Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 10 (40th Legislature, 3rd Session)

40-3-10

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Fortieth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Daryl Reid Speaker Vol. LXVI No. 10 - 1:30 p.m., Monday, November 25, 2013 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Fortieth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy St. Vital NDP ALLUM, James, Hon. Fort Garry-Riverview NDP ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley NDP ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson NDP BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli NDP BLADY, Sharon, Hon. Kirkfield Park NDP BRAUN, Erna, Hon. Rossmere NDP BRIESE, Stuart Agassiz PC CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East NDP CHIEF, Kevin, Hon. Point Douglas NDP CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan NDP CROTHERS, Deanne St.

James NDP CULLEN, Cliff Spruce Woods PC DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk NDP DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FRIESEN, Cameron Morden-Winkler PC GAUDREAU, Dave St. Norbert NDP GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Liberal GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach PC GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC HOWARD, Jennifer, Hon. Fort Rouge NDP IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Richmond NDP JHA, Bidhu Radisson NDP KOSTYSHYN, Ron, Hon. Swan River NDP LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. Dawson Trail NDP MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns NDP MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Flor, Hon.

Logan NDP MARCELINO, Ted Tyndall Park NDP MELNICK, Christine Riel NDP MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East PC NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake NDP OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River NDP PALLISTER, Brian Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PETTERSEN, Clarence Flin Flon NDP REID, Daryl, Hon. Transcona NDP ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Kewatinook NDP RONDEAU, Jim Assiniboia NDP ROWAT, Leanne Riding Mountain PC SARAN, Mohinder The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron St. Paul PC SELBY, Erin, Hon. Southdale NDP SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Verendrye PC STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo PC STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon.

Dauphin NDP SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto NDP WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas NDP WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WIGHT, Melanie Burrows NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC Vacant Arthur-Virden Vacant Morris

305 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, November 25, 2013 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom , know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen. Good afternoon, everyone. Please be seated.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 10–The Fires Prevention and Emergency Response Amendment Act Hon. Erna Braun (Minister of Labour and Immigration): Moved–I move, seconded by the Minister of Health (Ms. Selby), that Bill 10, The Fires Prevention and Emergency Response Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la prévention des incendies et les interventions d'urgence, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Ms. Braun: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 10, The Fires Prevention and Emergency Response Amendment Act. This bill will bring enhanced penalty provisions in order to provide a stronger deterrent to non- compliance wit h the act and key regulations including the Manitoba Fire Code.

Maximum penalties under the act are currently very low compared to those in other public safety statutes, such as The Workplace Safety and Health Act, and do not reflect the very serious life risks– serious life safety risks that are created when a fire – when fire safety requirements are not followed. In addition to increasing maximum fines for persons convicted of an offence under the act, the proposed amendments will also give the Fire Commiss ioner authority to issue administrative penalties directly to persons who fail to comply with an order issued by a Fire Commissioner or a designate. Mr.

Speaker, it is our hope that the new provisions will encourage increased compliance and thereby improv e public safety. However, these amendments will also ensure that those who choose to disregard their responsibilities with respect to fire safety can be held accountable. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Further introduction of bills? Bill 208–The Drivers and Vehicles Amendment Act (Support Our Troops Licence Plates) Mr.

Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): I move, seconded by the member from Charleswood, that Bill 208, The Drivers and Vehicles Amendment Act (Support Our Troops Licence Plates), be read now for a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Eichler: I encourage all members of the House to support this legislation.

It's similar to the plates bill that we brought in before, going back to 2004, the veterans' licence plate bill, which all members of the House supported unanimously, and similar to that to the firefighters' plate and other plates that's been brought forward not only by this side of the House but by that side of the House as well. And we encourage all members to remember how important it is to support those that are out there making Manitoba and Canada a better place for us all to live. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker: Is the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Any further introduction of bills? PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: Seeing none, we'll move on to petitions. Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Busy day, Mr. Speaker. Good afternoon. I wish to present the following petition to the Legis lative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

306 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as th e PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. This petition's submitted on behalf of D. Leduchowski, H. Strick, R. Cook and many other fine Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: In keeping with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to have been received by the House. Provincial Sales Tax Increase– Cross-Border Shopping Mr.

Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): I wish to present the followin g petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition: Manitoba has a thriving and competitive retail environment in communities near its borders, including Bowsman, Swan River, Minitonas, Benito, Russell, Bins carth, St -Lazare, Birtle, Elkhorn, Virden, Melita, Waskada, Boissevain, Deloraine, Cartwright, Pilot Mound, Crystal City, Manitou, Morden, Winkler, Plum Coulee, Altona, Gretna, Emerson, Morris, Killarney, Sprague, Vita, Reston, Pierson, Miniota, McAuley, S t. Malo, Foxwarren, Roblin and many others.

Both the Saskatchewan PST rate and the North Dakota retail sales rate are 5 per cent, and the Minnesota retail sales rate is 6 per cent. The retail sales rate is 40 per cent cheaper in North Dakota and Saskat chewan and 25 per cent cheaper in Minnesota as compared to Manitoba. The differential in tax rates creates a disincentive for Manitoba consumers to shop locally to purchase their goods and services.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To acknowledge that the increase in PST will significantly encourage cross -border shopping and put additional strain on the retail sector, especially for those businesses located close to the Manitoba provincial borders. And, secondly, to urge the provincial government to reverse its PST increase to ensure Manitoba consumers can shop affordably in Manitoba and support local businesses. This petition's signed by D. Froom, J. Letkeman, J. Siemens and many, many more fine Manitobans. Mr. Cliff Gra ydon (Emerson): Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the reasons for this petition:

(1) Manitoba has a thriving and competitive retail environment in communities near its borde rs, including Bowsman, Swan River, Minitonas, Benito, Russell, Binscarth, St -Lazare, Birtle, Elkhorn, Virden, Melita, Waskada, Boissevain, Deloraine, Cartwright, Pilot Mound, Crystal City, Manitou, Morden, Winkler, Plum Coulee, Altona, Gretna, Emerson, Mor ris, Killarney, Sprague, Vita, Reston, Pierson, Miniota, McAuley, St. Malo, Foxwarren, Roblin and many others. * (13:40)

(2) Both the Saskatchewan PST rate and the North Dakota retail sales tax rate are 5 per cent, and the Minnesota retail sales tax rate is 6 per cent.

(3) The retail sales tax rate is 40 per cent cheaper in North Dakota and Saskatchewan and 25 per cent cheaper in Minnesota as compared to Manitoba.

(4) The differential in tax rates creates a disincentive for Manitoba consumers to shop locally to purchase their goods and services. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

(1) To acknowledge that the increase in the PST will significantly encourage cross -border shopping and put additional strain on the retail sector, especially for those businesses located close to the Manitoba provincial borders. And (2) to urge the provincial government to reverse its PST increase to ensure that Manitoba consumers can shop affordably in Manitoba and support their local businesses.

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 307 And this petition is signed by M. Maynard, F. Gagne, E. Racine and many, many mo re fine Manitobans. Government Services Offices Closures– Public Consultations Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition: Since April 1, 2012, the provincial government has closed at least 20 government services offices in communities throughout Manitoba.

The closure of these offices creates job losses and reduces economic activity within the community and decrease the accessibility and qual ity of services for local citizens. The provincial government did not consult with the communities impacted by these office closures before deciding to close, merge or consolidate the offices. These office closures unnecessarily increase the financial co st and time commitment required by citizens to access government services that were previously offered in their community.

Manitobans have a right to access provincial programs and services in a timely manner within a reasonable distance from their community regardless of their locations. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge that the provincial government restore the services provided to the affected communities until the provincial government conducts public consultations and provides an alternative solution that maintains or increases the level of service provided in the local area. This petition is signed by M. Whelpton, H. Swanson, J. Turner -Cox and many, many other fine Manitobans.

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 today members of the Native Women's Transition Centre, who are the guests of the honourable member for Burrows (Ms. Wight). On behalf of honourable members, we welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS PST Increase Request to Reverse Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Manitoba's NDP Premier has a tax -and-spend problem.

In fact, he's taken Manitoba back to the days of Howard Pawley where they ran deficits every year, they raised 16 taxes and they created five new ones. They never saw a tax they didn't like, and this Premier has brought back yesterday's NDP. Before he does any more damage to Manitoba's finances, will he stop the PST hike, cancel Bill 20 or at least call a referendum? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, we'll keep Manitoba one of the most affordable places to live in the country.

Now, I noticed the members last week had an extraordinary interest in the federal by -elections, and I did also note as well that the candidate for Provencher said that a student who spoke out against bullying manufactured the public bullying that he experienced. And I want to know if the acting, presumably, leader of the PC caucus next door would like to get up and say that they will repudiate the statements made by that candidate and withdraw their support and actually say that they do not agree with the fact that this young person did not manufacture this public bullying.

Taxpayer Protection Act Government Intention Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, we know the Premier is trying to detract from his own provincial issues, and I would ask him to focus on what's happening under his watch. Mr. Speaker, if Bill 20 passes, Manitoba is no longer going to have any taxpayer protection from this NDP government. In fact, it's going to be the final nail in the coffin of taxpayer protection law in Manitoba. So I would ask–like to ask this Premier to give Manitobans a hint at what new taxes he has in store for them after he gets rid of the taxpayer protection law. Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I've indicated to this House before that all gove rnments across the country regardless of political stripe

308 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 worked together to keep the Canadian economy going in the midst of a global recession, and only the members opposite didn't co- operate with keeping Manitobans and Canadians working at a time when the private sector was completely failing in terms of their ability to access credit. Now, Mr. Speaker, five members of the PC caucus, the member from Emerson, La Verendrye, Lac du Bonnet, St. Patel and the member from Steinbach, have endorsed this candida te and his comments that blame the victim and say that we manufactured a public bully.

Will they withdraw the support for that candidate? Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I would ask–like to ask this Premier to focus on a very serious issue that is happening under his nose under provincial legislation. Earlier this year, when he was asked if he was going to raise the PST again, this Premier did not say no; in fact, he left the door wide open. We now know that the NDP requested a briefing note on the PST hike where it appears that they were actually looking at a PST hike larger than 8 per cent.

I would like to ask this Premier to focus and tell hard-working Manitobans: Once he kills the taxpayer protection act, can they expect higher taxes in the next two ye ars? And, Mr. Speaker, I think this is really important. Taxpayers want to know. What are his plans for the next two years? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, Manitoba has been and will be one of the most affordable places to live in Canada. Mr. Speaker, what w e need to know is if the members of St. Paul, Lac du Bonnet, La Verendrye, Emerson and Steinbach will support the leadership of the member of St.

Vital and now endorse the antibullying legislation we brought forward in Manitoba or will they again repudiat e that and support the candidate in Provencher saying that people manufactured their own public bullying, blaming the victims. Shame on the members opposite. Manitoba Hydro PAYS Program Reduction Mr. Ron Schuler ( St. Paul ): Mr. Speaker, I have documents to table for the minister's photo album of shame. During the April 26th, 2013, PUB hearings, Manitoba Hydro to close–disclosed that Power Smart plan was to be slashed by 17 per cent. That's for the year of 2012 and 2013.

My question is: Is this just further proof that this NDP government cannot be trusted? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Acting Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro): Mr. Speaker, with respect to Manitoba Hydro, I'm very pleased that, despite the roars and the attempts by members opposite to privatize Hydro and all of the awful, destructive and horrible criticism they made of Manitoba Hydro – and they're making Saskatchewan like the nirvana of the world –that Saskatchewan has purchased $100 million worth of clean Manitoba energy to deal with their energy problems. They're supplied by coal. And, Mr.

Speaker, not only are we going to sell our clean energy at above cost to the United States but to Saskatchewan, and Alberta's knocking on the door as well. And those members opposite would privatize our oil, our liquid gold. Mr. Schuler: Mr. Speaker, the criticisms being made are being made by pre- eminent Manitobans like former Premier Ed Schreyer. So I would be –I would caution the member from Kildonan to choose his words carefully. In the same document, Manitoba Hydro reports that Power Smart in 2013-2014 is to be slashed again by 17 per cent.

The actual numbers of Power Smart are in direct contrast to the spin of last week. Is this not further proof that this NDP government cannot be trusted? * (13:50) Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons that, when we came to office, we went from No. 10 in national listings in terms of energy efficiency to No. 1 was because of our Power Smart and creative ventures. Members might forget that it was only two years ago we introduced

an act called pay as you go, which is the most advanced in North America, that provides to low-income individuals and, soon, businesses the opportunity to pay off their meter, Mr. Speaker, a nd to pay actually less cost and to pay less for energy while saving hydro to have that extra power that they sell on the grid, which they would get nothing for if they poured it over the dams like members opposite would do, and they get profits from the United States and now from Saskatchewan.

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 309 Mr. Schuler: Only this NDP government would take a program that worked from the '90s and then slash it two years running. As Manitoba Hydro rates hit historical rate increases, Power Smart remains one of the few remaining ways for ratepayers to save money. But by slashing the Power Smart program by 17 per cent and rate increases of 8 per cent, is this not further proof, when it comes to Manitoba Hydro, this NDP government cannot be trusted? Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, the member only has to look on today's editorial page of the Free Press to see that 60 per cent higher costs in Ontario and 60 per cent higher cost in their favourite province, Saskatchewan, for electricity–they only have to look at that and look at their own plan to have hydro go to market rates, just like they did with MTS when they privatized it. Look at the rates in Manitoba for telephones now compared to what it was when it was a Crown corporation. Look at the fact that we equalized the rates between urban centres and rural centres that allow rural centres to grow and prosper.

They voted against it, and they will do everything they can–everything they can–to destroy Manitoba Hydro, to privatize it, to give money to their friends and to hurt al l Manitobans by losing our greatest resource, our liquid gold. Flooding

(2011) Compensation Claim Numbers Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Mr. Speaker, this NDP government has attempted to mislead this House and the people of Manitoba by stating that farmers and ranchers in the Lake Manitoba 2011 inundation zone received an average of $300,000 in compensation. Will the Minister of Agriculture correct that oversight and put the actual, accurate compensation numbers on the record? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister responsible for Emergency Measures ): Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased that we're actually getting some questions on what is a very important concern.

In this case, in fact, I met, along with the MLA for the Interlake and our Minister of Agriculture, with people from around Lake Manitoba. And I can tell you that what was particularly important to them is the fact that we've announced a review of the operation of the Portage Diversion, something that has not been done, really, since it was constructed. They al so were very much interested in the fact that we've announced mitigation, $250 million of mitigation that's going to protect those communities against future flooding.

In fact, we had a very lengthy meeting, a very positive meeting, and, again, it's because we are committed to working with those flood victims to rebuild and also to protect them in the future against those kinds of floods. Mr. Briese: That protection on future flooding he keeps blowing about is nine years down the road. I don't know how far in the future he wants to go. Mr. Speaker, freedom of information numbers show that 502 farmers and ranchers shared $34,731,934 for an average payout of $69,187.

I ask again: Will the Minister of Agriculture stop trying to mislead the people of M anitoba and put accurate numbers on the record? Mr. Ashton : Mr. Speaker, I'd remind the member opposite that the channel that we're talking about converting into a permanent channel has already been built. We built it during the flood, protecting those communities. And we will be looking to the federal government to work with us because that's one of the first targets is we are aiming at making that a permanent outlet. But I also want to indicate, Mr.

Speaker, we had very good discussion at that meeting with people from in around Lake Manitoba are also very interested in the fact that we're going to add an additional outlet. And I'd remind the member opposite, by the way, that we are attempting to do it as soon as possible. In fact, the time frame certainly is comparable to any other major project. In fact, I think Duff Roblin took nine years to build the floodway. We took about eight in terms of the floodway expansion. We aim to get it done even quicker than that because we're committed to those communities. Mr. Briese: Mr.

Speaker, broken promises, inaccurate, mi sleading information, farmers and ranchers are placed in desperate situations by this NDP government. The minister continues to show a lack of integrity and no indication of responsibility. I ask again: Will the Minister of Agriculture at least post accur ate compensation numbers on the record? Mr. Ashton : Well, Mr. Speaker, I –let's put on the record that, when members opposite were in

310 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 government for 11 years –this is a bit of a trick question. I'd like to ask him: What did they build? Well, I could tell yo u. It is a trick question because the answer is absolutely nothing and certainly when it came to flood mitigation. I know the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Speaker, was so concerned about flooding and flood mitigation, he quit as EMO minister months befor e. He then quit provincial politics to run federally to pursue his own ambitions. So we need no lectures on–from members opposite. We're committed.

We put a billion dollars into flood mitigation, and thanks to the 1 cent on the dollar, we're going to be further committed, Mr. Speaker, to Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin. Unfortunately, members opposite do nothing more than either criticize or vote against that. Violence against Women Sex Offender Release Concern Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, on this, the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, it is important to review the NDP government's dismal record regarding domestic violence and violence against women.

We know that in Manitoba the rate of violence a gainst women is nearly double the national average. We know that yesterday yet another sexual offender was scheduled to be released, this time from Headingley. What does the Minister of Justice plan to do to protect the women of Manitoba from this viole nt sexual offender? Hon.

Andrew Swan (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Certainly, we take the issue of domestic violence and protecting women very, very seriously, and that's why every budget that's brought down contains more support for police, more support for victim services and more support for the victims of domestic violence and sexual crimes. Now, of course, the member wants to talk about family violence. Manitoba's actually respected across Canada at being a jurisdiction that takes the issue extremely seriously.

In a recent report, Family Violence in Canada, Manitoba is attributed as a pro-charging and pro- prosecution jurisdiction that causes increases in arrest rates. Women know that their issues are taken seriously in this province. That's why they're more likely to come forward, because they know police and courts take this issue very, very seriously. Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, well, it would be good if the minister would take it seriously. But in a release to the public, the Winnipe g police noted that women of all ages are at risk of sexual violence and should take precautions.

The individual released recently has a criminal history of sexual assaults, harassment and is known to use fake names to contact women who could be potential victims. I'll ask again: What is the minister doing to protect the women of Manitoba from a recently released sexual offender who is a high risk to reoffend? Mr. Swan: Mr. Speaker, of course, the police have the ability to make notifications of this kind to make communities aware. Where there are appropriate circumstances, the Crown attorney's office will make application in certain cases that can result in a–in equivalent of a peace bond.

In certain cases where there is appropriate evidence and in th e Crown's opinion it warrants it, there will be further applications made. That can't always happen. It's not always possible under the Criminal Code to get that kind of extraordinary measure. That's why I support the police going forward and making appr opriate notifications where they think it's the right thing for the citizens, and I'm just wondering if the member for Brandon West is criticizing the police on their choice in this case, because that wouldn't make any sense. Mr. Helwer: Mr.

Speaker, inde ed, it would not make sense in this case to criticize the police. The question is for the Minister of Justice and he seems to be able–that he's not able to answer it. Earlier in November we heard that the police issued a second warning to Manitobans about a convicted sex offender deemed a high risk to reoffend. So the police are doing their job, Mr. Speaker. The police cautioned Manitobans in this instance, saying females are at risk of sexual violence. Once again, what is this Minister of Justice planning to do to keep Manitoba women safe? * (14:00)

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 311 Mr. Swan : Well, Mr. Speaker, myself and other members of this caucus and this government are not going to do what the opposition Conservatives did when they were in power and cut services to women and cut pr otections for women, and let's think of some of the things the opposition did which were intended and which have hurt women.

For example, it was the opposition leader when he was sitting around the Cabinet table that cut $150 a month from social assista nce, which hurt women, single women raising families, without any consideration for the impact that would have. It was the Progressive Conservatives that clawed back the national child -care benefit, taking millions of dollars from low-income families in this province, Mr. Speaker.

It was the opposition that cut funding for child-care centres, didn't just freeze it, didn't manage it, they cut it because they couldn't care less about women, especially single women raising children, because they've continued to hack and slash. And the Leader of the Opposition– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time has expired. Violence against Women Sexual Assault Rates Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): I'll remind the minister that they've been in government for 14 years and we're dead last in Canada still, Mr. Speaker.

According to annual data released by Statistics Canada on crime, Manitoba has the highest level of violent crime among the provinces and is leading in violent crime against women. And if that's not bad enough, Manitoba also has the highest sexual assault rate in the country. Mr. Speaker, why does this NDP government continue to fail to protect women from violent crimes and sexual assault in our province? Hon. Andrew Swan (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Well, Mr.

Speaker, perhaps the member opposite would like to look at some of the statistics which have shown 2012 had dramatic decreases in almost every area of violent crime, including crimes against women. And if the me mber would take a look at what police services, not just in Winnipeg but also in Brandon and the RCMP, are telling us, there continues to be a decrease in violent crime, including crimes against women. Well, here's the member for Brandon West (Mr. Helwer) chattering away. Let's take a look at what the Brandon Sun reported on November 9th, 2013: crime down.

And here's the chief of police in Brandon talking about how there's been a 42.5 per cent drop in reported crimes in Brandon over the past 16 years, including a 31.5 per cent drop in reported crimes over just the past six years, not including further decreases. So I don't mind the member for Brandon West heckling, but perhaps he should get his facts straight. Mrs. Stefanson: Well, Mr. Speaker, that's co ld comfort to the women who are suffering from violent crimes and sexual assault in our province. This government should be ashamed of itself. Mr.

Speaker, at a time when we recognize International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, here we are in Manitoba with a very sad story under this NDP government. Manitoba has among the highest level of violent crime against women, almost double that of the national average in our country. Clearly, the policies of this NDP government are not working. Mr. Speaker, why is the NDP government failing to protect women against violent crimes in our province? Mr. Swan : Well, frankly, Mr.

Speaker, and I will again tell the member opposite that we know that violent crime continues to decline in Brandon, in Winnipeg and other communities across this province. And it doesn't happen by accident. That happens by making choices, by supporting our police, not threatening to cut police positions, not threatening to cut positions in the police and not threatening to cut positions indiscriminately in important areas such as victim services and, of course, prosecutions.

Year after year, this government continues to make those investments to keep people safe, to allow people to feel safe in their homes, in their comm unities, in their workplaces. And every year, Mr. Speaker –I know the Conservatives talk a good game. When they have the chance to stand up for women in Manitoba, they vote against them every single time. Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, actions speak much louder than words. And, clearly, the actions of this government–[interjection] Only the NDP would sit in this Chamber and clap for themselves being dead last when it comes to violent crime rates in this

312 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 country–or No. 1 in Canada when it comes to that. Shame on them. Mr. Speaker, Jane Ursel, a sociology professor at the University of Manitoba with more than 20 years of research in family and interpersonal violence, said, and I quote, the Manitoba government has reduced the number of programs aimed at curtail ing domestic violence. And she went on to say, we've done something–we've done some backsliding when it comes to the correctional pieces. Perhaps that's why we are where we are when it comes to domestic violence and the crime rates in this province. Mr.

Speaker, this NDP government has failed to protect women in our province. Clearly– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired. Mr. Swan: Mr. Speaker, I am certainly aware of all of the good work that Jane Ursel has done, and that' s why she was one of the people we relied upon as we rolled out our new five -year strategy to address domestic violence, and that launch included a number of different factors, including making sure that awareness is out in our community. And, you know, in the past, messages were only directed at women and we knew it was time to change.

We knew that it was time to make sure that men are involved, and not just a message of telling men not to abuse women but to make sure that men aren't bystanders, to make sure that men stand up, whether it's a co -worker or a family member or a teammate or someone else, to stand up and make sure we all work together to prevent domestic violence. We think that is the right way to go.

And I would also point out, of course, that this is the Leader of the Opposition who, when he was sitting around the caucus table in the federal government, cancelled the national child -care program, scrapped the agreement to provide child care in Manitoba, and he was also a government NDP when the federal Conservative government closed 12 Status of Women offices around the country, including the one in Winnipeg. Who's really standing up for women? It's this government. Ambulance Service Response Times Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): And the result of all his hard work is dead last in Canada. Mr.

Speaker, a recent media report shows that ambulances in Manitoba's rural communities fail to meet response time guidelines nearly half the time. According to provincial guidelines, ambulance response times are not to exceed 30 minutes 90 per cent of the time, but, in fact, between April 2012 and March of this year ambulances failed to meet that guideline 46 per cent of the time. Can this minister explain: When it comes to ambulance response time, why does she fail half the time? Hon. Erin Selby (Minister of Health): I thank the member for giving me a chance to correct the record. Mr.

Speaker, there was actually some erroneous reporting on our ambulance response times, and if the member likes, I could meet with him after and explain those statistics to him. In fact, despite the fact that we're actually seeing more rural calls, responding to more rural calls, our average time to respond to them has gone down, which means we're actually improving results across rural Manitoba. Mr. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, we rendered a gr aph for the minister last week that shows that the response times for ambulances are up from 66 to 74 to 78 minutes.

I don't know what to tell her; maybe she could invert the graph and look at it the right way. Last week we tell this minister about one instance where a woman waits 90 minutes for ambulance to arrive from 7 miles away. Then another nurse dials 911, she waits 45 minutes for an ambulance to come from 12 kilometres away. And now we know that, rather than being the exception to the rule, this seems to be the rule. Mr. Speaker, when it comes to ambulance response times, how can this minister say that she's doing anything but failing? Ms. Selby : Well, Mr.

Speaker, as I said, although we're seeing a higher volume of calls, we actually are seeing our average response time go down, and that's because of several investments that we made into the EMS system. Mr. Speaker, i n 2006, we opened the Medical Transportation Co- ordination Centre in Brandon to better co -ordinate dispatch around the province. It is seen as one of the best dispatch systems in North America, in fact. We've replaced all of 160 existing ambulances and added 15 more to make 175 ambulances on the road.

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 313 But, of course, this is a big province. It's a province with a population that is very spread out, which is why we don't just have ambulances, but we have land ambulances, we have air ambulances and we have the STARS helicopter for the more difficult-to-reach patients. Mr. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, I ask this minister to focus. She's not making the grade. According to her own EMS system review that just came out, the response time target for rural areas: 14.59 minutes. That's a far cry from 90 minutes last week.

Last week we show that Manitoba is dead last when it comes to waiting for medically necessary treatment to start. This week we find out –this time –that half the time ambulances don't get to their patients on time. Mr. Speaker, the question for the minister is this: How worried should Manitobans be about information that continues to paint a troubling picture of the health -care system performance, very worried or very, very worried? * (14:10) Ms. Selby : Mr. Speaker, the only thing that Manitobans need to worry about is if they were ever in government. That is the thing they have to worry about.

Manitobans should worry about what half a million cuts across the system would do to health care and, more importantly, Manitobans should worry what a two -tier health system would look like in this province. It would mean t hose who have money would go to the front of the line, those who have money would see emergency response, and everybody else would wait behind them. Hip and Knee Replacement Surgery Patient Wait Times Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, as repo rted by the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, when the present NDP government came to power the median wait time for hip replacement surgery was 12 weeks. Today the median wait time for hip replacement surgery is 19 weeks in Winnipeg. Similarly, the medi an wait time for knee replacement surgery has risen for –from 15 weeks in 1999 to 23 weeks now. With wait times more than 50 per cent higher than when his government was elected 14 years ago, I ask the Premier: Is it his goal to continue increasing wait times for Manitobans in need of hip and knee replacement surgery? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): First of all, the number of patients being treated for hip and knee surgeries at Concordia is continuing to go up, Mr. Speaker. Last year we added 64 surgeries . In Manitoba we performed the second most hip and knee surgeries per capita of any other jurisdiction in Canada, and since 2006 we have cut the number of patients waiting for knee surgery by 60 per cent –by 60 per cent–and that was a high of 56 weeks down to 21 weeks today. And I do have to remind the ex- leader of the Liberal Party, every time we've made an investment in health care, he has not supported it. Mr. Gerrard: Mr.

Speaker, I'm not going to support longer and longer wait times in hip and knee replacements. Mr. Speaker, as reported in the Free Press on Saturday, the government is actually cutting back on the number of hip and knee replacement surgeries at Concordia Hospital. You know, it's hardly good planning to restrict access of disabled seniors to needed health care. One of the approaches that people would expect the government to take to reduce the demand for surgery is to work with Manitobans, particular ly seniors, to prevent knee and hip problems in the first place.

I would ask the minister: Can she table today her present plan to prevent knee and hip problems to decrease the need for so many hip and knee surgeries? Mr. Selinger: That's a good question because there's a number of things you can do on that. First of all, all the initiatives we've taken in Manitoba on healthy living, working with citizens to find healthier lifestyle practices, active transportation investments that we've made across th is province, Mr.

Speaker, the money we invest in municipalities that allows them to deal with issues like snow clearing and proper infrastructure for sidewalks and roads, the disability investments we've made in all of our public buildings in Manitoba, inc luding the front of this Legislature; where there never was a disability ramp in the place before, now it's here in this Legislature, and all of our public buildings have done that. So investments in infrastructure, investments in public buildings, ground path-breaking legislation for disabilities in Manitoba, all of those things plus

314 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 an investment in the Concordia hip and knee program which has ramped up dramatically the thousands of procedures that have been performed that have allowed people to get back to their lives as quickly as possible. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, the provincial plan is either not very good or it's not working, because the number of needed surgeries keeps going up and up and up. Mr. Speaker, senior citizens need hip and knee replacements to regain their mobility.

Immobility, of course, it causes dependence, but Manitoba seniors want to retain their independence and their dignity. Now, the NDP government has allowed waits for hip and knee surgeries to go up and has responded with no real plan to keep Manitobans healthier so that fewer surgical procedures are needed. It's not clear where this government stands on the needs of seniors in our province with their poor management of knee and hip surgery procedures. When is the government going to present a rational plan for reducing wait times for knee and hip surgeries in Manitoba? Mr. Selinger: Mr.

Speaker, the member is coming at this question from two sides. First, on the questi on of providing services to people, the number of surgeries has actually gone up. We're performing more procedures at a higher quality. People are spending less times in hospitals, getting back to their lives faster. That's the remedial procedures. What about the preventive procedures that he's also addressed in his question? Just a few weeks ago our Minister of Healthy Living announced another 15 communities that are participating in the Aging in Place program.

We're making record investments in personal-care homes, record investments in assisted living, record investments in supported living. We're providing infrastructure which the members vote against, safer sidewalks, safer streets, more active transportation for–Mr. Speaker. And as part of our Health y Living initiative and our Aging in Place initiatives, we do an enormous number of wellness programs in partnerships with senior citizens organizations at the community level. There's congregate meal programs, there's diet programs, there's nutrition pr ograms. And, Mr.

Speaker, seniors in Manitoba, we work in partnership with them to be able to have a healthy lifestyle in their homes, in their communities. New Apartment Complex Downtown Construction Project Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I want to team up with my Cabinet member colleague here and try and help the opposition get past this malaise they have with good news. It's also on a topic where they might learn something; they seem to be a little bit confused about their affordable housing policy.

They came out with a commitment which said they were actually going to do something for low-income people. Then the Leader of the Opposition on three separate occasions got caught on tape saying, no, no, no, we're not actually going to do that, it'll just be for a small number of low-income people. Then when we exposed them, they said, oh, well, and maybe we're going to do the original thing. Yes, okay. This from a party that has a leader who lives in a house that is–got seven-car garage attached to it. You can understand the confusion, Mr. Speaker.

Meanwhile in the real world, this government is actively building more affordable housing all over the province. Can the Minister for Housing and Community Development give us some latest news on that front? Hon. Peter Bjornson (Minister of Housing and Community Development ): I'm very pleased to have been part of an announcement today in downtown Winnipeg, where we've seen an incredible renaissance over the last 10 years wit h incredible investment in the downtown.

And one of the partners in the redevelopment of the downtown is the University of Winnipeg, and we partnered with them today to announce a 14- storey housing unit with 102 suites, Mr. Speaker, and that includes 46 apartments that will have rent ceilings so it can be affordable for students. It also includes 56 market-rate suites and it'll be a community unto itself where it will also have 16 premium suites in this 14-storey building. Now, buildings are going up i n the downtown at the university. Enrolments are going up at the downtown in the university.

The only thing that went up as far as universities were concerned when they were in office was tuitions, Mr. Speaker.

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 315 Heritage Services Government Intention Mr. W ayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, the new minister in charge of department of tourism, culture, sport and consumer affairs attempted to destroy Manitoba's heritage by forcing unique municipalities to amalgamate, as I mentioned on Friday. Mr. Speaker, why does this new minister want to continue his assault on Manitoba's facts –past and redact our heritage? Hon.

Ron Lemieux (Minister of Tourism, Culture, Sport and Consumer Protection): And I know members opposite truly are proud of Manitoba even though, you know, day in day out we see them cheering for the Saskatchewan Roughriders. And yet, let me take the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Sport, I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the Saskatchewan Roughriders in winning the Grey Cup. I know we're very, very pleased that western Canada won the Grey Cup, and we support them. And I know, you know, Mr.

Speaker, members opposite are green with envy when it comes time to take a look at what has really happened in Manitoba with regard to the new museum of human rights, the MTS Centre. We're taking a look at the FIFA world games coming to Manitoba, and, you know, the Western Canada Summer Games have been here. And, Mr. Speaker, as a Manitoban, as a proud Manitoban, I know New York Times and others have talked about this parka -clad bunch that live up here. What that means is we're proud to be Manitobans, we're proud to live here, we're proud of the heritage and sport that Manitoba offers– Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time expired. Mr. Ewasko: Mr. Speaker, I thank every day that my boys are allowed to –are able to wear helmets in hockey. * (14:20) Mr. Speaker, there continues to be a backlash towards the NDP government by attempting to make municipalities forcefully amalgamate. These municipalities were established based on the unique heritage of the people who first settled there and deserve the government's respect. Mr. Speaker, did the government elimina te the Heritage portfolio because it now knows that the new minister is clearly incapable of honouring Manitoba's heritage? Mr.

Lemieux: You know, Mr. Speaker, the – you know, sometimes I wonder whether –where the opposition's coming from, quite frankly, be cause in Manitoba we have world -class provincial parks. We have the Jets back in Winnipeg, which they voted against the MTS Centre. We have the Junos coming to Manitoba, the Canadian museum of human rights, the Journey to Churchill at Assiniboine Park looking at polar bears. Mr. Speaker, Manitoba has so much to offer, so much in heritage, so much in culture, so much in sport, why doesn't the opposition get on board, get on the love train, enjoy the rest of the Manitobas? Mr.

Ewasko: Mr. Speaker, everyone knows that it's important to understand the past in order to successfully plan for the future. In fact, many believe this is essential. As the former minister of Local Government, the minister and the Premier (Mr. Selinger) tried to destroy Manitoba's heritage by forcing municipalities to amalgamate against their will. Mr. Speaker, in light of the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Sport and Consumer Protection's poor stickhandling of the municipal amalgamations file, is the government's new plan to destroy Manitoba's heritage by neglecting the Heritage portfolio altogether? Mr.

Lemieux: You know, in Manitoba we have Folklorama. We have the Winnipeg Folk Festival, the Dauphin Countryfest –25th anniversary, the Countryfest in Dauphin. We have Festival du Voyageur. In Manitoba we have such a proud heritage, such a proud –you know, the fact that we have many volunteers that work in all those attractions in Manitoba, we should be proud and stand up beside them shoulder to shoulder. You know, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity at one time in my life to participate in professional sports, but where we're focused is not on professional sports in Manitoba.

We're talking about amateur sports, giving young people, giving children a chance to play hockey, soccer, football. Any choice that they have, we want to be supportive of them with regard to activity and being able to participate as young people and citizens of this province.

316 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 We're proud of our record. We'll continue to support sports in Manitoba, heritage, culture– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time has expired. Flooding

(2011) Crop Insurance Coverage Review Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Mr. Speaker, in 2011 in Langruth this government made some promises to some farmers and ranchers on ongoing flood recovery programs. Not only were those promises broken, now those same ranchers are being penalized by reduced crop insurance coverage because of no yield in 2011 and low yields in 2012 and 2013 as a result of that flood. Will the minister commit to a review of crop insurance coverage to the flood victims that takes into account the yield losses in 2012 and 2013 that were a result of the 2011 flood? Hon.

Ron Kostyshyn (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development): It's a great honour to answer the question by the member opposite. I do want to reinforce the fact of importance of Manitoba crop insurance to the producers, whether it's crop or hay production or livestock production. I do want to say that one of the greatest programs that were announced in the last little while is the forage insurance program that we're bringing forward for livestock producers. Never, ever in the country of Canada –we're the first province to bring forward forage insurance protection in the province of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, also, we are bringing forward livestock price insurance that's going to be a great 'testatute' to the livestock industry in the province of Manitoba. Yet I hear across members opposite always complaining about the beauty of agriculture in the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, it's a $10.1-billion industry in the province of Manitoba, and I'm very proud to stand here and be Agriculture Minister for the Province of Manitoba rather than paint the picture of doom and gloom the– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. The honourable minister's time has expired. Time for oral questions has expired.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Mr. Speaker: Time for members' statements. Holodomor Awareness Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye) : Mr. Speaker, on Saturday I was pleased to join local dignitaries as well as members of Winnipeg's and Manitoba's Ukrainian community at City Hall to remember the tragic times of the Holodomor, a dark time in the history of the Ukrainian people. The Ukrai nian people of this province have helped build Manitoba into what it is today, and it is important to recognize the accomplishments and the achievements that have helped move Manitoba forward.

Manitoba is blessed to have such a diverse, multicultural population, and the Ukrainian people are a very big part of that. At the same time, it is important to recognize the significant impact of the Holodomor on the Ukrainian people. There is no way to put into words the amount of suffering and loss that was the result of Holodomor. But events like this and taking time to remember our 'ancents'–our ancestors' struggles and our freedom from oppression in this country, this is important each and every day.

Researchers still do not have an accurate number, but anywhere between three and 10 million Ukrainians died as a result of this genocide. Holodomor killed millions of Ukrainians in 1932 and 1933, and this genocide has touched almost every Ukrainian family in some way. Canada and Manitoba have taken leading role s in ensuring that genocides such as this do not happen again. And we must keep a watchful eye on the entire world, that events such as this never happen again.

I am proud to represent an area with such a large Ukrainian population, and I am proud that our country and our province has welcomed so many Ukrainians to make their home here. My own ancestors came to Canada in 1896 from Ukraine. La Verendrye is a constituency that has a rich Ukrainian heritage, and many Ukrainian families and communities like Cooks Creek, Stuartburn, Gardenton and Vita have truly built some of the finest communities in this province. Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of all my constituents and the members of this House, I want to take this moment to remember the horrible events of Holodomor, and I hope that we never see this again, sacrifice and the pain was seen there before. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 317 International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women Ms. Melanie Wight (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, the United Nations General Assembly has designated today, November 25th, as the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. Violence against women has a devastating impact on individuals, families and whole societies, both worldwide and here at home. In many c ases these terrible acts go unreported.

Today we join with people around the world to recognize the scale of this problem and to take steps to protect women and to address the structural discrimination that continues to make women the primary target of violence. Here in Manitoba, local organizations are doing some amazing work to support women and their families who are escaping violent situations –two of which join us in the gallery today. The North End Women's Centre has been serving women and their families for 27 years. The resources they provide include individual and crisis counselling, employment programs and transitional housing.

They offer a welcoming atmosphere where women can receive understanding and support. The Native Women's Transition C entre has worked to support Aboriginal women and mothers on their journey of healing and recovery from family violence, addictions, intergenerational issues and institutionalization. They have so far offered a safe space and support programs to over 20,000 Aboriginal women and their children. These organizations can save lives, but we need to continue to counteract violence against women in various ways. Our government is investing over $1 million to improve shelters and family violence facilities.

We have also partnered with the Winnipeg Blue Bombers in the campaign to engage men in the discussion, encouraging them to lead by example and commit to being part of the solution. Mr. Speaker, it takes an enormous amount of courage for women to break the silence and name the violence happening against them. I want to thank the North End Women's Centre, the Native Women's Transition Centre and countless others for reaching out to women in need and helping them take steps towards independence, empowerment and a life free of violence. Mrs.

Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Today I'd like to rise and recognize In ternational Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. Violence against women is a global pandemic, one of the most frequent human rights abuses and one of the least prosecuted crimes. Women and girls have –should have the right to live free fro m violence, yet not a week goes by in Manitoba without all of us being reminded of the horrific impact that gender -based violence continues to have on the lives of women and girls.

From intimate partner violence to human trafficking, violence affects women of all races and ethnicities, sexualities and social and economic classes, hindering women's rights and freedoms. * (14:30) Violence against women is especially prevalent in Manitoba. Among all the provinces in Canada, we have the highest sexual as sault rates and almost double the rate of violence against women in Canada. Mr. Speaker, poverty, systemic racism and social injustice make our Aboriginal population especially vulnerable to gender -based violence.

Indeed, Manitoba's Aboriginal women ar e much more likely than non- Aboriginal women to be victims of violent crime and spousal violence. Statistics Canada reports that 24 per cent of Aboriginal women report being victims of spousal violence, more than three times higher than the rate for non- Aboriginal women. Aboriginal women are also significantly more likely than non- Aboriginal women to report –and most severe and potentially life-threatening forms of violence –and are seven times more likely to be murdered.

Tragically, over the past 30 years, m ore than 500 Aboriginal women and girls have gone missing or have been found murdered in Canada, some 80 in Manitoba alone. And today we remember them, as well as their families, who live daily with that pain. As we work towards ending violence against a ll women, we must ensure that we are taking a holistic approach, including enhancing access to education and health care, equal pay for equal work, affordable housing and child care and ending poverty. But today is not just about raising awareness; it is a lso about taking action.

And, for this reason, organizations like those in the gallery today and others, such as Elizabeth Fry, Sisters in Spirit, Osborne House and so many others, give me hope for a better future

318 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 for Manitoba's women. Every day they work with survivors of sexual violence, listening to them, providing support and raising awareness of gender inequality. Mr. Speaker, violence against women is not just a women's issue. Violence against women is everyone's issue. And we need to work together every day to make sure that we end this. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Vaughn Karpan Mr. Frank Whitehead (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, this October, the Manitoba Hockey Hall of Fame inducted its newest member, Mr.

Vaughn Karpan, a fellow northerner and a role model for our young people. Vaughn Karpan's career is an exceptional example of the opportunity sports can offer to young people. Vaughn grew up in The Pas and, like most kids, started playing hockey at a young age. Together with the other kids in our community, he learned teamwork, discipline and self -confidence. After years of guidance and encouragement from local coaches, Vaughn started his professional career in the–at the junior level in Brandon.

From there, he played with the Manitoba – University of Manitoba Bisons and was named Most Valuable Player three years in a row. Vaughn has a– had an extensive international career, playing over 200 games with Team Canada, i ncluding the 1984 and 1988 Olympic winter games, the opportunity of a lifetime. After ending his playing career, Vaughn now continues to be heavily involved in hockey as a scout for several NHL organizations.

Hockey is a game that connects us to our neighbours and to our province, whether it's through camaraderie of playing together, building new rinks or organizing local teams, hockey brings communities together. Northern Manitoba has a strong tradition of supporting hockey, and The Pas is no exception. Coaches, volunteers, players and parents are all integral to the success of these young players. The people of The Pas and Opaskwayak Cree Nation, including a young Mr. Karpan, benefit from any major hockey leagues and associations.

These teams create the opportunity for kids and young adults to travel, explore and play hockey across the province. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to take this opportunity to extend my congratulations to Vaughn and to other new inductees to the Manitoba Hockey Hall of Fame for t heir exceptional hockey careers and dedication to the sport. BizPaL Manitoba Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): Mr. Speaker, our government is focused on a steady, growing economy with more training opportunities and good jobs for families.

To continue cre ating jobs and fostering growth here at home for Manitoba entrepreneurs, we brought in BizPaL Manitoba to help spur economic development. BizPaL Manitoba is an excellent business tool that provides entrepreneurs with simplified access to information on the permits and licences they need to establish and run their businesses. Manitoba is already a great place to invest and start a business. Our real GDP has the second fastest rate of growth in Canada and, according to independent studies, Winnipeg has t he lowest costs for doing business amongst 25 midwestern and western Canadian cities.

We're pleased to see that the Province added 2,500 jobs in September 2013, as well as 5,700 jobs since the beginning of the year. This increase was driven entirely by the private sector. Manitoba remains the only province in the country to have completely eliminated its small business tax. BizPaL Manitoba is another great example of our government's commitment to support Manitoban businesses so they can do what they do best: innovate, create jobs and generate opportunities in our community.

We have one of the most affordable costs of living in the country and a high quality of life that makes our province a great place to live, work, invest and raise a family. Whether you want to support or start or grow your business, BizPaL Manitoba can help. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Grievances? House Business Mr. Speaker: Seeing no grievances, the honourable Government House Leader on House business. Hon. Andrew Swan (Government House Leader): On House business, Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to call Bill 2, that's The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Safety of Workers in Highway Construction Zones) for second reading. But I'd ask you to verify whether the Opposition House Leader is in agreement with proceeding in this fashion as required under sessional order 11, which was adopted this September; and, if

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 319 indeed he is in agreement, we'll then proceed with second reading of Bill 2. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, there's not been adequate notice provided and have not had the discussion with our critic and with stakeho lders, so that would be denied. ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Hon. Andrew Swan (Government House Leader): On further House business, Mr.

Speaker, we'll then proceed with the report stage amendments, and I propose we call them in this order: Bill 1 7, Bill 35, Bill 19, Bill 24, Bill 30, Bill 44, Bill 27, Bill 41, Bill 42, Bill 8, Bill 16, Bill 25, Bill 36, Bill 38 and Bill 46. Mr. Speaker: We'll be calling report stage amendments on the following bills in this order, starting with Bill 17, then Bill 35, 19, 24, 30, 44, 27, Bill 41, Bill 42, Bill 8, Bill 16, followed by Bill 25, Bill 36, Bill 38, finally Bill 46.

REPORT STAGE AMENDMENTS Bill 17–The Consumer Protection Amendment and Business Practices Amendment Act (Motor Vehicle Advertising and Information Disclosure and Other Amendments) Mr. Speaker: And we'll start by calling a report stage amendments on Bill 17, The Consumer Protection Am endment and Business Practices Amendment Act (Motor Vehicle Advertising and Information Disclosure and Other Amendments). Mr. Cliff Cullen ( Spruce Woods ): I move, seconded by the member for Morden- Winkler (Mr. Friesen), THAT Bill 17 be amended in Clause 2 (

a) in the proposed clause 231(2)(b), by striking out "subsections (3) and (4) " and substituting "subsection (3)"; (

b) in the proposed subsection 231(3), by striking out " Subject to subsection (4), if an advertisement" and substituting " If an advertisement"; (

c) by striking out the proposed subsection 231(4); and (

d) in the proposed subsection 231(5), by striking out " subsection (2) to (4) " and substituting "subsection (2) and (3)". * (14:40) Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable member for Spruce Woods, seconded by the honourable member for Morden-Winkler, THAT Bill 17 be amended in Clause 2 (

a) in the proposed clause 231(2)(b), by striking out "subsections (3) and (4)" and– An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense? Dispense. The amendment is in order. Mr. Cullen : Appreciate the opportunity to have a little more debate on Bill 17. In fact, this is the consumer protection amendment and business practices amendment, and it deals with motor vehicle advertisement and information disclosure and other amendments, and, clearly, this bill is another NDP bill dealing with some consumer affairs measures.

Be interesting to see –we have a new minister responsible for consumer affairs and we're certainly looking forward to see what direction he takes the Province in terms of consumer affairs. Mr. Speaker, this legislation –this bill deals with transparency, and what the NDP is trying to do is certainly make some headlines in terms of what they deem is consumer protection in terms of motor vehicles, in terms of motor vehicle sales, so what they're trying to do, I think, through this bill is provide some transparency in terms of what the actual price is on motor vehicles.

I–there's some irony in this particular legislation in my mind. You know, we have a government here who's trying to legislate some transparency in different areas of the Province and in consumer affairs regulations, and this government has been much less than transparent with Manitobans when it comes to issues. And the amendm ent that I am proposing, Mr. Speaker, actually speaks to provincial sales tax. Under the legislation, there's no provision really to indicate to consumers what provincial sales tax will be–have to be paid on motor vehicles.

We wanted to make the point in this amendment of the irony in the situation. The NDP campaigned on the premise that they would not raise taxes, Mr. Speaker, and they were very adamant and the Premier (Mr. Selinger) was very adamant they would not raise provincial sales tax to Manitobans. And, in fact, what they have done, once they came into office after the last election, the first order of business

320 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 under their new budget was to expand provincial sales tax on a number of goods and services across the province. And in their second budget –and again they never campaigned on it –they actually increased the provincial sales tax by 14 per cent, taking an extra almost $300 million out of the pockets of Manitobans. They were not transparent in doing that. This came after they were elected.

They were not upfront with Manitobans when they proposed this, and, in fact, we believe they actually circumvented the law by ignoring the existing balanced budget protection law that's there. We really should be dealing with laws that protect us as consumers from the NDP, instead of the NDP going out trying to get some headlines, saying that they're protecting Manitoba consumers, and that's the irony in this legislation and that's why I want to bring this particular issue in this

section of the legislation in Bill 17 that's being proposed. That's why I wanted to highlight it through this amendment, and I hope the new minister will see the irony in this story. You know, we're allowing vehicles to be sold, and, certainly, I think, we all want to be making sure that the marketplace is transparent and consumers are protected. And there's certainly a lot of areas that are in existing legislation that protect consumers at the end of the day, but they're taking it one step further.

And the other thing that is a trend in this particular legislation and I see in other legislation they've introduced is the increase in terms of their fines and assessments to various businesses, Mr. Speaker, and that's certainly a trend. And we know the NDP hav e got their hands in Manitoba's pockets more and more all the time through not just taxes but other fines and other various assessments. And we talk about automobiles, too, Mr. Speaker, and I bring this up from any –as many occasions as I can, is the vehi cle registration fees. That is something that this government has not been transparent on.

It's something that the government has not campaigned on, but it's something that hits each and every owner of a motor vehicle. Back in 1999, vehicle registrations were $48 per passenger vehicle; now Manitobans are paying $154 for each and every passenger vehicle, each and every year when it's registered, Mr. Speaker. That is a threefold increase in vehicle registration fees. In my view, that is a straight tax. That is money that is collected by Manitoba Public Insurance and then turned directly over to the NDP government and goes into general revenue. The NDP did not campaign on raising those fees.

The NDP did not campaign on raising provincial sales tax either. I had an opportunity just yesterday, in fact, to speak to a service manager who operates a business just in Saskatchewan –Langenburg, Saskatchewan, and I said, how's business? He said, business is booming. I said, well, I'm not surprised, because I know tha t people in Manitoba recognize that the provincial sales tax is only 5 per cent in Saskatchewan, clearly, 60 per cent higher in Manitoba than Saskatchewan.

Manitobans, being astute business people, they are going to go where their best deal is, and they're finding they can go and do their service work over in Saskatchewan at a much cheaper rate than they can in Manitoba. And those are the things that impact our economy and they impact each and every Manitoban. So, Mr.

Speaker, with that, the issue about provincial sales tax, it's an ongoing debate for Manitobans and it's going to be an ongoing debate for many years to come, I'm sure, and I'm sure, as we go forward, more and more Manitobans, as they reach in their pocket and pay the taxman, will be more and more aware of this as time moves on. Now, Mr. Speaker, it's ironic in this legislation that the government is saying you don't have to tell consumers what they're paying for provincial sales tax.

And that's the issue that I'm raising in this particular amendment, and I certainly look forward to the comments that will be made by the new minister responsible for consumer affairs. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Tourism, Culture, Sport and Consumer Protection): Well, Mr. Speaker, I know the member opposite stated he'd like to hear from me. He may not like to hear what I have to say, though, with regard to some of the things that we've done in Manitoba, with regard to making life more affordable for Manitobans, protecting consumers. Mr.

Speaker, we do not support the amendment raised by the opposition. Primarily, our legislation is based on regulations from Ontario's Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, as well as legislation from the great province of Alberta and British Columbia, w ith regard to consumer protection. And, you know, the amendment is really, you know, is inconsistent with the general advertising practices for goods and services in the marketplace, and our government has

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 321 talked and consulted with the Manitoba Motor Dealers Association about the proposed amendment, and they advised us that they don't support the amendment and the industry already supports Bill 17 and the introduction of advertising standards in the marketplace. Current vehicle advertising practices, Mr. Speaker, in Manitoba can be very misleading for consumers as advertisers–advertised practices may not reflect the actual cost associated with the vehicle.

Advertised prices may exclude mandatory fees like administrative fees, delivery fees or include deductions, minimum trade value –trade-in value, sorry. Our bill requires that all in pricing in motor vehicle advertisements and includes new protection against false and misleading motor vehicle advertisements. So, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to be absolutely cl ear with regard to the industry. The majority of the industry want to play it by the rules.

They do indeed play by the rules and we have many, many great automobile dealerships in this province, throughout the province of Manitoba, not just in Winnipeg, and many of them want to be good corporate citizens and they want good, clear legislation that applies to all dealerships and applies to all businesses that deal in the sale of automobiles. You know, Mr.

Speaker, we know families work hard and expect good value for their money and our government has a plan to keep life affordable for Manitoba families moving forward, and we have a high quality of life that makes our province a great place to live, work and start a business and raise your family. And our plan is to keep Manitobans–to keep Manitoba, sorry, building and keep our unemployment rates low, and we've made changes that will keep Manitoba affordable. * (14:50) Mr. Speaker, already we've– you know, and we continue to introduce different legislat ion to protect consumers.

We've introduced new consumer protection for new homes, car purchases and repairs, and cellphone contracts. And also we've introduced New Home Warranty Act which will require Manitoba warranty protection for Manitoba families purchasing newly constructed homes. Our government, Mr. Speaker, is proud of our record of protecting consumers. Consumers want government to be involved to ensure that what they are paying for is what they get. And so as a government we are very proud of our record.

And ministers on this side previous to me have worked diligently, and worked in co- operation in consultation in a collaborative way with the industry to ensure that a level playing field and a good and honest straightforward business practices are adhered to, and it's something that Manitobans expect. Manitobans love a sale; they love a deal. In fact, Manitobans probably prefer things to be free, but that's not the way it is in the real world. So to ensure that when people say there are sales and to ensure that a price is put on a product, whatever that may be, it's important to note, you know, Mr.

Speaker, that they are getting value for what they pay for and they are getting what has been proposed for their investment. So, Mr. Speaker, with that we are not going to support the amendment raised by the opposition. We believe what the op –what the business has told us, the businesses have told us, what the industry has told us, the Motor Dealers Association and Manitoba motor dealers have said t hat they support the legislation as is. So we'll take their lead with regard to this legislation. We won't support the amendment. So, with that, Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to make a few comments.

Mr. Speaker: Any further debate on the amendment? Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Speaker: Seeing none, is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment? Some Honourable Members: No. Some Honourable Members: Yes. Mr. Speaker: I hear a no. Voice Vote Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment will please signify by saying aye. Some Honourable Members: Aye. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the amendment will please signify by saying nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: Opinion of the Chair, the Nays have it. Mr. Cullen: Yes, Mr. Speaker, on division.

322 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 Mr. Speaker: On division. Bill 35–The Consumer Protection Amendment Act (Compliance and Enforcement Measures) Mr. Speaker: We'll now proceed to calling report stage amendments for Bill 35, The C onsumer Protection Amendment Act (Compliance and Enforcement Measures). Mr. Cliff Cullen ( Spruce Woods ): I move, seconded by the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson), THAT Bill 35 be amended in C lause 15 by adding the following after the proposed subsection 135.2(2): When inspections may be conducted 135.2(2.1) An inspection may be conducted (

a) at any reasonable time, in the case of a payday lender, direct seller, credit grantor or any other prescribed person; and (

b) only after a specific complaint has been received, in the case of any other person. Mr. Speaker: It's been moved the honourable member for Spruce Woods, seconded by the honourable member for Tuxedo, THAT Bill 35 be amended in C lause 15 by adding the following after the proposed subsection 135.2(2): When inspections may be conducted 135.2– An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: Dispense? Dispense. The honourable member for Spruce Woods –the amendment is in order. Mr. Cullen : Bill 35 provides th e NDP very broad powers in terms of dealing with consumer protection, Mr.

Speaker, and, you know, we feel that they're probably going a little further than maybe what many Manitobans would think they should. We're trying to be the voice of opportunity to r eason this out. We're certainly standing up for Manitobans who will be impacted by the legislation that this government is proposing to pass. Mr.

Tom Nevakshonoff, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Again, I'm hoping the new minister responsible for consumer affairs has taken the opportunity to read the details of the legislation that has been proposed and he will recognize the powers that will be granted to his inspectors within his department. And I think clearly there will be, and the potential arises, for many businesses and many Manitobans to be impacted directly by this. And I know the minister alluded to other provinces and other jurisdictions and what they're doing when we talk about Bill 17.

I'm hoping he's taken the time to look at Bill 35 and see what other jurisdictions are doing as well. And I think if he did that he will find out that Manitoba's out of line and out of step with what other jurisdictions are doing. This particular legislation will give his department and his people within his departme nt and inspectors extreme powers of inspections to go into businesses to check records, and, clearly, other jurisdictions are not allowing that.

Now, clearly, we talk about Saskatchewan and Ontario, they both still require a complaint to carry out an inspe ction and, in fact, in Ontario they require both a complaint and a warrant to carry out an inspection. So there certainly is some protection to the business community there in those other jurisdictions.

So what we're trying to indicate in this amendment is the government has to be careful in terms of how far they want to go and provide their own people inspection powers to go into these premises, without –possibly without having due diligence being paid to the issues around the investigations and without complaints being made to a specific business. So it certainly is important that the government have a look, again, a sober second thought at what they're proposing. And, as I alluded to before in my previous comments on Bill 17, Bill 35 also follows the t rend of increased fines.

In fact, what we're seeing here is the maximum penalty has increased from $5,000 to $20,000 for a corporation. So, clearly, the NDP are trying to get their hands on as much money as they can, and we know the financial situation tha t the NDP have got ourselves into, got all of us into as Manitobans. We know they're reaching into our pockets more and more for taxes.

We know they're reaching into our pockets more and more for fees and assessments across a wide range of goods and services, and now we've seen them on the regulatory side where they're coming after us in terms of heightened fines in various areas all across all jurisdictions in Manitoba. So what the Province is doing–and seemingly unchecked power going back into the hands of these inspectors. Again, it comes to the point where you almost have to have legislation there to protect Manitobans

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 323 from the NDP. Now, they haven't been transparent with us in terms of their provincial sales tax increase and they haven't been telling Manitobans what this new legislation is about, and I think Manitobans will be finding out the hard way some of the new powers that are provided under this legislation and this, I'm sure, will be very troubling to Manitobans as they move forward.

I look forward to the minister's comments on this particular piece of legislation to see if he under –with an–as being a new minister in this portfolio, if he is looking at making any changes to this legislation as it is proposed. Thank you very much. Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Tourism, Culture, Sport and Consumer Protection): I'm pleased to put a couple comments on the record and I'll say that we are not going to support the amendment.

And, with regard to some of the comments made by the opposition, it's r eally a shame to see that the opposition members are proposing short -sighted changes to this legislation that would essentially weaken the bill itself. And we're protecting consumers and all Manitobans while the opposition leader and some of his supporter s across the way are proposing short -sighted changes that would only benefit a few and let companies that are taking advantage of Manitobans off the hook.

Now, I know the member opposite, my critic, is a very honourable person, and misguided as he may be sometimes, I think, you know, he doesn't realize that you're letting some of these companies off the hook with regard to what they're doing, and you're not allowing, you know, the Consumer Protection Office to do its job, quite frankly. And, you know – and in this case what they're suggesting and the amendments are suggesting, inspections would not be allowed for other types of businesses other than payday lenders, direct sellers, credit granters and – unless a complaint has been made.

Well, we know through history and through our experiences that that often does not happen. * (15:00) I just want to–I don't want to take too much time. I know there's other bills that we have to deal with today and other amendments, you know, but in other provinces like Ontar io, BC, Quebec, and Saskatchewan, they have the authority to inspect with or without a complaint, and this has proved to be of great benefit to the consumer, and that's what this is all about.

The opposition does not want the Consumer Protection Office to be empowered to look at the concerns raised in the media or otherwise about a business that is not a payday lender, for example, or direct seller or credit granter unless a complaint has been received. As I mentioned, other provinces allow the authority to inspect without a complaint. As well as Manitoba –as well, Manitoba municipalities, towns, villages, RMs and cities all have the authority to inspect businesses without a complaint to monitor compliance with municipal by-laws, for example.

What we're trying to do is, again, not only make Manitoba affordable, but also ensure that what people are paying for is what they are going to get, they're not being misled in any way, shape, or form, and, you know, members and ministers before me have talked about thi s, about the lowest combined public utility rates, for example, that we have. Anyone sitting at the kitchen table setting out the family budget knows that home heating, electricity, auto insurance rates make a big difference in making ends meet at the end of the month.

That's why our government is guaranteeing Manitoba families pay the lowest cost for these combined services. This is just another example that we're working with Manitobans, working with consumers, to ensure we keep Manitoba one of the mos t affordable places in Canada to live. Experiences in other provinces across Canada show how difficult this can be. In Ontario the government is trying to deal with an out-of-control private auto insurance cost, for example.

BC has seen reports of a potential 26 per cent hike in electricity rates, and Saskatchewan is proposing a 16 per cent increase in these rates over the next three years. You know, we've just seen a recent announcement with SaskPower, I believe it's called, with Manitoba Hydro, and that's a tremendous, tremendous initiative. It's a great –it's one step forward, just another piece in the puzzle how Saskatchewan wants to be not only in name green; they want to be clean green like other provinces, like Manitoba. They want to get away f rom using coal, for example, as their main source of energy.

So, thank you, the government of Saskatchewan, for working with Manitoba Hydro and ensuring that hydro sales are going to benefit the public of Saskatchewan. So I just want to say keeping life a ffordable in Manitoba's important, but also on the regulatory side,

324 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 you have to ensure that Manitobans are getting what they pay for, so they're not being misled and so they're not being tricked into buying something. They're not being forced; they're not being coerced, where some people are kept in a room for hours at a time until they finally sign –just through frustration, they sign on the dotted line and they leave. And then sometimes, you know, it can be a language issue. We have new citizens coming to Manitoba; we want to encourage that.

We don't want businesses to be taking advantage of people who have a difficulty with the language, understanding what certain deals are all about. And one thing I can say is that, thank goodness, in Manitoba, we have a lot of great companies that adhere to the law, they're absolutely legitimate, they want to provide a service for the consumer in a very legal and upright and forthright way.

What we're talking about is to ensure that we have legislation so the complaints that we've received through our consumers branch, that we want to ensure that those companies that want to gouge and take advantage or trick the consumer, it's not going to happen, and we want to allow the authority for people to look into these concerns without having complaints written out, and we want to be able to proceed in a way that protects our consumers overall.

So, with that, regrettably, we're not going to support amendments made with regard to this bill, and we want to see this proceed quickl y so we can protect more of the consumers in Manitoba the way they expect their government to protect them. Thank you. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question is: Shall the amendment pass? Some Honourable Members: Yes. Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I hear a no. Voice Vote Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of passing the amendment, signify so by saying aye.

Some Honourable Members: Aye. Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it. Mr. Cullen: On division. Mr. Deputy Speaker: On division. Bill 19–The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment and Environment Amendment Act Mr. Deputy Speaker: The next issue before the House is report stage amendment of Bill 19, The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment and Environment Amendment Act. Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): I move, seconded by the member for River East (Mrs. Mitchelson), THAT Bill 19 be amended by striking out Clause 2. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for Agassiz, seconded by the honourable member for River East, THAT Bill 19 be amended by striking out Clause 2. The amendment is in order. Floor is open for questions. Mr. Briese: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I rise to speak on the amendment, deleting clause 2 from The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment and Environment Amendment Act. The –clause 2, essentially in this bill, does away with the advisory council that was set up under The Waste Reduction and Prevention Act, and we feel there's still a use for that advisory committee.

Even though they did not meet very of ten, I think there is definitely a role for them to play. I've seen some of the messes that have been made by some of the commissions and bodies that this government has under them, and I think an advisory committee is useful anywhere with them. We know they did not meet often, but that's simply because the government never asked them to. The NDP–this amendment would give them a chance to call the advisory group together and task them with helping to reduce waste in Manitoba. We've had some improvements ov er the years, and we've had some kind of losses on waste reduction.

We've seen instances where we've gone from pretty strong recycling programs in some areas to transportation costs and collection costs eating up any of the advantages to the recycling programs, and that results in a lot more material going into the landfills. So, I think there's some very good models out there that could be looked at. I think the advisory committee would have a role to play in looking at the places that are working well and they could make

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 325 recommendations to the Province on how to improve the recycling and collection in this province. We know that the NDP have failed to meet their emission reduction targets, and I think that would be another role for the advisory committee to play. The– I remember–much touted–remember the member for Assiniboia (Mr. Rondeau) standing and talking about how they were going to meet the Kyoto numbers and they were going to do all sorts of wonderful things, like plant five million trees.

I don't know where that five million trees went that was proposed to be planted, but I expect it was the normal reforestation plantings that go on in the province every year that he was counting on and, in the big scheme of things, five million trees isn't very many trees. That might be about–I'm not sure –I'll pull a number of the air – but it might be two sections of trees.

It's a very small area of the province. * (15:10) It's–you know, all the years I farmed, I had about one third of my farm was in grassland and t rees and mostly pasture land and about one third of the total acreage, so essentially I was certainly doing my part to greenhouse gas reductions and carbon sequestering.

I've been told many times by many people that are much better educated than me that the grazing of cattle on property or the cutting of hay on property increases the carbon sequestration because the carbon sequestration takes place as the grass and vegetation is re-growing, and the more times it's in a growth state, the more carbon is dra wn in and stored in the soil. But the fundamental position of this amendment is that we think there is a role for the advisory council. We believe that clause should be removed and we think the advisory council should be kept in place. Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Question, the question before the House is: Shall the amendment pass? Some Honourable Members: Yes. Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I hear a no. Voice Vote Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of passing the amendment, please say aye. Some Honourable Members: Aye. Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it. Mr. Cliff Cullen (Spruce Woods): On division. Mr. Deputy Speaker: On division. * * * Mr.

Deputy Speaker: The next item before us is report stage amendment of Bill 24–oh, one moment – one more amendment on this bill. Mr. Briese: I move, seconded by the member for River East (Mrs. Mitchelson), THAT Bill 19 be amended by striking out Clause 4. Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable member for Agassiz, seconded by the member for River East, THAT Bill 19 be amended by striking out Clause 4. The amendment is in order. The floor is open for questions. Mr. Briese: I'm disappointed to see that the NDP didn't even have any concerns or any comments about the last proposed amendment.

You know, at least respectful if they told us why they didn't like it. They just ignore us and say they're not going to– probably because he can't find the minister, he needs the notes. But, whatever, it's a little disappointing that they have no comments on the amendment. This amendment, striking clause 4 or deleting clause 4 is the clause that deals with the fines, and the fines in The Waste Reduction and Prevention Act are at the present time $25,000 for individuals and $250,000 for corporations.

We feel those existing fines are quite hefty and the –to the–especially to the average person and there's no rationale in raising them. What this legislation essentially does is double those fines. The $25,000 per individuals goes to $50,000 for individuals and the $250,000 for corporations goes to $500,000 for corporations. We think that fines of that magnitude could literally bankrupt the average person or put a small business

326 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 out of business, bankrupt a small business, and I don't think that's what we're in there for. I think wha t we prefer to do is work with the business, with individuals, use the carrot a little bit more than the stick. I know the Province is desperate for money and higher fines looks like a good way to get some of it, but it's at somebody else's expense and I t hink there's a –there should be a reasonable approach. I see no reason for these fines to be doubled. I know the NDP like to take money away from Manitobans.

They've raised taxes on everything from new cars to home insurance, and the PST alone a 14 per c ent increase pretty near across the board. Our hydro rates are going up: 8 per cent last year, 4 per cent this next year. It just gets more and more difficult. It's taking the money off the kitchen table and it gets more and more difficult for people on even middle-of-the-road incomes to make ends meet. We have the highest income tax west of Qu ebec and we have the highest sales tax in western Canada and we're getting to the point of being unsustainable.

And so now we come along and say, if you do certai n things, either intentionally or non-intentionally, these are what your fines could be and the fines are massive. And systematically found another way to deprive Manitobans of the use of their own money –$25,000 is a lot of money to the average Manitoban and remains an adequate penalty–probably more than adequate, it's overbearing. You know, I go back to what I said on the other amendment, the environmental actions of this government have failed miserably. They've talked a big noise.

They've said they were going–they passed a Save Lake Winnipeg Act, which we supported, as a matter of fact, and Lake Winnipeg continues to get into worse shape every year. They've targeted small segments of the population, hog industry being the main one, but the –now they're moving to target other agricultural practices.

And they pick out small segments of the population, target them, tell the larger segment of the population we've solved it; we've solved the problem out there because we made these people stop doing something that wasn't actually causing any harm, but we made them stop doing it and it looks good, we'll do the spin and we'll make it sound like we've really solved the problem, we've saved Lake Winnipeg. We've–I wouldn't target anybody. I would be putt ing out a few carrots, a few incentives–incentives rather than heavy -handed forcing things down people's throats.

You know, I experienced it just last year –I built a new house. There's only my wife and I on a half

section of land. Because of the regulati ons this NDP government put in place, I had to put in a septic field rather than the ejector, a waste water ejector, which worked fine in our area, by the way. I asked the installer, the contractor, the difference in cost, and it was $9,000. I had to pay $9,000 more because I couldn't put in an ejector there when all the properties around me have ejectors on them that are grandfathered, you know, all the properties within three miles, and so I had to pay $9,000 more.

Now, you think that's great, you think y ou've solved the environmental problem, but you're doing it on somebody else's back; you're doing it on my back. It cost me $9,000 and it cost everyone else that built a new house in a rural area $9,000 or more, and that's just unacceptable. I think now you're pumping up the fines to where if I had done what I really wanted to do and put in a waste water ejector instead of a field, I would get nailed–I would've got nailed with this massive fine. My old yard site, where I lived, I had an ejector in that y ard for 45 years –45 years no problem.

No problem, and it wasn't polluting anything. In fact, I think the fields are worse than the ejector. The field puts the waste underground closer to the water table. Like, it goes through to the water table. Does that make sense? Anyhow, I've said enough here and I'd like to see what the minister may have to comment on this amendment. Thank you. * (15:20) Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship): Well, I notice that my new critic just co ncluded by saying he said enough, and I think that he probably was told or there's a little buzzer that went off telling him to sit down, because he was continuing, of course, to give away what the Conservatives would do if they ever came to office, which would be to gut the environmental regulations in this province. I know that he was sent into committee the other night with a whole raft of amendments by his leader to go and gut our green plan.

But, again, today, as soon as you let a Conservative at the m icrophone they start to babble on about how they're going to cut the environmental regulations. They're going to do–the first day in office, I know they would be loosening all of

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 327 the regulations when it comes to the science- based approach to how to better protect Lake Winnipeg – [interjection–and I think I just heard the applause. And I think that this should be loud and clear for all Manitobans of a warning that it's not just the critic standing up here talking about how they're going to loosen up all the regulations. The–was a resounding chorus of thunderous applause to that plan of theirs.

And I think when they talk about Lake Winnipeg on one side of their mouth, the other side of their mouth is talking about loosening all the regulations and the science-based approach to reduce phosphorus and nitrogen loading to our great lake. So just another day in the life of understanding, of course, the Conservative approach to protecting Mother Earth. So, when it comes to the amendments before the House–I regret I was unable to get here for the first proposed amendment.

But, first of all, let me just say that while they want to gut the fines and the regulations in place, they want an advisory committee to still be allowed under the act that's never met since the act was passed by them in 1990. They never met. They never had an advisory committee for nine years when they were in government, but today they're saying, oh, don't get rid of that. Well, that advisory committee model never worked for the former governme nt; it never worked for this government.

This legislation has become very important to a lot of Manitobans and so the committees that are at work to make sure that the regulations work are many and varied.

There's a very important engagement process that has evolved under this legislation and an advisory committee approach, a single approach would undo and would certainly –you could never hold a candle to the kind of engagement efforts that have been put in place, whether it's the committees for the used oil, to hazardous –household hazardous waste, whether it's the municipal working group on extended producer responsibility –and we know that meets once or twice a year; that's with the deputy and AMM co -chairing it–whether it's the organic waste working group that's now looking at where we go, whether it's the other forms of public input –by the way, that are required under

section 22 of the act. That is where we're putting our stock and that is where experience under this legislation shows is the best form of advice and engagement. With regard to the proposed amendment currently before the House, the Conservatives, again, as they did in committee, want to come in and cut the proposed fines in half, because protecting the environment, they'd only put half the effort into it. You can just see that was more than symbolic, that amendment. That fine level –by the way, it's a maximum fine level –it's a maximum fine level. It was put in place in 1990. They don't live in the '90s.

They really want to go back to 1990, that was a good year for them. That was where they want the fines to remain forever. Producer responsibility has moved a long way since they were in office and there are now some very serious implications when people will try and get around the requirement s in the act. There has to be a level playing field for producer responsibilities.

For example, when it comes to tires, we have to know that people that are producing or selling tires are playing by the rules for a level playing field, that they can't get around the rules, that the funds are going into the proper fund to support recycling efforts. There has to be a strong deterrent message with this legislation to keep up with the times. There is so much at stake, and whether it's tires or whether it's oil or whether it's batteries or paper or beverage containers, household hazardous waste, this regime has to be one that has integrity.

So we want to send a strong message about the importance of complying with the regulatory scheme that's evolved, and kee ping in mind that these are maximum penalties, we have to know that people are going to pay attention and will comply with the steward rules. So we have to stand strongly in opposition to the proposed amendment as we did to the earlier proposed amendment. Mr. Deputy Speaker: No further speakers, is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Question before the House is: Shall the amendment to Bill 19 pass? Some Honourable Members: Yes.

Some Honourable Members: No. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I hear a no. Voice Vote Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of passing the amendment, please say aye. Some Honourable Members: Aye.

328 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 Mr. Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Deputy Speaker: In my opinion, the Nays have it. Mr. Cullen: On division. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The amendment is defeated on division. Bill 24–The Endangered Species Amendment Act (Ecosystem Protection and Miscellaneous Amendments) Mr. Deputy Speaker: Now move on to report stage amendment of Bill 24, The Endangered Species Amendment Act (Ecosystem Protection and Miscellaneous Amendments). Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship): I move, seconded by the Minister of Jobs and the Economy (Ms. Oswald), THAT Bill 24 be amended in C lause 18 by adding the following after the proposed subsection 12.4 and before the proposed

Part III.2: Public notice of proposed regulations 12.4.1(1) At least 90 days before a regulation is made under

section 12.3 or 12.4, the minister must give public notice that a copy of the proposed regulation is available for review on the department's website (

a) by publishing a notice in a newspaper having general circulation in the vicinity of the ecosystem p reservation zone or the proposed ecosystem preservation zone; and (

b) in any other manner he or she considers appropriate. Submissions 12.4.1(2) Within 60 days after public notice is given under subsection (1), any person may make a written submission to the minister. Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship– An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense? Dispense. The amendment is in order. The floor is open for questions. Mr.

Mackintosh: So, when the opposition came into committee with these raft of amendments to undo our green initiatives, they did have a couple of ideas that I undertook to give further consideration to, and one of them was to look at the notice that would go to stakeholders or persons that may be affected by a regulation under the bill. And that would essentially be moving the notice provisions from procedural –a procedural level into a legislative level, and we're fine with that. We think that is –that's fine. I think it may send a clearer message about the importance of stakeholder notification and feedback. Mr.

Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I am pleased to speak to the amendment put forward by the minister to Bill 24. Yes, ind eed, it was our thoughts that there should be a reporting

section to this bill and a method for presenting regulations to the public and public feedback–or the option of public feedback to amendments–or to regulations being put in place under this bill. So I'm pleased to see this amendment added. Thank you. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question is: Shall the amendment pass? [Agreed] Bill 30–The Forest Health Protection Amendment Act (Heritage Trees) Mr. Deputy Speaker: Now move on to report stage amendment of Bill 30, The Forest Health Protection Amendment Act (Heritage Trees). Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship): I move, seconded by the Minister of Jobs and the Economy, THAT Bill 30 be amended in Clause 2 by adding the following after the proposed subsection 26.3(4): Nomination process for trees on private land 26.3(4.1) If a nominated tree is located on private land (

a) the owner of the land must be given a copy of the nomination; (

b) the owner of the land must be given an opportunity to make a written submission to the heritage tree review committee before the committee makes its recommendation on the nomination;

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 329 (

c) any submission made by the owner of the land must accompany the heritage tree review committee's recommendation to the minister; and (

d) the minister have regard to the owner's submission when deciding whether to designate the tree as a heritage tree. * (15:30) Mr. Deputy Speaker: Who's the seconder? [interjection] It's been moved by the honourable Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship, seconded by the honourable member –the honourable Minister of Jobs and the Economy–dispense? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense. The amendment is in order. Mr.

Mackintosh: There was a good discussion on this issue in committee and it was signalled to the committee that we would take under further consideration, and moving from the procedures of the committee to the bill, the notification and the ability of the landowner to make a submission and to move that into legislation. We think that's fine. The outcome is much the same, but this also provides not only for the owner to make a written submission to the committee but also it ensures that the minister must have regard to the owner's view, and we think the owner's view will be important.

And so, with that, I commend this amendment to the House. Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): And I agree with the minister, there was a –quite a spirited discussion at committee on this, sometime in the wee hours of the morning, I think, that particular night. And this indeed was something that I had some significant concerns about, and it was the private landowner's rights around this type of legislation and the rights of the private landowner to control their property. And we too many times see those private property owner's rights encroached on.

It seems like in rural Manitoba especially, they –everybody thinks every piece of land belongs to everybody; well, it doesn't. And trespassing on one of my fields is no different than somebody driving their vehicle over your lawn, and you can imagine what your reaction would be. So I'm really a ctually very supportive of this amendment. It's an amendment that at least addresses some of the concerns we had at committee, and it obviously requires consultation with the landowner before anything, any action is taken on the landowner's property. So, with that, I thank you. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: House ready for the question? Question before the House is: Shall the amendment pass? [Agreed] Bill 44–The International Education Act Mr. Deputy Speaker: Now move on to report stage amendment of Bill 7 –or Bill 44, The International Education Act. Hon. James Allum (Minister of Education and Advanced Learning): Proposing amendments to The International Education Act, moved by the Honourable Mr. Allum and seconded by member for St. James (Ms.

Crothers), THAT Bill 44 be amended by renumbering Clause 20 as Clause 20(1) and adding the following as Clause 20–[interjection]–oh, seconded by the Minister of Jobs and the Economy (Ms. Oswald). Sorry, forgive me. She's just–sorry.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Jobs and the Economy, THAT Bill 44 be amended by renumbering Clause 20 as Clause 20(1) and adding the following as Clause 20(2): Exception 20(2) Despite subsection (1), a designated education provider is not required to publish the name of a particular recruiter if the director is satisfied, on application by the provider , that publishing the recruiter's name could be –could reasonably the threaten the safety of an international student. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Minister of Education and Advanced Learning, seconded by the honourable Minister of Jobs and the Economy–dispense? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense. The amendment is in order. Mr. Allu m: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Bill 44, The International Education Act, will make Manitoba the first province to codify best practices for ensuring the integrity of Manitoba's international education

330 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 providers and the welfare and safety of the students they host. At committee hearings on the bill and in the course of consultations with stakeholders, we have received praise for our efforts to promote Manitoba as a safe and high quality destination for the over 6,000 international students who journey to pursue educational opportunities here and in our province every year.

I would like to affirm that our government is privileged to work with Manitoba institutions, which above all else govern their work with student well -being and educational quality in mind, and we applaud their efforts to safeguard Manitoba's quality education brand. In consultation with our educational institution stakeholders and in response to stakeholders' additional concerns for the safety of their students, we've proposed this amendment to

section 20. Under

section 20 government proposes an amendment to exempt the public disclosure of recruiter names where the public release would endanger the safety of a student. Bill 44 will protect Manitoba's reputation for providing high-quality education and provide greater assurance for students and parents as well as administrators and policy makers that Manitoba is a safe and welcoming destination for international study. This amendment helps make sure that student safety is taken as a priority. Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): I'm pleased to rise and speak to this amendment to Bill 44.

The amendment, as it sits, is probably a fairly good amendment. Overall, the bill, I don't think, is a very good bill, and the bill creates a registry for recruiters. There's some 52, I think, private vocational institutes in this province along with our other post -secondary institutes, the bigger ones like the universities and the –and Red River and university of the North and Assiniboine and those types of facilities. Now, those larger facilities all have recruitment protocols that are very workable. This legislation essentially won't even mean much to them. They already have the protocols in place.

The smaller ones, it's my understanding that there are very, very few foreign students in the smaller ones, and some of them aren't that terribly small, Robertson College being the largest of the PVIs, and this piece of legislation will probably curtail them from taking – bringing in foreign students. And the government of the day, and probably ourselves if we were in government, would feel the same way on foreign students.

They usually bring a fair amount of capital with them, and it's helpful to our universities to have a fair number of foreign students in their–in the facilities because it does help to offset some of the costs of those institutes. But the–this Bill 44, in my view, will curtail the private vocational institutes from even entertaining bringing in foreign students, and I think that's wrong.

I think we need to –we need to try and attract more foreign students into our main post -secondary, the large facilities, but also into the small ones. * (15:40) And, occasionally, there may be a bit of a problem somewhere with a recruiter, but the protocols are already in place that would address those–when something goes off the tracks a little bit, and there's been very, very few cases of that.

In fact, the former minister, in briefing, said that there had been none, and then we found out that there were one or two, but she said there were none at the briefing, and then, lo and behold, it did turn out that there had been a couple of incidents, but there is –you ca n't legislate common sense. There is a responsibility to look after yourself a little bit in this world, and I think it's up to the individual to do the research, do proper research and make sure they're getting what they're paying for. That being said, this amendment does improve the bill, albeit it's a poor bill. Thank you. Mr.

Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is: Shall the amendment pass? [Agreed] * * * Mr. Deputy Speaker: Next item before the House is report stage amendment to Bill 44, The International Education Act. Mr. Allum: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Jobs and the Economy (Ms. Oswald), THAT Bill 44 be amended by adding the following after Clause 43(4):

November 25, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 331 Duty to adopt security safeguards 43(5) The minister and the director must protect all information, including individual international student information, collected under this Act by adopting reasonable administrat ive, technical and physical safeguards that ensure the confidentiality, security, accuracy and integrity of the information. Safeguards for sensitive information 43(6) In determining the reasonableness of the security safeguards adopted under subsection (5), the degree of sensitivity of the information to be protected must be taken into account.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Minister of Education and Advanced Learning (Mr. Allum), seconded by the honourable Minister of Jobs and the Economy (Ms. Oswald), THAT–dispense? Some Honourable Members: Dispense. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Dispense. Mr. Allum: In consultation with our education system's stakeholders and their concerns about student safety, we propose this amendment under

section 43 which will add additional guarantees to the safety of international students. Mr. Deputy Speaker, u nder

section 4 3, government proposes an amendment to further safeguard information collected under the act. We believe that these amendments will enhance the overall effectiveness of Bill 44 in supporting and protecting the safety of international students and in strengthening Manitoba's position as a destination of choice for international study. You know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, students from around the world come to Manitoba to study. The number of international students on our campuses has more than doubled in the la st 10 years.

We want to maintain our reputation as a destination of choice for international students by ensuring that we protect students who come to our province to study. Better training and education opportunities are the key to keeping Manitoba on the right track. More people with access to a better education will translate into a better-trained workforce that's ready for the jobs of tomorrow. This bill governs the education providers that enrol international students, as well as the persons who recr uit international students. To enrol international students, an education provider must be designated.

Universities, colleges and other specified education providers are designated automatically. Others are required to apply to become designated, and their designation may be made subject to conditions. Education providers and recruiters must comply with the code of practice and conduct to be set out in the regulation. The code will provide consistent standards for education providers and their recruiters in dealing with international students. Education providers and recruiters are also prohibited from engaging in misleading or deceptive contact with international students.

Additional protection is provided by requiring education providers to make a list of their recruiters available to the public or on the Internet. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Briese: Mr. Deputy Speaker, once again I'm pleased to rise and speak to this amendment. You know, there's a number of things in this. Adopting reasonable administrative, technical, physical safeguards and sure of the confidentiality, security, accuracy and integrity of the information, and goes on further than that. But, when we were briefed on this bill, the minister said would –this bill would require no new staff.

One of her–already, one of the existing staff members would be able to handle this all by themself. It sounds, more and more when you read the in -depth of this, that they are building another bureaucracy, that we're going to need several staff to look after these things. So it gets –it makes you kind of wonder. You know, anytime a government comes along with amendments to a bill at report stage, I would think that would kind of indicate that they didn't do a very good job of consulting before they wrote the bill.

And I recall at the committee on this bill–I think there were six presenters, six or seven presenters. I asked them all the same question. I asked them if they had been consulted prior to this bill being put forward. One said they had. They others said, no, they hadn't. And I mention again, Robertson Career College, a private vocational institute –and it's fairly large, a lot of students –and they were very emphatic that they'd had no consultation at all before. It's the largest one in the province, and it's my understanding there are 52.

Some are as small as English-as-a-second-language type schools, but it's my understanding there's 52 of these facilities in the province.

332 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 25, 2013 And, you know, once again, it's a piece of legislation that I don't think even needs to be there. People have to be to a certain degree responsible for their own actions. This legislation also allows the Province to charge each of the PVIs a fee–and the universities and the colleges –charge them a fee for thi

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-3-10
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 3rd hansardpdf 10.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7c9d820073a7c684b57fd053a9e0031259b599b3

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