Manitoba Hansard — 10 March 2021 (Sitting 33, 42nd Legislature, 3rd Session)

42-3-33

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session – Forty-Second Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Myrna Driedger Speaker Vol. LXXV No. 33 - 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, March 10, 2021 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Forty-Second Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ADAMS, Danielle Thompson NDP ALTOMARE, Nello Transcona NDP ASAGWARA, Uzoma Union Station NDP BRAR, Diljeet Burrows NDP BUSHIE, Ian Keewatinook NDP CLARKE, Eileen, Hon. Agassiz PC COX, Cathy, Hon. Kildonan-River East PC CULLEN, Cliff, Hon. Spruce Woods PC DRIEDGER, Myrna, Hon. Roblin PC EICHLER, Ralph, Hon. Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne, Hon. Lac du Bonnet PC FIELDING, Scott, Hon. Kirkfield Park PC FONTAINE, Nahanni St. Johns NDP FRIESEN, Cameron, Hon. Morden-Winkler PC GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib.

GOERTZEN, Kelvin, Hon. Steinbach PC GORDON, Audrey, Hon. Southdale PC GUENTER, Josh Borderland PC GUILLEMARD, Sarah, Hon. Fort Richmond PC HELWER, Reg, Hon. Brandon West PC ISLEIFSON, Len Brandon East PC JOHNSON, Derek, Hon. Interlake-Gimli PC JOHNSTON, Scott Assiniboia PC KINEW, Wab Fort Rouge NDP LAGASSÉ, Bob Dawson Trail PC LAGIMODIERE, Alan Selkirk PC LAMONT, Dougald St. Boniface Lib. LAMOUREUX, Cindy Tyndall Park Lib.

LATHLIN, Amanda The Pas-Kameesak NDP LINDSEY, Tom Flin Flon NDP MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Malaya Notre Dame NDP MARTIN, Shannon McPhillips PC MICHALESKI, Brad Dauphin PC MICKLEFIELD, Andrew Rossmere PC MORLEY-LECOMTE, Janice Seine River PC MOSES, Jamie St. Vital NDP NAYLOR, Lisa Wolseley NDP NESBITT, Greg Riding Mountain PC PALLISTER, Brian, Hon. Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine, Hon. Midland PC PIWNIUK, Doyle Turtle Mountain PC REYES, Jon Waverley PC SALA, Adrien St. James NDP SANDHU, Mintu The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron, Hon.

Springfield-Ritchot PC SMITH, Andrew Lagimodière PC SMITH, Bernadette Point Douglas NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Vérendrye PC SQUIRES, Rochelle, Hon. Riel PC STEFANSON, Heather, Hon. Tuxedo PC TEITSMA, James Radisson PC WASYLIW, Mark Fort Garry NDP WHARTON, Jeff, Hon. Red River North PC WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC WOWCHUK, Rick Swan River PC

1509 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, March 10, 2021 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Madam Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen. Please be seated. Good afternoon, everybody.

Introduction of bills? ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Madam Speaker: Introduction of bills? Committee reports? Tabling of reports? Ministerial statements? MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Gerry Koreman Hon. Ron Schuler (Minister of Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, communities do not simply appear. They are built and strengthened through the hard work of volunteers. Today, I wish to recognize Gerry Koreman, a Cooks Creek resident who has dedic ated his time, energy and knowledge to bettering our community.

Gerry has been involved with Cooks Creek all his life and has now received the Manitoba 150 honour award for his outstanding history of volunteerism. In 1998, Gerry became the president of t he Columbus community centre. He served in this position until 2007, at which time the Columbus com- munity centre successfully merged with the Zora com- munity centre. This amalgamation resulted in the creation of the Cooks Creek Community Centre, where Gerry continued his presidency until 2019. Under Gerry's leadership, the Cooks Creek Community Centre has seen unprecedented growth and development.

It recently went through a $1.5-million expansion, which includes a full -size gymnasium, permanent stage, kitchen expansion and the inclusion of additional washrooms. Gerry's involvement with the centre has con- tinued even after the end of his tenure as president. He still serves as treasurer and remains involved as a member of the board of directors. Gerry also has a history of volunteerism apart from the community centre within Cooks Creek. He is known to volunteer at the medieval feast, Cooks Creek 'herit' days and the monthly pancake breakfast. He has also served on the administration board of St.

Michael's Parish, served as the financial secretary for the Cooks Creek Knights of Columbus council and is a member of the Chartered Professional Account - ants of Canada. Madam Speaker, I invite all members of this House to recognize the exceptional volunteers that make up our beautiful province. Thank you to Gerry Koreman for helping make Cooks Creek a beautiful place to live and grow. Thank you, Madam Speaker. School Division Funding Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): This government has slashed education budgets every year since taking office.

They have bottlenecked divisions so terribly that school divisions are forced to defund resources for Manitoba children. Now the Pallister government has forced Pembina Trails and Winnipeg School Division to cut millions of dollars from their budgets. Yesterday, the Winnipeg School Division posted a $5 -million cut from their budget due to the government's austerity agenda. These cuts will end the entire milk subsidy program while scrapping teacher support positions and services for students with sig - nificant emotional and behavioural challenges.

The division has been forced to cut adult crossing- guard positions, which will make schools and streets less safe for children. Pembina Trails School Division is forced to reduce student supports by $7 million, yet they are the fastest growing division right now in Manitoba, with over 350 new students this year. The Pembina Trails School Division needs 19 new teachers, and what did this government think was appropriate? To defund them.

1510 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 Madam Speaker, Pembina Trails has proposed the following cuts: to eliminate middle -year and high - school teacher -librarian positions; cut English -as- additional-language specialists in K to 8; reduce allocations for EAs; defer the Kindergarten Here We Come program and postpone maintenance and improvement projects that have been necessary in the division for years. These cuts are a huge step backwards for edu - cation in Fort Garry and across Manitoba. Madam Speaker, this government continues to fail Manitobans, families and folks who work in education.

Every person sitting on that side of the Chamber should be ashamed of themselves. [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order, please. Murielle Bugera and Robert Cesmystruk Mr. Dennis Smook (La Vérendrye): I rise in this House today to honour two constituents of mine: Murielle Bugera of St. Pierre Jolys, and Robert Cesmystruk of Vita. Both Murielle and Robert were recipients of the Canada Life Honour 150 awards recognizing 150 people from across the province whose volunteer activities have made a real difference in their communities.

Murielle Bugera has volunteered on many organizations over the years, but her work on the Crow Wing Trail sits atop her list of accom - plishments. For more than 20 year s, Murielle has spearheaded the development of the Crow Wing Trail, a 193-kilometre trail from Emerson to St. Norbert, one of the longest stretches of the Trans Canada Trail in Manitoba. The Crow Wing Trail connects neighbouring communities, promotes hea lthy living and brings history back to the former ox cart trail. Robert Cesmystruk has been a community leader in Vita for decades.

His list of volunteer positions include helping establish and became the first fire chief of the RM of Stuartburn Fire Depa rtment, volunteer ambulance driver -attendant, Vita Curling Club, Vita Lions Club, Vita credit union board and many more boards and committees. Robert also has a great passion for his church, the Holy Trinity Ukrainian Orthodox Church, where he has served i n various capacities since 1976. I would ask all members of this Chamber to join me in congratulating and thanking Murielle and Robert for all they have done to make a difference in their communities. Thank you.

Vaccine Rollout in Northern Manitoba Ms. Danielle Adams (Thompson): Many com - munity members in the North have reached out to me to express concern over the Province's disastrous vaccine rollout for northern Manitoba. They tell me the plan just doesn't make sense to have so many people travel t o the vaccine rather than bring the vaccine to people. The current plan is overly centralized and puts stress on those eligible to receive the vaccine and exposes people to unnecessary risk.

Having only one or two super sites up north that everybody trav els to doesn't simply work, especially as more and more people become eligible. The Vaxport site isn't even up and running yet, and the proposed second location in The Pas or Flin Flon hasn't even been selected. There are more remote communities in the North that don't have easy, affordable transportation access to Thompson. For many of those communities it takes hours to travel to each –to travel to Thompson, and these distances are very large. Why not bring the vaccine to more communities instead?

It would save people time and stress, and not to mention reduce the risk of COVID transmission due to the travel. The super sites may work in cities like Brandon or Winnipeg, but it's clear it won't work in the North. The government should listen to the conc erns of the people who live up north and make the change to their plans accordingly. Today I am asking again that the Health Minister meet with the northern MLAs to create effective, common sense vaccine plans for northern Manitoba. [interjection] * (13:40) Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Michaleski)?

I understand the member for Dauphin was having some technical troubles with his computer. Is the honourable member for–was the honourable member for Dauphin able to correct that?

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1511 Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, given the technical difficulties that the member for Dauphin (Mr. Michaleski) is having, is there leave of the House for him to try again to do his member's state - ment prior to petitions? Madam Speaker: Is there leave of the House to allow the member who's having technical difficulties with the computer to do his private member's statement at the time of petitions? [Agreed] ORAL QUESTIONS Hydro/Government Relations Request for Premier's Apology Mr.

Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): As of 4:30 yesterday, 2,300 Manitoba Hydro workers have been forced to strike by the actions of this government. You can actually hear them honking at the Legislature right now. And this is what happens when you disrespect workers who are willing to go and work tremendous overtime, working–to sleep in a gym in order to get the job done. They're not going to back down when it comes to their rights, when it comes to their jobs.

These are the heroes that we all stood to honour after the 2019 winter storm, and yet, shamefully, just a few months later, this government turned around and threatened those very same heroes with layoffs if they didn't bow to the unreasonable demands of this government. Of course, they're ordering these wage freezes all while Hydro turns a $111 million profit made possible, no doubt, by the unnecessary hydro rate increases that this government legislated in the dark of night. It's clear which first step is needed to help redress the problem.

Will the Premier simply go outside today and apologize to the Hydro workers of Manitoba? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Madam Speaker, this government has tremendous respect for our Hydro workers across the province. We th ank them again today for their work, their ongoing efforts, not just during COVID but during the ice storm that preceded it and on an ongoing basis. I thank my friends and workers at Hydro on behalf of the government and people of Manitoba. I would just say that the member references the word respect in his

preamble. Where was that respect when the NDP was digging a hundred– $10-billion debt hole at Hydro, Madam Speaker? How would the negotiations go between Hydro management and the IBEW if we didn't have that $10-billion debt hole? I'd ask the member to reflect on that and to have some contrition and take some ownership of the reality that the attempt by the NDP to Americanize Manitoba Hydro has negative consequences for the people of Manitoba, Madam Spe aker, including the workers at Hydro. Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question. Mr.

Kinew: Madam Speaker, the–we know that the Premier is ashamed to go outside. He won't show his face to these Hydro wor kers who are on strike –those who are gathered for the honkathon outside the building today. And we know why. His government seeks to cut Hydro. They seek to privatize Manitoba Hydro sub - sidiaries. And they raise rates on the good, hard- working people of Manitoba through legislation–not through public oversight, but through legislation in the dark of night. And what's happening today?

Well, even as Hydro turns a profit of $111 million, this Premier still orders that corporation to not just freeze wages, but actually to roll wages back. And what happens if these hard-working Hydro heroes don't buckle behind this government's whims? Well, then they are threatened with layoffs. So I'll ask the Premier again: Does he have the courage to go outside this afternoon and apologize to the Hydro workers directly? Mr. Pallister: I appreciate any question from the NDP leader on courage and shame, Madam Speaker.

I've had the willingness and the ability to stand up for the things I believe in, and the things governments I've been a part of believe in, for a long, long time. I don't have the record the member has, but I do have a record of understanding and accepting principle and abiding by it.

Madam Speaker, the member speaks of Hydro profits as if it was something he should celebrate, but he ignores the fact that if Hydro is fortunate enough to make the same amount of money over the next 99 years that it made this year, it will be able, without covering the interest, to fill in the debt hole the NDP dug for it ov er the last decade. It will just take that

1512 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 long, that century, for Hydro to get back on its feet after the damage the NDP did. So, when the member speaks to me about shame, I understand he's coming from a place of under - standing. Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary. Mr. Kinew: It's quite a tangled web that the Premier is laying out there, but the bottom line is this: the Premier won't go outside and face the Hydro workers because he knows he is the one who threatened their jobs.

He won't go outside and face the Hydro workers because he knows it is his government that is weaken- ing and undermining Manitoba Hydro. And he won't go speak to the workers of Manitoba Hydro because he is the one who had the hypocrisy to try and celebrate these workers one month and then threaten their jobs just a few weeks later. Madam Speaker, it's one thing for the Premier to try and engage in, you know, his, you know, subtle back and forth here in the Chamber, but to disrespect those Manitoba Hydro workers, who do tremendous work on all of our behalf here in Manitoba, is just wrong.

So, again, will the Premier simply go outside and apologize to the hard- working folks of Manitoba Hydro's IBEW membership as a gesture of good faith towards, perhaps, turning the negotiations onto a better foot? Mr. Pallister: Where was the good faith, where was the respect, Madam Speaker, when the NDP were Americanizing Manitoba Hydro and taking it away from Manitobans? Where was the respect and good faith when the NDP spent –75 per cent of the money that they spent on Keeyask and Bipole wasn't spent with IBEW workers; it was spent out of province.

Where was the respect, Madam Speaker, for trying to take away Manitoba Hydro and give it to Americans and have Manitobans pay for it? Where was the respect that the member's talking about? There was no respect. Madam Speaker, the president of the cover -up club over there wants to–us to ignore his record and he wants us to ignore the NDP record, an d he points his finger over here and says, look at that, and he can't get Manitobans to forget the fact that the NDP squandered $10 billion of their money for no good end.

And now we're doing our best to clean up that mess, and the workers at Hydro and we will work together to make sure that happens. Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. Elective Surgery Backlog Wait Time for Procedures Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): All I know is that I'm able to go outside and have some good conversations with the hard - working Hydro employees, and this Premier won't show his face to them. Now, when it comes to the backlog of surgeries, we know Manitoba is in one of the worst positions of all the provinces in our great country.

There are some seven–some 11,000 surgeries, and this wait -list con- tinues to grow because the Premier hasn't done enough about it. Angie Valgardson suffers from a heart arrhythmia and needs a surgery to figure out what is causin g it before she can get treatment. Now, she's at risk of having a stroke every day because of these delays. When she asked her surgeon, she simply said that the backlog was extensive and that the wait will continue to grow. Now, what does the Premier have to say to the thousands of people who are waiting for surgeries in Manitoba and what is his plan to address it? Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, the president of the cover -up club's at it again, Madam Speaker. Here we go. You see, there's a pande mic on, and the member doesn't want to pay attention to that because it doesn't serve his political purposes. He wants to use the pandemic for political posturing. What a shameful way to behave. Every province–every province–is facing incred- ible health p ressures on its surgical demands. Every province was before, frankly, the pandemic hit, and now there's a pandemic pile-up and it's real.

And that's why we joined together with all the other premiers, including Premier John Horgan, an NDP premier in British Columbia, Madam Speaker, to fight for greater resources from the federal government. And I thought, Madam Speaker, the NDP were on side, but now they've slipped away from that position and they're looking to place blame, during a pandemic, on a government that is addressing this issue in real ways, effectively in this province, as every other provincial government is endeavouring to

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1513 do without the historic strength of a partnership with the government in Ottawa. * (13:50) We will continue to stand up for health care in this province, and I would encourage the member to do the same. Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question. Mr. Kinew: Madam Speaker, the member for Fort Whyte raises an interesting question. What does the pandemic response in our province have in common with the backlog for surgeries? Well, I'll tell you what it has in common, Madam Speaker.

It is the cuts of the PC government that has made each situation immeasurably worse. We know that we had to move to code red more quickly because this government cut ICU beds during their first term in office. That left all of us vulnerable. Now–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Kinew: –the same effect compounded itself when it came to the surgery backlog. Their cuts have simply made the situation worse. Now that he's taken his free shot at Justin Trudeau, what substantive message would the Premier have to share with the people of Manitoba who are waiting for these very important surgeries? Mr.

Pallister: Two thirds of a billion dollars, Madam Speaker, more than the NDP ever invested in health care was our commitment, and that's what we budgeted to add to our health -care budget prior to COVID. But now, Molly McCracken–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr.

Pallister: –Molly McCracken, a close personal friend and someone who I have a lot of time for, has told us, through survey work that the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has done, Madam Speaker, that we are second only to one other provincial government in supports for people during COVID, including supports for health care –first in business supports, I might add, second in supports for people. Madam Speaker, we're–our commitment's clear and it's real. The NDP's failu re is real as well.

The member shouldn't continue to act as the president of the cover-up club and try to deny that. [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary. Mr. Kinew: Madam Speak er, the reason that they have to spend so much money is because their cuts have been an absolute disaster in health care. All the additional money is going to pay for nurses' overtime who are being forced to work mandatory OT shifts.

It's being spent on hir ing and retraining and recruiting people who have had to leave the workforce because of the stress that they've been put under–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Kinew: –by this government. But the question that I'm asking is about surgeries. It has to do with people like Hallie Thiessen, who is a young two-year-old from Steinbach. Now, Hallie suffers from a rare condition which means she cannot eat food without an adverse reaction. Her parents actually have to force a feeding tube through her nose. My heart certainly goes out to them, Madam Speaker.

But these are the type of people in Manitoba who are being done a disservice by the waits for surgeries. What will the Premier tell them today about what his plans are to address the backlog and to commiserate with their situation? Mr. Pallister: The honorary president of the cover-up club, Madam Speaker, with those very emotive statements, chose to ignore the reality that the NDP government that we inherited the mess from promised–promised–that it would address wait times. An awkward reality that the member – [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr.

Pallister: –fails to accept is this: the NDP wait times doubled and tripled while they were in government. Yet, according to the Canadian institute of health information–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Pallister: –the wait times in our province –the only province where wait times did not go longer– An Honourable Member: Look at the Speaker. Madam Speaker: Order. Doesn't have to.

1514 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 Mr. Pallister: –in our first three years in government, the only province that kept the line– An Honourable Member: He's trying to intimidate members in the House. He's trying to– Mr. Pallister: –on growing wait times, the only province that's– Madam Speaker: Wab does that, too. Wab does that, too. Mr. Pallister: –proceeded to address that issue. But now we need to stand together. Premiers from all political parties–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Pallister: –have done that. The only opposition in Canada that's–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr.

Pallister: –against restoring–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Order. Order. I was standing quite –for quite some time before members recognized that I was standing, and what that means is there should be silence so that I can actually speak to all of you. Couple of things here. It probably is best to put your questions and answers through the Speaker. I know that there are a number of people in the House that aren't doing that, and so I would ask everybody to refocus on that.

The other thing I would ask is to–and both sides are doing this, talking about cover -up or, whatever, gangs–I would ask everybody, maybe they want to become part of a get -along gang and everybody can get along with each other in here so that we don't end up in situations like this. So I would ask for everybody's co- operation please. That's kind of not appropriate for this kind of a venue for references to that.

So, if everybody could get along I think we would be able to get further ahead with demonstrating to the people that are watching and everybody that we do value civility and democracy and it's important to us and we respect it. National Inquiry into MMIWG Final Report Implementation of Recommendations Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Jana Williams, a beautiful young woman and a mother to two young girls and pregnant with her third, Madam Speaker, was found murdered last week. Let me confirm for the House that Jana is loved by her family. Her family is absolutely devastated. Jana deserves to be honoured.

Jana deserves justice, Madam Speaker. Will the minister, after nearly two years, finally prioritize the implementation of the recommendations of the national inquiry's final report? Hon. Cameron Friesen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, let me begin by saying that Manitobans are devastated by the loss of this woman. We know that there was a vigil that was recently held, and that it was well- attended.

We know that there is an investigation underway right now, and we are all waiting expectantly for the results of that investigation, because we want someone to be held accountable for the loss of life of this woman. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, on a supplementary question. Ms. Fontaine: And yet, we haven't heard a peep from any single member of the PC caucus in respect of condolences to the families. We didn't see them there at the vigil. We know that nobody's reached out to the family. That's shameful, Madam Speaker.

And here we are, two years after the national inquiry's calls to justice, and we've seen no action from this government. Why? Why have we not seen any action from this government? Because they simply don't care, Madam Speaker. What we know is that the budget for the family information liaison office has been discontinued, and I table our FIPPA confirming that these funds, which are critical for engagements of fami lies, have been discontinued. Why is the Pallister government not prioritizing MMIWG2S? Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): I congratulate the member on attending the vigil the other night, and I know that she spoke well in the TV clip I saw, and I appreciate her efforts in that respect, but I think it's shameless political behaviour to try to cast aspersions at people who weren't at the vigil along with her and the few dozen people who were there. I admire her effort in respect of this, but I don't think it's right to try to score political points using the death of a Manitoban as a lever.

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1515 Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, on a final supplementary. Ms. Fontaine: Madam Speaker, I'm not trying to score political points. An Honourable Member: Oh, yes, you are. Ms. Fontaine: I am simply–[interjection] I am simply– An Honourable Member: In the most disgraceful way. Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Order. Ms. Fontaine: The Minister of Justice (Mr. Friesen) is yelling at members over h ere on the opposite side saying that it's 'disgressful'–disgraceful.

Madam Speaker, I am simply pointing out that not one single member of the PC caucus has reached out to the family or has even posted on Twitter, which they are so apt to do when it's Or ange Shirt Day, condolences to the family. It is indicative that they just don't give a crap about Indigenous women and girls– Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Order. I think the member probably knows full well that the language she was using is unparliamentary in the House. And I'm going to ask her to withdraw that statement. * (14:00) Ms. Fontaine: I will not.

Madam Speaker: I'm going to ask the member – again, in this House, that was unparliamentary language. Most times, when people are asked to withdraw unparliamentary language, it is something that they are more–most willing to do. Sometimes we get caught up in the passion of something. I'm going to give the member another chance to withdraw those comments and conclude her question. Ms. Fontaine: There's a slaughter of Indigenous women, and I will not– Madam Speaker: Order. Order.

I will give the member one more chance, out of courtesy, to give some further important thought to that and ask the member one more time if she would be willing to withdraw her unparliamentary comment. Ms. Fontaine: I will not. Madam Speaker: The member has been given three chances to withdraw her comments, and I have requested, directed, instructed the member to do that. I have no alternative now to name the member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine)–the honourable member for St. Johns, pursuant to our rules, for –oh. I have no alternative but to name Nahanni Fontaine, the honourable member for St.

Johns, pursuant to our rules, for disregarding the authority of the Chair and to direct that she withdraw from the Chamber for the remainder of this sitting day. I will now proceed with oral questions, and the – there was a question had been posed to the Premier (Mr. Pallister), and I will allow him the opportunity now to respond. Mr. Pallister: Unfortunate, Madam Speaker, because these are issues we should all be unified behind. We've been working diligently and, I think, with the support of the opposition, in respect of pur suing the goals of the Truth and Reconciliation Com - mission.

We've been pursuing diligently the recom - mendations of the missing and murdered women's inquiry. We've been working to uplift the lives of Indigenous women, Indigenous people through treaty land entitlement settlements and building Freedom Road and advan cing property rights and health initiatives and homeless initiatives and 'addics' initiatives as a government that were never before invested in.

And it is not appropriate for the member, who knew these problems existed for years while she was working wi th the previous administration, to try to score points by attacking a government that is addressing the issues that were not addressed as well by the previous government. Madam Speaker, I would just simply say that and say it's unfortunate. I respect the member's passion, but I do not respect her excessive partisanship and blame-placing. Manitoba Municipalities Staff Vacancy Concerns Mr.

Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Madam Speaker, cities, towns and municipalities across our province work hard to provide vi tal public services to Manitobans. Central to that is having a provincial partner at the table to provide fair funding and to ensure municipal

1516 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 revenues can be properly collected. Unfortunately, Pallister government is doing the exact opposite. Through freedom of information, we've learned that one out of every four assessment positions has been left vacant across the province, and that's across the entire department. There's nearly 100 good-paying jobs sitting vacant, and I'll table this document now. Will the minister stand up for Manitoba muni - cipalities and commit today to quickly filling these vacant jobs? Hon.

Derek Johnson (Minister of Municipal Relations): I'm going to take this first opportunity to speak in the House as Minister of Municipal Relations to thank the constituents of Interlake -Gimli for entrusting me to bring their voice forward as their Member of the Legislative Assembly. I want to thank my Cabinet colleagues for their generous support in their helping me prepare for this new ro le, and mostly I'd like to thank the Premier (Mr. Pallister) for entrusting me and my ability to perform as Minister of Municipal Relations. Mostly, of course, I want to thank my family for their support in this exciting new

chapter of my life. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Concordia, on a supplementary question. Mr. Wiebe: Madam Speaker, the Pallister govern - ment is not meeting the needs of communities across the province. One out of every four assessment positions now sits vacant. The minister's own briefing notes say that municipalities are concerned because less staff means more delay in assessment, which means less money provided to those local communities. In short, the government's short -sighted cuts to services are costing communities more.

The AMM is willing to call out these positions to be filled, and last year, the AMM , in fact , said to this government: funding freezes do not recognize inflationary in - creases and put greater financial and administrativ e pressures on municipalities. Will the minister take the AMM's advice and stop the funding freezes, restore these good jobs, and support our municipalities? Mr. Johnson: Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank the member opposite for the question.

And, obvi ously, we take consultation and our partners with AMM very, very seriously, and we have reached out to not only the president, many of the municipalities on an individual basis, and we will continue to collaborate with AMM and bring their voice forward to this Legislature. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Concordia, on a final supplementary. Mr. Wiebe: And yet, the AMM continues to be critical of this government and this minister.

Whether it's the closure of the MASC offices, which are forcing jobs and services out of our towns; Bill 37, which this government continues to ram through, which the AMM still says poses significant risks and will lead to more red tape and delays; and now nearly 100 vacant jobs in Municipal Relations. We know this government is, in fact, not listening to AMM and our municipal partners. The government's own documents admit that, quote, municipalities raise concern that staffing vacancies are resulting in delays and limiting municipal tax revenue.

Will the minister listen to municipalities who have voiced their concerns, and fill these vacant jobs immediately? Mr. Johnson: I thank the member for the question and his concerns with Bill 37. I'm really surprised that members opposite bring up consultation. They–I don't think they know much about consultation. The government on this side of the House, we have an outstanding record on consulting. Bill 37 is just one of the main examples of our working group and–with the key stakeholders. And this participation includes AM M and the City of Winnipeg.

We will continue to bring their force –voice forward in this Legislature. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Manitoba School Divisions Funding Level Concerns Mr. Nello Altomare (Transcona): As we know, the Brandon School Division reluctantly passed their annual budget last –just last week, and the budget includes cuts to teaching positions, support staff, and it means the division is forced to withdraw proposals for eight additional school counsellors and nutrition

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1517 programs. All this because the government is failing to adequately fund Manitoba schools. Trustee Jim Murray, of Brandon School Division, explained it well by saying that the school counsellors are needed now more than ever, but we can't do it because there's a guy in Wi nnipeg that wants to balance the budget. They're still trying to change course. Will the minister commit today to increase funding for Manitoba schools? * (14:10) Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Education): I thank the member opposite for a question on education.

This being my first question, I want to take a minute, Madam Speaker, to acknowledge our stake - holders that are –been working with our government over the last year during COVID. I want to point out and thank the teachers, principals, superint endents, the boards–the school boards, all of our other support staff, including custodians, education assistants and bus drivers–certainly went through a lot over the last year. I also want to acknowledge students and parents who have had to face so many challenges over the past year.

And everyone working together is providing safety in our schools, and that is paramount. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Transcona, on a supplementary question. Mr. Altomare: Well, Madam Speaker, it isn't just the Brandon School Division who is having to make major budget cuts as a result of this government's austerity agenda. The Winnipeg School Division passed its budget yesterday. It also had to make severe cuts, including cuts to n utrition programs and to students with additional needs: physiotherapy–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Altomare: –occupational therapy.

This is all due to this government funding reductions and directives to school divisions. Manitoba teachers and support staff have continued to go above and beyond to provide quality education to our kids during the pandemic. And this government is actively choosing to reduce those supports. Will the minister today reverse course and adequately fund education? Mr. Cullen: This year we added almost $21 million to supports for school boards across the province. This translates to a 1.56 per cent increase. Total budget coming from the Province of Manitoba: $1.35 billion, the highest ever in Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, we're also supporting– [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Cullen: –we're also supporting local property taxpayers. We've asked school boards to freeze the taxation, the local taxation–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Cullen: We've asked school boards to freeze the local property taxation. We've backfilled that to the tune of $23 million. We're saving Manitoba taxpayers $23 million. And more good news in my third answer. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Transcona, on a final supplementary. Education System Review Request to Release Mr.

Nello Altomare (Transcona): We know that the pandemic has led to a greater demand on our schools, not less. And we know that our education system requires more investment and not less. This government clearly doesn't agree. They con- tinue to force school divisions to cut. And Mary -Louise Davis, the Brandon school - teachers' association rep had this to say: I really hope it's hard for them to sleep at night knowing that this was the choice they made for our children. And they haven't even released the K -to-12 review yet.

Manitoba educators, support staff, students, parents, everyone in the system deserve transparency from this government, yet they continue to hide this thing. So now, wil l the minister be transparent and accountable and release the K-to-12 review today? Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Education): Certainly a lot of points in that question. I will say we take this COVID situation very seriously, Madam Speaker. We have al located $185 million to fight the COVID pandemic in our

1518 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 schools in Manitoba. We have committed to that. We expect by the end of the school year we will have invested $154 million of that to fight the pandemic and keep our kids safe in schools. Madam Speaker, record investments in education here in Manitoba to the tune of $427 million more than the NDP ever invested in education. Madam Speaker: I just want to indicate that, due to a loss of four minutes and 45 seconds due to procedural issues that we have had to deal with, I am going to add those four minutes and 45 seconds to the clock and ask the table to do so.

Finance Minister's Business Interests Conflict of Interest Disclosure Inquiry Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): The Minister of Finance (Mr. Fie lding) has an interest in a company called Tiber River, which stands accused of a number of unfair labour practices, including the shocking allegation around the termination of employee who was pregnant. Legal action has been taken on this matter. Manitobans expect transparency on such serious matters, and the minister has declared his interest in the company, has declared the potential for a conflict with his duties.

Despite being the minister since 2018, he only now claims he would recuse himself from anything to do with Tiber River. Manitobans expect a high level of accountability for something so serious. Will the minister table the memo or letter he pro- vided recusing himself? [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Order. Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Legislative and Public Affairs): Well, Madam Speaker, this is the level that the NDP has sunk to. A party that wants to someday reclaim government, it's many, many years in the future if they continue to go down this low, low road.

This issue has already been addressed and dealt with by the conflict officer in this House. Now, I know, Madam Speaker, that they don't like independent officers and independent analysis and they don't like to actually follow the rules of the Legislature. They've already made that clear in the last several weeks. But I would ask that this member – who's a relatively new member–try to look up and try to find the high road, because he hasn't been on it since he's been elected. Madam Speaker: The honourable membe r for Fort Garry, on a supplementary question. Mr.

Wasyliw: Well, if the minister has nothing to hide, why can't he stand up in this House and say that, and why does he need to be protected by the member from Steinbach? Now, given how serious these allegations are, given that this minister's in charge of protecting Manitoba's most vulnerable workers, Manitobans need to have confidence he is going to do his job and protect them over protecting his own financial interests. Minister is saying he's going to recuse himself. That's not good enough.

To protect Manitobans, he needs to go one step further and ensure that any such investigation is done –that it's done externally from people that he directs. In the same way that Manitoba Justice can ask for independent outside investigations, the same approach should be taken here. Will the minister commit to that today? Mr. Goertzen: Well, it's a little rich, Madam Speaker–or maybe I should say poor–for the member opposite to talk about protection of workers. It's a little bit strange for that member, or any member of the NDP, to raise that issue in this House.

There has been many individuals who've looked for protection from the NDP, Madam Speaker. Some of them knocked on the door of the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Kinew). And they got turned away. The Leader of the Opposition said no wrong door, but that was the wrong door when they went looking for protection there. This issue has been addressed by the conflict of interest officer. Every member on this side of the House has full confidence in the Minister of Finance today, tomorrow and in the future, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Garry, on a final supplementary. Mr.

Wasyliw: Well, apparently, Madam Speaker, the minister has entered the Pallister government witness protection program and can't speak for himself. The situation at Tiber River is deeply troubling, and the Finance Minister's involvement with the company subject to such 'actients' are unprecedented. [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order.

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1519 Mr. Wasyliw: Manitoba has no dedicated labour minister, and handing those responsibilities to this minister has clearly been a terrible error. Troubling allegations of abuse and unfair labour practices go back some time. The minister has been in his portfolio since 2018. He has only now recused himself. Can the minister tell us how many complaints to the Employment Standards have been received since he became a minister, and why is he only recusing himself now?

Madam Speaker: I can't hear, so I'm going to ask for everybody to please allow me to hear the questions and answers. * (14:20) Mr. Goertzen: Well, Madam Speaker, again, this has been dealt with by the conflict of interest officer. I'm glad the member is now inte rested in complaints. I wonder how many complaints have been lodged against the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Kinew). I wonder how many complaints have shown up at his door, and people asking for pro- tection. I know of at least one who was turned away and told they had no policy on protecting anybody – the NDP had no policy.

That was already reported in the newspaper, Madam Speaker. We've heard lots of complaints around here. I remember the conflict of interest officer having to go through the entire Cabinet of the NDP to see who had taken free Jets tickets. They went through every one of the NDP, Madam Speaker. I remember the Auditor General having to knock on the door of the Cabinet to find out stuff about the Tiger Dams. Complaint after complaint after complaint. Ask me another question, I'll give you the rest of the complaints, sir. Manitoba's Vaccine Supply Selection of Calgary Company Mr. Dougald Lamont (St.

Boniface): We can all agree that Manitoba needs to increase its vaccine development capacity. As it happens, more than a decade ago I worked on a bid to bring the publicly funded pilot vaccine manufacturing facility here in Winnipeg. It was cancelled by the Premier's colleagues in the federal Conservative caucus. The real mystery is how the Premier picked a Calgary company, Providence Therapeutics, with no RFP, no due diligence, because they have never completed a human trial. I table SEC documents showing that, in August, the mailing address was a suburban house in Calgary.

Apparently it had between zero and 49 employees. How did this very junior Alberta company get chosen over scientists and organizations in Manitoba who actually have experience and success taking vaccines to market? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I think the real question, Madam Speaker, the member would like to ask–and I'm sure he'll ask it in his second one–is: how the heck did we get to be 57th as a country getting vaccines in here?

And I think the answer is: because the federal Liberal government deci ded to rely on people from across great oceans and far distances away –totally rely on those people –to supply us with vaccines in a time of a pandemic. And that strategy, which the Prime Minister's already acknowledged, was a miserable failure and continues to be.

So for that reason, Madam Speaker, I expect that the member will be asking himself, prior to asking the next question: why did I raise this issue, when obviously I'm the only person in this Chamber who doesn't understand how important it is to ha ve vaccines produced here in Canada available to Canadians during a pandemic? Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Boniface, on a supplementary question. Mr.

Lamont: The Premier was quite correct yesterday when he said that Manitoba Liberals sto od alone in questioning this government's decision to spend millions of Manitoba dollars on an Alberta company–a company that, by its own admission, may only be able to deliver a vaccine a year from now, if they can develop one, if it gets another $150 mi llion in government funding. While Manitoba schools, universities and bus - inesses are all facing massive shortfalls and cuts, this government is gambling $7 million in Manitobans' money in Alberta.

The one exceptional thing about this company appears to be its chairman: Ken Hughes, a former PC MLA and minister in Alberta and an MP in Ottawa. Now, the Premier says he doesn't know him, and that's fine. But Mr. Hughes' time in Ottawa did overlap with that of David McLaughlin, who was then chief-of-staff to Brian Mulroney.

1520 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 What exactly –and who exactly –brought Providence Therapeutics to the Premier's attention? Mr. Pallister: I think Shop Easy's selling tinfoil, Madam Speaker. The member can make himself a hat to go with his tie, okay. The fact of the matter is, Madam Speaker, the federal government has also offered assistance and invested in this same company. So the member got to talk to his friend, Justin, about the logic or lack of logic of investing in a Canadian domestic manufacturing company –pro- duction and research company.

Now, we have a manufacturer and producer here in Manitoba that's partnered with this company for some time now, to distribute vaccines. And the member thinks that's a bad idea? I think he should cling to that position, hold onto it, go out to the media and tell everybody that he doesn't want Manitobans to get vaccines when the next pandemic comes around. National Pharmacare Program Request for Government Support Ms.

Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): Living in a pandemic has further highlighted the importance of a pharmacare program, and how our province could be better supporting those in our health care fields, as well as Manitobans who struggle to afford their prescribed medications. Currently–and just as an example, Madam Speaker–prescribed medications, such as continuous glucose monitors and insulin pumps for those living with diabetes, are not covered by Manitoba Health.

And that is why I am asking if this provincial government will commit to working towards a univer- sal, evidence-based pharmacare program that would enable all Manitobans to afford their prescribed medi- cations. Hon. Heather Stefanson (Minister of Health and Seniors Care): I thank the member opposite for the question, Madam Speaker, and of course t he important thing here is that we need to call on her federal cousins in Ottawa to ensure that we properly fund programs like this as part of the federal government. And I know that our Premier (Mr.

Pallister) has been working with the premiers across the country to ensure that we call on the federal government to adequately fund health care in this country. And so if the –I would call on the member opposite to call on her federal cousins to do the right thing and ensure that there's appropriate levels of funding from Ottawa in health care in Manitoba and across the country. Budget 2021 Release Date Mr.

Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): Madam Speaker, when our government was first elected in 2016, Manitoba gave us–Manitobans gave us a man- date to fix the finances, repair our services and rebuild the economy and to clean up the financial mess left by the NDP. Thanks to our hard work, that is exactly what has been done. However, Madam Speaker, COVID -19 has presented a new fiscal challenge, and Manitobans know that our government is up to the task. Budget 2021 will be a blueprint to help Manitoba emerge from the pandemic stronger than ever.

I ask the Minister of Finance if he can tell us when we can expect Budget 2021 to be presented to Manitobans? Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): Well, Madam Speaker, I am pleased to discuss this important upcoming budget. I want to thank, as we finalize our blueprint for our budget, the 50,000 Manitobans that we consulted during the budget process to ide ntify their priorities to help shape Budget 2021. Budget 2021 reinforce our government's priorities to continue to protect Manitobans from COVID -19 and chart Manitoba's path forward with a roadmap to recovery to grow our economy.

Madam Speaker, I'm very pleased to announce that I'll rise in the Chamber and present Budget 2021 on Wednesday, April 7th. Madam Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired. Petitions. The honourable member for–oh, pardon me. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS (Continued) Madam Spea ker: We were going to, at this time, revert back to members' statements, and I understand that the member for Dauphin (Mr. Michaleski) has resolved his technical issues. So, I will recognize the honourable member for Dauphin.

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1521 Canadian Agricultural Safety Week Mr. Brad Michaleski (Dauphin): Next week, March 14th to 20th, is Canadian agriculture safety week. This will be the third year of a campaign empowering and celebrating farmers, their families and their communities. If you grew up on a farm or i n a farming community, like many in the Dauphin constituency, chances are good that you know someone who has been affected by a life -altering accident, and most farmers have stories about close calls and near misses that they can recall with sharp clarity.

We all rely on agriculture producers and their farms to provide for everyday needs. These men and women are busy and face many pressures as they carry out their day-to-day tasks. By nature of proximity to heavy equipment and large animals, farming is a dangerous profession. Agriculture -related fatalities and injuries seldom make national headlines, but they impact their local area and communities deeply. Canadian agriculture safety week is committed to raising an awareness about the importance of safety in agriculture.

It aims to educate, support and encourage farmers and their community partners as they stay safe and as they take the lead in agriculture safety and health. It also raises awareness of supports for farmers who have experienced traumatic i njury and are returning to work after recovery. I encourage everyone to join 2021's digital campaign by going to agsafetyweek.ca and down- loading your AgSafe ribbon to share on social media. Remind your non-farm friends to be alert and patient as we enter the spring season and we encounter farm vehicles on roadways.

Let's educate ourselves and our families and show our agriculture producers that we support them and that we support safe and strong farms. * (14:30) Thank you, Madam Speaker. PETITIONS Public Child-Care Grants Ms. Danielle Adams (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to the petition is as follows:

(1) The pandemic has further emphasized the need for quality, affordable and accessible child care and demonstrated that the government has failed to ensure child care is accessible to all Manitoban families.

(2) Over 90 per cent of Manitoba children receive child care through non-profit, licensed centres and yet funding has been frozen since 2016. These cuts have resulted in many early -childhood educators leaving the sector.

(3) While the child -care centres have faced increased costs associated with loss of parent fees due to COVID-19 closures, spent thousands on PPE when open, to keep kids safe, the provincial government has provided no additional funding–financial supports.

(4) The government has spent less than 1 per cent of the $18- million temporary child -care grant, and instead gave KPMG double their contract, nearly $600,000, to conduct a review that will raise parent fees and lay the groundwork for privatization.

(5) The provincial government cut to the nursery grant is doubling parent fees for hundreds of families, making child care less affordable and accessible.

(6) The provincial government passed bill 34, budget implementation and tax status amendment act, which removes the cap on child- care fees for private sector businesses. We petition the Assembly of Manitoba as follows: We urge the provincial government to reverse their changes to the nursery school grant and to end the freeze on child -care operating grants while committing to keep public child care affordable, accessible for all Manitobans. This has been signed by many Manitobans. Madam Speaker: In accordance with our rule 133(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Mr.

Nello Altomare (Transcona): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background for this petition is as follows: The pandemic has further emphasized the need for quality, affordable, accessible child care and has demonstrated that the government has failed to ensure child care is accessible to all Manitoba families. Over 90 per cent of Manit oba children receive child care through non-profit, licensed centres, and yet funding has been frozen since 2016. These cuts have

1522 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 resulted in many early -childhood educators leaving the sector. While child -care centres have faced increased costs associate d with lost parent fees due to COVID-19 closures and spent thousands on PPE when open, to keep it safe, and the provincial govern- ment had provided no additional financial support.

(4) The government spent less than 1 per cent of the $18- million temporar y child -care grant, and instead gave KPMG double their contract, nearly $600,000, to conduct a review that will raise parent fees and lay the groundwork for privatization.

(5) The provincial government cuts to nursery school grants is doubling parent fee s for hundreds of families, making child care less affordable and accessible.

(6) The provincial government passed bill 34, the budget implementation and tax statutes amendment act, which removed the cap on child- care fees for private sector businesses. Therefore, we petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to reverse changes to the nursery school grants and to end the freeze on child -care's operating grants while com - mitting to keeping public child c are affordable and accessible for all Manitoba families. This petition is signed by Shelby McLeod, Samantha Martin, Randi Matthews and many more Manitobans.

MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background for this petition is as follows:

(1) The pandemic has further emphasized the need for quality, affordable and accessible child care and has demonstrated that the government has failed to ensure child care is accessible to all Manitoba families.

(2) Over 90 per cent of Manitoba children receive child care through non-profit, licensed centres, and yet funding has been frozen since 2016. These cuts have resulted in many early -childhood educators leaving the sector.

(3) While child-care centres have faced increased costs associated with lost parent fees due to COVID-19 closures and spent thousands on PPE, when opened, to keep kids safe, the provincial govern- ment has provided no additional financial support.

(4) The government spent less than 1 per cent of the $18- million temporary child -care grant, and instead gave KPMG double their contract, nearly $600,000, to conduct a review that will raise parent fees and lay the groundwork for privatization.

(5) The provincial government's cuts to nursery school grants is doubling parent fees for hundreds of families, making child care less affordable and accessible.

(6) The provincial government passed bill 34, the budget implementation and tax statues amendment act, which removed the cap on child- care fees for private sector businesses. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to reverse changes to the nursery school grants and to end the freeze on child -care operating grants while com - mitting to keeping public child care affordable and accessible for all Manitoban families. This has been signed by many Manitobans. Cochlear Implant Program Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows: People who suffer hearing loss due to aging, illness, employment or accident not only lose the ability to communicate effectively with friends , relatives or colleagues; they can also experience unemployment, social isolation and struggles with mental health.

A cochlear implant is a life -changing electronic device that allows people who are deaf or hard of hearing to receive and process sounds and speech, and also can partially restore hearing in people who have severe hearing loss and who do not benefit from conventional hearing aids. A processor behind the ear captures and processes sound signals which are transmitted to a receiver implanted into the skull that relays the information to the inner ear, the cochlea. The technology's been available since 1989 through the Central Speech and Hearing Clinic, founded in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

The Surgical Hearing Implant program began implementing

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1523 patients–implanting patients in the fall of 2011 and marked the completion of 250 cochlear implant surgeries in Manitoba in the summer of 2018. The program has implanted about 60 devices since the summer of 2018 and–as it is only able to implant about 40 to 50–45 devices per year. There are no upfront costs to Manitoba residents who proceed with cochlear implant surgery, as Manitoba Health covers the surgical procedure, internal implant and the first external sound processor.

Newfoundland and Manitoba have the highest estimated implantation costs of all provinces. Alberta has one of the best programs with Alberta aids for daily living, and their cost share means the patient pays only approximately $500 out of pocket. Assistive divisive program in Ontario covers 75 per cent of the cost, up to a maximum amount of $5,444, for a cochlear implant replacement speech processor. The BC Adult Cochlear Implant Program offers subsidized replacements to aging sound processors through the Sound Processor Replacement program.

This provincially funded program is available to those cochlear implant recipients whose sound processors have reached six to seven years of age. The cochlear implant is a lifelong commitment, however. As the technology changes over time, parts and software become no longer functional or available.

The cost of upgrading a cochlear implant in Manitoba of approximately $11,000 is much more expensive than in other provinces, as adult patients are responsible for the upgrade costs of their sound processor. * (14:40) In Manitoba, pediatric patients, under 18 years of age, are eligible for funding assistance through the Cochlear Implant Speech Processor Replacement Program, which provides up to 80 per cent of the replacement costs associated with a device upgrade.

It is unreasonable that this technology's in - accessible to many citizens of Manitoba who must choose between hearing and deafness due to financial constraints because the costs of maintaining the equipment are prohibitive for low -income earners or those on a fixed income, such as an old age pension or Employment and Income Assistance.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to provide financing for upgrades to the cochlear implant covered under medicare, or provide funding assistance through the Cochlear Implant Speech Processor Replacement Program to assist with the replacement costs associated with a device upgrade. Signed by Wilma Greatrex, Len [phonetic] Greatrex and Wendy Greatrex, and many, many other Manitobans. Thank you. Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

The background to this petition is as follows: People who suffer hearing loss due to aging, illness, employment or accident not only lose the ability to communicate effectively with friends, relatives or colleagues; they also can experience un - employment, social isolation and struggles with mental health. A cochlear implant is a life -changing electronic device that allows deaf people to receive and process sounds and speech, and also can partially restore hearing in people who have severe hearing loss and who do not benefit from conventional hearing aids.

A processor behind the ear captures and processes sound signals which are transmitted to a receiver implanted into the skull that relays the information to the inner ear. The technology has been available since 1989 through the Central Speech and Hearing Clinic, founded in Winnipeg, Manitoba. T he Surgical Hearing Implant program began implanting patients in the fall of 2011 and marked the completion of 250 cochlear implant surgeries in Manitoba in the summer of 2018. The program has implanted about 60 devices since the summer of 2018, and it i s only able to implant about 40 to 45 devices per year.

There are no upfront costs to Manitoba residents who proceed with cochlear implant surgery, as Manitoba Health covers the surgical procedure, internal implant and the first external sound processor. Newfoundland and Manitoba have the highest estimated implantation costs of all provinces. Alberta has one of the best programs with Alberta aids for daily living and their cost share means the patient pays only approximately $500 out

1524 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 of pocket. Assistiv e Devices Program in Ontario covers 75 per cent of the cost, up to a maximum amount of $5,444, for a cochlear implant replacement speech processor. The BC Adult Cochlear Implant Program offers subsidies replacements to aging sound processors through the Sound Processor Replacement program. This provincially funded program is avail able to those cochlear implant recipients whose sound processors have reached six to seven years old. The cochlear implant is a lifelong commitment.

However, as the technology changes over time, parts and software become no longer functional or avail - able. The cost of upgrading a cochlear implant in Manitoba of approximately $11,000 is much more expensive than in other provinces, as adult patients are responsible for the upgrade costs of their sound processor. In Manitoba, pediatric patients, under 18 years of age, are eligible for funding assistance through the Cochlear Implant Speech Processor Replacement Program, which provides up to 80 per cent of the replacement costs associated with a device upgrade.

It is unreasonable that this technology is in - accessible to many citizens of Manitoba who must choose between hearing and deafness due to financial constraints because the costs of maintaining the equipment are prohibitive for low -income earners or those on a fixed income, such as old age pension or Employment and Income Assistance.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to provide financing for upgrades to the cochlear implant covered under medicare, or provide funding assistance through the Cochlear Implant Speech Processor Replacement Program to assist with the replacement costs associated with a device upgrade. And this petition has been signed by many Manitobans. Diagnostic Testing Accessibility Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background of this petition is as follows:

(1) Until recently, diagnostic medical tests, including for blood and fluid samples, were available and accessible in most medical clinics.

(2) Dynacare blood test labs have consolidated their blood and fluid testing services by closing 25 of its labs.

(3) The provincial government has cut diagnostic testing at many clinic sites, and residents now have to travel to different locations to get their testing done, even for a simple blood test or a urine sample.

(4) Further travel challenges for vulnerable and elderly residents of northeast Winnipeg may result in fewer tests being done or delays in testing, with the attendant effects of increased health -care costs and poorer individual patient outcomes.

(5) COVID-19 emergency rules have resulted in long outdoor lineups, putting vulnerable residents at further risk i n extreme weather, be it hot or cold. Moreover, these long lineups have resulted in longer wait times for services and poorer service in general.

(6) Manitoba residents value the convenience and efficiency of the health-care system when they're able to give their samples at the time of the doctor visit. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to immedi - ately demand Dynacare maintain all the phlebotomy, blood sample sites existing prior to the COVI D-19 public health emergency, and allow all Manitobans to get their blood and urine tests done when visiting their doctor, thereby facilitating local access to blood testing services. This petition is signed by many Manitobans.

Dauphin Correctional Centre Mr. Jamie Moses (St. Vital): Good afternoon, Madam Speaker. I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) The provincial government plans to close the Dauphin Correctional Centre, DCC, in May 2020.

(2) The DCC is one of the largest employers in Dauphin, providing the community with good, family-supporting jobs.

(3) Approximately 80 families will be directly affected by the closure, which will also impact the local economy.

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1525

(4) As of January 27, 2020, Manitoba's justice system was already more than 250 inmates over capacity. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Justice to immediately reverse the decision to clos e the DCC and proceed with the previous plan to build a new correctional and healing centre with an expanded courthouse in Dauphin. This petition has been signed by many Manitobans. Early-Learning and Child-Care Programs Mr. Adrien Sala (St. James): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

The background for this petition is as follows: The pandemic has further emphasized the need for quality, affordable and accessible child care and has demonstrated that the government ha s failed to ensure child care is accessible to all Manitoban families.

(2) Over 90 per cent of Manitoba children receive child care through non-profit, licensed centres, and yet funding has been frozen since 2016. These cuts have resulted in many early -childhood educators leaving the sector.

(3) While child-care centres have faced increased costs associated with lost parent fees due to COVID-19 closures and spent thousands on PPE, when open, to keep kids safe, the provincial govern - ment has provided no additional financial support.

(4) The government spent less than 1 per cent of the $18- million temporary child -care grant, and instead gave KPMG double their contract, nearly $600,000, to conduct a review that will raise parent fees and lay the groundwork for privatization. * (14:50)

(5) The provincial government's cuts to nursery school grants is doubling parent fees for hundreds of families, making child care less affordable and accessible, and

(6) The provincial government passed bill 34, the budget implementation and tax statues amendment act, which removed the cap on child- care fees for private sector businesses. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to reverse changes to the nursery sc hool grants and to end the freeze on child -care operating grants while committing to keeping public child care affordable and accessible for all Manitoban families. This has been signed by many Manitobans. Dauphin Correctional Centre Mr. Mintu Sandhu (The Maples): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) The provincial government plans to close the Dauphin Correctional Centre, DCC, in May 2020.

(2) The DCC is one of the largest employers in Dauphin, providing the community with good, family-supporting jobs.

(3) Approximately 80 families will be directly affected by the closure, which will also impact the local economy.

(4) As of January 27, 2020, Manitoba's justice system was already more than 250 inmates over capacity. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Justice to immediately reverse the decision to close the DCC and proceed with the previous plan to build a new correctional and healing centre with an expanded courthouse in Dauphin. This has been signed by many Manitobans. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) The provincial government plans to close the Dauphin Correctional Centre, DCC, in May 2020.

(2) The DCC is one of the largest employers in Dauphin, providing the community with good, family-supporting jobs.

(3) Approximately 80 families will be directly affected by the closure, which will also impact the local economy.

1526 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021

(4) As of January 27, 2020, Manitoba's justice system was already more than 250 inmates over capacity. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Justice to immediately reverse the decision to close the DCC and proceed with the previous plan to build a new correctional and healing centre with an expanded courthouse in Dauphin. And this has been signed by many Manitobans. Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) The provincial government plans to close the Dauphin Correctional Centre, the DCC, in May 2020.

(2) The DCC is one of the largest employers in Dauphin, providing the community with good, family-supporting jobs.

(3) Approximately 80 families will be directly affected by the closure, which will also impact the local economy. No. 3–

(4) As of January 27, 2020, Manitoba's justice system was already more than 250 inmates over capacity. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Justice to immediately reverse the decision to close th e DCC and proceed with the previous plan to build a new correctional and healing centre with an expanded courthouse in Dauphin. This petition, Madam Speaker, is signed by many Manitobans. Madam Speaker: Grievances? ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Hon.

Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, could you please call for a debate this afternoon Bill 31, followed by Bill 61 and then Bill 41. Madam Speaker: It has been announced by the honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) that the House will consider the following bills this afternoon: Bill 31, Bill 61 and Bill 41.

DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 31–The Horse Racing Regulatory Modernization Act (Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Act and Pari-Mutuel Levy Act Amended) Madam Speaker: I will therefore now start with calling debate on second reading of Bill 31, The Horse Racing Regulatory Modernization Act (Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Act and Pari -Mutuel Levy Act Amended), standing in the name of the honourable mem ber for River Heights, who has 30 minutes remaining. Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Let me begin by saying that we're in general support of this measure which would transfer the authority for ensuring that the horse races in the thoroughbred and standardbred category continue and are properly regulated under the Manitoba liquor, lotteries and cannabis com - mission.

These measures, which we generally support –I will bring up a couple of concerns in due course–but, first of all, I would like to say thank you to the current and past members of the Manitoba Horse Racing Commission, which has served Manitobans well–and those in the horse-racing community, in particular–for some 55 years since the Horse Racing Commission was first established in 1965. Mr. Doyle Piwniuk, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Horse racing is an important part of Manitoba, particularly but not exclusively rural Manitoba.

There are many in the city of Winnipeg who have an interest in horses and in horse racing. The horse ra cing provides the opportunity for breeding and training of horses. It provides an opportunity for those who are involved with the horses themselves to partner with wonderful animals and to be part of their training and racing. I think that we, as humans, gain a lot from spending time with animals, whether it be dogs or cats or horses or, indeed, other animals or birds, and this is an important part of growing up and learning.

There is a lot of, of course, training and discipline involved if you're going to be involved in horse racing. And for young people, the excitement of being involved with the horse, riding a horse or even racing a horse is a really positive experience. I remember when I was a teenager going to a camp where we did a lot of riding hor ses, and it was an amazing experience. I learned a huge number of

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1527 names for many parts of a horse. I learned how to ride horses near Rocky Mountain House in Alberta, and on one occasion we went for a seven -day ride in the mountains–quite an experience bein g a partner with the horse in the journey and learning and seeing a lot throughout it all.

What we are doing today is to move the authority from where it has been under the Manitoba Horse Racing Commission unto the organization which regulates gaming in the province, and that, I think, is a reasonable approach, given that there are similarities between betting here and betting in casinos, to some extent, although very different in nature and in context. I have a couple of concerns which I will talk about a little bit.

One is that as we move away from the Manitoba Horse Racing Commission there is a concern that the change will take things out of the hands of people who have had long experience with horses and horse racing and move it under an organization or a Crown cor - poration–the liquor, gaming and cannabis control authority–in a way that will take it away from, to some extent, the governance by people who are extremely knowledgeable about horses, who care a lot about horses.

And I hope that the Crown corporation will ensure that they include people who are involved and knowledgeable and care about horses as they move this forward. * (15:00) I would presume that many of those who've been involved in inspections of jockeys and drivers and other racing participants would be people who have already had a lot of experience in this area. Indeed, many will have worked for the Manitoba Horse Racing Commission, we presume. I think this is a really important part of this, not to lose the context, not just to se e this as some other casino -type game, some sort of gambling.

It is quite different and it needs to be continued to be considered such, and I would hope that this happens. The second concern that I have relates to one of the clauses here, and this is the clause which is added in

section 14.1(2). It provides, this section, the author- ity for the minister to provide directions with regard - ing to the distribution of the fund. The minister must specify the recipients of distributions. One presumes that this is not an unbridled authority in which the minister can authorize dis - tributions to his or her friends. I presume that there are very clear guidance and approaches that the minister will use, and I hope that the minister will talk a little bit about this and that we may hear a little about this when we get to the committee stage.

I think the –while this may seem natural in a government like the current Conservative govern- ment, to take all the control in the hands of the ministers, I think it is really impo rtant that power is used very carefully and very fairly and with good decision making, and that this is not a power which is going to be used willy-nilly and in a way that, in fact, could cause a lot of harm, if not used properly, to the horse racing industry.

With those remarks, I just want to express my hope that we have enough people vaccinated, that we have a sufficient decrease in the number of people with COVID -19 infections that we can have an operating horse racing thoroughbred and standardbred season this year, with people able to watch in the stands. We will see how things develop. Being around horses is a wonderful opportunity. I guess there may be some questions as to whether horses can get coronavirus infection, and that needs to be something which would need to be determined if it hasn't been already.

But let us hope that there can be a positive season this year and that this will lay a good groundwork for many years ahead of horse racing, thoroughbred and standardbred, in Manitoba. Thank you. Merci. Miigwech. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is there any further speakers on the–this bill? Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 31, The Horse Ra cing Regulatory Modernization Act: Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Act and The Pari-Mutuel Levy Act amendments.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] SECOND READINGS Bill 61–The Apprenticeship and Certification Amendment Act Mr. Deputy Speaker: Now we'll move on to second reading of Bill 61, The Apprenticeship and Certification Amendment Act.

1528 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Economic Development and Jobs): I move, second by the Minister of Crown Services (Mr. Wharton), that Bill 61, The Apprenticeship and Certification Amendment Act, be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Eichler: I'm pleased to rise again to provide some comments on Bill 61, which makes amendments to Apprenticeship and Certification Act.

In 2018, the final report of the Manitoba apprenticeship and certification governance review found that red tape and unnecessary administration in the administration –the apprenticeship system have delayed Manitoba's abilit y to update and harmonize trade standards. Also, as part of the review, the industry expressed their frustration with these delays. In response to the report's recommendation, this bill introduces several system transformations to better meet the needs of industry and to ensure competitiveness, mobility and safety within the trades.

First, the bill will make changes to the size and composition of the Apprenticeship and Certification Board. This will help streamline the board to promote effective governance, practices, as well as ensure that training providers have input to board discussions. As well, the board will shift its focus from pro - ducing annual strategic plans to five -year plans to allow for a longer term planning. This bill will also allow the b oard to establish committees as needed, instead of mandating permanent standing committees.

The amendments will allow for greater con - sideration of industry needs by establishing sector - based committees that will provide recommendations to the board. Thes e sector committees will seek the expertise of trade professionals to inform their recom- mendations and consider the implications of the broader industry–'industies' decision making. This will also provide more flexibility for the board to tailor its governance into emerging issues and reduce the administrative burden associated with maintaining a large number of advisory committees.

Next, the regulations will–voluntary trades will be replaced with board bylaws, a more independent process that requires fewer steps to make changes to the standards for the apprenticeship programs. This will allow Manitoba to update our voluntary trade standards more quickly and easier in order to ensure that we catch up and keep up with Canadian standards. Finally, this bill also brings clarity to the designation of occupation as a way of introducing and recognizing standards for occupations that do not meet the definition of a trade or regulated profession.

The bill specifies training and certification parameters for designating occupations in Manitoba and provides industry with an opportunity to access provincially recognized certification in non-designated programs. This will help industry establish a standard for occupation certification so employers can be satisfied the employees have met a minimum standard of knowledge and expertise in their field.

In closing, established in a more responsive apprenticeship and certification system, through this bill will better support industry and help increase Manitoba's competitiv e advantage by ensuring that Manitoba's program standards are aligned with other jurisdictions. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Questions Mr. Deputy Speaker: A question period of up to 15 minutes will be held.

Questions may be asked and addressed to the minister by any members of the following sequence: first question from the official opposition critic or designate; subsequent questions may be asked by each independent member; remaining questions may be asked by any opposition members. And no questions and answers shall exceed 45 seconds. * (15:10) Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): I would like to ask the minister some questions. I would like to thank him for the bill briefing.

So could I ask the minister –I know he's talked a lot about consultation or the lack thereof –could he explain just exactly who it was that he consulted with when they decided to make these changes to the apprenticeship system? Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Economic Development and Jobs): I thank the critic for the question. We had sent out 25,000 surveys for feedback. That feedback came back to the apprenticeship board, of which we took– and took analysis on it. It was overwhelming that business and apprenticeships themselves felt that modernization was in order, in

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1529 order to move forward with the changes of which we put forward in Bill 61 for consideration of this House, and look forward to moving it into third reading once we have a good debate on it in the House. Mr. Lindsey: I heard what the minister said, that they sent out 25,000 surveys and believes that that is consultation, I guess. So my question would have to be, who all got these surveys and how many of them were actually returned?

So that we have some idea, then –he talks about percentages that thought some of these things were a good idea, but if only 10 per cent of the surveys came back and 50 per cent of them thought it was a good idea, it's pretty low numbers. So if the minister could give us more information on who the surveys went to and– Mr. Deputy Speaker: Honourable member's time is up. Mr. Eichler: Of the information that was sent out was sent to various sector councils, whether that be labour, whether it be the business sector, post - secondary apprentices themselves.

The return actually came back–it wasn't as high as we had liked but as if– with all consultations, when we send out con- sultations, it was about 6 per cent return, which is about normal. And when we look at legislative changes in this regard, out of 1.4 million people, 25,000 is not a lot and 6 per cent's not a lot, but the response we did get back was more of a positive and very little negative. So with that– Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable minister's time is up. Time's up. Mr. Lindsey: So, 6 per cent.

That seems like a ridic- ulously low number of responses to actually start tinkering with a system that's worked well for so many years. Now, if–from that 6 per cent, do we know how many per cent were in favour of the government's proposals and how many were against them? And could the mini ster tell us –he said he went to sector councils, but how many of the surveys actually went to the trade unions that represent apprentices– Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member's time is up. Mr.

Eichler: Yes, in regards to the follow -up and to his question in regards to the–those that were for and against, the recommendations came back from the survey that we had was, I would say, two thirds in favour and a third that was not. But, certainly, part of our consultation was very clear. And also, the modernization–it's been two decades since we had an opportunity to look at upgrading the apprenticeship act. So there was a lot of red tape, as I said in my comments earlier on. Also, there was some reductions in the board that we decided to put in the legis lation as well to make it govern better.

The apprenticeship had some board representatives on there as well, and normally– Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable minister's time is up. The honourable member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey), do you have any more questions? Mr. Lindsey: Yes, sorry, was muted. Sorry. So, what prompted the government to send out this survey? Was there a great hue and cry from industry? Were apprentices screaming for the changes? Was anybody asking for these changes? Or was it just part of this government's overall mandate to reduce red tape, as they call it, for things that were actually working quite well? Mr.

Eichler: In regards to the apprenticeship act, as I said earlier on, it's been two decades since we had a chance to update it. As I said, it was full of red tape; it was full of slowness. And, of course, when we looked at the PAC committees, we saw that they were aging; they were taking sometimes up to two years for an apprentice to get his certification, which allowed him or her more timelines to not be able to work and get the pay that they needed. This is about modernizing our workforce and keeping them active with good-paying jobs. Ms.

Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): Has the minister considered if these changes will affect either– or both–employers and employees, as far as receiving quality and fair opportunities go in an apprenticeship? Mr. Eichler: I have a quote here from Jared Jacobson–he's the president and CEO of Jacobson & Greiner Group of Companies –who said: This is fantastic news on a new bill that modernizes and needed changes for apprenticeship in Manitoba – he's the president and CEO, as I said –as a group of companies, we employ all areas of major trades and

1530 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 see this as a positive step to remove barriers an d red tape for our industry. And our consultation did tell us very clearly this was something that the industry wanted. Apprentice - ship wanted it, Red Seal wanted it and that's why we're modernizing the act. Mr. Lindsey: Well, it's interesting that the m inister brings out a quote from one of the industry players that clearly wants to make getting apprentices a whole lot easier and less expensive.

And does the minister have any similar quotes from a trade union that suggests that these changes are going to work in their members' or their future members' benefits, or did he just base his decision on some industry players that responded? Mr. Eichler: Absolutely, Mr. Deputy Speaker. One of the leaders from the government unions, Mr. Sandhu, had been outspoken concerning young tradespeople: A badly broken system which was just needed to push through the most dramatic changes we've seen in apprenticeship in decades. And he's very clear that he's concerned about this, and he's expressed his opinions to me.

H owever, he knows that the things need to be changes. He will be making presentation, I'm sure, at committee. We're looking forward to hearing not only from him but other Manitobans from across Manitoba. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the honourable member for T yndall Park (Ms. Lamoureux), do you have a question? Okay, the honourable member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey). Mr. Lindsey: So, the–one of the union groups that represents workers has suggested they needed some changes.

Now, have they suggested to you or have you heard from them to say that these changes that you've proposed will meet their needs, will meet the needs of apprentices going forward? Has anybody, for example, I don't know, maybe from IBEW, come forward and said, what a great idea this is, Mr. Minister; this should make our apprentices better and more trained? So, could the minister comment on that level? Mr.

Eichler: I thank the member for the question. * (15:20) At this point, we've had no recommendations come forward from any other group, but certainly we've made it very clear we're a government that listens, a government that consults, and the member well knows that when we did the briefing we have been engaged with all sectors in order to make sure we get this legislation right and redu ce red tape at the same time, and also meet the needs of those businesses and those employees that so badly need the jobs to help us grow our business here in Manitoba. Mr.

Lindsey: As the minister well knows from the notes I made during our briefing on this, it–the minister says they talked to the journey companies. They talked to some of the education and service providers. They did speak to some of the PAC shares. They didn't really speak to any apprentices to get their thoughts on whether this was going to make their life easier. And now they've taken apprentices off of any committees that may be established. Can the minister explain the thought process of why leaving apprentices out of any of these decisions that directly affect apprentices, how's th at make sense? Mr.

Deputy Speaker: The honourable member's time is up. Mr. Eichler: I have to correct the record. The member is wrong. Actually, we did have consultation with the apprentices. The member should know that. If not, he knows it now. They had every opportunity to provide feedback, which they did. And in overall consultation process, what we heard from apprentices was that the larger percentage was in favour of these changes which – that's what we based our decisions on. So we stand by those ap prentices that actually did phone back and write back to us with their ideas and thoughts.

So that's what I want to put on the record. Mr. Lindsey: Seems to be slightly different than the information I wrote down at the time, but I won't quibble about it. So if the board is now only required to submit a strategic plan on five -year intervals instead of one-year intervals, what steps are included in these changes to the act or regulations that would ensure that the board is meeting the obligations that is required of it, that the plan is actually working, that the plan makes sense, that maybe five years is too long, maybe there needs to be changes to the plan.

Is there any accountability steps along the way or changes possible along the way?

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1531 Mr. Eichler: It's a good question and one that I want to address. As we know, we have a very strong aviation sector within Manitoba, at least prior to COVID. We knew that we had an aging population within that aerospace sector, of which a lot of apprentice staff worked there, got their training in Manitoba and stayed and got good-paying jobs. So I think it's really important that we do value the five -year plan so that we can make sure those apprentices have jobs and good- paying jobs when they graduate and get their Red Seal and go out to the work world.

So I know we'll continue to update those as we go forward. It's one of those things that I'm very proud of, that our department's got a good handle on, to meet the needs of business tomorrow and those needs of apprenticeships so they have– Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable minister's time is up. Mr. Lindsey: So when I read through the changes that have been proposed, there used to be several man - dated committees and it was mandated by the act what those committees were supposed to do and how they were made up.

And now it seems like a watered-down version that the board may make some committees up and they may make some bylaws on how those committees function. And it seems like a pretty loosey-goosey way to run things that they may make them up or they may not. Can the minister explain why they've suggested this change to the committee structure? Mr. Eichler: Absolutely. There's 55 PAC boards –is what's referred to as PAC board. Some of the committees haven't met for two years. People change, people move, so a lot of the committees just weren't functioning properly.

And as I said earlier in my comments, sometimes it would take up to two years –extra years –for that apprenticeship to meet with that group. And this way, with the new modernization with four to six committees–and which, by the way, for the member's interest, they can appoint a committee very quickly to deal with a particular apprentice or a problem, so modernization is really important because what we had in the past was not working. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Time for question period has expired. Debate Mr. Deputy Speaker: The debate is open. Any speakers? Mr.

Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): So here we are, in the middle of a pandemic. We've seen the government do several things already with apprenticeships and apprentices that really fly in the face of what they claim. We've seen them change the ratio, for example, of apprentices from the one-to-one–which means one journeyperson to one apprentice –which guarantees proper training, to two -to-one. And then for some steps along the way, we can see that they've suggested that well, they can get their training over the phone or via radio or something. The journeyman doesn't have to be in the same room with them.

So really, we've–we looked at everything and how it ties back to this Bill 61, the apprenticeship certification act. This particular piece of legislation may not be the scary piece of legislation, if you will, or the most damaging piece of legislation when it comes to apprenticeships, but it's one piece in the puzzle, one piece in the master plan that really puts apprentices on shaky ground going forward, thanks to changes that this government has made. You know, it really is –leaves us questioning, I guess.

We've seen that the government has decided to do away with the requirement, for example, of apprentices to be a part of public construction projects, that they don't seem to value proper trades apprenticeship training.

It will lead them off and then seems that t his is all tied back to their ideological desire to fully embrace some kind of magic free trade agreements, because from comments the minister made, this ties in with the new west trade partnership, which, when we were in government, we wouldn't sign on to, and rightfully so, because we saw it as part of the degradation of things like we're talking about here, like trades training, like apprenticeship training. It was really the part of the overall plan to race to the bottom, if you will, to train to the lowest common denominator.

And, really, that's when you separate the wheat from the chaff in the minister's statement. That's what this is all about. It's not about providing the best apprenticeship training possible so that we have the highest qualified a pprentices–which I stand behind our apprentices right now, and when they become journeypeople, journeypersons, they are without a doubt some of the best that this country has to offer–but with some of the things that this government is putting in place.

I don't foresee that claim potentially being valid going forward because, again, the whole point, whether it's the new west trade partnership or the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, it's all about

1532 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 lowering the standards. It's not about modernizing the standards, unless you consider the modernization of standards to really mean the lowering of standards, because that's what happens a lot of cases here. Now, there are some very troubling things in this particular piece of legislation. It does some things that maybe saves some money and doesn't necessarily mean the end of the world, such as decreasing the size of the board from 15 to 12 members, but one of the troubling things on that is that now there's going to be no apprentices as part of that board.

They'v e decided that the voice of apprentices on apprenticeship training is troublesome. They don't want them there. They won't listen. They really like to listen to their industry friends to make sure they're accommodating them as much as possible, to make sure that apprenticeship training is as cheap as possible. * (15:30) And I'd remind the minister that –the old adage, you get what you pay for sometimes. So in the process of some of these changes, like the one-to-one ratio for electricians in particular, could be disastrous effects.

And, certainly, if the minister was to spend some time speaking to people like Cindy Skanderberg, whose son died working as an electrical helper –and she fought long and hard to get some of these changes that this minister, with a stroke of his pen somewhere in the dark of night just before Christmas, did away with, and now says that he has the inability to fix it, which seems odd. But certainly she–she's quite upset, to say the least, by this change in ratio. And I had the pleasure of–I guess it wasn't really pleasure–I worked with Ms.

Skanderberg doing Workers of Tomorrow presentations when I was the Steelworkers safety rep going into schools, talking about worker safety. And her son, her deceased son, his picture hung on my union safety office wall to remind me and to remind people coming into the office of some of the things that we were fighting for, why it was important to make legislation better, not lesser. And that's really what this government has done. Right from the time they first got elected, they've attacked working people. They disrespected working people. They've done everything in their power to undercut working people.

And this whole gambit of Bill 61 really is just another step along that path that really does n't respect the knowledge that a trades - person has to impart to an apprentice in order for them to be fully trained and cognizant in all aspects of the job. And, certainly, I know the minister is aware of this. Even figuring out during these COVID times how apprentices in the power engineers can go about writing their tests in a safe manner so that they can progress from one level to the next level, that's all just been frozen.

And yet we've got kids going to school, we've got all kinds of other groups t hat are meeting. And, certainly, you don't want to have 45 or 50 apprentices all in the same room writing a test at the same time. But there has to be a way that if this government was serious about making sure that tradesmen can progress and really hono uring the government's commitment to those young people that are in that trade that are trying to get their ticket, that are trying to earn a better standard of living and trying to be able to do a job safely and properly, they'd really come up with some answers.

I was at the Building Trades compound that they're developing as a training centre and looked at how they've structured things so that during these times they can continue to offer training and education to young people entering the trades or thinking about entering the trades. So it's not impossible. So I'd encourage the minister to make sure that somebody from the Office of the Fire Commissioner, who somehow is in charge of the power engineers' training, figures out how to allow those apprentices to progress.

So just before I wander too far down the path of everything that this government has done wrong– because it'd be a long, winding path–let's drag myself back to this particular piece of legislation. So this particular piece of legislation repeals all the mandated committees that were there and now it replaces it with some language. It says the board may create subcommittees–and by the very word, may, it means that they also may not.

So it's–on the surface of it, it's left up to the board to decide what committees they would structure to help them guide their way along the path of providing the best training possible for apprenticeships. But then there's some other bits and pieces in this legislation, when you look at it as a whole piece, that as the board makes its strategic plan, it's a strategic plan that it is to be directed by the minister. So, just let me read part of this: The strategic plan must set out the board's priorities in advancing its

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1533 mandate–so it would seem it's the boa rd's priorities, but then, when you read the rest of it –taking into account the strategic direction of the government in the areas of apprenticeship and training as communicated to the board by the minister. So the board will make up its strategic five -year plan as directed by the minister. So, really, it's the government of the day, the minister of the day, that is making up the five -year plan.

They're going to dictate to the apprenticeship board what the plan is and then expect the board to write up a plan based on exactly doing what they've been told. So that seems like direct interference now by the part of the minister, which I suspect was the game plan all along, because we've seen ministers of the Crown interfere in a lot of aspects of what takes place, whether it's with apprenticeships, whether it's with collective bargaining, whether it's with the operation of Crown corporations. For a government that claims to have a hand-off approach on how Crowns operate, it's completely opposite.

It's this government's usual double-speak when it comes to, well, the board's going to make up the plan; we're just going to tell them what to put in the plan. And the minister fully admits that even though this legislation has now been introduced, there's nothing in the legislation as it's laying before us that it's going to have any accounting for how the board, how the apprenticeships are progressing along the strategic plan.

So while it may make some sense to have a plan based on a five-year projection as opposed to a one-year projection–for a lot of things, that probably is a good idea–but in this fast-changing world that we see ourselves in, something as devastating as a pandemic happens and the plan may need to change, a new technology advances and the plan may need to change.

But the minister's clearly admitted that there's nothing in here that talks about keeping track of how the apprentices, how the training, how the board is progressing along the plan, and there's nothing in here that talks about the board's ability, or, for that matter, the minister–because he's got his fingers in this pie up to his elbows –there's nothing that says how they're going to account for changes that may be required, or anything of that effect.

So, while the minister has devel oped an appren- ticeship plan that allows him the full and ultimate control of what the plan is, he failed to build in any kind of accounting mechanism to make sure that he or the board is living up to whatever the plan is. * (15:40) Now, I recognize that this minister isn't going to be the minister forever, a couple more years, maybe, at best, and then when we take over, we'll be able to fix some of this, obviously.

I would hope and encourage the minister that if he knows there's some glaring omissions in his legislation as he's presented it, but–he'll have ample opportunity to make changes, to make it a better plan. You know, he talks a lot about he's big on consultation. Now, I'll admit I didn't take

part in this 6 per cent of surveys that happened, but I would offer a suggestion, now that we have something, that's quite important that should be built into the apprenticeship training: it's the ability to track that plan. And there may be other avenues that will allow some of that to happen, such as the Auditor General, but those reports and recommendations take a while to come to light and be implemented, so it would seem to me a better way would be to have something in this legislation that talks about, perhaps, annual reporting on progress to plan, whatever that plan is.

And I guess the minister would know that, seeing it's really, truly– it's going to be the minister's plan, not the board's plan. I think it does do a disservice to apprentices to leave their voice out, and particularly if, as we move to this five -year planning, that we really need to be listening to what the people in the program, not necessarily the people in charge of the program that will see their funding, perhaps, tied into how well they think they're doing.

We really need to have the voice of those apprentices in there to make sure that, whatever the plan is that the minister foists some on the board, that those voices are heard and, one would hope, listened to. I wouldn't have a lot of faith in that action happening, but I –well, I have some faith in this minister that he will actually listen to some suggestions that are being proposed.

And while we may not completely agree on some of the changes here, I'm pretty sure that there are some things we can agree on, such as how to track the plan and the voice of some of those apprentices that are in the plan to make sure that the plan makes sense and is working.

1534 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 I'm still concerned by the fact that we've done away with all of the mandated committees. Now, is the minister right by s aying some of the committees have met and some of them are getting long in the tooth? Yes; I won't dispute that. But why would you throw the baby out with the bath water?

In this case, if there's some committees that aren't working, review whether those committees are still needed, review how effective some of the other committees are and what can be done to make them more effective, as opposed to just saying, well, we'll get rid of all those committees and maybe we'll make some new ones. And some of thes e committees are going to be tasked with deciding what's best for multiple trade groups.

And we don't see anything in here now that it would mandate that some of those very trade union groups will have much of a voice in how these committees or how the a pprenticeship program will work going forward, which is troubling, because not only do they represent tradesmen, journeymen– journeypersons, excuse me, but in a lot of cases they represent the apprentices as well. And those union folks will be some of the best positioned ones to really comment on how the plan is working, whether we're getting better tradespeople, at the end of the day, or whether we're getting lesser tradespeople.

And really, that's part of the concerning part, when you look at the whole pa ckage of things that the government has recently done to apprentices, to apprenticeships–not necessarily for apprentices and for apprenticeships. It really gets back to the whole problem that we had with free trade, which is the race to the bottom. So we' ll–we won't train our apprentices to the same level, potentially, as they were before. The government is –has done away with some of the protections that used to be built in so the big construction projects, there would be apprentices.

They've done away w ith some of the project –or they haven't done away with that yet. They tried for many years to do away with project labour agreements that built in a lot of those training aspects that we're talking about here that helped us have better, more competent, better trained, safer workers at the end of the day, rather than this government's mantra of just cheaper work. So it ties into the whole free movement, I guess, of workers.

But, unfortunately, what it does is allows the government to always go to the lowest bidder, regardless of where they're from, regardless of the quality of work that they may get from the lowball bidders.

It allows certain employers–and, certainly, I don't want to paint all employers with the same broad brush here–but it's going to allow some unscrupulous employers to really undercut others by undercutting what they're offering for apprenticeships, what they're offering for quality training, by bringing in employees, workers from other jurisdictions, and then lowering our standards so tha t we're okay with workers that have a lower standard of training. In my mind– An Honourable Member: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Point of Order Mr. Deputy Speaker: Point of order.

The honourable member for Rossmere, on a point of order. Mr. Andrew Micklefield (Rossmere): Let all members pause their work , to celebrate the Clerk , whose mother on this day, gave birth and said, hooray. This Clerk now knows the rules, while clerking keeps her cool, and guides us with advice, calls members to be nice. I wish her a great day, and join her mom's hooray. May this year be her best, from me and all the rest. Happy birthday. Mr. Deputy Speaker: On the same point of order, the honourable member from Concordia. Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Well, I could be critical of the timing, I think.

My colleague from Flin Flon was in full flight and talking about a very important issue. On behalf of the opposition caucus, I also wanted to extend our birthday wishes to our Clerk, and thank her for all of her work throughout this year and always. Happy birthday. Mr. Deputy Speaker: On the same point of order, the honourable member for River Heights. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I think we need– in the midst of debate and ongoing discussion–t o pause for a moment and wish the Clerk all the very best of a wonderful birthday and many more.

March 10, 2021 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1535 Mr. Deputy Speaker: Like, I just want to wish the – Patricia a happy birthday, and it is not a point of order, but thanks for all your words of kindness. * * * Mr. Deputy Speaker: And we'll get on to the debate, and the honourable member for Flin Flon. Mr. Lindsey: Certainly don't have any bad wishes for the Clerk, but interrupting the debate in the middle of a speech seems ill-timed, ill-conceived, at best. But, happy birthday all the same. So where was I?

Oh, jeez, maybe I've got to start again. * (15:50) You know, maybe five years for this strategic plan won't be the end of the world because, well, what we see from this government is their failure to rea lly invest in infrastructure projects.

So I guess it'll be left up to private industry to find a way to train workers, because, as we come out of this pandemic, this would be the ideal time for the government to really sink some thought and some money into rebuilding some of the infrastructure and using it as a training opportunity, particularly when we look at some of the, like, communities in the North, where getting university educations, post-secondary educations is a dream that, really, for so many you ng people isn't attainable simply because it's too expensive, it's too far away.

They don't have the initial training, but it's the opportunity–it should be the opportunity for them to enter into some of these trades' training and really start their jour ney to self -sufficiency and bringing their families out of poverty. But the government introducing bills like this Bill 61, it really slams the door yet again to some of those opportunities because we don't know right now what they're going to do, really, with the apprenticeship training and all the rest of it.

We know that they're not making the investments that are required in the other education endeavours, so I guess that's part of their whole reducing red tape is– it's always tied to reducing dollars for themselves or some of their industry cohorts, when really it should be about using the resources to help uplift new workers, whether they're from northern communities, whether they're new workers to this country, to make sure that they actually get the training to do the jobs properly, that they get the training to do the job safely.

And with this government's weird desire to buy into free trade agreements at any cost, I guess it would allow–if we maintain the best standard of training –it would allow some of these young people that we're talking about here to really spread their wings and go work in other jurisdictions. Knowing that they had the best training, they had the best education, they were the best tradesmen, that other jurisdictions would want to snap them up because they knew that Manitoba offered the best training for apprentices.

But with bills like this one and some of the other ones that the government is introducing, really, they're cutting the legs out from underneath those tradesmen, those future tradespeople, those apprentices that may never achieve their full Red Seal status. There's some things in here that talk about that the government coming up with some new voluntary trades, uncertain yet, but at the bill review we spent a lot of time talking about some of these new tow trucks that are out there that really are mobile cranes, but the operators won't be mobile crane operators.

They'll be something less than, and really, the equipment they're operating is–it's a mobile crane, som e of these new super duty tow trucks that are used for clearing crash scenes at–of certainly large vehicles. Is that the right way to go? To say, well, they're going to be maybe a voluntary trade, maybe some kind of designated trade, to get some kind of training, but if you're to operate a mobile crane itself, you would get a whole lot more stringent training.

Now, although with some of the changes we've seen in ratios and training requirements that, again, the government snuck in just before Christmas in regulations, some of those apprentices also won't get the same level of training. Imagine you're operating a mobile crane and it's about to tip over because you haven't rigged things properly, and the best you can hope for is to the pick up your cellphone and phone some person who's a certified crane operator, maybe in some other city, and say, hey, my crane's tipping over, what should I do? Little too late then.

That–really, that's the whole point of the one -to- one, hands -on: so that the journeyperson with the experience is there to guide the apprentice. And what we've seen from most of this government's legislation when it comes to labour or to apprentices has really been to either disrespect them or to lower their standards of training so that it's the race to the bottom again. It's not the right way to go.

1536 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 10, 2021 Now, like I say, this particular piece of legislation may not be the complete bad thing that I've painted here, but it's one piece in the whole puzzle that leads to the degradation of training and quality that we should expect from all our trades groups and from all our apprentices. And I'm sure that they expect, when they enter into a trade, to get the best quality training, the best possible outcome, so that they can go to work and be safe and be productive and make sure that they're a part of our economy going forward. So, with those very few words, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I think I'll cede the floor to the next speaker. Mr. Rick Wowchuk (Swan River): I also want to commend the whip for adding som e life into this afternoon's debate. And I'd like to thank the minister for bringing Bill 61 forward, The Apprenticeship and Certification Amendment Act. Our apprenticeship and certification program is too outdated, and these amendments are necessary to ensure we have skilled labour force to complement the opportunities that are required by industry.

Trades are very important, and we need skilled personnel to help improve employment outcomes of individuals who would like to pursue a career in a given chosen–or, occupation. This is important to our economy and provides the skills necessary to fulfill the needs of industry out there. As an educator for 35 years and, more impor - tantly, a vocational educator for 25 years, I realize the importance of a well -prepared, skilled individual in the workforce. Manitoba's the second most regulated appre

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	42-3-33
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	42nd 3rd hansardpdf 33.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	73b84e5f645ca5c74a79c355b6f279f8b9c1a45b

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