Manitoba Hansard — 7 October 2008 (Sitting 81B, 39th Legislature, 2nd Session)

39-2-81b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LX No. 81B – 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, October 7, 2008 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P.

DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P. Vacant Elmwood

3811 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, October 7, 2008 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Long-Term Care Facility–Morden Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background for this petition is as follows: Tabor Home Incorporated is a time-expired personal care home in Morden with safety, environmental and space deficiencies. The seniors of Manitoba are valuable members of the community with in creasing health-care needs requiring long-term care.

The community of Morden and the surrounding area are experiencing substantial population growth. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) to strongly consider giving priority for funding to develop and staff a new 100-bed long-term-care facility so that clients are not exposed to unsafe conditions and so that Boundary Trails Health Centre beds remain available for acute-care patients instead of waiting placement clients. This is signed by Stan Hildebrand, Wes Schroeder, Jan Hand and many, many others. Mr.

Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Hard Surfacing Unpaved Portion– Provincial Road 340 Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition. All Manitobans deserve access to well- maintained rural highways as this is critical to both motorist safety and to commerce. Provincial Highway 340 is a well-utilized road.

Heavy vehicles from potato and livestock operations, agricultural-related businesses, Hutterite colonies and the Maple Le af plant in Brandon use this road. Vehicles from Canadian Forces Base Shilo also travel this busy road. Commuter traffic from Wawanesa, Stockton, Nesbitt and surrounding farms to Shilo and Brandon is common on this road. Provincial Highway 340 is an alternate route for many motorists travelling to Brandon coming off Provincial Highway 2 east and to Winnipeg via the Trans-Canada Highway No. 1. An upgrade to this road would ease the traffic congestion on Provincial Highway 10.

Access to the Criddle-Vane Homestead Provincial Park would be greatly enhanced if this road were improved. The hard surfacing of the unpaved portion of Highway 340 south of Canadian Forces Base Shilo towards Wawanesa would address the last few neglected kilometres of th is road and increase the safety of motorists who travel on it. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Lemieux) to consider hard surfacing of the unpaved portion of PR 340 south of Canadian Forces Base Shilo towards Wawanesa.

This petition is signed by Dennis Thompson, Kurt Heinrichs, Colleen Scott and many, many others. Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition. All Manitobans deserve access to well- maintained rural highways as this is critical to both motorist safety and to commerce. Provincial Road 340 is a well-utilized road. Heavy vehicles from potato and livestock operations, agricultural-related businesses, Hutterite

3812 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 colonies and the Maple Le af plant in Brandon use this road. Vehicles from Canadian Forces Base Shilo also travel this busy road. Commuter traffic from Wawanesa, Stockton, Nesbitt and surrounding farms to Shilo and Brandon is common on this road. PR 340 is an alternate route for many motorists travelling to Brandon coming off PTH 2 east and to Winnipeg via the Trans-Canada Highway No. 1. An upgrade to this road would ease the traffic congestion on PTH 10. Access to the Criddle-Vane Homestead Provincial Park would be greatly enhanced if this road were improved.

The hard surfacing of the unpaved portion of PR 340 south of Canadian Forces Base Shilo towards Wawanesa would address the last few neglected kilometres of this road and increase the safety of motorists who travel on it. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Lemieux) to consider hard surfacing of the unpaved portion of Provincial Road 340 south of Canadian Forces Base Shilo towards Wawanesa. This petition is signed by Earl Vidler, Karen Kotak, Verna Hutlet and many, many other fine Manitobans. Education Funding Mr.

Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: Historically, the Province of Manitoba has received funding for educati on by the assessment of property that generates taxes. This unfair tax is only applied to selected property owners in certain areas and confines. Property-based school tax is becoming an ever- increasing burden without acknowledging the owner's income or owner's ability to pay. The provincial sales tax was instituted for the purpose of funding education.

However, monies generated by this tax are being placed in general revenue. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth (Mr. Bjornson) consider removing education funding by school tax or education levies from all property in Manitoba. To request that the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth consider finding a more equitable method of funding education such as general revenue following the constitutional funding of education by the Province of Manitoba. This petition, Mr.

Speaker, is signed by Roland Dandeneau, Ray Ostertag, Wayne Robson and many, many other fine Manitobans. Air Canada Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to the petition is as follows: On September 29, 2008, the Member for Inkster stated in question period: ". . . when Air Canada was privatized, there was a moral, if not a legal obligation, for Air Canada to protect the bases here in Winnipeg." On September 29, 2008, the Premier (Mr.

Doer) responded by saying that: ". . . the wording of the law and the spirit of the law is consistent with the member's analysis that the presence would stay." We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider taking whatever action possible to keep both the Air Canada flight attendant base and the Air Canada pilot base here in Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker, this is signed by C. Graham, P. Smith, M. Boudreau and many, many other fine Manitobans. Neepawa, Minnedosa and Areas–Local Hospitals Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Mr.

Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3813 These are the reasons for the petition: Residents of Neepawa, Minnedosa and the surrounding areas are concerned about the long-term viability of their respective local hospitals. Impending retirements, physician shortages and the closure of many other rural emergency rooms have caused residents to fear that their health-care facilities may also face closure in the future. Local physicians and many residents have expressed their support for a proposed regional health centre to serve both communities.

It is believed that a new regional health centre would help secure and maintain physicians and would therefore better serv e the health-care needs of the region. The success of other regi onal hospitals, such as Boundary Trails Health Centre, has set the precedent for the viability and success of similar health-care centres in the Neepawa and Minnedosa area. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) to consider the feasibility of a joint health centre, including an emergency room to service Neepawa and Minnedosa and the surrounding area.

To urge the Minister of Health to consider sustaining health-care services in this area by working with local physicians and the Assiniboine Regional Health Authority on this initiative. This petition is signed by D. Cox, Kelly Wisnoski, Matt Soroka and many, many others. Paved Shoulders for Trans-Canada Highway Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Speaker.

These are the reasons for this petition: The lack of paved shoulders on the Manitoba portions of the Trans-Canada Highway poses a serious safety risk for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians alike. This risk was borne out again with the tragic June 2008 deaths of two cyclists travelling east of Virden on the Trans-Canada Highway and injuries sustained by two other cyclists. Subsequently, the Government of Manitoba has indicated it will pave the shoulders on the Trans- Canada Highway but has not provided a time frame for doing so.

Manitoba's Assistant Deputy Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation told a Winnipeg radio station on October 16, 2008, that when it comes to highway projects, the provincial government has a "flexible response program." In the interests of protecting public safety, it is critical that the paving of the shoulders on the Trans- Canada Highway in Manitoba be completed as soon as possible. We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows: To request the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr.

Lemieux) to consider making the completion of the paving of the shoulders on the Trans-Canada Highway an urgent provincial government priority. To request the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation to clearly articulate a time frame for paving the shoulders on the Trans-Canada Highway in Manitoba Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by Jacey Careme, Donna Knott, Carolyn Grant, Irene Rowand and many, many others. * (13:40) TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Healthy Living): I'd like to table the Healthy Child Manitoba Annual Report '07-08, the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba Annual Report '07-08 and the Manitoba Seniors and Healthy Aging Secretariat Report '07-08. Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): I'm pleased to table the '07-08 Annual Report for Manitoba Health and Healthy Living, which includes the Annual Report for the Manitoba Health Services Insurance Plan. Hon.

Rosann Wowchuk (Minis ter of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives): I'm pleased to table the 2007-2008 annual repo rts for The Cooperative Promotion Board and The Co-operative Loans and Loans Guarantee Board. Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of Culture, Heritage, Tourism and Sport): On behalf of the Minister of Aboriginal an d Northern Affairs (Mr.

3814 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 Lathlin), I'd like to table the Annual Report of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs 2007-2008. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us the reeve of the Rural Municipality of North Cypress, Brad Wells. Also in the public gallery we have with us from Carberry Collegiate 20 grade 9 students under the direction of Mrs. Raegan Dyck. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Cullen).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS Independent Prosecutors Attorney General's Directions Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Taman commission report, authored by retired Justice Salhany, indicates that the plea bargain that was agreed to by the independent counsel in the Taman case brought the administration of justice into disrepute.

We know that, under this Attorney General's department's policies, he has the right and the power under his own policies to give direction to the independent counsel provided that he makes that direction public after the giving of that instruction to the independent counsel.

The objective of the policy is in those special cases where independent counsel is appointed, that the department, which has regular interactions with police officers and others, is essentially set aside and that there's a direct relationship between independent counsel and the Deputy Attorney General or Attorney General to ensure there's accountability for decisions. Mr. Speaker, we know that the Attorney General in this case, after several briefings leading up to this plea bargain, chose not to exercise that power.

He argued vigorously some four or five weeks ago that he ought not to have that power or to exercise it. He then said yesterday that he accepted all of the recommendations of Justice Salhany. One of those recommendations not only acknowledges that power but calls for the clarification and enhancement of that power. Justice Salhany says that there should be a change to the policy, which says, and I quote: Independent prosecutors are required to keep the Department of Justice advised of all significant decisions that they propose to take in connection with the cases they are assigned.

This is done solely to keep Department of Justice officials apprised of the status of the case and to enable the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General to give direction as contemplated by

section C of this policy. This is the recommendation of Justice Salhany, which he is recommending. It's the very power that he was arguing against some four or five weeks ago. I want to ask the Premier who he agrees with, his Attorney General who says that he has no such power and that he ought not have such power, or does he agree with Justice Salhany who says that the power exists and that it ought to be clarified in the department's policies? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, this is an excellent opportunity to clarify September 8, 2008, Hansard, wherein the Conservatives claim that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak), in a very serious allegation, had agreed with the offer and conditional sentence, and they accused the minister of interfering with the plea bargain. In fact, on page 18 of the Salhany report: I am satisfied in this case Mr. Minuk made all material decisions and did not ask for approval from Manitoba Justice officials. That's on page 18 of the report.

I wonder if the Leader of the Opposition can clarify the record in terms of the Salhany report and apologize to the Minister of Justice for the very unfair allegation that he made, Mr. Speaker. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, it's too bad the Premier, by that comment, doesn't understand the purpose of special counsel. What the report says is that department staff are not to be involved in directing independent counsel but that the Deputy Attorney General and the Attorney General do have that right. That's in the Attorney General's policy. Mr.

Speaker, what we said was that the Attorney General had the opportunity to give direction as provided in his policy, and he didn't. The Attorney General chose not to exercise that power. So, then, rather than trying to confuse the issue, I just wonder if the Premier can indicate: Is he accepting the recommendation of Justice Salhany to proceed with and clarify the already existing power of the Attorney General to give direction to independent counsel provided that that direction is

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3815 made public? Rather than trying to confuse the issue, why doesn't he just respond to a direct question? Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite and his Justice critic got a lot of media by making an allegation that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak) interfered and approved the issue of the plea bargain. The quote is: agreed with the offer and conditional sentence.

The reality is I'm satisfied in this case–this is a direct quote from Hansard: agreed with the offer and the conditional sentence–that Minuk made all material decisions and did not ask for approval from Manitoba Justice. You have an allegation made by members opposite. You have a finding made by Justice Salhany. I would expect the members opposite would want to have the honour of correcting the record and apologizing for making an allegation that has proven to be incorrect. It was a major allegation made in this House, Mr. Speaker, and I think that the members opposite have a responsibility.

I would point out, Mr. Speaker, that the member opposite has talked about Mr. Minuk. He's talked about him: I know Mr. Minuk and I know others are involved. I am confident they will put the best case forward. He said that in the media scrum on October 29, 2007. So the bottom line is, Mr.

Speaker, it's easy to be a genius after the fact, I su ppose, that the Leader of the Opposition is acting like, but I would ask him to correct the record from the false statement being made by his critic that actually is really detrimental to the good operation of the justice system under the stewardship of our Minister of Justice. Mr. McFadyen: I'm surprised th a t s o m e o f t h e longer serving members of the NDP would clap for that response. It's exactly what he did when the former Member for Fort Whyte started asking questions about Crocus.

He demanded an apology at the time when members on this side asked questions about Crocus. He demands apologies every time he's in trouble, Mr. Speaker, and he's lear ned after many years in politics that the best defence is a good offence, and that's fine. It may work as a political tactic to demand apologies every time he's wrong, to cast himself as the victim in this scenario, but the fact is that we have said all along that we disagree with the Attorney General's decision. He had the opportunity and the power under his own policy to give direction.

He chose not to do it and that's a legitimate issue for debate. He chose not to exercise the power. The Member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) disagreed with that. We think that there's a role for a proactive Attorney General in Manitoba, and Justice Salhany believes there's a role for a proactive Attorney General in Manitoba when it comes to independent prosecutions. I want to ask the Premier: Does he accept this recommendation of Justice Salhany, or does he side with his Attorney General who thinks there's no role for the Attorney General when it comes to these sorts of issues? * (13:50) Mr. Doer: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the whole purpose of the–if one goes back in Justice Dewar's report dealing with the establishment of an independent counsel, the first word in that is independent counsel, having somebody that is outside of the stakeholders of the justice system or of the government. That is a principle with an independent prosecutor that's even more important to maintain. There are a number of recommendations in the report from Justice Salhany to even further enhance independence for the independent prosecutor.

We have accepted those recommendations, and, in fact, there are four existing independent prosecutors in Manitoba on a go-forward basis. All those contracts are ended because of the recommendation of Justice Salhany. We will be building and implementing a larger list of independent prosecutors, as recommended by Justice Salhany. As I say, it will be a new list. It will be a broader list. That list, though, will be made independent of the political arm of government. It will not be the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Chomiak) establishing a list of independent prosecutors that might deal with a case of an MLA in the government. It will be the Deputy Attorney General implementing the Salhany recommendation, which the Minister of Justice has said we will implement, Mr. Speaker. Independent Prosecutors Attorney General's Directions Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, it's interesting that the Pr emier (Mr. Doer) now confirmed that the Minister of Justice will be refusing one of the recommendations by Commissioner Salhany, because in Manitoba the current independent prosecutor policy allows the

3816 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 Attorney General to reject the advice of an independent prosecutor before the matter is brought before a judge. The commissioner in the Taman report not only confirmed that power; he made it stronger. The Minister of Justice refused to use the power given to him in his own department policy to stop a conditional sentence from being brought before a judge in the case of Crystal Taman. He said yesterday it's his practice not to use the power.

Is he now rejecting the recommendation of the commissioner that reaffirms and strengthens the right of the Attorney General to reject advice from an independent prosecutor? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, the member who just spoke said last week that I had agreed with the offer and the conditional sentence. That's what you said on the Hansard record, Hansard. That's what you said on the Hansard record.

Now, today, you're trying to turn it around and trying to take political advantage of a case that was one of the most tragic, that had a lot of victims, trying to turn it into a political football that I have tried to avoid. We put together an independent commission that came down with 14 recommendations that we are following. We will follow through on those recommendations. The members may try to make as many political spins as they want, Mr.

Speaker, but we believe that we did the right thing in following the recommendations and, in fact, in setting up the commission which, had we interfered, would probably not be in place. Mr. Goertzen: Yesterday, the Minister of Justice said that the B.C. Attorney General had rejected the advice of independent prosecutors nine or 10 times, he said. The Attorney General of B.C., Wally Oppal, is a former judge of both the Supreme Court of British Columbia and the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

The Taman report commissioner, Roger Salhany, is a former justice of the Ontario Superior Court, and he recommended that the policy that allowed the Minister of Justice to reject the advice of an independent prosecutor not only remain in place but become stronger. Only our Minister of Justice is saying that the policy should never be used or not be there. Is he telling Manitobans he was right to do nothing when the former Justice Oppal and former Justice Salhany were wrong in their actions? Is that what he's telling Manitobans? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, this is not mute court.

The recommendations–I was very pleased, as pleased as one can be, with the outcome yesterday, given the tragic nature. A small light of hope, I think, has been raised by virtue of these changes that we're putting in place, and we intend to put them in place despite the political word-smithing. Despite all of that, the most important thing is to deal with the victims and to deal with the justice system, and I was very proud to be able to do that and to follow the recommendations of Justice Salhany as he sat beside me at a press conference and we delivered our implementation plan that we're going to put in place.

Centralized Police Training Government Support Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): The Minister of Justice announced that he would be reviewing the police act in Manitoba to install police standards for training. The announcement came a year after we asked for this very action, and it's added to the long list of ideas that opposition members have brought forward and that the NDP first scoffed at and then they rushed to adopt it with much media fanfare. But it doesn't go far enough. What is needed along with these standards is the centralization of training for municipal offi cers.

We need a Manitoba police college, a centre of excellence to ensure that our municipal police officers have the same high level of training across the province. Will the minister commit today to accepting our proposal for a Manitoba police college which we asked for more than a year ago? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I don't care where a good idea comes from. If members opposite want to take credit for everything we've done, that's fine. The public gets a chance every four years.

As I've already indicated to the members opposite, we will be going public with our new police act in January and February. I am glad we had the advice of Commissioner Salhany. We are looking at the issue of a training centre. We are reviewing that particular issue, Mr. Speaker. The important thing, Mr. Speaker, is we will have a police act that will have–I, in fact, announced the police act would be brought in next session. We

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3817 will bring it in next session, and I'm very glad that we have the recommendations of Commissioner Salhany to add to the work that we've done with the police act in order to– Mr. Speaker: Order. Federal NDP Tax Policy Government Position Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Just as thousands of Manitobans were starting to recover from the Crocus debacle, then, there today, as a result of the debt crisis that is now global, reeling from lower stock prices and hits to their retirement savings, last week, Mr.

Speaker, 368 Manitobans learned that they were being laid off at DeFehr's, and many others are concerned about the prospects for their jobs and their incomes. I just want to ask the Premier if he can be clear today: Is he in favour of or is he against Jack Layton's plans to raise taxes on corporations like DeFehr's in Manitoba that are trying to stay afloat? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I'm very much in favour of the platform that we brought in in the last election campaign that was given a great strong vote of confidence by the people of Manitoba. I think the fact, Mr.

Speaker, that we had targeted tax cuts in the last budget dealing with the manufacturing sector, if you look at those targeted tax reductions on the capital tax, the corporate depreciation for manufacturers, the corporate tax reduction–when we came into office we had the highest corporate taxes in Canada–those targeted tax cuts for the manufacturing sector in '08 that the members opposite voted against I would argue were a lot more prudent than the reckless tax cuts of $900 million proposed by the Leader of the Opposition and repudiated by the people of Manitoba. So, Mr.

Speaker, we certainly support the kind of balanced approach that we brought forward to lowering the high corporate taxes in Manitoba. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. We certainly support th e measures we took. We support the fact that our budgets say subject to balanced budget, Mr. Speaker, and I think you'll find–[interjection] I'm glad that they're using the phrases I used last week. Flattery is a wonderful form of imitation, Mr. Speaker. * (14:00) Mr.

McFadyen: We do remember that platform when he said we will not run the next transmission line down the west side of Manitoba. We recall what he said in the election campaign. Oh, and what was that thing you left out of the platform? Oh, yes, the million-dollar-vote tax that we're going to put on Manitobans right in the middle of a recession, Mr. Speaker. Now, Mr. Speaker, Jack Layton, yesterday, was on Charles Adler and is using this Premier (Mr. Doer) as an endorser of their tax-increasing platform.

He said on Charles Adler yesterday: We would adopt a more strategic approach as the Manitoba NDP leader pointed out when he and I talked about this. It would make no sense to lower the corporate tax rates across the country to a lower level than they are right now. Mr. Speaker, he said in the Free Press –Layton claims the Manitoba NDP leader has told him he doesn't believe now is the right time for Canada to cut its corporate tax rate because it's already lowered. I've spoken to the Premier about this, said Layton. I'm sure he'd say the same thing if you asked him.

So now I'm asking him: Is he in favour of raising corporate taxes, as Jack Layton is proposing for Canadians? Mr. Doer: Well, Mr. Speaker, I find it passing strange that the former chief of staff can't confirm– and I've certainly confirmed it with friends of mine; in fact, a brother of mine who's an accountant–that we had the highest–when the member opposite was sitting an arm's length away from the Premier as the chief of staff, the corporate tax rate was 17 percent. The small-business tax rate was 9 percent. We had the highest corporate taxes in Canada. We have lowered that, Mr. Speaker.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. For the information of members, I've been standing quite a while. When the Speaker is standing, the members should be seated, and the Speaker should be heard in silence. We have question period time. That's for asking questions and hearing the responses. The honourable First Minister is trying to give a response, and we need to hear the response, and we need a little bit of

3818 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 decorum in here. So I'm asking the members' co- operation. The honourable First Minister has the floor. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the people that are against corporate tax reductions in Manitoba are actually the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba. When we lowered the corporate tax from 17 to 16 percent, did they vote for it or did they vote against it? They voted against it. When we lowered the corporate tax from 16 to 15 percent, did they vote for it or against it? They voted against it.

When we lowered the corporate tax from 15 to 14 percent, did they vote for it or did they vote against it? They voted against it. When we lowered the corporate tax in this budget from 14 to 13 percent, they voted against it. When we lowered the small-business tax from 9 to 8 to 7 to 6 to 5 to 4 to 3 to 2, did they vote against it? Yes, they did. The party that's against corporate tax reductions and education tax reductions and against more nurses is the party opposite, Mr. Speaker. Mr. McFadyen: Mr.

Speaker, that would have been a convincing response if it wasn't for the fact that in the answer that he gave right before it, he accused us of being in favour of tax cuts. So he said in one response that we're wrong because we're in favour of tax cuts. Now he says in the next response that we're against tax cuts. Mr. Speaker, the key to being successful is to pick a message track and stick with it. He can't even stay consistent from one response to the next. Now, Mr.

Speaker, speaking of inconsistent message tracks, we've got Jack Layton on the public record all day yesterday in media outlets all over the place using the Premier (Mr. Doer) as an endorser of his plan to increase taxes on companies like DeFehr that are putting hundreds of Manitobans out of work as a result of the economic struggles. He's on the record saying that the Premier of Manitoba approves our plan to increase taxes on companies that are struggling. Will the Premier just provide clarification?

Is Jack Layton misleading Canadians, or is this just another case of the Premier saying one thing to one audience in private and something completely different to another audience in public? Mr. Doer: You know, I want to say to the people of Manitoba that we are in challenging times in North America. We're certainly in challenging times in the world. We're in challenging times across Canada and we're in challenging times in Manitoba. The fact that the member can't ask a specific question on the Manitoba budget and the Manitoba economy is quite surprising to me, Mr. Speaker.

I would say that we should all be judged by what we do, and what we're doing is lowering corporate taxes, lowering personal taxes, lowering small-business taxes. But the one thing I would say, that everybody said the same, when I watched–in between the Vikings winning the football game last night–the news, every leader was talking about the necessity to balance the budget. You'll notice that all our tax reductions in our budget say, subject to balanced budget legislation, and that is a very important part of our platform, Mr.

Speaker, because their platform to bring back the Jets and to have a 1 percent sales tax reduction immediately would have been a reckless way of using public finances. Our targeted tax redu ction for manufacturing was $34 million last spring. The members opposite voted against it. They voted against the tax reduction for manufacturers. They voted against a reduction of the corporate capital tax. In fact, we eliminated the corporate capital tax for manufacturers, along with having the smallest and lowest small-business tax in Canada. That's balanced. That's what we bring and that's why we're moving forward, Mr.

Speaker. Economy Fiscal Strategy Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): What the Premier neglected to say is that even with all those wonderful tax reductions, we are still the highest taxed regime in western Canada. We have the highest personal taxes. We have the highest corporate taxes, Mr. Speak er, and they are going nowhere with the reduction in taxes. Stephen Harper and the federal government have announced an economic plan to get Canada through these tough economic times. His plan consists of no operating deficits, controlled spending, balanced budget and reduce taxes. Manitoba, Mr.

Speaker, on the other hand, has its own economic plan: get rid of the balanced budget legislation, get back to deficits, continue to be the highest taxed regime in western Canada, no

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3819 control over spending and be totally dependent upon the federal government for equalization. Why is this Minister of Finance so out of step with sound fiscal planning? Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, when the member opposite talked about the program for keeping solid fiscal relationships and growing the economy, he said that you had to have balanced budget legislation. We have it; the federal government doesn't. He said that you have to reduce corporate taxes– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Sorry, I can't hear.

Let's have some decorum, please. The honourable member asked the question and the honourable minister [inaudible] We have a lot of people in the gallery that came here to listen to the questions and the answers, and we have the viewing public. Let's have the decency to at least allow people to hear that. The honourable minister has the floor. Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the member would just refer back to the budget book on page C-1, he will see that we eliminated the capital tax for manufacturers July 1 of this year.

He will see that the Manufacturing Investment Tax Credit has been made refundable up to 70 percent. He will see that the capital cost appreciation allowance has been moved to a 50 percent $9-million benefit to manufacturers. He will know that in Manitoba, the cost of a manufacturing enterprise doing business in Winnipeg or Brandon is among the lowest in Canada and, indeed, lower than 59 cities in the United States, and our payroll taxes are lower as well. All of those things bode well for the future of Manitoba. Not only have we kept the costs affordable, but we have several initiatives.

Private sector investment is up 22 percent and public investment will generate new wealth in this province every single year that we're in office. Mr. Borotsik: The Finance Minister would also recognize that we have the lowest productivity in western Canada, Mr. Speaker. He'll also recognize that we do have the highest corporate taxes in western Canada. Jack Layton, the other day, Mr. Speaker, said the Premier (Mr. Doer) believes that there should be additional corporate taxes. That's what Jack Layton said. Jack Layton also said that he does not believe in deficits.

This Premier believes in what Jack Layton is out to sell. Will the Minister of Finance commit today, commit today, that he will not run an annual operating deficit for the next three years? * (14:10) Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, we commit to moving forward on everything we promised in the election. We said that we would continue to keep taxes among t h e m o s t a f f o r d a b l e i n C a n a d a . W e s a i d w e w o u l d keep the cost of living among the most affordable in Canada. We said we would invest in infrastructure which helps grow the economy.

The member opposite wants to cut and run when the economy starts showing some issues on a global basis because of financial turmoil. It's steady as she goes in Manitoba with progressive investments that will grow the economy, keep Manitoba affordable, keep Manitobans educated, give them opportunities for apprenticeship programs, provide housing for them and, in addition, Mr. Speaker, allow us to balance the budget every single year. Mr. Borotsik: Mr.

Speaker, the Finance Minister can certainly ramble on about all the things that he says he's going to do, but the one thing, the one thing that I ask him to stand today and tell this House, the one thing I want him to do on behalf of Manitobans is to stand today and say that he and his government will not run an operating deficit for the next three years. Can you commit to that today to Manitobans? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, we have balanced the budget nine times in a row under anybody's rules, including the legislation the members opposite brought into effect.

We have every intention of balancing the budget going forward. We will balance it this year. We will balance it next year. We will balance it in subsequent years, and while we're doing that, we will continue to grow the economy. We will grow the economy in a balanced way that allows all Manitobans to participate in the labour market. We will grow the economy in such a way that we manage to provide more assets in Manitoba for the future, more private assets as well as more public assets.

3820 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 Members opposite, when they get into a crunch, they privatize, they deregulate and they cut everybody loose that doesn't vote for them. Clean Environment Commission Report Scientific Advice for Nutrient Reduction Mrs. Bonnie Mitche lson (River East): Mr. Speaker, this NDP government has forced the City of Winnipeg to spend tens of millions of dollars removing nitrogen from waste water, when according to respected scientists like Dr. David Schindler, it won't help the algal problem in Lake Winnipeg. In fact, it could make these problems worse. Mr.

Speaker, why did the government take so long to admit that its nitrogen removal strategy is flawed? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Inter- governmental Affairs): Well, Mr. Speaker, I would caution members opposite, who only a few years ago didn't believe the science on climate change, that when you're dealing with the environment, what you do is you don't listen to only one scientist. You look to independent bodies who will listen to all the scientific evidence.

The member opposite might want to also read the Clean Environment Commission report and understand that we have indicated already that we are quite prepared, as part of the Clean Environment Commission process, to refer the question in terms of nitrogen. But every other major western Canadian city has been removing both phosphorus and nitrogen, including the City of Regina, and I say to members opposite, politicians shouldn't be making decisions in terms of science. It should be independent bodies such as the Clean Environment Commission. Mr.

Speaker, they were wrong on Kyoto, and they should listen to the scientific evidence on this. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Once again, can we have a little decorum. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, it was politicians that made the decision that the City of Winnipeg should remove nitrogen against the scientists that said that it wasn't necessary. Mr.

Speaker, a year and a half after we asked this government to reconsider the direction that they had given to the City of Winnipeg, they have now referred the issue back to the Clean Environment Commission, after millions of dollars have been spent by the City of Winnipeg removing nitrogen. Mr. Speaker, will the government now put a hold on any further expenditure on nitrogen removal until the CEC report is back? Mr. Ashton: Well, Mr.

Speaker, once again, we know members opposite don't believe in the Clean Environment Commission process, because the City of Winnipeg waste-water treatment licensing was supposed to go to the Clean Environment Commission in 1992 and 1993. The NDP, in 2002, referred it. In fact, the first and only licensing that has taken place in terms of the waste-water treatment for the city of Winnipeg is under the NDP. They don't believe in the Clean Environment Commission. They didn't believe in it then, and they clearly don't believe in it now. The members also shou ld know, Mr.

Speaker, that the $23 million has been spent for both ammonia and nitrogen. We have indicated our openness, through the Clean Environment Commission, to any and all of the scientific evidence, but we're not going to take lectures from a party that wasted 11 years. They didn't license one waste-water treatment plant, and some of the problems we're dealing with in Lake Winnipeg now should rest squarely on that decision. They ignored waste water; we're dealing with it. Mrs. Mitchelson: It somehow seems that the louder the minister yells, the more he thinks people might believe what he's saying, Mr. Speaker. But, Mr.

Speaker, we're in a time of real economic turmoil, and it's incumbent upon governments to try to make sure at this time more than ever that they're spending taxpayers' dollars wisely. The City of Winnipeg is doubling their water rental rates, Mr. Speaker, and they're talking about doubling them again because of the NDP that has forced them to remove nitrogen from waste water. I'm asking a straight question today, Mr. Speaker: Will the minister now put on hold any further expenditure on nitrogen removal until the Clean Environment Commission reports? Mr. Ashton: Let's put one thing clearly on the record here.

Let's look at what the cost might have

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3821 been if the members opposite in 1992 and 1993 had referred the City of Winnipeg waste-water licensing to the Clean Environment Commission. Let's understand that. An Honourable Member: One-third the cost. Mr. Ashton: One-third the cost. Let's understand that they didn't refer it once during that period. Let's also understand that the $23 million is for the removal of both nitrogen and ammonia, Mr. Speaker. So we don't take any lectures from members opposite who didn't do a thing about waste water, who wasted 11 years.

We, in this government and in the NDP, are making up for that lost time, and we are committed, by the way, to one-third of the operating of the three plants in Winnipeg. We're going to have complete licensing, and we are on the way, Mr. Speaker–are going to deal with one of the biggest single point sources in terms of Lake Winnipeg. That's the NDP record. The Conservative record is they did absolutely nothing for 11 years. Brandon University Strike Binding Arbitration Strategy Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): The Brandon University strike is now well into its second week with no end in sight.

The conciliation process is an ongoing process that could still take some time to resolve the dispute. In the meantime, the students are suffering. They paid for an education that they're not getting. So I ask the Minister of Advanced Education: Why has she failed to ask the faculty at the Brandon University to go back to work while the conciliation process is still ongoing? Hon. Diane McGifford (Minister of Advanced Education and Literacy): I do thank the member for the question. But I do point out to him he hasn't been keeping up with his news releases because last week the Minister of Labour (Ms.

Allan) and I did publicly request that both the administration and the faculty agree to binding arbitration. Mr. Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, the minister hasn't been keeping up with the news. Doesn't she realize there is no arbitration going on at this point? A press release is not action. The well-being of students at Brandon University should be a top priority for this minister, but clearly it's not. She has the opportunity to use her influence now with the union by asking the faculty association to ask the facult y to return to work while conciliation continues. But she refuses to do so.

So I ask the Minister of Advanced Education: Why has she placed the interests of the union ahead of the students? Ms. McGifford: This is, indeed, a distortion of the facts, and I'm really quite surprised at the Member for Lac du Bonnet, who is a lawyer. I thought he would know a little better than he's shown today. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Labour (Ms. Allan) and myself have requested both the administration and the faculty to agree to binding arbitration.

The member over there knows full well that it is not in the powers of my office to force the union and to force the administration to engage in binding arbitration. I think it shows a sad lack of understanding of the issue. I'm really disappointed. * (14:20) Canadian Communication for Physicians Trained Abroad Program Government Support Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, there are many Manitobans who are without a family physician, and yet at the same time we have many doctors who've come from other countries and are not yet able to practise here.

In the gallery today is a representative of a group of more than 20 doctors who have come from the Philippines but are not currently able to practise their profession in Canada. Mr. Speaker, one of the programs which could be more helpful is the Canadian Communication for Physicians Trained Abroad program at Red River, but the program is run only once a year and has a very limited number of spaces. I ask the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald): When will she expand this program and make sure that it has adequate spaces and is run at least twice a year? Hon. Nancy Allan (Min ister of Labour and Immigration): Mr.

Speaker, everyone in this House knows full well that Manitoba's Qualifications Recognition Strategy is th e most advanced of any jurisdiction in Canada. An Honourable Member: Focus on the question. Ms. Allan: Well, I am going to focus on the question, thank you very much.

3822 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 Everyone knows, Mr. Speaker, that we introduced the Medical Licensure Program for International Medical Graduates in 2001. It was introduced by our government, and it was the first of its kind in Canada. Other jurisdictions have adopted similar versions of this program because it is so successful. Mr. Gerrard: And yet the Web site for the Canadian Communication for Physicians Trained Abroad program at Red River says inactive at the moment. The minister can talk, but things aren't happening.

Helping physicians from other countries to meet Canadian qualifications is worthwhile because it can increase the supply of physicians and improve the quality of practice that they provide. When we come to one of the critical exams, the Canadian Medical College Evaluating Exams, new immigrant doctors from the Philippines and elsewhere are given a book and said write the exam. You know it would be much more helpful if there was at least a short tutorial program to help the new physicians arriving here, working in a differe nt language, to do better on this exam.

There are some simple th ings that the minister could be doing but is not. When will the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) or the Minister of Labour make sure that there's such a tutorial available for doctors before they do the MCEE exams. Ms. Allan: Mr. Speaker, I'd just like to remind the member opposite about Manitoba's Qualifications Recognition Strategy here in Manitoba. One of the reasons it is so successful is we work in partnership with the employers and th e self-regulatory bodies. That is what has made this program so successful.

In June we passed The Fair Registration Practices Act, and that is going to strengthen what we are doing here in Manitoba. You know, I find it curious strange that the MLA has ideas now on how to make our QR program more successful, because he has never once walked through my door with one idea about how we can strengthen our QR program or our immigration program. He's never even once walked through my door to be briefed on any one of the 14 pieces of legislation that I have passed in this House. Economic Forecast Government Report Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, the silence from the Minister of Finance is deafening given the economic environment that is around us. Whether it is the U.S., the European or what's happening in Ontario, the impact that that's going to have on the province of Manitoba is overwhelming. Let us not underestimate the potential cutbacks on equalization payments, transfer payments, the loss of jobs and the economic downturn that Manitoba could be facing.

I'm asking for the Minister of Finance to indicate whether or not he is in a position in which he might be able to provide an economic statement before the end of the year as to what this current situation will be in the province of Manitoba. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, we will have a quarterly report that shows the state of finances in Manitoba, also a forecast of what's expected going forward. We will have a Throne Speech that will indicate further progress we're going to make in Manitoba.

The member opposite needs to ask himself today, does he think that a green carbon tax at this time is the right thing to do given the economic turbulence out there? Could he just give us a clear answer on that, whether he wants to implement that carbon tax in the next immediate period of time. Mr. Speaker: Time for oral questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Team Manitoba Ringette Champions Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, today I want to congratulate the members of the Macdonald Wildfire Belle A, later Team Manitoba, on a more- than-successful ringette season.

In January, the team travelled to Regina to participate in the 19th annual Jim Benning Ringette Tournament. They placed first in their division, bringing home the gold. This was the very first time Macdon ald Wildfire had won a gold medal in the Belle A Division in a tournament outside the province of Manitoba. The Wildfire also dominated the tournament in Steinbach, winning all their games, assuming the division's top spot and bringing home another gold. Later they participated in the Winnipeg Ringette League playoffs and won silver.

In the Manitoba 2008 provincial playoffs the team stepped up their performance winning all their games and another gold spot. This earned them the right to represent Manitoba in the Western Canadian Ringette Championships held in Prince George,

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3823 British Columbia. They now became known as Team Manitoba. Team Manitoba was comprised of the core group from the Macdonald Wildfire from Oak Bluff, Domain, LaSalle and Sanford, and expanded to include players from Dakota, Lorette, North Forth Garry, Park City West and Winakwa community clubs. The team defeated reigning champs, Team Alberta, 3-0 in the gold medal final. This is the first time that Manitoba has ever won the Western Canadian Ringette Association Belle A Division.

On May 9, 2008, Team Manitoba received the Sport Manitoba, Order of Sport Excellence Award for their achievements. Members of the team are: Melissa Brick, Reisa Brooks, Kelsy Brown, Rachel Campbell, Jaclyn Dryden, Tessa Harvey, Sidney Irving, Maya Lafond, Michelle Lavoie, Rheanne Marcoux, Claudia Muller Moran, Rielle Nault, Joelle Remillard, Laura Simons, Shelby Sinclair, Kerri-Ann Tyschinski, Courtney White, Eric Bohemier, Cara Friesen is the trainer, Jacquie White, manager, and Wayne White the coach. Congratulations to all the members of Team Manitoba. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Job Works Youth Builders Program Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to recognize the success of the Job Works Youth Builders program on Ellice Avenue in my constituency of Wolseley. This program, funded by the Department of Education, Citizenship and Youth, brings Aboriginal youth into a comfortable setting and enables them to pursue educational opportunities and trades training. Youth Builders caters to the unique challenges of Aboriginal youth by placing all 30 students in an environment of community .

Every Monday morning the program offers a life skills workshop, which includes a traditional smudge, providing an opportunity for participants to get grounded for the week ahead and also to get to know one another better. Cultural, family and life skill components are clearly an important part of the Youth Builders program and each student is known by name and by their community heritage. The academic component of the program is based on grade 12 math and English and the completion of high school equivalency, as well as courses in woodworking and work as education.

After the completion of the 10-month program, Youth Builders offers graduates the opportunity to participate in their Trades Exploration Program. There are currently seven st udents in this program who are supported by a journeyman carpenter as they train for a career in the trades. With an 89 percent employment success rate, I would like to commend the Youth Builders program for the positive influence it has on the lives of Aboriginal youth. I am very pleased that the provincial government is supporting initiatives such as Youth Builders that are actively engaging Aboriginal youth in our economy.

Having recently visited the Youth Builders site, I can attest to the determination and focus of staff and students alike to make a better future for themselves, their families and their communities. I applaud the Youth Builders program for their vision and wish them the very best of luck as they approach their 10th anniversary next year. Special recognition should also go to Mr. Rob Loiselle, who serves as the project co -ordinator for Job Works Youth Builders.

In closing, please allow me to congratulate all students, past and present, and to encourage them to share their experiences with others who are interested in joining such an influential and effective program as Job Works. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. * (14:30) Mr. Gladwyn Scott Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to recognize and congratulate Mr. Gladwyn Scott of Carberry who was inducted into the Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame this past summer.

Gladwyn began his sporting career in the 1940s in McConnell, Manitoba, playing baseball with his father and brother Glennis while his mother kept score. Gladwyn was a player and is a builder that has been involved in sports in Manitoba for many years. Gladwyn enjoyed a rewarding career as an educator in Manitoba where he shared his talents with many students. Gladwyn's accomplis hments in sports in Manitoba are many. One year he played senior hockey on a team that won the league title, coached two high school basketball teams, a minor hockey team, three baseball teams and played senior baseball.

He coached seven provincial championship teams in five years and received three titles in one season at Hamiota.

3824 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 When Mr. Scott moved to Carman in the 1960s, he founded the Carman Cougarettes high school basketball team, Carman Goldeyes baseball team and the Carman Beavers senior hockey team. He was instrumental in establishing the Manitoba High School Athletic Association of 1962, which is so important to high school sports today. Mr. Scott coached for 38 years straight.

He has worked with the Canadian National Baseball team, served on the executive of Baseball Canada and has also served as president of both Manitoba Baseball Association and Manitoba Amateur Hockey and has always stayed on top of co mmunity sports wherever he resides. In 1992, Gladwyn Scott was inducted into the Manitoba Sports Hall of Fame as an All Round Builder for sport. He stays in touch with his community in sports, attending the events in his own and nearby communities and reporting special accomplishments and achievements in the local paper. Mr.

Scott is always interested in athletic news and maintaining contact with Manitobans as they pursue a career in sports, education or coaching. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Scott is a very deserving inductee into the Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame. I would like to congratulate Gladwyn of his most deserved honour. Thank you. Flin Flon Arts Council 25th Anniversary Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, last Saturday evening, October 4, 2008, my wife and I were thrilled to attend the gala evening at the R.H. Channing Auditorium celebrating a quarter century since the incorporation of the Flin Flon Arts Council.

Buz Trevor, master of ceremonies for the event, pointed out that there was a vibrant arts and cultural community in and around Flin Flon for almost 50 years before the Arts Co uncil's incorporation of March 26, 1982. In fact, people then supported and enjoyed the local Glee Club as much as their famous local hockey team, the Flin Flon Junior Bombers. Arts and culture in the Flin Flon, Creighton, Denare Beach and Cranberry Portage region is uniquely northern.

Where else could you enjoy a rapturous musical called Bombertown that artistically blended our twin passions, hockey and creative expression, with such expertise? Where else can you enjoy the angelic voices of our singers, intensified by Aboriginal drumming and the world's largest canvas teepee other than in Cran berrry Portage during the performances of Night on an Old Trade Route ? I would have to describe it as sheer magic.

There is huge diversity in the northern arts and culture scene: performing arts, poetry, writing, sculpture, quilting, painting, copper casting, caribou hair tufting, birchbark biting and more. I'd like to thank the performers of this gala evening, music by The Trio which included Crystal Kolt, Mark Kolt and Roger LeBlanc; The Usual Suspects band who performed at the dance and social later in the evening and th e many readers, singers and performers. Mr.

Speaker, I congratulate the Flin Flon Community Choir and the creative talent of their many members, some of whom have performed in Carnegie Hall, New York, and also with the Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra under conductor Bramwell Tovey. Our government applauds and congratulates the Northern Palette Art Club, Northstar Quilters, Ham Sandwich Theatre Productions, the Pottery Club, Copper Tones choral group, Borealis and Pantyhose choral ensembles, to name a few. We are looking forward to enjoying another 25 years of great talent in the north. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Air Canada Flight Attendant Base Closure Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wanted to put some words on the record in regard to the Air Canada flight attendant base closure that's being talked about and the possibility of us losing the pilot base. I want to express my appreciation to individuals, George Bouchard, Rob Weiser, Suzie Lamond [phonetic], and, in particular, Local 4093, for their efforts in trying to make sure that this Legislature is kept informed as to what's taking place with Air Canada.

We truly believe that there is a moral, if not legal, obligation for Air Canada to sustain those bases here in the province of Manitoba, and we're calling on the Premier (Mr. Doer) to take action. I was very happy with the response I received, once I had circulated a petition–and I'm still getting more and more in every day–in which we're calling on the government to take action. To quote the petition, it says: To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider taking whatever action possible to keep both the Air Canada flight attendant base and the Air Canada pilot base here in Winnipeg. Mr.

Speaker, we have hundreds of Manitobans that are getting behind these petitions. It's something in which the Premier has an obligation to stand up for Manitoba. Both opposition parties have indicated

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3825 their support to co-operate. We need to get the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce, work with the local unions and try to make sure that Manitoba does not lose these two bases, especially if you put it in the perspective of our geographical location and the long-term interests of the province of Manitoba in that whole industry. Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): Could you please call debate on third reading for Bill 37. Mr.

Speaker: We'll deal with concurrence and third reading of Bill 37, The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act. CONCURRENCE AND THIRD READINGS Bill 37–The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act Hon. Steve Ashton (Deputy Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture (Ms.

Wowchuk), that Bill 37, The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act;

Loi sur l'inscription des lobbyistes et modifiant la Loi électorale, la

Loi sur le financement des campagnes électorales, la

Loi sur l'Assemblée législative et la

Loi sur la Commission de régie de l'Assemblée législative, as amende d and reported from the Standing Committee on Justice and subsequently amended, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed. Motion presented. Mrs. Bonnie Mitche lson (River East): I'd like to put a few comments on the record about Bill 37 and indicate to the Deputy House Leader on the government side of the House that I'm glad to see he's calmed down since question period and he's able to present his thoughts in a little calmer manner, because I do know that my colleague the Member for Steinbach (Mr.

Goertzen) was recommending that he maybe move to decaf and it might help him to calm a bit. So I'm glad to see that he is able to conduct House business in a little more appropriate fashion, Mr. Speaker. Moving to Bill 37, Mr. Speaker, I do want to indicate that I certainly cannot stand in this House today and support Bill 37.

We know that many, many Manitobans had an opportunity to come out to committee and present their point of view and, by far, the vast majority of Manitobans that spoke, spoke against Bill 37 and what this government has brought to the Legislature in the form of five different pieces of legislation that were combined into Bill 37. * (14:40) I don't think I've ever seen this kind of precedent in this Legislature before. I've also never seen the First Minister shirking his responsibility when it comes to The Elections Act. You know, Mr.

Speaker, it is usually the Premier of the province that takes the lead role in making changes to elections and elections financing acts. I think it's unprecedented in this Legi slature that the Premier would shift that responsibility to the House Leader or to the Minister of Justice and try to hide behind some–[interjection] Well, I wonder if you might call–Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I wonder if you might call the Minister of Advanced Education (Ms. McGifford) to order.

She's being extremely rude from her seat, as she usually is, and very condescending, and I would hope that you would ask her to curtail her chattering from her seat, so that I might have the opportunity to put my comments on the record. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Deputy Government House Leader, on the same point of order? Mr. Ashton: On the alleged point of order, I've seen the Member for River Ea st (Mrs. Mitchelson) partake in various discussions from her seat. Mr. Speaker, this is not a point of order, and I think it's highly objectionable that the member would use those kinds of terms.

There was a discourse with the member from her seat. It's not a point of order. Mr. Speaker: Order. This gives me a good opportunity, because during question period there

3826 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 was a lot of distraction. I think members, all members in this House, should really reflect on why we're here and, also, how much respect do we have for the institution that our constituents have sent us to. We have guests many times during question period and the viewing public, and I'm sure, just as I can't at many times, I can't hear a word that is spoken. So I think we should all do some serious thinking about that. Also, when members have the floor, whatever member has the floor, they have the right to be heard whether members agree with them or not.

The member that has the floor has the right to be heard. I think we could all use a little soul-searching and maybe show some respect to each other, especially whichever member has the floor. The honourable member does not have a point of order, but I just wanted to make a few statements because I think we do have to have a little reflection here. * * * Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As I was indicating, it's very unusual for the Premier (Mr. Doer) or the First Minister of the province of Manitoba to shift the responsibility for moving a piece of legislation like this through the Legislature.

I know that when the news release was put out, Mr. Speaker, he was front and centre saying that democracy would be enhanced with proposed changes to The Elections Act, that we would have fixed election dates, a partial public financing and a lobbyist registry and all other wonderful features in this bill. But where was the Premier when this bill was debated and when this bill went before committee and over a hundred Manitobans registered to make presentation? Mr. Speaker, the Premier was nowhere to be seen in committee when this bill and when Manitobans came forward to make their comments on this legislation.

It's very, very unusual that five pieces of legislation would be rolled in together unless there was some ulterior motive by this government to try to fool Manitobans or confuse Manitobans with all five pieces of legislation, The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act. Mr.

Speaker, these are piec es of legislation that should have been amended individually, so that Manitobans could have had an opportunity to come out and present on each different aspect of the changes that were being made. Yet they tried, I think, Mr. Speaker, to slip through the vote tax and maybe think that Manitobans wouldn't see or wouldn't understand what was happening with this legislation. But, in uncertain times economically, I'm not sure that we want to see taxpayers having to support political parties that they don't necessarily choose to support.

It's my belief that, if someone supports a political party and the direction and the philosophy that they're taking, those individuals have every opportunity and ample opportunity to make personal contributions to those political parties. I don't believe that the taxpayers, generally speaking, right across Manitoba have to support or should be supporting political parties that they don't necessarily believe in. Mr. Daryl Reid, Acting Speaker, in the Chair This is one of the most offensive pieces of the legislation that presenter after presenter made comment on at the committee review, Mr. Acting Speaker.

We also know that the fixed election date that was set in the legislation has a significant loophole in it. It has a loophole. We've seen and we've heard the Premier say that he fashioned it; he wrote the legislation based on what the federal election act said and the changes that were made to the federal Parliament that allowed for fixed election dates. We saw that there was a loophole in the federal legislation, just as there is a loophole in the provincial legislation. After the next election, there will be set, fixed election dates, but the Premier still has the opportunity now to change that, Mr.

Acting Speaker. [interjection] Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker, and it's passing strange that members on the government side can speak from their seats, but none of them have the courage to stand up and speak about this legislation. So it's fine for them to sit in their seats and criticize members on this side of the House when they don't have the nerve to stand up and say that the vote tax is wrong, absolutely wrong.

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3827 Mr. Acting Speaker, they're going to stand in their places later today and say, we support gouging taxpayers once again; we support taking money out of taxpayers' pockets to support our political agenda. Stand up, have the courage to put it on the record rather than chirping from your seats about this. Mr. Acting Speaker, I will not be supporting Bill 37. I will not be supporting it.

I know that government members, even though they don't have the nerve to stand up and talk about taxpayers and protecting taxpayers, they will not stand up and admit that they're lining their own political party's coffers with money from the taxpayers of the province of Manitoba, so I will not be supporting Bill 37. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Acting Speaker, I find the comments of the Member for River East very interesting because, when the bill was introduced about providing taxpayer funding for political campaigns, the member and all the members of the Conservative Party chirped and complained and said, no, no, no, this is wrong, and they took every single penny of the money, every cent. During this federal election, the bill that's similar in Parliament the Conservative government introduced, they're taking every penny of the money, Mr. Acting Speaker.

When we banned corporate and union donations, they voted against it; when they voted against our bill banning union and corporate donations, they said we were destroying democracy. Now there's a similar bill in Parliament, and we think it's a fair way, a fair way of distributing. * (14:50) Every single duck they lined up when they had all the ex-Tory candidates come to committee. Every Tory candidate that ever ran against me was at committee, Mr. Acting Speaker. Unfortunately, one was deceased, but every one that ever ran against me was there. I recognized more Tories in that committee room.

It was like a Tory convention at the committee room, and they all came up and said the same thing, how awful that you're going to censor documents. They went out and did a bunch of media things. Of course, that was not our intention. In fact, we amended it to ensure that members opposite who, as usual, misconstrued, misread and went, alarming, right off to the reckless side as they often do, recklessly said that it would do this and it would do that. We amended all of those portions. We amended it to make it clear.

The great irony is we used the same wording that Prime Minister Stephen Harper used in terms of our fixed election date just to make sure. What am I not getting here, Mr. Acting Speaker? We used the same wording of the Prime Minister. I know the Member for Rive r East (Mrs. Mitchelson) is out there campaigning on behalf of her candidate. I know that. I know that because during the provincial campaign they were phoning from her constituency into my constituency. So I know they help each other.

I know that because the woman on Lansdowne said, why is the number phoning during the provincial campaign Bonnie Mitchelson's office. I said, well, I know why it's Bonnie Mitchelson's office, I know that. I know they help each. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Reid): Order, please. I think all members of the House know that we refer to members by their constituencies, and I ask the honourable Minister of Justice to refer to members by their constituency. Mr.

Chomiak: Right, I should indicate that my constituent's phone records indicated that it was the Member for River East's constituency office that was phoning into her home during the provincial election campaign, Mr. Acting Speaker. So my point is, Mr. Acting Speaker, we've amended all of the provisions that the members went out and said, the sky is falling, the sky is falling, the sky is falling. We amended those provisions. We think it's reasonable that a fair representation and financing be provided. I know members have a store chest of money they're using for a little advertising.

We are trying to make it fairer. We are trying to make it more democratic. We're going to have the Liberals in the LMAC. We are going to expand the capacity for parties to have an opportunity to get their message out on a fair ground, on a fair basis. The members might quibble about the way we're doing it. We're doing it in the way that seems to me to be the most obvious, the most logical, based on previous election campaigns. That will work its way throughout the political calendar and, I daresay, one day when members opposite, that dreaded day when members opposite may form government, it will continue to work.

But I know that there won't be any cheques returned from members opposite. I know that it will go right into the election campaigns, and we won't begrudge them. But I have to admit, Mr. Acting Speaker, they say one thing in this Chamber, they said one thing at committee when they were surrounded by all their ex-Tory candidates, but

3828 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 they'll still take the money and run. I don't mean that in a negative sense. They will do that. We think it's a fair way to go to the election. We think that having a fixed election day is important. I know they were really angry because the headline said fixed election day, and they somehow, because we introduced the bill, we were sneaking it in. You know, we introduce a bill, and that's sneaky. We provide a bill to the public, and we have public hearings, and that's sneaky.

I don't pick what headlines the–heaven knows, I don't pick what headlines the newspapers put in. I have no control over that, Mr. Acting Speaker. But somehow, in these conspiratorial-minded ventures of members opposite, everything is a conspiracy. Everything is the sky falling. Everything is an extreme. We're a balanced government that tries to approach all issues from a balanced perspective, representing all Manitobans. We don't say one thing in this Legislature and go out to the public and say another thing.

Having indicated that we support this legislation, we think it's a natural evolution in our democratic process. It's in place in many jurisdictions. It's in place in other provinces. It's in place in Ottawa where a Conservative government is in power. It's in place wh ere they provide these resources to a Conserva tive government, to all political parties.

So it does stretch credibility a touch when members opposite stand up and pronounce the fact that somehow what we're doing, which is exactly what's done in Ottawa and many other provinces, is somehow some conspiratorial means on the part of this government to take away from–you know, at the end of it, the public gets it right. The public knows what's going on. They knew what was going on in the last election. They knew what was going on in 2003. They certainly knew what was going on in 1999. I suggest to members opposite they pay attention. We can't fool them. I think it's a fair and honest approach.

We provided the legislation. Members can choose to vote how they want. Our job is to go forward and try to make this Province more open, more democratic and broader for all Manitobans. Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker. Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Acting Speaker, I would like to say it's a pleasure to participate in the debate. However, this particular bill I will not be in favour of, and so I can't really say it's a pleasure in which to debate because it is an omnibus bill to which all of us are being asked to vote on many, many changes. I will read the actual title of the bill, and I think, Mr.

Acting Speaker, you'll get the flavour of what I speak: Bill 37, The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act, The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act.

Obviously, this government is trying to take an opportunity, because they know it's controversial, to minimize the length of time to which they come to public scrutiny by ramming this omnibus bill through the Legislative Assembly in a fashion that otherwise would have afforded Manitobans the opportunity to come before committee and express their concerns at perhaps four, maybe five other occasions. But, no, this government says they listen to people, but, in fact, they do not. There were more than 100 registered presenters for Bill 37 that came before committee earlier this year.

The vast–and I will emphasize, the vast majority of those making presentations expressed their disappointment toward Bill 37 and, indeed, expressed that they did not support Bill 37 as it was currently presented. Now, Mr. Acting Speaker, I have had occasion previously to bring forward points regarding Bill 37, so I will be brief this afternoon.

In specific, I will say that I have spoken very positively about having an established election date with a four-year duration between general elections here in the province of Manitoba, as I believe it is incumbent upon those elected to put forward their election platform and carry forward throughout the next four years and completely fulfil their election promises. But, as it currently exists, even in this legislation, the call of an election still rests with the First Minister.

I would also like to say from my own personal observation–and I have mentioned it in the House in previous debates–is that we should take great care in expenditure of taxpayers' monies because we are just the custodians of those monies. The expenditure of taxpayers' money on the election process, I believe, could very well be placed in better use.

If we were to harmonize the election dates that are now in existence for the school boards and the municipal councils throughout the province with that of a general election for the Manitoba Legislative Assembly, we would save millions and millions of dollars which could be better spent in

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3829 whatever program the government of the day might believe would be a better investment. I would suggest education for one.

We could take those millions of dollars and put it right into the classrooms rather than have a separate election date, which is stated in this Bill 37. * (15:00) So I would like to see, and, I believe, I will hopefully have the opportunity to put forward private members' legislation that will call for an amendment to The Elections Act that would propose that we have a provincial general election on the fourth Wednesday of October every four years, commencing with the year 2010. In that way, then, we would be in sync with the other levels of elected officials here in the province.

I believe that Manitobans would appreciate having the opportunity to come out just on one occasion and be able to select their school board member, their mayor, reeve, municipal council member and, in due course, saving millions of dollars that could be put to other uses.

Also within the bill we have–and I had the fortunate experience of serving on the LAMC, which is the Legislative Assembly Management Commission that governs the activity of our Assembly, and I was very disturbed to see some of the requirements brought forward by Bill 37, that they impose scrutinization by the Speaker and by the Management Commission that I believe, to this point in time, we have had a very, very good working relationships within the House and how we as elected officials interact with our constituents.

So it leaves me wondering what is the reason for this bill and the proposed changes as it pertains to the scrutiny of our communications. I have yet to have had anyone in my tenure here in the Legislative Assembly come forward with a concern or complaint regarding mailings or any type of communications that I have had with my constituents in Portage la Prairie. So I believe that Bill 37 really–and the changes called for in that area–not necessary. So, Mr.

Acting Speaker, I do appreciate the opportunity to participate in third reading debate, but express at this juncture and time that I am not supportive of Bill 37.

I hope members on the government side of the House will show their support for what they do say more often than I can count, that they believe in the ability of Manitobans to put forward ideas and their thoughts, and if the government is listening, then they themselves will not be supporting Bill 37 because it was quite evident in committee when Manitobans spoke that Bill 37 was a bill that needs to be significantly changed from what we see here before us. Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): I, too, like the Member for Portage la Prairie just indicated, stand to speak to Bill 37 today with trepidation.

I certainly am concerned with a bill like this coming forward in the Legislature in Manitoba. It's like an omnibus bill. But it's an extremely unaccountable bill in the form that it was originally put in. There have been a number of amendments come forward on it, but it's certainly a bill that is all encompassing in a whole number of areas that I'll talk about in a moment, Mr. Acting Speaker, and could have been brought in in many separate forums, as was mentioned by the Member for River East (Mrs. Mitchelson). Mr. Acting Speaker, the Member for Kildonan (Mr.

Chomiak) today, I believe, indicated that you can't fool the public, and he's absolutely right. That will come home to roost as part of this bill is to have a set election date. It will come home to roost on the NDP because in three years, approximately three years this last weekend, we will have a vote in Manitoba if the amendment brought in by the Liberal members of this House, which did pass, carries forward. I assume that the bill will pass unless the government has some means in their wisdom to withhold the bill this afternoon. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I would assume that with that amendment we'll have an election in about three years, and the public of Manitoba will not be fooled, and it will come home to roost to the NDP. They will be thrown out of government. This will be part of the reason why: the very bill that we're debating today in the House along with other bills like 38. Manitobans are a small "c" conservative lot, as you know. Whether they vote NDP or Progressive Conservative or Liberal in this province, they like to know that their money's being managed well.

They really get their backs up when they see somebody trying to misuse funds the way the NDP are planning to do in this bill, and that is, of course, referring to the vote tax that I will talk about in a moment. Bill 37, when I talked about an omnibus bill, just listen to the name. Bill 37 is called The Lobbyists Registration Act and Amendments to The Elections Act, The Elections Finances Act, The Legislative Assembly Act and The Legislative Assembly Management Commission Act. Well, Mr. Acting Speaker, and it was brought forward by the Minister

3830 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 of Justice, the Attorney General (Mr. Chomiak). It's somewhat surprising and shocking that all of these would be wrapped into one particular bill when they could have been dealt with separately. If the government wasn't trying to slide four or five of these items through under the auspices of what the public wanted and that is set election dates–they are quite right in that area, that Manitobans have indicated that set election dates are favourable to them.

We only have to look at the combined school board and municipal elections that occur now every four years across this province. The government, as our members, who were bringing forward a private member's bill as well on this very point–only we had the credentials and I guess, if you will, the stomach to bring it forward as one particular bill.

The government here brings in set election dates with all of these other–Lobbyists Registration Act, Elections Finances Act, vote tax, scrutinize your information that you're sending out to your constituents before they–so that they have it–what's the word I'm looking for, Mr. Acting Speaker? I think it's incumbent upon–censorship, that's the one.

So that the information that we're sending isn't censored by the NDP, which was originally what was going to happen with information going out to our constituents in this bill until it was amended, and of course, we spent many hours, long hours in the summertime making sure that this bill did not pass last summer, making sure that it was corrected.

Of course, even at this late fall session or the session that we've had here in the fall, at the last minute the amendment brought forward by the Liberals to not have an election on the second Tuesday of June but on the first one of October was accepted by the New Democrats as a sound motion to be brought forward. We don't have a problem with that, Mr. Acting Speaker. They're going to have a set date. It just shows the lack of planning that went into this bill when the government can't even figure out which time of the year they want to have the election on their own.

They wanted to have set dates, but they didn't. All they had to do was really probably talk to anyone and they would have been able to find that out, but they didn't even put it in the bill properly. They had to have someone else amend it because it would have looked kind of funny for them to have done it, so I commend the Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) for bringing that forward and putting that in the bill. But that's just one area. That was the public part of the bill, and that's what Manitobans accepted. The government came out with a great flurry of expectations in Bill 37, bringing it forward.

We're going to have set election dates. But they didn't tell Manitobans in that news conference that they were going to have a vote tax. Have to pay a $1.25 or have $1.25 sucked out of their pockets or put into a special slush fund that they have to run political party operations. Now we're all hit by the same bill. They brought in a cap of $250,000 on every $1.25 that comes out of every voter's pocket.

It just so happens that they capped it to about $2,500 lower than what they would have got at a quarter of a million dollars. * (15:10) I made this comment in the House many times in regard to this ill-conceived bill, and that is we would end up with about $192,000 and the Liberals about $60,000 on this bill. That's a considerable amount of money, Mr. Acting Speaker , but that's not what Manitobans were happy about when they said that they were in favour of this bill on the initial press release on that day. It was brought in by the Premier and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak)–the Attorney General.

There was an absolute look of consternation and shock on many of the backbenchers on the government side of the House the day they brought this bill forward and tabled it in the House. It's as if they had never heard of it before.

Then back in subsequent debate in the late nights that we used to hold this bill up and to force the government to put amendments in to make the bill somewhat acceptable or more acceptable, at least livable in some cases, there were discussions across the table in the night by some of the members from the government side saying that they really didn't know much about this bill before it hit the table. Mr. Acting Speaker, we're not surprised by that.

Most of the items that have–part of what will bring the government down today is that everything's being run out of the Premier's office anyway, and the ministers don't have much say. We saw that in Bill 17 where the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) from Swan River and the Minister of Conservation (Mr.

Struth ers) from Dauphin were certainly being used as political puppets by the Premier in this whole process and should have at least had the courage to resign or withdraw from their portfolios if they had been backing up farmers and supporting farmers and even supporting conservation in the province of Manitoba, instead of

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3831 going ahead and dumping Bill 17 on Manitobans, particularly farmers who have built an extremely valuable industry in Manitoba and farmers who are extremely valuable stewards of their own land and land in the province of Manitoba, who know the benefit of making sure that land is kept in an extremely safe environmental manner because they make their living off that land. So it's incumbent upon each and every one of them, and I certainly know that from farming for over 30 years myself.

It's a concern to all Manitobans and we're finding even people in the city here as well know that this was just a political ploy on behalf of the government to bring Bill 17 forward, but that's just an example of how this government has misaligned and not read the public properly. By bringing Bill 37 in–they didn't bring in Bill 37 and another bill holding just the set election dates, Mr.

Acting Speaker, because they couldn't e v e n f i g u r e o u t w h a t t i m e o f y e a r t h e y w a n t e d t o have set election dates, as I pointed out earlier–but they also brought in about four or five other amendments or parts of bills to be looked at in this whole process. Before I leave the tax grab, Mr.

Acting Speaker, I just want to say that over 100 individual Manitobans came to speak at committee on this bill last summer, last June, as we held it up until 2 o'clock, 3 o'clock, sometimes 4 o'clock in the morning before the government actually got to the point of bringing in amendments that could actually be livable on this process and agreeing to debate these bills here in the fall before they came back after the committees. They were long, long hours and hard work by the opposition leaders, of the critics responsible for these bills.

I commend my colleagues and my leader for the work that they did on making the government accountable. That's what a strong good opposition does, Mr. Acting Speaker, in Manitoba or any other province–keep the government accountable. It took a considerable amount of effort, and I commend our House Leader for the work that he did in those areas and the work that was done at that time and certainly our whip from that end of things. Certainly it kept everybody going, but it was an enjoyable time for us in opposition, Mr.

Acting Speaker–if there is such a thing–because we were keeping the government accountable and showing Manitobans how terrible the legislation is. I have stated that Bill 37, along with 38 and 17– and probably 46, but I'll stick to these three because I've said it before–are three of the worse bills to ever come before the Manitoba Legislature. It's a shame that the government doesn't recognize the damage that they're doing, because we've been warning them about an economic downturn for years, some years. What will they do when that happens? I'd say if it isn't here now, Mr.

Acting Speaker, as we speak in this Legislature today, when will it come because we've seen, certainly, the lowest level on the stock exchange in over three years, and it's all happened in the last week. But yet, the government, they still don't understand the impact that these bills could have on the downturn in our Manitoba economy. Mr.

Acting Speaker, it's incumbent that I point out that this tax grab, the vote tax, as it's going to be referred to forever in the province of Manitoba, will cost taxpayers about $500,000 annually, about half a million dollars which will–over half of that will go to the New Democratic Party. Well, you don't think they knew what they were doing when they put this in place? They certainly did, $250,000. They short- changed themselves by $2,500 and, you know– An Honourable Member: That was nice of them. Mr. Maguire: That was nice of them, yeah. It was under the auspices of looking good.

We'll just have a nice round number that just happens to be less than 1 percent below what we're going to set it at. But, anyway, Mr. Acting Speaker, I just want to say that half a million dollars may not be a lot to a New Democratic government that's been absolutely flush with transfer payments and equalization, 40 percent of their budget coming from Ottawa on an annual basis now, but it's an awful lot to Manitobans. Manitobans want accountability. They want to know what their money's being used for.

When Manitobans already get a tax credit for donations up to $1,275 of an individual donation in the province of Manitoba, when the political parties and individual MLAs get half of their expenses refunded if they get 10 percent of the vote during the election campaign by Elections Manitoba, that money comes out of Manitoba taxpayers' pockets. We're not the only province, of course, that get those, but to add this on top of it, is like an insult to injury.

For a provincial party like the New Democrats that have put so many roadblocks in place, limits on the amount that individuals can spend, only individuals can donate to parties, not unions or corporations, they already had everything going their

3832 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 way that they wanted in the previous bills that they brought in in previous years, but that insult by injury, by putting this bill in leads me to believe that they can't get their members to give them any money anymore. When this comes in , they'll have even less of a reason to give the New Democrats' members money. But, Mr. Acting Speaker, I just want to point out that, if they were actually out raising funds in their constituencies or raising funds for the next election, they wouldn't need this bill.

They wouldn't need a bill that gives them $250,000 a year to operate. So it's a concern that I certainly have. Many, many Manitobans came to speak out against this bill, but I thought there was one–I was in the other committee room the night that Sid Green showed up.

I want to tell you, I just have to say that he put it in about as a succinct manner as I've ever heard anybody put it and that is if the Nazi Party ever gets any kind of vote and money out of this, if they should get the status to wh ere they could ever get a dollar out of this kind of a thing, they could throw him in jail because he would never pay his taxes again. I believe that many Manitobans feel, certainly in the back of their minds, that conviction about this kind of a bill, but Mr.

Green was the one that articulated it very, very clearly to the New Democrats, many of whom he perhaps had sat in this House with, particularly th e Premier (Mr. Doer). I want to say that I think it's absolutely appalling that the government won't listen to a former member from their own political party on this particular area.

I just wanted to say that we have forced the New Democrats to take a look now that the election date is in the fall and not the spring, that there is an amendment that came forward to increase the limit that you can have on political party election spending for advertising in the year of an election. Of course, that's another one that they agreed on with trying to leave it the same so that there would be fewer dollars for opposition parties to spend in the year of an election. They've moved it back and prorated it somewhat now that the election would be held in October.

I have to say that they've extended the limit to 90 days from 60 days before the election for advertising, for unrest ricted taxpayer-funded advertising campaigns until a few weeks before the writ is dropped, Mr. Acting Speaker. So it's a concern, but it still doesn't make up for capping the kinds of political party advertising that they're allowed to continue to do. * (15:20) Mr. Speaker in the Chair Mr. Speaker, it was a concern of mine, as a constituent indicated to me, that they phoned me up when this bill was coming before the House and, you know, which just shows to me that people do watch what's going on.

They certainly know the kind of legislation. But they don't phone until there's something that extremely negatively impacts them, and I got calls on this bill. I got calls on 17 and 38 as well, but this bill they said: What are they trying to do to you, Larry? You've kept very good contact with us. You've kept in touch with us throughout. You've usually been a member, and this government wants to censor the kind of information you're going to send out to us in the future. I just believe, Mr.

Speaker, that it's an absolute travesty that what the government was trying to do there by setting up a committee that they would control to scrutinize the kinds of franking pieces and information that we could send out in direct mails to the members that elected us and all of our constituents in any of our constituencies across Manitoba and have a say that they were going to control, if you will, the types of information that was going out.

Not to mention that the government already has all of the department information mechanisms at their hands and convenience to send out information, as well as the annual, the daily press releases that they roll out on issues anyway. So I want to say that I'm going to close on this bill, Mr. Speaker, by saying that I was very concerned about the censorship. I noted that the vote tax is in this bill. The next election would be October 4, 2011, but I have to say that the government has left themselves an out with this because it doesn't necessarily mean that there'll be an election.

It means that unless a general election has been held between the coming into force of this

section and October 3–and that's to do with the election change. Mr. Speaker, we're not in a minority situation, which is why you would have the opportunity of a leader to be able to call an election before the set election date might occur. In a minority government situation in our British democracy, minority governments can occur. I would believe that the Premier (Mr. Doer) would ha ve to have the right to go to the Lieutenant-Governor and allow for the dissolution of the Legislature so that an election could be called. But this is right in a bill at a time when the government has a majority in power, and

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3833 they're saying that unless a general election has been held between the coming into force of this

section and October 3, 2011, then we'll have an election on October 4, 2011. Well, Mr. Speaker, it still looks like the government is going to have it both ways on this bill, and that's a travesty in my mind because there are so many things that they've mixed up in this bill with set election dates that it certainly should have been separated and brought forth as a single amendment on this bill. Mr.

Speaker, this bill also talks about The Lobbyists Registration Act and excluding basically some sectors, particularly unions, on The Lobbyists Registration Act, that others would have to be registered lobbyists before they can lobby the government. I don't know if that goes to committee meetings. It would seem to me to be an unfair practice if we're actually going to have to be registered as a lobbyist to make a presentation at committee. I would certainly dump that.

I would hope that the government doesn't invoke that kind of mandate on Manitobans because it makes a sham of the committee process if that's what they do. I guess I'd just like to say that a couple of third- party commentaries on Bill 37 came from the likes of, well, one was Preston Manning, I think, in the Winnipeg Free Press on June 1, when this bill was up. Mr. Manning said, and I quote: Tommy Douglas would be turning over in his grave if he saw legislation introduced last month by Manitoba's NDP government. And that was to deal with Bill 37.

It probably referred to some of the other bills that they've got in the House as well. Another one was, and I quote: It's so obviously self-serving and to present it as some kind of altruistic move is laughable"–end quote. That one's by a reporter called Tom Brodbeck from the Winnipeg Sun . The Winnipeg Free Press said that the amendments Mr. Chomiak now offers are simply a tactic to lull voters back to sleep. Mr. Speaker, I guess the circumstance is that, when you've got a situation–and I mentioned Mr. Sid Green earlier.

I guess what I'd like to say is–what I'm indicating is that the people of Canada are being asked and forced by law to contribute to political parties that they don't believe in. I believe that is unconscionable. That's a quote from the former MLA, Sidney Green, on the 27th of May in the committee and committee Hansard. Mr. Bidhu Jha, Acting Speaker, in the Chair So, Mr. Acting Speaker, with those comments, I'd just like to say that I certainly will not be voting in favour of Bill 37. I know that there are many other colleagues who want to speak to this bill.

With that, I just want to reiterate that I will not be supporting this bill. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): It's a pleasure to speak to Bill 37, one of the bills that's probably had the strangest lives of any bill that I've seen in my six years here in the Legislat ure. I'm sure that other members might want to recall other pieces of legislation, but certainly this bill has had a strange existence, stranger than most pieces of legislation that we would see come before this Chamber. It started with the introduction of the bill. I remember the Premier (Mr.

Doer) having the bill distributed late into question period, which was unusual. Normally, bills would be distributed at a sooner time. [interjection] The Member for Minto (Mr. Swan) wonders if there was a conspiracy, and maybe he wants to save his judgment because, when he hears me lay out the case, he might, in fact, think that it is something akin to a political conspiracy that he may or may not have been aware of in the context of his government. So the bill was distributed late in a question period, which was unusual. We all thought it was unusual.

Then the Premier left part way through question period which was–I'd like to say it was terribly unusual for this Premier, but maybe not that unusual for him–but he did leave part way through a question period. He went out into the hallway, and he crowd the media together, crowd them all together to hold a scrum. We were hearing reports of this, and this seemed very strange.

Then, instead of holding the scrum in the hallway, which is the traditional way to do things after or during the context of a question period, he crowded them all down the hallway into his office, so that nobody else from the opposition or any passers-by, I suppose, could hear what the Premier was saying to the media. Then a news release went out that trumpeted that the government was moving on set election dates. An Honourable Member: Maybe he didn't want his own members to know. Mr. Goertzen: The Member for Arthur Virden (Mr. Maguire) raises the point that he might not have wanted his own members to know.

3834 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 I, in fact, believe that to the extent there was–to use the Member for Mint o's (Mr. Swan) words–a conspiracy, it would have been fairly limited. I actually don't believe that the majority of the New Democratic members of their caucus knew what this bill was about when it wa s introduced. It probably came as a surprise to them as it was unfurled over the course of the day. I'm sure that many of them were surprised to learn its content. But, of course, at first blush, the government, the Premier (Mr.

Doer) tried to sell this simply as a set election date bill, and it could have been easy to be fooled, any person who would have just heard that and would have probably said, well, that sounds good. The Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), whom I hold up as an honourable individual and a person who works hard on behalf of his constituents, I think, at first blush took the Premier at his word as well, took the Premier at his word that this bill was simply about set election dates. You could hardly hold the Member for Inkste r at fault for that.

He maybe has grown more suspicious since then about when the government introduces bills, but I think he and then probably other Manitobans who heard those initial early reports about the bill being about set elections said, well, that sounds reasonable, and that's something that most Manitobans would support. * (15:30) Then, of course, we got the actual bill and realized this is a pretty thick bill for something that's supposed to just deal with set elections, because it wouldn't take more than a couple of pages to put a law to change the election dates to a set election in Manitoba.

So you started to go through it and you realized, my goodness, this is an omnibus bill. There are all sorts of things contained within it, Mr. Acting Speaker. We went from the set election part of the bill, which was near the front, then you got into the lobbyist registration part of the bill, and we go, that's probably not so bad. There are some good aspects to lobbyist registration. Members of the opposition have talked about that in the past.

Then you got into the real reason this bill was brought in by the government when they tried to limit the ability for political parties to advertise outside of the context of an election, to try to shut that down. [interjection] I appreciate the fact that the Minister of Intergovernmental Affair s (Mr. Ashton) wants silence in the Chamber to hear this because that means he's probably still thinking about his position on this bill, and it's not too late in terms of how an individual would vote on Bill 37.

So we got into the aspects of whether or not political parties, through this bill, would be limited in their ability to advertise. We, of course, have talked about the lack of constitutional validity to limiting political parties from advertising when you have– [interjection] The Member for Minto seems quite agitated by this bill since he's gone into the hallelujah choir of Cabinet. He's been given the song book and he tries to sing it more often than not when it comes to this bill.

I remember at committee that the Member for Minto got into a heated argument with a committee presenter, which was very much outside of the nature of the Member for Minto who, I would say, we differ politically but is a nice individual generally. You could tell that he was so agitated by what his own government had foisted upon him that he was taking it out on presenters who were coming to the committee trying to make a valid point. Certainly, Mr. Acting Speaker, there are questions about the constitutionality of limiting political parties from advertising outside of the context of an election.

You can see quite apart from the constitution, the fairness argument about a government that has unlimited ability to spend and to try to disseminate information with taxpayers' funds versus an opposition party, or any political party, trying to counter that message by putting out a different perspective. That's really what democracy's about. It's about that give and take, that free flow of ideas, that back and forth, which the government, through Bill 37, was trying to limit, trying to restrict, and trying to shut down.

As we went a little further into the bill that afternoon, we saw that one of the reasons why the government was trying to bring in Bill 37 was because they were very offended by some direct mail or franking pieces that were going out to constituents of MLAs.

So sensitive was this government to any sort of message against their message, against their propaganda, that they wanted to shut down and limit the ability of individual MLAs to speak with their constituents, or to speak with Manitobans more broadly, I mean, you can tell a government's been there too long when they don't even want to defend their own ideas, when they don't even want to have an

October 7, 2008 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3835 open discourse. When they don't even want– [interjection] I can understand–I hear the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) speak from her seat–and if there's anybody who should be defensive about the policies of the government, it should be the Minister of Agriculture, whether it was Bill 17 or her inability to help farmers who needed help in the Interlake this spring, I can understand, Mr. Acting Speaker, why she wouldn't want the opposition to be able to put out an unfettered message to constituents, hers or anybody else's.

Manitobans by the hundreds came forward, and I know that the Member for Minto and others will speak negatively about who those Manitobans were or will try to cast aspersions on their motives, and that's another sign of an arrogant government, I would say, Mr. Acting Speaker. I'll say to his credit that the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Mr. Ashton) didn't speak disparagingly at the committee. Of course, he, I think, had been at a few different other committees where people came forward, when he was in opposition, and people like the Member for St. Norbert (Ms.

Brick), I believe, who came and made a presentation on a bill. The current Member for St. Norbert wasn't the Member for St. Norbert then, made presentations, and I don't think any of us, or any of the people who were in government then were casting aspersions on her. Mr. Acting Speaker, I would say that the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs didn't at the committee. He listened to the presentations.

He didn't say anything very negative, unlike many of his colleagues who were saying negative things and taking on the presenters there because I think that, in his heart of hearts, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs knows that this is an undemocratic bill, that it's not good for democracy, because he is one of the members that has actually sat on both sides of this House. That can't be said for all of the members of the current government. Mr. Acting Speaker, I know that some of the other ministers put up their hands and they say they've been on both sides of the House.

Maybe they just don't have as good a memory as the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Maybe they don't have that same sense of balance and that same sense of democratic proportion. But the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs knows that governments change, oppositions change, positions and parties change positions within this House. He knows that what seems like an advantageous position for the government today, when they move into opposition, it's something that they wouldn't want to live with themselves. So I'm glad that he is thinking about his own vote on this bill if it comes to a vote this afternoon.

I look forward to him doing the right thing. Not just for his party today, but for democr acy generally and for this Chamber and those who will come after us and those who will be sitting in whatever position they do in opposition or in government. Then, of course, we went further into the bill. Perhaps this was the heart of it. There's an old saying that money is at the root of all evil. I'm not sure that is always the–[interjection] I think the good reverend knows the source of the quotation. I would say, Mr.

Acting Speaker, that when you look at the true motivation of why this government brought the bill in, this is probably the one they wanted the most: the vote tax, the ability for them to take out of the pockets of taxpayers a certain amount of money for every vote that they'd receive in the last election. Perhaps they didn't anticipate the economic turbulence that would be coming forward. Certainly they would have had much warning from members of this side of the House, the Member for Brandon West (Mr. Borotsik). Perh aps they didn't anticipate the economic turmoil.

But, regardless of that, regardless of the economic times, the reality is that trying to take money from individual taxpayers to fund your political parties simply isn't, I don't believe, in accordance with what most Manitobans would be asking for. In fact, I knocked on a lot of doors in the last provincial election, both in my constituency and other constituencies.

I don't remember one constituent, one Manitoban, saying to me, you know, if you get elected or whoever gets elected, what you need to do is bring in a law that will allow political parties to get a certain amount of money for every vote they get in the election. I don't remember that. Mr. Acting Speaker, maybe the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) or the Minister of Advanced Education (Ms. McGifford) or the Minister of Intergovernmen tal Affairs (Mr. Ashton) will correct me.

Maybe they will stand up and say this was something in fact that their constituents were looking for and that they're representing their constituents by bringing forward this vote tax. I

3836 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA October 7, 2008 doubt it. I doubt that they would stand up and say that because I don't think they ever heard it. But I do think that those within their Cabinet and their party have decided that this is a necessary way for them to fund their ow n political party because they can't do it on their own, because they're not confident enough to go to Manitobans to knock on the doors, to go to the individual meetings and places and say, you know what, this is what we stand for as a political party. This is what we want to run on in the next election.

Will you support that with your dollars? With your $10? With your $20? With your $50 or whatever the amount of the donation is. That's not an easy thing. Mr. Acting Speaker, you know, you've run in campaigns. All members here know that it's not an easy thing to raise money for political parties. It takes a lot of work, it takes a lot of contact. You have to sell the fact that your political party would do something that will benefit the individuals who you are asking to give a donation to you.

That's not a simple or an easy–you know, there are a lot of people who are in elected life who don't like that part of the job, who don't like to go and ask for that funding and to try to sell the policies of the political party or to have others do it for them. It is hard work. * (15:40) What the government clearly was trying to do with Bill 37 is to eliminate that hard work.

To say they didn't have to actually go out and sell their ideas, either because they weren't confident that they could do it and that they, perhaps, saw their own ability to raise money diminishing currently or in the future, or simply because they didn't want to have to go and do the hard work. So they did what democrats, New Democrats and socialist governments around the world have done in the past. They simply said, well, instead of going out and earning the money, we're just simply going to take the money.

That's what Bill 37 is about, taking money from taxpayers instead of going out and trying to sell the idea that you bring forward. I think that that's not only bad for taxpayers, of course, it is that, but it's also bad for the democratic system and the process because it doesn't give you that motivation any more, to go to Manitobans to listen to their ideas, to sell your own ideas, and to really engage in a true dialogue, a democratic dialogue that we all benefit from when we engage with Manitobans. They've decided, the New Democrats have decided, that they don't want to have that sort of discourse.

They don't want to have that sort of responsibility to the taxpayers and so they would simply bring in the vote tax. I do remember also, as the Member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire) has mentioned, the presentation by one Sidney Green, and I would say I've now seen Mr. Green present at a number of different committees in this Legislature on a number of different topics. It's something you don't want to miss when Mr. Green is presenting at a committee because not only is it entertaining, it's enlightening every time he brings forward a presentation.

I remember him saying–and I don't have it written down so, if I miss a word or two, members of the Chamber or Mr. Green will forgive me, but I remember him saying: I used to donate to the New Democratic Party and now that I've stopped donating to the party, they're going to make me donate through my taxes. I think that there are many Manitobans who would echo the sentiment that now they are being forced to donate to political parties whose views and whose ideas they may not necessaril

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-2-81b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 2nd hansardpdf 81b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7639bc5421ca3ae286d34fd76c64d56d7ba6b77f

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