous. We are detect ing more people and that is very important. Wel l, I apologize if it's not the Member for Arthur, but somebody mentioned that. We are detecting more people.

When we introduced abuse for the spouse abuse, look at what we detected when people felt that there was somebody there, people who were afraid to say anything. lt is this kind of sick society that we have, and I don't think there's any different word than that. I think that you have to work with all the agencies, the government, the parents, the schools and to say that someone said that it's not time; there is no longer time to study and think about it, you'v e got to do something about it. You've got to know where you're going; you've got to know what you're doing; and this has been tried.

What I resent from the Member for St. Norbert is some of the accusa tions that he repeated today. He wrote a letter, and it's true - somebody mentio ned a letter that he wrote to our Minister of Community Services - but she did answer it. I will quote a couple of paragraphs that she answered, and this was on October 30, 1985. - (I nterjecti on) - You might have written 10 letters. I'm talking about this letter and I want to quote from this.

This is what she stated: "L ast week, without taking the time to check with me or my staff, you made what amounted to a claim that five children had died because of policies which you said I had impl emented. The facts show that these terrible tragedies had happene d in circums tances which were accidents or in cases where

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 the court had already decided that neglect was not the cause of death. "One case involved a child from Ontario. Further, all these cases occurred before the reorganization of child welfare in the City of Winnipeg . As well , the percentage of children taken to protection out of child abuse situations has doubled over the last few years.

" Another paragraph - because the member said that there weren 't enough resources given to this problem - "It was our government that funded the Child Protection Centre, passed new Child and Family Service Legislation which last year provided Winnipeg agencies with an additional $600,000 in preventative grant , funded Ma Mawi-Wi-Chi-ltata, which is a Native-run family service centre in Winnipeg, and it was our government which finally decided to do something about the deteriorating child welfare in Winnipeg and reorganize the Child and Family Services system into non-profit, voluntary, community-based agencies." And the last paragraph : "I am not prepared to ask you to review child care policy with my staff.

I would , however, be glad to meet with you personally to discuss these issues in a calm and rational fashion, but I must admit that your past actions cause me to doubt th at a non-partisan and non-political basis of discussion is possible ." I think, too, you can reproach a lot of things and you 'll always be right when you feel that it is not perfect. There have been mistakes made. Mistakes are made by society, also. I don't think that anybody would have the nerve to get up in this place and say that the Minister of Community Services is not interested, has no compassion for the kids.

I would stake my reputation or anything - my life - on this: that she has as much, at least as much as anyone in this House. I'm not going to say "more" but I know the person she is and I know the concern and I know the hours that she had spent on that. My friend, the Attorney ­ General said that it should be a non-partisan thing. I have said that before. I would hope that it is not construed as saying, oh, you 're trying to get everybody on your side because you're afraid to face the music . The people that know me know that is not the case .

But in the question of health - and this is health also - I think it is the only way. I think we must unite . We can play politics if we want. We have a choice. We can maybe try to get Brownie points but if we work together, it is the only way and it's with all society. If God Almighty permits that parents treat their children like that, or friends, or schools, how can a mere mortal be perfec t in dealing with all these things? I think that that is very difficult.

This is information that I'd like to share with the House: since January 1, 1986, there have been four babies who were victims of homicide, three by accident of natural parents in their home, one killed while in the care of a foster parent. The foster parent happened to be a cousin of the deceased, who was termed a suitable foster parent and placed by child care agencies . That, again, is another example of how difficult - I am positive that the Member for River Heights is very sincere. She talked about an experience in her life when she was younger.

She says you always go on the side of the child and everybody would agree with tha t, but is that as easily done? I said that one out of every two 388 females has been abused and one out of three females - can you see that we are going to have a camps of people taken away from their families? Is it that easy to prove, when doctors sometimes, even doctors are afraid to spe ak because of their clients . I'm not saying this is general; I thi nk there's been a big improvement on that. That has been a concern. Are you going to go and tell a mother, without having sufficient proof, that she is guilty, or a father?

Do you think that's easy, when we're not there? That is a difficult thing. I gave the answer today, of where those 22 kids are . They are being supervised. We talked abou t the kids - a doctor talked about these kids at the Childre n's Hospital. Darn it, any doctor - in his place, ii I were a doctor, I'd make darned sure that none of those kids would ever leave the hospital unless they were sure they were going someplace where it was safe. I think tha t is being done. I think that we owe a lot - we didn't understand; we had to be pushed - both parties, all the members of this House - by Dr. Ken McRae and other s.

They've improved the situation . There's been an awful lot of money spent. There's been an awful lot of improvement. But we are still failing because society, as I say, is sick and we have to work with society, with the schools, with the day care, with the Big Brother organization, with the police, and so on. It is folly to think that one alone . . . MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, please. The member's time has expired . HON. L. DESJARDINS: Thank you. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition . MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

I am pleased to enter into the discussion and the debate on the topic that has been raised by my colleague from St. Norbert. I compliment the Speaker in seein g the wisdom of having this debate at this particular time because I think it is urge nt, it is important , and it is something that is been long overdue in this Legislature between the government and the members of the Opposition . I compliment my colleague from St. Norbert for having raised the issue on numerous occasions over the past six to eight months. I honestly believe, Mr.

Deputy Speaker , that had the opportunity for this sort of open discussion and debate taken place earlier, had the opportunity been given by the Minister responsible and the members of the government , we may perhaps have avoided some of the tragedies that have occurred over the past number of months.

I believe that now that debate is occurring, we have an opportunity to address the concerns and perhaps to avoid a recurrence of many of the circumsta nces that are prevalent today in Winnipeg and perhaps even thoughout the province with respect to the child welfare syste m, that have led to cases of abuse turning into tragedy. I regret that the Minister responsible has chosen to be at a conference in which child abuse and child welfare are being discussed , because we are not talking about

Wednesday, 28 May, 1986 this in some theoretical sense; we are not talking about this in an abstract opportunity to gain information. We are talking about a very real situation of crisis that pertains today in Manitoba. lt pertains today und er her ju risdiction, in her department, that has been identified and drawn to public attention for many, many months. lt seems to me that it is unfortunate that she has chosen as a priority to enter into discussion on the matter outside of this province and leave the crisis situation behind in Manitoba.

I regret very much not only her choice of priorities but her Premier's choice of priorities in authorizing her to go at this time. Having said all of that, I am glad that the debate is taking place even without her opportunity to participate because it has been well indicated by the Member for Arthur that many opportunities were given to her to debate the situation publicly with the Memb er for St. Norbert, with profess ionals in the child welfare field, over the past six months.

That opportunit y was not only ignored but it was purposely avoided because the Minister apparently did not belie ve that there was a problem. Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is what we are up against today because I say to you that this is not, as the Minister of Urban Affairs has indicated, just a debate on different models or systems of delivery of child welfare in this province. We are not just debating whether this should be a dece ntralized or a centralized sys