Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 30B (38th Legislature, 3rd Session)

38-3-30b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Thirty-Eighth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LVI No. 30B - 1:30 p.m., Thursday, April 14, 2005 (REPRINT)

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Eighth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation AGLUGUB, Cris The Maples N.D.P. ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thom pson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. CUMMINGS, Glen Ste. Rose P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon. Concordia N.D.P. DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C.

FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LATHLIN, Oscar, Hon. The Pas N.D.P. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. LOEWEN, John Fort Whyte P.C. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P. MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon.

Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. MURRAY, Stuart Kirkfield Park P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PENNER, Jack Emerson P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. REIMER, Jack Southdale P.C. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. ROCAN, Denis Carman P.C. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SALE, Tim, Hon. Fort Rouge N.D.P. SANTOS, Conrad Wellington N.D.P. SCHELLENBERG, Harry Rossmere N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P. SMITH, Scott, Hon.

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

1343 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, April 14, 2005 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Provincial Road 355 Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: The unsafe conditions of PR No. 355 from the western edge of Minto municipality to PR No. 270 (including the hill out of the Minnedosa valley), poses an undue risk to Manitobans who must travel on this roadway.

The steady stream of traffic on this stretch of PR No. 355, which includes automobiles such as "B" train semi-trailer tractors, mail delivery vehicles and school buses, make the roadway in its current state dangerously impassable. Continued expansion of the regional economy in livestock development, grain storage and transporta- tion and the proposed Mohawk Plant, puts additional strain on PR No. 355 and creates further safety concerns for motorists. PR No. 355 experiences an increased risk in traffic flow during the spring season when there are weight restrictions on surrounding provincial trunk highways.

For several years, representatives of six municipal corporations, as well as an ad hoc citizens' group have been actively lobbying the provincial government to upgrade and reconstruct the stretch of PR No. 355 at issue. Manitobans and visitors to the province deserve a better rural highway infrastructure. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux) to consider upgrading PR No. 355 from the western edge of the R.M. of Minto to PR No. 270 (including the hill out of the Minnedosa valley).

To request the Premier of Manitoba (Mr. Doer) to consider supporting the said initiative to ensure the safety of our Manitobans and all Canadians who travel along Manitoba highways. Signed by Gail Birch, Richard English, Harvey English and others. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

The background to this petition is as follows: Manitoba's provincial auditor has stated that Manitoba's 2003-2004 budget deficit was the second highest on record at $604 million. The provincial government is misleading the public by saying they had a surplus of $13 million in the 2003-2004 budget. The provincial auditor has indicated that the $13-million surplus the government says it had cannot be justified. The provincial auditor has also indicated that the Province is using its own made up accounting rules in order to show a surplus instead of using generally accepted accounting principles.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the provincial government to consider adopting generally accepted accounting principles in reporting Manitoba's budgetary numbers.

1344 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 Signed by A. Jing Asperin, R. Bantugan and A. Gacutan. * (13:35) Pembina Trails School Division–New High School Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: Overcrowded schools throughout Whyte Ridge, Lindenwoods, Linden Ridge and Richmond West subdivisions are forcing Pembina Trails School Division to bus students outside of these areas to attend classes in the public school system.

Elementary schools in Pembina Trails School Division have run out of space to accommodate the growing population of students in the afore- mentioned areas. Five-year projections for enrolment in the elementary schools in these areas indicate significant continued growth. Existing high schools that receive students from Whyte Ridge, Lindenwoods and Linden Ridge are at capacity and cannot accommodate the growing number of students that will continue to branch out of these subdivisions.

Bussing to outlying areas is not a viable long- term solution to meeting the student population growth in the southwest portion of Winnipeg. The development of Waverley West will increase the need for a hi gh school in the southwest sector of Winnipeg. The government is demonstrating a lack of respect for the students and families in Whyte Ridge, Lindenwoods, Linden Ridge and Richmond West by refusing to provide adequate access to education within the community. The Fort Whyte constituency is the only constituency in the province that does not have a public high school.

NDP constituencies in Winnipeg continue to receive capital funding for various school projects while critical overcrowding exists in schools in Lindenwoods, Whyte Ridge and Richmond West. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the provincial government recognize the need for a public high school in the southwest region of Winnipeg. To request the provincial government, in conjunction with the Public Schools Finance Board, to consider adequate funding to establish a high school in the southwest sector of Winnipeg.

Signed by Erin Beaudry, Lindsay Beaudry, Jae Beaudry and many others. Coverage of Insulin Pumps Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: Insulin pumps cost over $6,500. The cost of diabetes to the Manitoba government in 2005 will be approximately $214.4 million. Each day 16 Manitobans are diagnosed with this disease compared to the national average of 11 new cases daily.

Good blood sugar control reduces or eliminates kidney failure by 50 percent, blindness by 76 percent, nerve damage by 60 percent, cardiac disease by 35 percent and even amputations. Diabetes is an epidemic in our province and will become an unprecedented drain on our struggling health care system if we do not take action now. The benefit of having an insulin pump is it allows the person living with this life-altering disease to obtain good sugar control and become a much healthier, complication-free individual. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Premier (Mr.

Doer) of Manitoba to consider covering the cost of insulin pumps that are prescribed by an endocrinologist or medical doctor under the Manitoba Health Insurance Plan. This is signed by Dora Sobering, Carol Wall, Annette Giesbrecht and many, many others. * (13:40)

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1345 Highway 227 Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition. It is unacceptable for the residents of Manitoba to travel the unsafe gravel roads of Highway 227 in the constituencies of Lakeside and Portage la Prairie. Inclement weather can make Highway 227 treacherous to all drivers. Allowing better access to Highway 227 would ease the flow of traffic on the Trans-Canada Highway.

Residences along Highway 227 are not as accessible to emergency services due to the nature of the current condition of the roadway. The condition of these gravel roads can cause serious damage to all vehicles, which is unacceptable. Residents of Manitoba deserve a better rural highway infrastructure. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux) to consider having Highway 227 paved from the junction of highways 248 and 227 all the way to Highway 16, the Yellowhead route. To request the Premier of Manitoba (Mr.

Doer) to consider supporting said initiatives to ensure for the safety of all Manitobans and all Canadians who travel along Manitoba highways. Submitted on behalf of Joseph Hofer, David Hofer, Jerry Hofer and many, many more. Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition. It is unacceptable for the residents of Manitoba to travel the unsafe gravel road of Highway 227 in the constituencies of Lakeside and Portage la Prairie.

Inclement weather can make Highway 227 treacherous to all drivers. Allowing for better access to Highway 227 would ease the flow of traffic on the Trans-Canada Highway. Residences along Highway 227 are not as accessible to emergency services due to the nature of the current condition of the roadway. The condition of these gravel roads can cause serious damage to all vehicles, which is unacceptable. Residents of Manitoba deserve a better rural highway infrastructure. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr.

Lemieux) to consider having Highway 227 paved from the junction of highways 248 and 227 all the way to Highway 16, the Yellowhead route. To request the Premier of Manitoba (Mr. Doer) to consider supporting said initiatives to ensure for the safety of our Manitobans and all Canadians who travel along Manitoba highways. This petition is presented by Peter Bradley, Ross McRae, Armin Friese and many, many others. * (13:45) Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition.

It is unacceptable for the residents of Manitoba to travel the unsafe gravel road of Highway 227 in the constituencies of Lakeside and Portage la Prairie. Inclement weather can make Highway 227 treacherous to all drivers. Allowing for better access to Highway 227 would ease the flow of traffic on the Trans-Canada Highway. Residences along Highway 227 are not as accessible to emergency services due to the nature of the current condition of the roadway.

1346 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 The condition of these gravel roads can cause serious damage to all vehicles, which is unacceptable. Residents of Manitoba deserve a better rural highway infrastructure. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services (Mr. Lemieux) allow having Highway 227 paved from the junction of highways 248 all the way to Highway 16, the Yellowhead route.

To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider supporting said initiatives to ensure for the safety of all Manitobans and all Canadians who travel along Manitoba highways. Signed by Craig Finnie, Grant Bullock, Bonnie Boon, Bev MacMillan and many others. Ambulance Service Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for the petition: In May 2004, 46-year-old Peter Krahn suffered a heart attack while exercising in East St.

Paul and was pronounced dead just under an hour later after being transported to the Concordia Hospital in Winnipeg. Reports show that it took nearly 18 minutes for an ambulance to arrive for Mr. Krahn. The Interlake Regional Health Authority claims that 21 minutes is an acceptable emergency response time,

whereas the City of Winnipeg uses a benchmark of 4 minutes. Ambulance coverage for East St. Paul is provided from Selkirk, which is almost 25 kilometres away. The municipalities of East St. Paul and West St. Paul combined have over 12 000 residents. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the provincial government to consider providing East St. Paul with local ambulance service which would service both East and West St. Paul.

To request the provincial government to consider improving the way that ambulance service is supplied to all Manitobans by utilizing tech- nologies such as GPS in conjunction with a Medical Transportation Co-ordination Centre (MTCC) which will ensure that patients receive the nearest ambulance in the least amount of time. To request the provincial government to consider ensuring that appropriate funding is provided to maintain superior response times and sustainable services. Signed by Catherine W ilde, Sheila Wolfe, Bernie Wolfe and many others. * (13:50) Highway 227 Mr.

Gerald Hawran ik (Lac du Bonnet): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition. It is unacceptable for the residents of Manitoba to travel the unsafe gravel roads of Highway 227 in the constituencies of Lakeside and Portage la Prairie. Inclement weather can make Highway 227 treacherous to all drivers. Allowing better access to Highway 227 would ease the flow of traffic on the Trans-Canada Highway. Residences along Highway 227 are not as accessible to emergency services due to the nature of the current condition of the roadway.

The condition of these gravel roads can cause serious damage to all vehicles, which is unacceptable. Residents of Manitoba deserve a better rural highway infrastructure. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services consider having Highway 227 paved from the junction of highways 248 and

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1347 227 all the way to Highway 16, the Yellowhead route. To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider supporting said initiatives to ensure for the safety of all Manitobans and all Canadians who travel along Manitoba highways. Signed by Jerald Wollmann, Mark Fleury, Bruce Matthews and others. Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition.

It is unacceptable for the residents of Manitoba to travel the unsafe gravel roads of Highway 227 in the constituencies of Lakeside and Portage la Prairie. Inclement weather can make Highway 227 treacherous to all drivers. Allowing better access to Highway 227 would ease the flow of traffic on the Trans-Canada Highway. Residences along Highway 227 are not as accessible to emergency services due to the nature of the current condition of the roadway. The condition of these gravel roads can cause serious damage to all vehicles, which is unacceptable.

Residents of Manitoba deserve a better rural highway infrastructure. We petition the Manitoba Legislative Assembly as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation and Government Services to consider having Highway 227 paved from the junction of highways 248 and 227 all the way to Highway 16, the Yellowhead route. To request the Premier of Manitoba to consider supporting said initiatives to ensure for the safety of all Manitobans and all Canadians who travel along Manitoba highways. Signed by Archie McRae, Al Jones, Peter Hofer and others.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 29–The Municipal Councils and School Boards Elections Act Hon. Scott Smith (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Struthers), that Bill 29, The Municipal Councils and School Boards Elections Act, now be read a first time. Motion presented. * (13:55) Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, this bill replaces a Local Authorities Election Act. The bill streamlines and modernizes the procedures for electing members of municipal councils and school boards in the province of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the loge to my right where we have with us Mr. Binx Remnant who is a former Clerk of the Manitoba Legislative Assembly. Also in the public gallery we have with us from F.W. Gilbert School 21 Grade 5 students under the direction of Mr. Devon Turner. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.

ORAL QUESTIONS Crocus Fund Public Inquiry Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, before putting my question forward, on behalf of all of us, I wish to offer condolences to the Clerk. I understand that she lost her loving grandmother who was at the wonderful age of 103. I just want to offer our condolences.

1348 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 Mr. Speaker, the Crocus Fund is an issue for more than 33 000 Manitobans and all taxpayers of Manitoba. They deserve to have full disclosure, the truth to come forward as to what happened with this mess. We understand the Auditor General is going to be bringing his report forward, and we understand that there is a May 6 Securities Commission meeting scheduled which we hope will go forward as well.

Regardless of the Auditor General's report or the May 6 meeting, it is very important that an independent public inquiry be called so all Manitoba taxpayers and shareholders of the Crocus Fund find out the truth of what has happened with this Crocus mess. Mr. Speaker, this Premier has the opportunity to do the right thing. He can either sweep this under the carpet as if it did not happen, or he can do the right thing and today call for an independent public inquiry so all Manitoba taxpayers, the shareholders of Crocus and the future of venture capital in Manitoba, that there is confidence restored.

I am going to ask the Premier today will he do the right thing and call for an independent public inquiry to clean up the mess with Crocus. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member opposite says, quote, "regardless of the work of the provincial Auditor General and regardless of the work of the Manitoba Securities Commission." We do regard, with a great deal of respect, the work that has been delegated to the two bodies. The Manitoba provincial auditor was given the authority by members opposite in 1992 for oversight provisions on the Crocus Fund. The Auditor reported to this Legislature in 1998.

I would point out yesterday that the member opposite was asking me to intervene in a quasi- judicial body which, I think, would break the law here of Manitoba, asking me to break the law.

Section 22(4) of The Securities Commission Act, for the purposes of an investigation, the commission and any person appointed to make the investigation has the same power to summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses an d compel them to give evidence on oath or otherwise and to produce documents, records and things as is vested in the Court of Queen's Bench for the trial of civil actions. Mr. Speaker, that is tremendous quasi-judicial power. Tomorrow he is going to ask me to interfere with the Court of Queen's Bench. I will not politically interfere. Mr. Murray: Mr.

Speaker, the political rhetoric coming from the Premier is unbelievable. What I have been asking this Premier, if he has been listening, is to ensure that his political appointee does not ensure that somehow there is a cover-up and that at least the May 6 meeting goes ahead. That I have been telling him. Mr. Speaker, we all know that Manitoba Securities has done an investigation and has asked for a meeting to take place on May 6. We want that meeting to go ahead. We know the Auditor General's report is coming down. It is going to be a very, very important report for the Manitoba taxpayers and those in Crocus.

But again, this Premier should understand that the best way to ensure there is full, honest disclosure on behalf of all the taxpayers of Manitoba, on behalf of those shareholders in Crocus, is to have an independent public inquiry. That is the right thing to do. This Premier has an opportunity to stand and give confidence to the Manitoba taxpayers and the Crocus ratepayers that he believes in that. Will he today say he is going to have an independent public inquiry and get to the bottom of this Crocus mess? * (14:00) Mr.

Doer: The member opposite again, this first question talks about regardless of the provincial auditor and now he is talking about a full investigation. Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General in agreements made before he was even an Auditor General, back in 1992, was given authority to deal with the oversight of the fund by the former Filmon government. The Auditor General reported out in 1998 and basically stated th at this fund is a retail fund similar to other mutual funds in Manitoba. We have furthered that power. He had an administrative power under a memorandum of agreement.

We have enhanced that power under legislation we have passed. The member opposite talks, and he has not corrected the record yet when he talks about full facts. The members opposite, in 1993, approved a loan loss provision of 2 million. They wrote it off in a Treasury Board decision in January 1994. The prospectus in 1999, before we were in office, clearly says this matter was written off in terms of an asset

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1349 in the Crocus Fund, in terms of the provincial government obligation. So he should start putting the facts on the table himself, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, of c ourse, the Premier should understand that the Government of Manitoba is a shareholder. They have 2 million shares. Those are the facts. Mr. Speaker, everybody knows– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Murray: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Everybody knows that under this Doer government the Crocus Fund has become a mess. The taxpayers of Manitoba know.

The shareholders of Crocus Fund know. We on this side of the House know. It is this Premier that seems to be putting his head in the sand. Clearly, the right thing to do if the Premier believes in strengthening venture capital for the future of Manitoba, the right thing to do on behalf of all Manitoba taxpayers, on behalf of those shareholders in the Crocus Fund, on behalf of the future for venture capital in Manitoba that creates jobs, would be for this Premier to give his assurance that he will stand and ask for an independent public inquiry to get to the bottom of this mess.

I will ask him today: Will he do the right thing, stand in his place and call for an independent public inquiry to clear up this Crocus mess? Mr. Doer: Well, I am surprised the member opposite would treat the two independent bodies as a regardless body, Mr. Speaker. I am quite shocked. Mr. Speaker, under this government, the member opposite stated that under the Filmon government, the provincial government invested in three major Crocus co-investment activities– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

They invested in 1996 and '97, $29 million in Isobord; Crocus invested, in 1997, $7 million in Isobord. Crocus lost $7 million. The provincial government, with four members of Cabinet sitting in the front bench, lost $29 million. Mr. Speaker, a second Crocus investment, which was articulated by Martin Cash, Westsun; the provincial government had a feasibility study of $4 million before Crocus invested $21 million. Winnport Logistics; the provincial government wrote off $5.6 million, another activity that had investments from Crocus.

We do not have MIOP loans that we have written off with that kind of loss of taxpayers' money. They had a chance to protect taxpayers' money and they failed at Isobord. They failed at Winnport and they failed at Westsun. Crocus Fund Settlement Agreement Details Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, the 33 000 shareholders of Crocus deserve– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Hawranik: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The 33 000 shareholders of Crocus deserve all the facts about the Crocus fiasco.

The underlying value of their shares has been reduced by more than $60 million and on top of this are forced to pay the legal fees of the directors. The CEO of Crocus, Alfred Black, has stated that a settlement of the lawsuit is likely. Will the Minister of Industry guarantee the Crocus shareholders that all the facts regarding the Crocus fiasco will be made public and that he will not muzzle any person, including the NDP appointee to the board of directors? Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to let the opposition know that, not only did we not muzzle the members who are quasi- judicial and have the power and authority to go in, actually, when we got a request from the Auditor one day, we responded that day and gave him the authority. Under my author ity as the Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) agreed to make sure he had the power to go in and investigate the Crocus Fund on behalf of government and on behalf of the shareholders.

The MSC has been conducting an investigation on behalf of the government, on behalf of the share- holders. Mr. Filmon, the former Premier, said that it

1350 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 would be inappropriate and illegal for us as a government, or at the time, the Tories as a govern- ment, to interfere with the Manitoba Securities council or any other quasi-judicial board. We believe it is important to follow the law and the proper procedures. Mr. Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, on April 28, 2000, the Premier (Mr. Doer), who was the subject of a lawsuit in 1998 when he was the Minister of Urban Affairs, settled a lawsuit for $100,000.

As part of that release, he bought the plaintiffs' silence by forcing them to sign a release to keep the terms confidential and that the terms not be disclosed, revealed, confirmed or otherwise communicated to any person, corporation or entity. Will the minister guarantee to the 33 000 Crocus shareholders and all Manitobans that he will not follow the lead of this Premier and not muzzle all those involved in the lawsuit against Crocus? Mr. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I would like to read a quote.

"I am sure the member opposite would not want me to intervene or interfere with the quasi-judicial tribunal such as the Manitoba Securities Commission." That is done in the Hansard, November 1, 1996, and the speaker was Gary Filmon. I think it is very, very essential that we give authority to the people who are the experts, to give the people who are quasi-judicial and are not doing the political. What they ar e doing is their job as professionals on behalf of all Manitobans and on behalf of all shareholders. That is our job. Public Inquiry Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr.

Speaker, the 33 000 Crocus shareholders and the taxpayers of Manitoba need to know what went wrong at Crocus and who was responsible. They need to know this so it will not happen again with a settlement. The only way to guarantee this would happen would be to call a public inquiry so we can get to the bottom of the Crocus fiasco. Will the minister, and I ask the minister again, will he do the right thing and advise the Premier (Mr. Doer) to call a public inquiry? Hon. Jim Rondeau (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Once again, Mr. Speaker, another quote.

On October 17, the year 2000, the Securities Commission announced a settlement agreement with Wellington West, a company the members opposite do know about, on allegations that it acted inappropriately on the privatization of MTS. The commission stated, "the commission has reviewed the settlement agreement and is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to make this order." * (14:10) This is an order for settlement of the issue. It was not something the government at the time tried to politically interfere with. We believe that we should let quasi-judicial organizations do their job.

In fact, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) and myself made sure that the Auditor General had the power to act on behalf of both of us in all respects to investigation and looking at this whole thing. His job was to work on behalf of all shareholders. Crocus Fund Public Inquiry Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr.

Speaker, it is unfortunate for those unit holders and the taxpayers of Manitoba that anybody in government or anybody in authority at the Crocus Fund who has the ability to share with them exactly what happened and when it happened is treating them over and over with complete disregard, and in fact, has been treating them with contempt, particularly this government and this minister. They have the ability to get to the bottom of this mess. They have the ability to call a public inquiry to ensure that unit holders and taxpayers know what has gone on here.

They have the ability to clear up all of the deceit that we have seen, telling the board that there was going to be further declines and the board not telling the shareholders anything. Mr. Speaker, this government has acted in a contemptuous manner. I would ask this minister to have the courage today to stand up and indicate that his government will get to the bottom of this by calling a public inquiry today. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, in 2001, we passe d The Auditor General's Act which had not been reviewed for 20 years.

In that act, we expanded the scope of that act to give the Auditor General greater powers. The powers we

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1351 gave them specifically were the power to investigate a business entity or organization that has issued a share debt obligation or other security if a person is eligible for a tax credit under a Manitoba law, in respect of that acquisition or ownership of the security. We gave the provincial auditor the ability to investigate exactly these kinds of situations. The Auditor's office is a completely independent office reporting to the Legislature.

There is no encumbrance, no barrier, nothing in the way for them to get to the bottom of any situation they wish to examine. We put those powers in legislation. The members opposite did nothing for 11 years. Mr. Loewen: Mr. Speaker, once again a contemptuous answer from a minister who refuses to stand up and be accountable and refuses to act on behalf of the shareholders. If the minister felt so strongly about it, why did he not send the Auditor in two years ago? Why did he not send the Auditor in September when it was devalued by 15 million? Why did he not ask the Auditor to go in?

Instead, he sends a letter February 9. February 9, he sent a letter to the Auditor General asking. Why did he wait so long? Why is he waiting so long now? Why does he not have the decency to stand up for the unit holders to assure them today that his government will see all the facts are out in the open and that they get to the bottom of? Why does he not assure us today that we will have a public inquiry so we can find out everything that has gone on in this sordid mess and why 33 000 Manitobans have been fleeced? Mr.

Selinger: I have just put on the record the legislative authority that we have given the independent Auditor to investigate this matter. The Auditor requested we confirm that authority and I did that the day it was requested on February 9, with a letter which said, "I am requesting that you carry out a special audit of the Crocus Fund, as per

section 16(1) of The Auditor General's Act." The Auditor General wrote back thanking us for confirming the power we conferred to them under the legislation. They have more power than they have ever had in the history of the province to investigate exactly these ki nds of situations. If those powers would have been there when you were in government, you would have been gone a long time ago. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I want to remind all honourable members that if the Speaker is standing all members should be seated and the Speaker should be heard in silence.

I would like to remind all honourable members and I ask the co-operation of all honourable members, please. Mr. Loewen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am astonished this minister has the arrogance and the contempt that he has shown to the unit holders of the Crocus Fund. I would remind him these are individuals who, in the last seven months, have seen $60 million of their retirement income wiped off the books, $60 million. His government said in 2001 that it was their responsibility to monitor. Where were you in 2001? Where have you been since, sir? You have been nowhere. Mr. Speaker, they can correct that.

They can correct that today by saying we are interested in having full, plain and true disclosure. They can correct that by standing up today and saying regardless of what happens at the Securities Commission, regardless of what happens from the Auditor General, we will insist that all information comes to the public's eye through an independent public inquiry. It is as simple as that. There is a simple answer to all of this. Have a public inquiry. Announce today that you will have it.

Tell everybody involved to keep all of their notes and make sure the public and the unit holders find out why they have been screwed. Mr. Selinger: We acted in 2001 when we gave these special powers.We acted in 2001 when we took an old piece of legislation which was 20 years out of date. We updated that legislation in 2001 to give these special powers to the Auditor General of Manitoba, who is an officer of this Legislature. They have all the powers they need to investigate to the depths they wish to, to the breadth they wish to.

There is nothing in the way for them to go as far as they wish to investigate and to receive any information they have. That report will be tabled in the Legislature through you. It will be a report available to anybody in Manitoba that wishes to read it. Those powers were only brought into place under

1352 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 this government. They are unique powers that we put in place. Workers Compensation Expansion of Coverage Mr. Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, it has become clear with some of the proposed amendments to The Workers Compensation Act that this NDP government has formulated their own agenda. The Legislative Review Report, containing 100 unanimous recommendations put forward by both business and labour, recommends that coverage be extended gradually after a full opportunity for consultation and discussion.

Contrary to this recommendation, under Bill 25 there would be universal coverage of all industries unless excluded by the Premier (Mr. Doer) and Cabinet. Why would this NDP government ignore this important recommendation? Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for the question because it provides me an opportunity to clarify the misinformation the member put on the record.

The day that Bill 25 is passed in this Legislature, the coverage for Workers Compensation, the industries will look absolutely no different than they look today. I can guarantee the member that. It will be the status quo. I want to also inform the member that the Review Committee's recommendation on page 17 of the report says that we should expand coverage in consultation with stakeholders. That will be our approach. We will consult with stakeholders on any coverage that occurs in Manitoba. Mr. Cullen: Mr.

Speaker, if the minister's intent was to consult, why would she not add the word "consultation" in the new legislation? Mr. Speaker, at the same time this NDP government is running from the Crocus scandal, they are trying to interfere with the Workers Compensation Board. Until now, the Workers Compensation Board, a quasi-independent body made up of equal representation from business and labour, plays an important role in determining which industries were to be covered. Under Bill 25, this Premier (Mr. Doer) and Cabinet would be making those decisions.

Why is this NDP government taking the decision-making authority away from Workers Compensation? Why do they not trust the Workers Compensation Board? Ms. Allan: The coverage model in Bill 25 will reflect the modern and mainstream approach to WCB coverage in Canada. We will be the eleventh jurisdiction when we implement our coverage model in Canada. We will be the eleventh jurisdiction to introduce this kind of legislation. The first jurisdiction in Canada, Mr. Speaker, was Alberta in 1974. If it is good enough for Alberta, I think it is good enough for us. Mr. Cullen: Mr.

Speaker, I ask which way the minister wants it. Clearly the minister is doing some serious damage control. She has verbally indicated that coverage will remain status quo. However, her legislation says the opposite. Which way is it? This NDP government has misled Manitobans time and time again. What are businesses, workers and Manitobans to believe? Do they believe the legislation tabled in the House? Do they believe these verbal comments from the minister? Ms. Allan: Mr. Speaker, the current

schedule in the WCB legislation is cumbersome and antiquated. It was brought in in 1917. It refers to planing cheese boxes, manufacturing buttons, manufacturing gun cotton and manufacturing shoe blacking or polish. We are going to update the act. We are going to modernize the act. We are not the mothball party. We are going to modernize the Workers Compensation system in this province. Waverley West Subdivision Approval Process Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): On April 1 past, Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs approved the Waverley West development without first sending the proposal to the Municipal Board for review. Considering the fact that the Province is the majority landowner in this develop- ment and the incredible scope of the project, will the minister explain why he felt the Province could play both roles, that of developer and that of the review body. * (14:20)

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1353 Hon. Scott Smith (Minist er of Intergovernmental Affairs and Trade): Mr. Speaker, this question is a good question. It gives me an opportunity to clarify for the member opposite the process. Certainly, the City of Winnipeg Charter and The Planning Act outline the process for development plans and amendment proposals in the province of Manitoba. Obviously, the member opposite knows that after first reading, there are public consultations on the process.

After those public consultations are completed, it goes back to the City and the jurisdiction, in this case, the City of Winnipeg. After that, second reading is given and it is forwarded to the minister's department for consideration. The process was followed, consideration was given. It is now back with the City of Winnipeg. Mr. Maguire: Well, Mr. Speaker, this minister's own predecessor, Mary Ann Mihychuk, when she was Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, indicated to the Provincial Council of Women that she would send the development plan to the Municipal Board if any objections came forward.

Will the current Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs explain the flip-flop in this NDP govern- ment's policy? Mr. Smith: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, this procedure is followed by the office that I am in. It was followed to the letter. Previous things were said by the former government, as I recall, the Leader of the Opposition saying he would not sell MTS and many other things. Mr. Speaker, they went back on their word. In the case on this side of the House, process was followed, procedures are fo llowed to the letter. That has been done.

It is back with a responsible level of government that we have here with the City of Winnipeg. I am not sure if the member opposite is inferring that the City of Winnipeg is not a responsible level of government to make their decisions. Mr. Maguire: Mr. Speaker, any time the government owns the majority of the land in a project like this, the citizens of Manitoba are entitled to a review, an independent review.

Can this Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, if he thinks this is normal procedure, the procedures in establishing Wellington West, Waverley West subdivision at this point–I ask the minister a simple question. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Maguire: Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, as it relates to Waverley West, is he saying that the Premier (Mr. Doer) directed him to bypass the Municipal Board review? Can he tell us when the Premier asked for this Municipal Board review process to be changed? Mr. Smith: Mr.

Speaker, it seems to be a state of mind as opposed to a slip of the tongue on Wellington West and Waverley West. In a case that certainly, through the office, it is my role to review and assess cases that are put forward by the City of Winnipeg through the Winnipeg city charter. The city of Winnipeg is growing, Mr. Speaker. It is done with pertinent information and details that are supplied to my office based on factual information supplied by the City of Winnipeg to our office.

Historically, going back 20 years to 1985, very rarely is anything sent to the city Municipal Board that is referred from the City of Winnipeg unless it is a procedural issue. Mr. Speaker, there is no procedural issue. This has been followed to the letter and it is back with the City of Winnipeg as it should be. Hydra House Government Funding Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, last September the minister indicated she was disengaging from Hydra House and would ensure the least disruption possible to the residents and families of Hydra House. Has this minister disengaged from Hydra House?

Is Hydra House still receiving government funding? Hon. Christine Melnick (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, when we learned of the situation on July 6, 2004, from the AG's investigation, we began to discuss what were the needs of the very vulnerable people who were residing in the Hydra House homes. I committed to the residents, families, caretakers, front-line workers and to the people of Manitoba that I would work in a way that would see disengagement from Hydra House, but would put the care of these vulnerable people first.

1354 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 We are continuing to work through the disengagement that took 10 years to develop. The mess took 10 years to develop because of the actions of members opposite. We will continue to work through the disengagement. Yes, that will take time, but we will not do it at the expense of the care of the vulnerable people. Quality of Care Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I will remind the minister of her commitment last September. It has been six months now.

Yes, the minister indicated she would provide the least disruption possible for people receiving services from Hydra House. How will the minister ensure residents receive quality and consistent care during this transition? Can she guarantee that no one will be moved from their present home? Hon. Christine Melnick (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, there is a very complex set of negotiations under way. These negotiations include St.

Amant Centre, which is an organization of high repute, which is an organization of long-standing in the care of individuals such as the Hydra House residents within a home setting. We have been assured and we believe that as we move forward, St. Amant Centre will ensure the level of care that these individuals need will, in fact, be provided. Purchase of Homes Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): Mr. Speaker, Manitobans want to know what plans there are to provide the long-term care for their most vulnerable citizens. The minister has indicated that she is in negotiations with St. Amant Centre. Will St.

Amant Centre take over the Hydra House homes? Is the NDP government going to buy these Hydra House homes? Hon. Christine Melnick (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Again, Mr. Speaker, I can assure the people of Manitoba that the care of the residents is at the top of the list. A personal care plan has been done for each and every resident in Hydra House. Again, as I had mentioned, there is a complex set of negotiations under way. We are dealing with the care of the residents in terms of talking to St. Amant. We are sure they will provide the care that will be best for the individuals.

We have also consulted with the family members, the caretakers and the residents themselves to assure them that we will work in a way that is least disruptive to their loved ones. Prairie Production Centre Purchase Price Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I would like to call into question the motives of this government in purchasing and buying a movie set. No one wanted it, yet this government reached into the public tax purse and pulled out $3 million in order to get a movie set that no one wanted. Mr. Speaker, the only direct real connection is with the Crocus Fund.

The Crocus Fund had an investment in this prod uction set and because the government moves in to purchase something that no one else wanted, with an exorbitant amount of public tax dollars, that set is still alive today. That movie set– An Honourable Member: That is quite a set. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Lamoureux: The production set, whatever you want to call it, it is corruption from my point of view. Mr. Speaker, the Prairie Production Centre, if that makes the government feel a little bit more at ease, is being acquired in order to cover up Crocus.

My question is this: Besides bailing out one of the Crocus Fund's investments, why did this government pay millions of tax dollars in a failed movie set? Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, again allow me to repeat what I said yesterday in response to the member from Southdale. We believe that we see some long-term benefits to Manitoba's economic future if we proactively are in a position to turn around the former government's example of fiscal accountability or lack of.

The decisions made prior to 1999, our government was left with an option of having to write off $1.3 million in unsecured loans and losing a sound stage. * (14:30) Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, using this minister's logic from yesterday, one would argue then, why not

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1355 go and spend a billion dollars on movie sets and create an industry because the private sector will not do it. The simple answer, it is because this government was trying to cover up an issue which is embarrassing and that is their incompetence in dealing with the Crocus Fund. That is the bottom line. My question to the minister responsible for Culture and Heritage is this: Has he had any communication with his Cabinet or, in particular, the Minister of Industry (Mr. Rondeau) in regard to bailing out this particular movie set?

Was there any communication between these two ministers? Mr. Robinson: Allow me to repeat, Mr. Speaker. Our government was left with the option of having to write off $1.3 million in unsecured loans and losing a sound stage, an asset that is important to the overall strategy in remaining competitive and continuing with the process of ensuring success of a movie industry that is thriving in the province of Manitoba. Now we choose to pay $1.8 million to secure a very important part of the film and video production industry's infrastructure.

This industry, we know, has virtually doubled in the last five years with film production budgets topping $100 million last year. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, what we are asking is if there was any coercion between the different Cabinet ministers. Did the ministers actually talk about bailing out, and the importance of bailing out this particular Prairie Production Centre in order to cover them up on the Crocus Fund? That was the question. Has this minister not sat around the Cabinet table where surely this i ssue would have come up?

Did this minister share his intent to purchase Prairie Production Centre in order to cover up and protect this government's political interests in the Crocus Fund? They know, Mr. Speaker, that they are losing. They shafted over 34 000 Manitobans that have invested in the Crocus Fund. Shame on them. Come clean and tell us whether or not there was communication between your Cabinet members. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Yes, there is communication between Cabinet ministers. There is communication, hopefully, between members in this Chamber.

There was a $1.3-million unsecured loan agreed to and announced, and I can show the press release to members opposite, in 1998– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: That arrangement included money, like the Isoboard investment made by a former Cabinet minister in the former government. That included co- investments from Crocus. That issue, Mr. Speaker, has been described by the minister yesterday in Question Period. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, the $1.8-million invest- ment that we are making and we are responsible for is a secured loan.

It is a secured loan against an asset of $1.8 million, the production studio. It is a secured loan against movie productions such as Shall We Dance? and other movie productions. Liberal governments all across Canada– Mr. Speaker: Order. Time for Oral Questions has expired. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Could I just have the attention of members. I would like to introduce a school that arrived while we were in Question Period. I would like to welcome the Grades 4, 5 and 6 classes of Ms. Bissoon. This school is the Luxton School and is located in the constituency of the honourable Justice Minister.

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Fort Garry Seniors' Programs Ms. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, on Friday, April 18, seniors from Fort Garry were invited to an important meeting that occurred at the Victoria Community Centre in my constituency of Fort Garry. The focus of this meeting was to discuss with seniors how to improve programs and services for them in Fort Garry and to discuss the formation of the Seniors' Advisory Council.

The purpose of this advisory council is to help seniors maintain their independence by providing them information on current services and programs as well as enhancing and improving existing services.

1356 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 Mr. Speaker, the format of this meeting was unique. Small focus groups of seniors worked through a number of questions related to current programs and on the potential for new programs. This format allowed each resident to take an active role in voicing their concerns and sharing their ideas. Representatives from the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, City of Winnipeg and Victoria Lifeline also attended this event. Free transportation was provided as well as a free pancake breakfast for all participants. Mr.

Speaker, public consultations with Fort Garry seniors are integral to ensuring that our seniors enjoy an enhanced and independent quality of life. Seniors also discussed th e Fort Garry shuttle bus initiative that we have undertaken since 2004. The response to this program has been very positive. I am happy to report that approximately 50 seniors attended this consultation. As the MLA for Fort Garry, I will continue to host similar consultations.

In conclusion, I would like to thank Deborah Lorteau, the Age and Opportunity seniors' resource co-ordinator for Fo rt Garry, Joe Egan from the City of Winnipeg, Tonya Beveridge from the WRHA and Karen Velthuys from Victoria Lifeline for helping me with this event. I especially want to thank all the seniors for attending. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. * (14:30) Portage Terriers Mr. David Faurschou (P ortage la Prairie): I am absolutely delighted to rise today and to share with all honourable members that on Tuesday, April 12, the Portage Terriers captured the Manitoba Junior Hockey League championship.

I have been a season ticket holder for more than 20 years, and it is extremely exciting for all of us that follow the Terriers to see this deserving young team win the Turnbull Memorial Trophy. The Terriers earned victory under the leadership of head coach and general manager, Don MacGillvray, and team captain, Colin Slobodian, who, I might add, was attending kindergarten class when the Terriers last won the Manitoba championship.

All of us in Portage la Prairie and area are very pleased to see the Terriers win the provincial championship this year, especially when the title was won through a 4-2 series triumph over last year's Manitoba champions, the Selkirk Steelers, the very team that swept the Terriers to the sidelines in last year's finals. I trust that all my colleagues, including the honourable members from The Pas, from Ste.

Rose and from Selkirk, whose home teams faced the Terriers in this year's playoffs, will join with me in congratulating the Portage Terriers, their coaching staff, and to wish them the very best of luck and success when they represent Manitoba in the upcoming ANAVET Cup Junior Hockey Championship. Indeed, all Manitobans can be proud of the Portage Terriers, their coaches, staff and organiza- tion for not only their success on the ice but also for their community spirit and dedication. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Angela Sherwood Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of this House the accomplishments of Angela Sherwood, a teacher and resident of Cranberry Portage. Angela is a remarkable woman and recent recipient of the Frontier School Division Achievement Award. I was privileged to participat e in that award ceremony. This award, established in 1989, honours the achievements of former Frontier School Division and home placement students who have been successful in their careers or made a significant contribution to their past or present communities.

Angela grew up in Grand Rapids and graduated from Frontier Collegiate Institute in Cranberry Portage. She obtained a one-year teaching certificate and returned to Grand Rapids to teach. She completed the Brandon University of the North teachers' education four-year program while continuing as a teacher in Grand Rapids. Angela spent 14 years teaching in Grand Rapids followed by 19 years at Frontier Collegiate Institute in Cranberry Portage. As a former colleague, I can attest to the caring and positive outlook Angela brought to her work.

Despite periods of personal adversity and serious illness, Angela was a friendly and outgoing teacher who recognized the needs of her students and of the communities where she lived. Angela started the toy library and parent and child resource centre in Grand Rapids. Brownies and

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1357 Guides and 4-H clubs, Teens Against Drunk Drivers groups, school yearbook committees, safe grad committees and student councils have flourished under Angela's guidance. In conferring on Angela the Award for Outstanding Contribution by an Employee, Frontier School Division has recognized more than an employee. They have recognized a successful former graduate, an outstanding teacher, a community leader, and above all, a fine human being whose contribution to her students and to her communities has made many lives better.

Angela continues in her civic roles as magistrate for Cranberry Portage, as a marriage commissioner and as an active member of the Flin Flon

Chapter 29 of the Eastern Star. I invite the members of this House to join me in congratulating Angela on her award and in appreciating the contributions she has made to her communities, her profession and to the many lives she has touched in her career. We wish her, her husband, Wayne, and her family all the best. Darryl Jackson Mrs. Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): It gives me great pleasure to rise today and pay tribute to a generous and distinguished man, Mr. Darryl Jackson. Mr.

Jackson is a pharmacist from Souris whose love and dedication towards community service has been recognized by the Manitoba Pharmaceutical Association. Mr. Jackson was awarded the Whitehall Robins' Bowl of Hygeia Award in recognition of the time and personal sacrifice he has devoted to the welfare of his community. Darryl Jackson grew up on a farm near Margaret, Manitoba, and graduated from Boissevain High School. Following graduation, he attended the University of Manitoba where he studied to become a pharmacist and arrived in Souris in 1980. Mr. Jackson has volunteered on many town projects and committees.

He served on town council for six years, chaired the local Souris and Glenwood Community Development Corporation for several years, served as chamber president on two occasions and has been a member of the BPO Elks for 15 years. He is currently the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce Southwest director. This is not the first time that Mr. Jackson's commitment to community service has been recognized. He was the recipient of this same award in 1979 and in 2001, he was presented with the Lieutenant-Governor's Make a Difference in Your Community Award. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Mr.

Jackson for his unending dedication towards the town of Souris, and I invite all honourable members to join me in wishing Mr. Jackson and his family continued success. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Music Education Programs Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind members of the House that the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth (Mr. Bjornson) has announced April as Music Education in Manitoba Schools Month. Along with the Juno awards, many celebrations of music take place in our province this month.

Our government has provided 23 schools across the province with special grants to enrich their music program by performing in special music events and workshops. Students will participate in a range of activities, including public performances and learning new instruments. I encourage all members to take in some of the wonderful noon hour musical performances taking place right here at the Legislature over the month. In my constituency of St. James, all the schools have thriving music programs. From the elementary to the high schools, students in St.

James are members of everything from bands and choirs to musical theatre groups. Why, in St. James even the preschools are making music. Music programs make a valuable contribution to Manitoba schools. They create an enjoyable atmosphere within school s so the students look forward to returning each day. They provide students the opportunity to prove to themselves that through hard work they can develop their talents and excel. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank teachers and school administrators who help make school music programs possible. Especially thank you to all the

1358 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 parents and the parent councils who lend their tireless support. Also, thank you to the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth for fostering an atmosphere where school music programs flourish. For enriching the character of Manitoba's schools and for dedicating so much time and effort to an activity they feel passionate about, I commend and congratulate students who participate in school music programs. Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, would you– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. We are going through Orders of the Day and I need to be able to hear exactly what business we will be dealing with. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, would you please canvass the House to see if there is agreement to change the Estimates sequence such that the Department of Finance will now be placed ahead of Agriculture in the Chamber, with this change to apply permanently?

Would you also see if there is agreement for only two sections of Supply to sit tomorrow morning with those sections, that is from 10 to 12:30 as I recall, with those sections being the Estimates for Finance, and Family Services and Housing? Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement to change the Estimates sequence such that the Department of Finance will now be placed ahead of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives in the Chamber, with this change to apply permanently?

Also is there agreement for only two sections of Supply to sit tomorrow morning from 10 till 12:30, with those sections being the Estimates for the Department of Finance and Estimates for the Department of Family Services and Housing? [Agreed] Mr. Mackintosh: Please call Supply, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The House will now resolve into Committee of Supply. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) JUSTICE * (14:50) Mr. Chairperson (H arry Schellenberg): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 will now resume consideration of the Estimates for the Department of Justice. As had been previously agreed, questions for the department will follow in a global manner. The floor is now open for discussion. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Chairperson, we have had a couple of days, not off as the Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) might suggest, but away from this committee for a little while. I want to start off with just an issue that the minister brought forward today in the form of a news release. Three new provincial court judges were appointed.

Can the minister indicate how many names came forward from the advisory committee to fill the three positions that he put forward today? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (M inister of Justice and Attorney General): I was just thinking, is this confidential or not? I am trying to think of my legislative scheme here. The legislative scheme requires that there be a minimum of three names for every vacancy.

I would be a little more comfortable checking the legislation to see what my confidentiality obligations may be and there may be none in there aside from the names that are sent, but it is certainly within the range that the legislation contemplated. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Chairperson, could the minister indicate whether or not any of the judges who were appointed today had been previous government appointees to any boards or commissions? Mr.

Mackintosh: I believe my recollection is that Judge Harapiak was appointed to the Municipal Board and I think there was another board, it might have been, actually, I think it was a Workers Compensation appointment, yes.

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1359 Mr. Goertzen: Now, Justice Harapiak, the minister points to her specifically, can the minister indicate if he had any previous dealing in law with Ms. Harapiak, if you have ever served with her as a colleague, or if he had any other kind of professional relationship? Mr. Mackintosh: I met her when she was an employee of Manitoba Justice in the Family Law branch. She was employed there for sometime.

The period of time is not in the press release which I have with me, but I know she was employed with the Family Law branch for some time and I remember her on a consultation, or on a briefing regarding auto orders, actually, in maintenance enforcement, but that was where I was aware of her. I think I might have met her once before, too. So that was my extent of my knowledge, first-hand, of her, but she certainly rated highly, obviously, with the nominating committee in being nominated. Mr.

Goertzen: Could the minister indicate if, I am only incidentally aware of some of the Harapiaks and the family, but could the minister indicate if there is any relationship with the new provincial judge with any members of his caucus? Mr. Mackintosh: It is my understanding that Judge Harapiak is the daughter of Harry Harapiak. Her family would include the Minister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk). Mr. Goertzen: The minister obviously was aware of a relationship, whatever it might be. I do not know what the relationship is, if it is a cousin.

Prior to the appointment, did he consider perhaps an alternative form of recusing himself from the decision in terms of her appointment becaus e of a connection with a colleague on Cabinet? Mr. Mackintosh: Well, first of all, is the member alleging some conflict of interest? He should be aware of the conflict of interest law. I do not see how that would apply in the circumstance. * (15:00) Mr. Goertzen: I am aware of the conflict of interest law. I just wondered if the minister himself might have thought of it as a conflict.

I certainly know the minister has made statements in the past in his previous functions and role in the Legislature about the importance of judicial independence, perceived or real. I just wonder, given the statements that the minister has made in the past, whether he himself considered an alternative method. Mr. Mackintosh: Alternative? Mr. Goertzen: Alternative method, or whether or not you thought it was appropriate that you are making the appointment. Mr. Mackintosh: I will go through the process. The Cabinet appoints a nominating committee.

It is headed by the Chief Judge, another judge of the Provincial Court, a representative of the Law Society, a representative of the Bar Association and three lay representatives appointed by the government. In this case, three lay representatives, I think, represented different communities and interests in the community that would be most directly affected by the Provincial Court appointment. My understanding is the process then is to go through some advertisements, receive applications.

This nominating committee then short-lists it, does the interviews, not unlike other kinds of hiring processes, and then provides a list to the minister of no less than three names per vacancy. That nominating committee, comprised of former RCMP head for Dauphin, Ron Marlin, and Gisèle Funk who, I know, is active in the Aboriginal community, the Métis commun ity in that area, and I believe it is a business person, Reid Minish, from Swan River. So the Swan River area, Dauphin area were represented and areas in between. I thought it was an excellent nominating committee.

The person I knew myself there was Ron Marlin, who was a highly, highly respected RCMP officer in the city of Dauphin and retired a year or two ago, so I was very pleased that he took on this appointment. Then the names come into the minister, and the minister will make a recommendation to the Cabinet. So, in fact, the appointment is not by a minister, it is by the Cabinet. This was an appointment made by the Cabinet. It was made yesterday morning. Mr. Goertzen: Is the minister aware of any recommendations that have been made by the current or previous Justice ministers that have not been accepted by Cabinet?

1360 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 Mr. Mackintosh: The ministers are restricted to making appointments from the list that is provided to the minister. I know there was a controversy a few years ago with my predecessor– Mr. Goertzen: Your controversy. Mr. Mackintosh: Huh? Mr. Goertzen: Your controversy. There was no controversy. Mr. Mackintosh: There was a controversy that was made public by the Bar Association and the Law Society, actually the president of the Law Society of Manitoba and the president of the Manitoba Bar Association. Mr. Goertzen: Got Francophone representation. Mr.

Mackintosh: There were allegations about sending the lists back, or acceptability. That was an example there of allegations, at least, and I think there may have been some admissions that took place. I cannot recall if there were admissions or not at the end of the day, but it certainly was a serious allegation by very prominent members of the Manitoba Bar as to the conduct of my predecessor.

That was the only circumstance I am aware of where a minister may have attempted to have a name from other than on the list or at least trying to interfere with the process that is, I think, very highly independent and, I think, too, with the eyes of the Chief Judge and the Bar Association, all the members of the nominating committee on this process. It is arguably the best nominating process for bench appointments in the country, but in terms of my own recommendations to Cabinet, I can tell you that there are always robust discussions about appointments.

The Cabinet does take it seriously and wants to ensure that the candidates that are being considered will serve justice well. Mr. Goertzen: Can the minister indicate whether the new provincial judge being discussed at this point–is there a relation to John Harapiak, who, I understand, ran for the NDP in St. John's in the last election? Sorry, in Ste. Rose. Mr. Mackintosh: I do not know that relationship, actually, other than the name association. I think there might be assumptions that there is a relationship there, but I do not know the fact. Mr.

Goertzen: When the name came forward, there was part of a list of six, or as few as three, and the name the minister obviously knew at the point was a relation to a colleague in Cabinet. He put that forward of his own volition. The other name may or may not have come forward in terms of a New Democratic candidate in the last election. Did the minister have cause for pause in terms of whether or not he may, himself, have at the very least perceived conflict in the appointment? Mr. Mackintosh: The names are not put together by myself or the Cabinet.

The names come from a nominating committee that, I would suggest, is beyond reproach through a very vigorous process. I know the calibre of names that come forward from that process from repeated nominating committees. I know how difficult many of the decisions are because of the calibre of the people that come forward. This particular candidate has an excellent background as a lawyer with a varied practice in the city of Dauphin in family law, in Manitoba Justice and, more recently, with Justice Canada in the Aboriginal law area.

My understanding is that she is, in every way, an excellent appointment, and I have no reason to think otherwise. That there is some association by family with a Cabinet minister I do not think should bias the consideration of her or disqualify her in any way. I think that she should be considered on her own merits, and I am sure if the nominating committee thought she was not worthy, there would not be her name put forward. I know that in every way she is worthy from what I understand is her reputation and, indeed, her experience. Mr.

Goertzen: I do not think that, in this committee, any accusations have come forward regarding the provincial judge's qualifications, or that of the nominating committee. It was about whether or not there would be a perceived conflict with the recommendation coming from a minister who sits around the table with someone who is now related. Certainly, I know there are many people within the Law Society in the province who would be qualified, I think, to have their names come forward as well, and there might very well be questions that they would be asked. I think the perception of a

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1361 conflict is as real as an actual conflict in this case and in many others. I wonder if the minister would indicate if he would see more of a concern if, in fact, he had to select the individual off a list of more than three? Mr. Mackintosh: First, I think we have to be clear that I do not think that relations should disqualify anyone. If there are issues of conflict of interest, there are procedures in plac e to govern that so that there is not a loose application of what should or should not constitute conflict of interest.

There is an independent committee that does its work. The process in Manitoba has integrity, and I would say great integrity. In fact, I have urged this on the federal government for their Queen's Bench appointments. I would urge them on anyone who would listen to the Manitoba process. I believe that process began, I think, under Jim McCrae, if I recall. I think it was in the early nineties.

So the process speaks volumes about Manitoba's approach, in a principled way, to appointments to the bench, and I think that it served us well and will continue to serve us well. * (15:10) Out of the candidates that was considered, the nominating committee gave us a list. I do not think it is fair that someone be disqualified because of some relations. They have to choose from the list, and I would urge the member to consider support for the nominating process in Manitoba. It goes way beyond what I have seen from other jurisdictions and way beyond what I see even with the Queen's Bench appointment in Manitoba.

I just had a discussion in my office, actually, in the last couple of days, comparing our process to the Queen's Bench appointment process. I know how hard some people work on this Queen's Bench appointment process here in Manitoba. They come up with a short list of excellent candidates, and then, lo and behold, I get a call from Ottawa, or I read a news release from somewhere saying they appointed so-and-so and the person was never on the list. It turns out it was some person al relationship or party relationship to the federal government. I am sick and tired of that kind of thing.

It is because it is done without a nominating process, without the application process, and the transparency that we have in Manitoba. So I think it is worthy of support. Now, I can say as well if the member wants to go this way, and this is maybe where he is going, but this decision was made yesterday morning in Cabinet and I can tell you that the Minister of Agricult ure (Ms. Wowchuk) was not even there. She was on a plane somewhere, actually, to Sacramento. Mr. Goertzen: Well, I am not surprised that ministers in the government are on a plane somewhere, because most of them often are at various times.

I think that the minister should be careful because the only one who has raised any kinds of allegations about how the individual is appointed or the appropriateness of the Manitoba system has been the Minister of Justice at this point. Sometimes the protest that he puts forward speaks volume to the issue. He did raise though and he might want to look back on his own comments in Hansard about the federal system, how he has great concern about how there are sometimes personal relationships, and that is the genesis of people being appointed.

That is specifically what I am speaking about here, so I am glad that the minister raises that point for me. He did not answer the question that I posed, so I will pose it again although perhaps in a different way so it might be more meaningful to the minister.

Given the fact that the individual had been appointed to two boards by the government, the Municipal Board and, I understand now, the Workers Compensation Board Appeal Commission, and given the fact that it is related to one of his colleagues in Cabinet and possibly related to a candidate in the most recent provincial election, I just simply raise the fact again. Does the minister not feel that this has come to mind when the name came forward that it might be perceived as a conflict?

There is no suggestion that the person should be disqualified, but I certainly want to ensure that there is not a perception that an individual is helped by their affiliation, either possibly with the party or with somebody who represents that party. Mr. Mackintosh: Well, I just think it is unfair to suggest that this new judge would be tainted by criticism that she was appointed because of some connections. She made the short list and she was appointed from the list that was provided under the law, the best law of its kind, the best process of its

1362 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 kind, I think. She is going to be an excellent judge, I know that, for the Dauphin area. Mr. Goertzen: I do not think that anybody, except the minister again, has called into any kind of question about her qualifications for the position at this point.

I am just simply asking the minister that because of his past statements, and I can dig them out if he wants for him about the perception of a conflict of interest when it comes to the law, whether or not it struck him, given many of his past comments, that this might itself seem to be a conflict and whether or not there was a way that he might recuse himself or other members on this issue, whether to seek any other kind of advice on the issue of how it could be handled. Mr. Mackintosh: Is the member suggesting that the Minister of Justice not have a role? I do not see the logic. There is no conflict there.

There is no conflict with my role whatsoever. I cannot answer the question any different way. She was short-listed; she was put forward for consideration, and the Cabinet made a decision based on qualifications. Mr. Goertzen: I would ask the Minister of Justice a question regarding the amendments to the stalking, commonly referred to as The Stalking Act in Manitoba. Certainly, we are well aware of diffi- culties and troubling circumstances on the weekend, not to discuss specifics, obviously, of that particular situation, which I suspect all of us were troubled by.

It did come to light again, and it was not the first time that it has come to light that the amendments that the minister put forward have been delayed significantly. In fact, it has been two years, the minister can correct me if I am wrong, it might even be two years to the day, that the act was introduced into the Legislature, and it still has not come forward.

Can the minister indicate the difficulties that he is having in bringing forward legislation that, I believe, when he brought it forward, said it was a significant and urgent piece of legislation, why it has been two years that legislation has not come forward? Mr. Mackintosh: Well, the member is wrong. The bill passed in June. An Honourable Member: Proclaimed. Mr. Mackintosh: It was passed in June. Mr. Goertzen: The minister might want to split hairs on this issue. He knows full well what the issue is and I ask him why the law has not been proclaimed in two years. Mr. Mackintosh: The member is wrong.

The act passed in June and will be proclaimed October 31, so the member has his dates wrong. The important date, of course, is when the b ill passes. It was a money bill. The member knows that. Given that it is a money bill, it required financial commitment in the budget and the budget contained amounts in order to facilitate a sure-footed proclamation of the legislation. Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): I just want to pursue along my colleagues line of questioning. The minister is saying that the bill passed in June of 2003– An Honourable Member: No, it passed last June. Just passed in June. Mrs.

Mitchelson: But the act, in my understanding from the newspaper article, so are you saying that the newspaper

article is wrong when it says that it was introduced in April 29 of 2003? Was it April 29 of 2004 that it was introduced and passed in June of 2004? I have some difficulty understanding if it was introduced in April of 2003, that it did not pass till June of 2004. So I am just asking for some clarification. Mr. Mackintosh: The Domestic Violence and Stalking Act Amendments passed at the end of the last session, which was in June 2004. Mrs. Mitchelson: I thank the minister for that clarification.

I guess the bill died on the Order Paper during the election campaign and was brought back in after, so thanks for the clarification. Can the minister indicate what money is in his budget this year for the training and the resources and the hiring of new staff in his department in order to have this law proclaimed? Mr. Mackintosh: Yes. There is a quarter of a million dollars in this year's budget that was sought, and I just want to explain this. When the former government brought in this kind of legislation, it took them, by the way, a similar time frame to proclaim it.

The reason given at that time was that there had to be developed regulations and training. As it all turned out, there have been shortcomings

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1363 with the regulations and the training which, by indications that I have received, fell short of what was required for an even application and the knowledge by those that can get these orders used across Manitoba. * (15:20) When this legislation was introduced, the department and stakeholders clearly told me that we had to first of all look at the regulations again in a consultative way and fix them up. In fact, that was required. As well, we had to put in place resources which were never in place when the legislation was brought in.

It was really unfortunate there were no resources that went along with the introduction of this legislative scheme in Manitoba, I am advised. They felt they had to have some further resources. As well, they had to develop training materials, and that is under way, and engage in stakeholder education and public education. The most intensive part of that will take place in late summer. What is critical here is that the shelter workers in particular who now will be empowered to assist victims and survivors make application have to be given full knowledge of what the remedies are under the act.

I do not think the act is quite as straightforward as any of us might like in terms of the difference between protection orders and prevention orders, for example.

If there is a buzz that has been going around about what the act provides for, that will change significantly becaus e there are some changes that I think are of significance in the bill, particularly with regard to dating violen ce, with regard to a test available for the hearing officers, with regard to the publication bans, compensation for children, orders for treatment and other situations like elders, where there have not been people living together in a family. There are some big changes.

As well, there has been a concern about th e uneven application and uneven granting of orders under the legislation across the province. You know, this is good legislation. It was good legislation when it was brought in by and large. I had criticisms of aspects of it and some of that has been dealt with in the bill. But let us face it, this is a good idea. There are a number of provinces, five or six of them now, that have this kind of legislation. There are records going back about my contributions and so on, but this option, I think, is very positive to deal with the scourge of domestic violence.

These improvements are very significant. This is not my own conclusion, but I am advised this makes the strongest domestic violence protection legislation in the country, and I would say that is where we should be. I hope that is the case, but we want to do it right. We want to do it in a sure-footed way and that is why the department and stakeholders have so clearly given me that opinion. I am obliged to take that because it is such a serious issue of protection. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr.

Chair, I listened closely to the minister's answer and I think we all would agree to have strong legislation in this area, especially looking at what happened last weekend and issues of domestic violence that continue to take place. I think it is important that we all recognize that laws needs to be strengthened, and resources and tougher regulations and better dealing of these issues is very important.

It is interesting to hear the minister admit that, unfortunately, there were no resources in place when the government brought this piece of legislation– [interjection] I guess the minister, in his hurry to get something like this introduced into the House and put out a new press release and introduce legislation, did not think about the detail that was involved in bringing this kind of legislation in and did not do any planning or any thinking about what resources might need to be put in place.

I know we went into an election in 2003 and the government was re-elected, and we had a very long hiatus before we came back into the House. I would think that if this was as much a priority for the minister as he talks about it being, some work would have been done. It was the same minister and the same portfolio, and that some work would have been done in preparation for introduction of this legislation.

Some of the issues and some of the complications that he talks about might have been looked at by him if he was truly serious about moving this legislation forward and ensuring that a plan of action was in place when the legislation passed. The minister has all kinds of reasons for why this is not in place yet, and I would ask him some very specific questions because I see that there is significant hiring. Can the minister indicate what the

1364 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 new sheriff, what the new magistrate and how many and what other Justice staff need to be put in place before the law is proclaimed? Mr. Mackintosh: In addition to staffing, dollars are required to do the educational materials. This will have to be disseminated to not only those who can now help get protection orders, but in the shelters and there may be housing people, but the police, the magistrates and the general public, as well, will have to have new information.

There will have to be the construction of some public information that has not been available before. As well, I can say the regulations have been developing under the act and there was a consulta- tion process put together to do that. It was not just done unilaterally by the government, but the consultation process was constructed. The views were obtained and considered in the development of the regulations. The Queen's Bench rules have to be changed, so this is all the process that is part of making a change, an important change, in an important law.

The dollars allow for hearing officers, judicial support staff, a sheriff position, training, trans- criptions, women's advocacy and legal counsel expenditures. No, I take that back. Those are the changes in terms of the staff. I will just go back. The member had paraphrased me saying that there were no resources for domestic violence. I did not say that, of course. She will see that from the record, but I want to just make it clear to her right now that I said there were no new resources provided along with that legislation introduced by the former administration.

There were a lot of pressures that were put on the system, I understand. We want to make sure, though, that this is a robust application of the legislation. As I say, the former government, when they looked at this legislation, had a similar time frame for the introduction and yet, there was no hiring. There were no new budget allocations and the training was skeletal. So we are doing it differently, and yet, within a very similar time frame. I think it is a difference of 30 days actually. I think the former administration had their legislation passed in June and it was proclaimed in late September or something.

It is a very similar time frame. We have to do this in a way that makes sure the bill is put to good use. If people are not aware of what is in the bill, particularly those in the law enforcement community, the shelter community and others that deal on the front lines with victims and survivors of domestic violence, we are not going to get what the Legislature expected when it passed the legislation. So, if that is what we want to do, we want to do it right. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chair, could the minister indicate to me whether any new staff have been hired in order to move forward on this piece of legislation?

I will ask a couple of questions, and then, hopefully, we will get some answers to them. You talked about training materials, education materials. Who is in charge of developing those and where are we at in that process? * (15:30) Mr. Mackintosh: Of course, the hiring will take place once the expenditure s are approved by the budget process, as the former minister knows. The department has already begun its preparation for that hiring in anticipation of a positive outcome from budget approvals. The Family Law branch is working on the materials and the regulation change.

I can tell you the regulation change has been a substantive piece of work, and that will be dealt with on a timely basis, of course, in concert with the other aspects of a proclamation. Mrs. Mitchelson: How many people will be hired? What will their positions be? Mr. Mackintosh: There are 2.5 hearing officers and 1.5 sheriff positions. An Honourable Member: Mr. Chair, 2.5 what? I am sorry. Mr. Mackintosh: Hearing officers, and 1.5 sheriffs. But the amount also goes toward the training which is operating and transfers for the hearings. Mrs.

Mitchelson: We are looking at page 41 in the detailed Estimates, and page 57 in the detailed Estimates, both Victim Services and Family Law, and it does not appear that there is any new staff resources or any new salaries. Can the minister tell me where those positions are located, and where we s hould see an increase in staff resources?

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1365 Mr. Mackintosh: The new amount is in Courts, and the amounts are reflected at pages 83 and 85. The amount was $250,000. I am advised that, just to help us over the breakdown there, page 83, under Judicial Services, the hearing officers are there for 184.4, and there is Operating of 4.2 on that page. They are not separated out in separate lines. Oh, 7.2. Mrs. Mitchelson: Under Other Expenditures or under what? Mr.

Mackintosh: For example, under Other Expenditures, the 7.2 is included there, I understand; 2.5 for Training, 4.7 for Transcription, and the hearing officers of 184.4 are on the Salaries line. They are not broken out se parately. They are in the total. And then, as I say, on the other page, under Sheriff Services, there is 58.4 that is included on the Salaries line. Mrs. Mitchelson: I am having a little bit of difficulty following the minister, so maybe we could go at it just a little slowly and I will go back and see whether I understand or not. Under Other Expenditures on page 83, there is 2.5. Mr.

Mackintosh: There is a total of 7.2 for new Operating related to this initiative. Mrs. Mitchelson: Okay, 7.2 for Training and Transcription. And under Salaries, then, there is 184.4 thousand. That is for how many staff, and what would there job descriptions be? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Chair, 2.5 hearing officers are included in that 184.4, I am advised. Mrs. Mitchelson: Then that begs the question, given that there are 2.5 new heari ng officers and it is only showing one additional staff in this line, are the reductions elsewhere? Is there a 1.5 staff reduction? Mr. Mackintosh: I am advised that the money is there.

They have not designated an FTE yet, but it is the dollar figure that goes towards the hiring of those positions, so the FTE has to be established by way of the HR process. Mrs. Mitchelson: What kinds of services might be reduced in the minister's department in order to enhance this function? Mr. Mackintosh: No, those are new dollars that I have just described. We had to go and get, as a new initiative, the amount of $250,000 for the proclamation of The Domestic Violence and Stalking Act. Mrs.

Mitchelson: But if there is no staff here in this line in the Estimates, if we are short 1.5 staff years, where will those staff years come from? Is, in fact then, the detailed Estimates misleading, because we have not created the new staff years yet for these positions, or will there be reductions elsewhere within the department to accommodate the new 2.5 hearing officers? Mr. Mackintosh: No, my understanding is that the positions will be terms until they are converted into FTEs at such time as that can be accommodated. But there is no difference.

They are new people; there are new positions, new money. * (15:40) Mrs. Mitchelson: I guess, you know we are only, I mean the budget was introduced how many weeks ago? If, in fact, there are going to be two-and-a-half new FTEs under Judicial Services to accommodate the hearing officers, why do we not have an increase in the Estimates of 2.5 FTEs? Mr. Mackintosh: My understanding is that the department HR, Administration and Finance, will look for other FTEs, but what is important here is that the initiative get going, and so the money– Mrs. Mitchelson: At what cost? What are you going to cut? Mr.

Mackintosh: No, there is no cut. There is new money. There is a quarter of a million dollars of new money– Mrs. Mitchelson: Well, you are taking the FTE from somewhere else. You are taking it– Mr. Mackintosh: The former minister should know how this is done. The amount is budgeted for, and there are new positions, and there will be term positions. Mrs. Mitchelson: I am having a little difficulty following the minister's logic, I guess. He is indicating that they will be term positions, so there will not be permanent positions–[interjection]

1366 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 Well, Mr. Chair, he said a second ago they would be term positions, and now he is saying they will be permanent positions. If they will be permanent positions, why do his Estimates not reflect permanent positions for a new initiative that we all support? Why on earth would the minister not have it reflected in this line in the Estimates if that is where the money is? Mr. Mackintosh: You know, as a former minister I am surprised. That is re flected in the line. I say there is $250,000 in new money to hire 2.5 hearing officers, and it is in the line.

That is what matters. That is the difference. That was the money that we were able to obtain as a result of the passage of the legislation and the decision of the government leading up to the conclusion of the budget considerations. Mrs. Mitchelson: Well, thanks again, Mr. Chair, but, again, yes, the money is here and we found out and that is fine. I have no problem with the money. I guess the problem that I have, again, is misleading through the detailed Estimates. It says here there is 184,000 new dollars and that is fine. That is great. The question is we are not seeing 2.5 new positions reflected.

We are seeing one new position reflected in the detailed Estimates. So the money may be there, but the reality is that the positions are not here in this book. So this is not correct reporting of the information and the decisions that were made and printed in the detailed Estimates. Mr. Mackintosh: I know the former minister must know this process. These people will be permanent. These are new positions with job descriptions. They are hired to deal with this legislation, and the money is there.

The FTEs will be attracted to these lines as a result of the HR process over the next year or so, I understand, but in the meantime they are going to be there and from the 2000 and some positions in Justice the department will look for the FTEs, but that does not make a difference to the money or the position. That is to marry the FTE with the hiring, and that is a usual procedure. So that is what the department is required to do and will do. It makes no difference to the provision of the service. The service is in here and indeed, like I say, it was a new initiative in what we call, in the budget process. Mrs.

Mitchelson: Well, thanks, Mr. Chair, but I guess I might ask then how many other new positions are there going to be within the Department of Justice and new staff years that are not reflected in these detailed Estimates. Mr. Mackintosh: Well, I think that the rationale here of the $250,000 in the block funding assigned to these lines is to allow the department to break down the different job descriptions, the different personnel that are required for the legislation. Mr. Gerard Jennissen, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair So now it is incumbent on the department then to reallocate the FT, which is an exercise.

It does not make any difference to the person in the position or the function. It is a matter of marrying that. I am sure the former minister knows all that, but that is how it was done here. It allowed for some flexibility in responding to what we saw as the best way to staff the legislation. Mrs. Mitchelson: Can the minister show us in the detailed Estimates where it would reflect the hiring of a new sheriff that will be needed to proclaim this legislation? Mr.

Mackintosh: So, on the Sheriff Services page, I am advised that the amount for sheriffs relating to the legislation totals 58.4 which is for 1.5 sheriff positions. Mrs. Mitchelson: Where is that under Sheriff Services? Is that under Other Expenditures under Salaries and Employee Benefits? Mr. Mackintosh: It is on the line Salaries and Employment Benefits, I understand. Mrs. Mitchelson: It was the first time I had been looking at the detailed Estimates, but I see that there was a reduction in 12 sheriffs as a result of, I guess, the gang trial, which is understandable.

But then, again, I do not see reflected in here the additional 1.5 staff years for the sheriffs that the minister has just indicated will be hired for this initiative. Could I also have the dollar figure for the 1.5 sheriffs? Mr. Mackintosh: The dollar figure is 58.4. I am advised that the sheriffs are casuals, that the issue of FTs is not relevant to that.

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1367 Mrs. Mitchelson: Could the minister indicate to me where we would find the resources for the magistrate that will be hired? Mr. Mackintosh: Yes, that was the 184.4 on the earlier page. * (15:50) Mrs. Mitchelson: So, then, the hear ing officers, is that magistrates, the 2.5? Okay, thanks. I appreciate that clarification. Then it also indicates that the government is in the process of hiring other justice staff. Could the minister indicate to me how many other justice staff that will be hired, and in which areas within the department?

Where would they be reflected? Mr. Mackintosh: I am just wondering if the member can clarify again that question, where she is quoting from. Mrs. Mitchelson: I believe it was a spokesman for the Minister of Justice that indicated that we will be hiring a new sheriff, magistrate and other justice staff that will be in place to enforce the law, he said, so that was the minister's spokesperson that said that. I guess I am asking what other justice staff, what will their responsibilities be and where are they located in the Supplementary Estimates? Mr.

Mackintosh: The hirings, they are called magistrates or hearing officers, I think. Technically, they are called hearing officers, so the hirings, as I said earlier, 2.5 hearing officers, and 1.5 sheriffs. That is the hirings that comprise the $250,000 plus the operating amounts that we talked about. Mrs. Mitchelson: So that is all of the staff, then, that is being hired to deal with the new initiative? We have got four new staff and that is $250,000? Mr. Mackintosh: That should comprise the $250,000. I have not done the quick math here, but I think that should be it.

Again, though, but including the transcription and training costs. Mrs. Mitchelson: There is a reference made in the same

article to $40,000 being given to A Woman's Place, a downtown clinic that supports victims of domestic violence. Could the minister just elaborate a bit for me on exactly what A Woman's Place is doing to support the new initiatives? Mr. Mackintosh: The former minister would remember this kind of discussions as between Justice and Family Services probably, but I have a sense I should defer to my colleague in Family Services. They are the lead on that funding. I am more than happy to talk about it, and if the member wants me to do that, I can, but I think that Minister of Family Services (Ms.

Melnick), because she has made the funding decisions in her area, is better qualified. I just got a letter the other day and 98 women have been helped in circumstances who might not have received help. I would urge the member to pursue that line of questioning. It think it is a good initiative that was community driven. We are part of that. Legal Aid did have a role, mind you. They are independent from my office, but the executive director at Legal Aid, prosecutions, and women's advocacy people, the people in Victim Services, have played a very strong role.

In that way the department does have a tie-in so I can speak about that. I can say that it is an initiative that is led by Nor'West, and it is in the Dayton Building on Portage Avenue. Instead of survivors going from one door to another door, it is to provide one door to provide legal assistance, not only on the criminal side, but on the civil side, to provide even help like, maybe going with a woman to court or even help with some chores, to provide housing assistance and advice. I think very importantly, though, it is that the victims' assistance that can be rallied.

My understanding is that this is very unique so I hope it continues to serve and grow, but I think the other minister may have more to add. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chair, so the $40,000 that is in the newspaper article, that would be funded through Family Services as the lead. Is there money from Justice in the project? Mr. Mackintosh: No, it is my understanding that the actual dollars come from Family Services, but I could quantify if the member asked what are the contributions in kind from both Legal Aid and from Manitoba Justice because they are significant.

I remember at the opening I had a list of the services in kind and the staff contributions on a weekly basis to A Woman's Place, but I could obtain that for the member if she wants that. Otherwise, I will leave that for the other department.

1368 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chair, just one or two more questions. It says also in this

article that the government is in the process of training front-line workers. Could the minister indicate to me what front-line workers are being trained or have been trained to date? Mr. Mackintosh: That may relate to the domestic violence and stalking act training agenda. I suspect that is what she is quoting about. Aside from the development of the regulations in consultation, I see the training as a key development in making sure this legislation is going to work as well as it can. The development of the training initiative is under way.

As I say, the family law group in Manitoba Justice hopes it can be delivered starting in late summer and into the fall when people are back from vacations and in time for proclamation on October 31. They will be conducting information sessions for justices of the peace, Court of Queen's Bench justices, family law lawyers through the Manitoba Bar Association, and community service providers. I will also add that they have to develop new and revised court forms. They have to change the court orders.

They will then, have to look at how this is going to be conducted across the province, how it can be most effectively delivered and they are developing that agenda now. * (16:00) Mrs. Mitchelson: Just one more question. It was a horrible situation on the weekend in Lockport with the murder-suicide, and I just want to be sure that we know for sure that there was no contact with the RCMP or with the judicial system, by way of requesting protection orders or restraining orders. Can the minister assure us that there was no contact in request for support? Mr.

Mackintosh: I am a bit cautious here because this is second-hand. That information is best provided by law enforcement agencies, but our contact, our liaison with law enforcement, Mr. Horn, advises that to the best of his understanding on advice from the RCMP that there were no requests for restraining orders, I am advised. Mrs. Mitchelson: There are restraining orders and there are also protection orders. Would that be both– Mr. Mackintosh: I am advised of the same, that there were no requests for protection or restraining orders or prevention orders, for that matter. Mrs.

Leanne Ro wat (Minnedosa): On the weekend, a mother of three children was taken away from her family. A father was taken away from the children as well. The family lost a brother, a sister and the mother lost her children, as well as a parent of the woman that was killed. We are seeing more and more that women are taking it upon themselves to uproot their families and move out of an abusive situation. This woman did everything right. She removed herself from the situation. She found the supports within her family to protect her the best that you can, and obviously it failed, tragically.

We did not need to motivate this woman to seek out a protection order. We did not need to motivate this woman to look for a restraining order. She had that option. I guess the question that I have, and I know that a lot of other women, husbands, families, would like to know whether, for some reason, there was an obstacle in her need to find protection. My question to the minister is how many of these restraining orders are granted on a yearly basis. How many of them have been granted this year, and how many of these orders have been refused in this past year?

I am asking for both protection orders, and I am also asking for prevention or restraining orders. Mr. Mackintosh: The department advises that there were 527 applications. Of those applications, 305 were granted and 223 were dismissed. Mr. Chairperson in the Chair We do not have the exact number of prevention orders, I am advised by the department, but we do have a number of prevention orders that were filed with CPIC from QB, and that is 255. So that may help in breaking down the type of order there, but that will not be an exact number because that will not be the total number.

There will be a larger number than that.

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1369 Mrs. Rowat: I would like clarification on why those numbers are not available. He is indicating there are 255 granted. I would like to know how many were applied for, and also the reasons why these numbers are not available. Mr. Mackintosh: The information I had was just what was at hand. I can undertake to look further to see if there is further information available in more detail. I understand and maybe the member will want put on the record, the breakdown of the information.

I think she was saying the difference between protection orders and prevention orders. If that is right, maybe she could clarify that and we can pursue that information. Mrs. Rowat: Mr. Chair, what I am looking for are the number of orders granted, the number of orders that have been refused and then total number of orders that have been applied for. I would like them both for protection orders, and I would also like them for the restraining or prevention orders broken down individually and specifically. I would also like to know the rationale for the ones being refused and my understanding is 222.

I am not sure if those were protection orders or restraining orders, but there are 222 of them that have been denied. I would like to know the rationale and the reasoning behind those denials. Thank you. Mr. Mackintosh: We can get some advice on different kinds of reasons. Of course, they may differ in each and every case based on the evidence. I can say one thing. We have had concern about the threshold test for obtaining the orders. With the new legislation, there is a different threshold in that there need not be violence current.

If there is–I will just get the language–I will just paraphrase, but if there is a reasonable likel ihood that violence will start up again in the future, an order will be obtained under the new legislation. So I think it is a good progression based on the experience under the act. Mrs. Rowat: Mr. Chair, I am a bit concerned and a bit confused on why, if there is a concern about the threshold, this is not being considered immediate, especially in light of circumstances that have been occurring unfortunately an d tragically on a more common basis. I think this government has to take this very seriously.

Obviously, measures currently in place are not working. We need a stop-gap measure in place now and not wait until October because I think the situations speak for themselves. We need some action from this government today. Mr. Mackintosh: What I am going to say is the very reason why there has to be a robust training and education program around the changes. If people do not know, not only the magistrates but the applicants, because that is where, I think, there have been so many conflicting pieces of advice, I understand, right across this province in terms of what this legislation can do for people.

When victims go to court and do not get an order because they have been told it is there for other th resholds or for other reasons, it reduces confidence in the system and I think that can have a chilling effect. What has to happen in this province is a clear understanding of how the legislation can work for victims. That is why there has to be the development of training and its delivery for those who can make a difference. So that is exactly why the department has urged on these. I will tell you in no uncertain terms that this has got to be done right by way of a robust training system.

I can tell you that as an elected member, I would love to just turn on the light switch and have a new act come in. It is not going to work if people do not know what it is going to do for them and do not know the circumstances in which it can be applied. The magistrates, the hearing officers have to know in a comprehensive and consistent way what the legislation is about and how it can be applied because I think there are different

interpretations that have developed from one hearing officer to another. I am hearing that from people and I have to listen to it. I have to respond to the advice of professionals who say, "There has to be a good training program. You have to let people know what this legislation is about." * (16:10) Mrs. Rowat: I guess I am a little concerned that we are waiting for legislation when we obviously know that there are some issues with the measures that are currently in place. They are not addressing the issues at hand.

Individuals are losing their lives because of this government's inability to act on issues and measures that need to be in place now. Legislation, we are seeing, obviously, has not addressed issues, and, yes, people have indicated, crisis intervention workers have indicated, police have indicated that

1370 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 14, 2005 the system is failing families, failing individuals who are looking at us as legislators to help. I think families such as this have a lot of questions and I think that waiting for a piece of legislation without addressing the measures that are obviously not working, you are failing families. Mr. Mackintosh: The way to ensure that we have an effective justice system response to domestic violence is to ensure that people know the tools available in the justice system to counter the violence.

So that is why professionals have said to me to pursue the course of action we are pursuing. I have to listen to that advice, and I think what we are doing here is making sure that this legislation is going to be one that is a valuable tool, that is understood, that makes a difference. This has to happen right across the province, from Souris to Shamattawa, and that is what we are going to do.

But I can say that when you look at the initiatives that we have introduced as a government dealing with domestic violence, there can be no doubt that we are committed, as Manitobans, to a very, very strong system in this province, and we have committed, not only resources, but new initiatives, new partnerships. I think this legislation is a good part of what has to be a multi-part response recognizing, of course, that everyone has an obligation.

I think the letter that went around from the North End Women's Centre on Monday to all MLAs, I understand, and to others really hit the nail on the head, is that all of us have an obligation, and when we feel that a person is in need, a neighbour, a friend, in need of protection, that we take steps, we provide advice but, at the same time, there has to be in place, obviously, systems that are responsive. So I think in Manitoba over the years we have learned from some tragedies; systems have improved, both under the former administration, and it is ongoing.

I think that, as a province, we are continuing to make advancements. We will continue to do that, but it has to be done in a sure-footed way. Mrs. Mitchelson: I have been listening very carefully to the minister, and he has indicated, obviously, with restraining orders if there were 527 applied for, and 220-some denied, that means that almost half of those that applied for restraining orders were denied.

Now, I heard the minister say that there is different appl ication of the present-day law, we do not have to wait for a new law to come into place, but he is saying that there are inconsistencies in the law that exists today. It is incumbent, he has been the minister now for six years, and if half of the wo men, or almost half of the women that are applying for restraining orders are being denied that kind of protection because the law today is being applied inconsistently across the province, why has he not done something to fix it now? You do not have to wait for a new law and new training.

What kind of training has been going on to date under this minister's watch that will see some consistency throughout the system? Mr. Mackintosh: It is the former administration's law and we are fixing it. The Legislature went to work. People that have watched the law unfold in terms of its application have learned lessons. So new legislation is coming in, and it is legislation that will be accompanied by training, by resources and by better regulations. One of the concerns is the requirement that there be a fear of immediate harm.

I think that by addressing that, we should have a different result, but there will be no different result if the process of implementation is not followed; by the way, a process of implementation, a period that is in the same time frame as the former administration's. Mrs. Mitchelson: I am sure that women that are feeling vulnerable today in society will take great comfort from those comments from a minister that has been sitting in this role as the Minister of Justice.

For six years, he has seen inconsistencies in the way the present-day law is being applied and he is saying that we have to wait until next October-November in order to have things changed. It is under his watch, he is in charge, he is in the driver's seat, and it is time that he took some responsibility for his inaction to try to ensure that people were trained consistently across the province under the present-day law so that women would be protected.

I hope that between now and November while the minister uses a new law for justification for any changes nothing dramatic happens to a woman as a result of his inaction. Mr. Mackintosh: The member seems to misunderstand that her government brought in a legislation with no new resources– Mrs. Mitchelson: Give me a break.

April 14, 2005 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1371 Mr. Mackintosh: Well, the very rude member should perhaps reflect on the silly way that they brought in their legislation. They not only took a period of time to proclaim this legislation, but they added no new resources. Can you imagine that? Their training has been criticized and ridiculed ever since they did that– Mrs. Mitchelson: You have been training for six years. Mr. Mackintosh: Is the member rude? Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. Mr.

Mackintosh: It is because of the application of this law and the experience under this law that we have learned lessons as to how to improve it. One of the lessons is that there has to be a better understanding of what it can do. There has to be training, there has to be some additional resources. There were shortcomings and they are going to be addressed. They are being addressed.

I want to ask the minister a few questions on the issue of conditional sentencing and, in particular, if he could advise the committee how many people in Manitoba today are serving conditional sentences as opposed to incarceration or jail or time in an institution. So, Mr. Chair, the member actually is making the point as to why we are doing exactly what we are doing. We are going to do it right; they did not. We are going to do this right, recognizing that this kind of law can only go so far. It is only one part of what has to be a multi-faceted response to domestic violence.

So I am going to listen to those who have advised me, who say that there has to be a province- wide training initiative. The lawyers have to know how this works, the hearing officers have to have the training. So that is what we are embarked on. Mr. Goertzen: I am obviously disappointed by the comments that the Minister of Justice brought forward on a very serious issue raised by my colleagues. I think he is quickly understanding why he is gaining the reputation that he has, maybe within his department, but certainly within the media.

I suspect some within his department would echo the concerns as well that the mi nis

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	38-3-30b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	38th 3rd hansardpdf 30b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7e93ab884e6084a35bd58bbb89704d1e96f8c5c4

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