Manitoba Committee Hansard — 19 December 1988 (Legislative Affairs Committee, Sitting 3, 34th Legislature, 1st Session)

34-1-la3

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 First Session - Thirty-Fourth legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba STANDING COMMITTEE on LAW AMENDMENTS 37 Elizabeth 11 Chairman Mr. H. Enns Constituency of Lakeside VOl. XXXVII No. 3 � 8 p.m., MON DAY, DECEMBER 19, 1988. Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba ISSN 07 13-9 586

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fourth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NA ME CONST ITUENCY AL COCK ,Re g Osborne AN GUS, John St. Norbert AS HTON , Si eve Thompson BURR ELL , Parker Swan River CARR , James Fort Rouge CARSTAIR S, Sharon River Heights CHARLES , Gwen Selkirk CHEEMA , Gulzar Kildonan CHORNOPYSKI, William Burrows CONNERY, Edward Hon. Portage la Prairie COWAN, Jay Churchill CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. Ste. Rose du Lac DERK ACH, Leonard, Hon. Roblin-Russell DOER, Gary Concordia DOWNEY, James Hon, Arthur DRIEDGEA, Albert, Hon. Emerson DRIEDGER, Herold, L.

Niakwa DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. Aiel EDWARDS, Paul St. James ENNS, Harry Lakeside ERNST, Jim, Hon. Charleswood EVANS , Laurie Fort Garry EVANS, Leonard Brandon East FILMON, Gary, Hon. Tuxedo FINDLAY, Glen Hon. Virden GAUDRY, Neil St. Boniface GILLESHAMMEA, tl arol d Minnedosa GRAY, Avis Ell ice tiAMMOND, Gerrie Kirkfield Park HARAPIAK, Harry The Pas HARPER, E lijah Rupertsland HELWER, Edward R. Gimli HEMPHILL, Maureen Logan KOZAK, Richard, J. Transcona LA MO UREUX, Kevi n, M· lnkster MALOWAY, Jim Elm wood MANDRAKE, Ed Assiniboia MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. Morris McCRAE, James Hon.

Brandon West MINENKO, Mark Seven Oaks MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. River East NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. Rossmere OLESON, Charlotte Hon. Gladstone ORCHARD, Donald Hon. Pembina PANKRATZ, Helmut La Verendrye PATT ERSON, Allan Radisson PENNER, Jack, Hon. Rhineland PLOHMAN, John Dauphin PRAZNII(, Darren Lac du Bonnet ROCAN, Denis, Hon. Turtle Mountain ROCH, Gillea Springfield ROSE, Bob St. Vital STORIE, Jerry Flin Flon TAYLOR, Harold Wolseley URUSKI, Bill lnterlake WASYLYCIA-LEIS, Judy St.

Johns YEO,Iva Sturgeon Creek PARTY LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP PC LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL NOP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC NDP NDP PC NDP LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL PC PC PC PC PC LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL NDP NDP LIBERAL

lEGIS lATIVE AS SE MBlY Of MA NITOBA THE STANDING CO M MITTE E ON lAW AME NDMENTS Monday, December 19, 1988 TI ME- 8 p.m. LOCA TI ON - Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIR MAN- Mr. Harry Enns (l akesi de) ATTEN DANC E - 11 - QUOR UM - 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Messrs. Ducharme, McCrae; Hon. Mrs. Mitchelson Messrs. Angus, Burrell; Mrs. Charles; Messrs. Doer, Edwards, Enns; Ms. Hemphill; Mr. Taylor APPEA RING: Public Presentations: Bill No . 11 Mr. F. Arno ld-l n the Best Interest of the Child Ms. M. Arno ld-ln the Best Interest of the Child Ms. K. Thibert-ln the Best Interest of the Child Mr. A.

Gowryluk-ln the Best Interest of the Child Bill No . 40 Mr. W. Kucharczyk -P rivate citizen. MATTE RS UNDE R DISC USSI ON: Bills Nos. 11 , 12, 38, 40, 47 and 52 . Mr. Chairman: I inf orm members of the committee that although we had more or less conclu ded public presentation to the Bills that had indicated their desire to do so when last this committee sat, my understanding that there are none theless some additional public presentations that would like to be heard. Is it the will of the committee to consider these or should we proceed by clause-by-clause consi deration of the Bills before us?

Do I hear some advice from the committee? Mr. Doer. Mr. Gary Doer (L eader of the Second Opposition): I think at 1:30 in the morning we did, if I can recall cor rectly, cont empla te perhaps other interv entions tonight on behalf of the public. I think we should hear them this evening. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Doer. I take it that expresses more or less the will of the comm ittee.

I am reminded !hat we did sit until 1:30 the other evening when this committee sal, that I believe the commit tee patiently iistened with a great deal of interest to ali of the pr esentati ons whether or not we could ask presentations, particularly if !he presentations had been made on these Bills be made as expeditiously as possible. Do I have some names here? I have one other piece of matter of business that I would place before the commit tee for some advice. We have one presenter, Miss Michaela (phonetic) Arnold , who is, I understand , of mino rity age.

Is there any di ffi culty with that to com mittee mem bers? My understanding is that she is requested to be heard. An Honourable Member: No. Mr. Chairman: Thank you. BILL NO. 11-THE CHILD CUSTODY ENFO RCEMEN T AMENDM ENT ACT Mr. Chairman: Then I will call in the order we are dealing with. We are dealing with presentations on Bill 11 . Mr. Alan Gowryluk. Mr. Fraser Arno ld, please come forward. An Honourable Member: Mr. Chairperson, do we have a list of delegations for this evening? Mr. Chairman: I can read them out to the committee. Mr. Alan Gowryluk, Mr. Fraser Arnold, Ms.

Arnold, Miss Kathy Thibert for presentations on Bill 11 . I understand there is at least one presentation on Bill No. 40, Mr. Waiter Kucharczyk and perhaps Mr. Sidney Greene. Mr. Arn old. Mr. Fraser Arnold (In the Best In terest of the Child): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen for your kind conside ration. I think I am here to perhaps speak on behalf of an endangered species according to some recent readings I have read. I have taken a look and I am sure I do not have to remind you of the turmoil and stress of divorce.

Some statistics have come to mind lately that have shocked me and I have been in that situation for 10 years. I have read recently, in a textbook that I use with a high school psychology class, that socially isolated people suffer two to three time s mo re li kely the possibility of dying prematurely to those with strong social ties.

Divorced men, of which I am one, before 70-and I am before 70-die from heart disease, cancer, strokes, and at the double rate of married men, three times as many die from hypertension, five times as many commit suicide, seven ti mes as many die from cirrhosis of the liver and 10 times as many die from tuberculosis. The rates of all types of cancer is as much as five times higher for both divorced men and women. I give you some of these statistics to perhaps provide some background in that I feel the stress and the social

Monday, December 19, 1988 fabric and the social ties that are ripp ed assunder when a divorce takes place are almost enough for a person without any kind of con cern in relation to custody. I spent a stormy six years in relation to custody and access myself, several times through the custodial courts. I feel very strongly that a code is needed to stabilize most areas of dispute. I feel very strongly that the legislatio n we have in place for mai ntena nce enforc ement has gone a long way and I much agreed with my ex-wife on this that it is a very just thing and has gone a long way to settle one of the areas of dispute. *

(2005) Basically, the major areas of dispute are payments of suppOrt and access. I know, however, that when I walk in the building kitty-corner across the street to make my access paymen ts, I want to kno w who represents me. I see a highly-tuned, very well, world renowned system for collection of payments for support for ex-spouses and for child support. I feel that is justified. I also feel that it is very much justified that someone should represent my interests.

Because of my rat her lackadaisical bill pa yment habits, I sometimes-! do not fall behind in my payments, because I live three blocks away from my ex-wife. I run over and give her the money, and then I run down a month later and pay it down here where I am supposed to so it can be done through the system as it is supposed to be done. I very much resent when I get these notic es, that there is nobody to give a notice on behalf of men who do not have access to their children. I must say, and I really want to stress that I have a very good working relationship with my ex-wife.

The only reason she could not come tonight and make presentation is she is doing a piano con cert and I am sorry I am not at that. I really want to stress we do have a good working relationship. We have gone so far as to have commun ity family holidays with my daughter, my ex-wife, her younger daughter, who is not my daughter, in Arizona last year. We have spent Christmases together. The reason I am here tonight and not in Toronto with the rest of my family is my daughter knows the reason we are here and knows the meaning of sharing enough that she said my mother will be alone this Christmas if we do not stay.

We are here so her mother will not be alone. I feel there are a lot of fathers, including a very close friend of mine who went to deliver his Ch ristmas packages and pick up his daughter and was told at the last moment, I am sorry that access is denied and I have the right to do that. I feel very strongly about the whole question of access, because I lived for six years in access squab bles. I lived through Kenora 49, 29, whatever the fo rest fir e was, I was surroun ded by forest fire, and I was told that because I did not return my daughter accord ing to Hoyle I would not see her till Christmastime.

One of our airlines, and I will not mention anybody's name overbooked, and I was assured by the airline people that nobody was that unreasonable and I would have 59 no problem with my ex-wife assuring her that I did my very best to reach the airpor t on tim e and that everything possible had been done. The airport, the company people talked to my ex-wife on the phone and then they assured me that they kn ew what unreasonable really ·was and this was from a very reasonable woman who from Day One had said, we will share this child, we will have joint custody, we will have a sharing agreement.

When the roads became icy between Peguis and here, and I could not return the child, I was told I would not have the next turn, I would not have the regular turns with the child. As I say, with forest fires, airlines, icy roads, things beyond control with a very reasonable person, I have suffered a great deal of problem. I have been told if I do not take the child to her ballet lesson, and I am not heavily into ballet unfortun ately, but if I do not do that on a Saturday morning, I will not see the child for the rest of the weekend when I have come down from Peguis to pick her up.

This is with a very reasonable woman, and I want to stress that, that my ex-wife has been more-w e have as I say a very good wo rking relationship. I would say I have joint custody but I do not. Legally, my ex-wife has sole custody and she metes out the time as she sees fit, and she sees it very much to her advantage, to our advantage as a family to mete out a great deal of time. I do not think other men are so fortunate, and I speak more on their behalf than my own any more.

I have no need to be here for my own person, I have need to be here for my daughter and for other children like my daughter who need these guaranteed rights, that they will have access with their father. I know my family and the things that we do together are very dear to her heart, and are very much a part of her life, and if she had to have been denied these for any reason, she would find a great deal of distress in this. * (20 10 ) I have considerable contact with children in my career as a high school teacher and part-t ime counsellor, and suppor t person in conta ct with new faces, CGC, and other agencies.

I find constantly in our school there is about a 40 percent single parent rate. In the area where my daughter and I live in Fort Rouge, there is about a 60 percent single parent rate. We are talking about areas where this is constantly a problem. I am talking about a child who came in and one of the other presenters today happened to be a student in my school at that time and I put the two children together after a while so they could help solve the problem. When the child came to me and said, I do not know what to do.

My mother says she will never attend another school function because my father was invited to the high school band conc ert. I found that very distressful but I also wonder what can the access rights be of that father if he is not allowed to even be in the same building. I am not saying there is never any cause for this, and I think there are certainly lots of safeguards for people when there are causes for fathers not to see

Monday, December 19, 1988 children. We have laws. We have provisions to look after those sort of things. Certai nly the best interests of the child must be safeguarded. I also know what a comp lete human being I am for having had that access to my daughter over the 10 years, stressful though it was for the first six, it has been glorious for the last four. I know how important it has been for me for my personal growth, for her personal growth. I think custody in itself denotes to one person; already you have been limited as a non- custodial parent in your contact with that child.

Any threat of any kind to that precious, fragile time cannot be tolerated. The rights of the child to see a parent must be guaranteed, because it is that child's right. lt is not my right as a father alone, although I would suffer greatly if I had lost my child, but it is the right of that child to see that parent. lt is very precious to us. I do hope you will give it due consider ation and it will be safeguarded. I thank you for your time. Mr. Ch airman : Thank you, Mr. Arn old. Do any comm ittee members have some questions they would like to place to Mr. Arnold? Hearing none, thank you for your presentation.

Miss Arnold. Miss Michaela Arnold (In the Best In terest of the Child): Hello, my name is Michaela Arnold. I am part of two families, my mother's and my father's. Both have me equally and they have allowed me to share the time with each of them. I believe that feeling good about yourself is impor tant. Seeing both parents is impor tant to me. If I did not see one of my parents, I would lack a sense of self-value. lt makes me feel good to see that they bother to let me interrupt their schedules to drive me to choir. If I did not have parents like this, I would be very insecure.

Insecurity is a lack of love for yourself. If you do not love yourself, you will probably grow into an unstable relationship. When my father lived in Ottawa and when I lived near Kenor a, I felt resentment for my mother not letting me see him. Sometimes I felt that my dad did not love me. That is not good. I resented my mother then. lt may have something to do with the way I feel about her now. Because I spend time with both of my parents, I have found out how great they are. If I had not lived with both of them, I would not have the experience of knowing them both as parents and friends.

When I was little, I felt it was my fault. In fact, I promis ed I would be good if they went back together. I have accepted that they will not go back together and that it is not my fault. But it took them both to convinc e me that this was the case. The legal custodian should share the children with the other parent as much as possible unless there was alcoholism or abuse involved. If the person is not willing to do this, the system should make them. When the child grows up, he or she needs the influence of both parents to develop a proper and full identity.

I have learned and loved doing many things with both parents. The things I love to do might not have existed without the love and caring of both my mother and father. 60 If my dad had not taken me to the beach I might not have learned to swim. If my mom had not taken me to church I might not believe in God. Right now I am looking forward to spending Christmas with my parents because they care enough to unde rstand that I need and love both of them. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Michaela.

I appreciate that the Chair ought not to editori alize, but I know that I speak on behalf of all the commit tee if we express our appreciation and thanks at your courage and at your presentations. Several members of the committee may have some questions of you . Would you be prepared to answer some questions? Do I hear any questions? Hearing none, thank you again, Michaela, and a Merry Christmas. * (20 15 ) Ms. Ka thy Thibert (In the Best In terest of the Child): Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Kathy Thibert and I am here for Bill 11 .

There is one word in the English language that can change a person's perspective on lif e and that word is "divorce." Although divorce is pretty common it can affect many people, especially if children are involved. I have seen and heard of many different reasons for divorce and the problems that can arise from it. I am very conc erned about the child's outlook on life when a divorce occurs. Most children adjust, but some become withdrawn, moody, depressed and even suicidal. Most of these are caused when the parents cause friction against each other.

If the parents would act responsi bly and work out the best agreement for everyone, with the children being the No. 1 priority, maybe the symptoms would disappear. I personally would like to see more group sessions set up for children and teens who would like to talk out their problems and receive encouragement in order to adjust to their new situation. I myself have gone through my own parents' separation and reconciliation. My parents were separated for six months. In that time I lived with both of them equally, and I am glad I did. I shared both their lives and they shared mine.

Being 16 at the time, I had a lot to do with their reconcilia tion. I was involved in a lot of activities and would always make sure both parents were there. That enabled them to talk and eventually work out their problems. They acted just like newlyweds up until my father's death in November 19 87. Although my parents' outcome was wonderful, most are not. So by voting for this Bill, maybe you can make the outcome wonderful or at least liveable. Thank you. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Thibert. Any questions from commit tee members? Hearing none, thank you again for your presentation. I will call on Mr.

Alan Gowryluk if he is available, thank you. Mr. Gowryluk. Mr. Alan Gowryl uk (In the Best In terest of the Child): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The two youngsters that we have with us today appeared on the television program which I began in 19 85. We ran 13 programs, produc ed

Monday, December 19, 1988 them on VPW 13 and the reason I started that program is because my daughter asked me a question. The question was, after the initial separation arrangement, why does someone not ask me what I want? I could not answer her; I did not have an answer for her. That is why I prod uced these shows to the best of our ability and tried to have indi viduals like the two youngsters we have here ind icate their feelings about separation and div orce, because I think there are periods in our lives, in the lives of normal people, when they are crazy, really certifiab ly, verifiably crazy.

That is the time when a divorce takes place. That is when characteristic good sense and judgment depart and all that is left is bizarre behaviour and pain. That is all that is left, and the children have to go through that. I feel that this Bill, along with the Maintenance Enforcement Program , is probably one of the most progressive steps in No rth America on this issue and I feel that anyone who would not vote for this would probably be voting in favour of, well, I guess suicide. That is how strongly I feel about it.

The reason I state that is because we are living in a time right now where Statistics Canada reports that there has been a dramatic increase in the incid ents of teenage suicides across Canada in the past 20 years. Twenty years ago our divorce laws were liberalized-1 969. The rate of teenage suicides in Canada has doubled for children 10 to 14 and tripl ed for teenagers from 15 to 19. *

(2020) Suicide is curr ently the second cause of death for Canadian teenagers after automobile accidents. Overall, my observations in the last Session on Bill 11 are the following, and some con clusions- these are my own: No. 1, the femin ists and other equality groups who advocate equality seem to forget to do so when they have the opportunity, as an example, on this particular type of Bill involving the equality of children, men and women.

No. 2, very often the best parents are driven from their children or they choose to stay away because of their desire not to cause the child more pain over custody and access arguments. This is usually caused by the sole custody award to one parent. No. 3, the parent who denies access, and I believe very strongly in this, probably first of all should lose maintenanc e payments; second ly, go to jail on their non -access weeke nd; and No. 3, probably lose custody to the friendly parent. That is how strongly I feel about this because of the way it affects children.

Final ly, I believe that in Canada a child should have the right to access of both parents and a child in Canada should have the right to custody of both parents. That is my presentation. Any questions? Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Gowryluk. Do any committee members have questions of Mr. Gowryluk? Mr. Gary Doer (L eader of the Second Opposition): Yes, thank you very much for the presentation.

The 61 Status of Women's Comm ittee, which I have usually fou nd to be a fairly rea sonable body in their presentations and research, stated in their brief that the financial penalties, that they are very con cerned about it in terms of the application that is considering the significant differences in the post-divorce income for women and men. Would you like to comment on that, their analysis of this Bill and their problems with it at this point? Not the issue of fair ness but just the way the Bill seems to, in their opinion, address the problem. Mr.

Gowryl uk: In my opm1on, the problem we are dealing with here is teeth in legislation, the amount of -if you look at the Maint enance Enforcement Program, men go to jail if they do not pay their maintenance and if we are looking at equality and the equal clout, we should say, if we are looking at the amount of re sponsi bility that will put someone in jail because they do not make their payments, and of course all the ramifica tions that goes with it, I think we should and feel very st rongly that we should have the same amount of responsibi lity on the other side of the scale which is only natural for the children of course, the best possible interest for them, because I feel that if we look at a loss of maintenance payments going to jail or lose custody to a friendly parent, I can guarantee you that they are not going to get passed, No. 2, and if they do go, they only go once.

Mr. Doer: A number of briefs have been presented to us with considerable data encoded from the federal department studies on the perceived problem of access and quanti fied only at less than 15 percent in most cases. Is there any cont rary data that we could have today? I know there are subjective opin ions as groups on the side of this issue but to my way of thinking, having listened to the briefs, there was data presented by a number of organizations that would seem to suppor t that the problem area was not as great as one may have expected, even though any one case is a problem in itself, I would agree. Mr.

Gowryl uk: Yes, let me say this about that. When we deal with this access problem, we have a lot of situations where the non-custodial parent, because they do not want to cause any more pain or problem to the youngster, the children involv ed just back off. They give up, they either run out of money or they choose not to pursue it any further. The reason for that is probably because they love their children so much. When you are dealing with an unreasonable person who has all the power, the custody order can keep you away from your child. What are you going to do? There are some who argue.

Those who are very direct from a behavi ou ral tendenc y point of view are the argumentative type. They are going to battle this, and we have classic cases in all the courts tha t indi cate that these people will battle till the end. They do not even think of the children. This is the whole issue. I think the key thing here is that after the separation arrangement occurs there are two things that happen. Underparenting is the most critical problem and then the second thing is, how do

Monday, December 19, 1988 I let my child spend time with someone I now happen to hate. That is the key issue there, and that is where this Bill, Bill 11 , helps the parents get through that period of time where they can get rid of their anger. *

(2025) We had presentations on Thursday night where there was just pure anger by two or three of the people. They were not past the anger stage. Once you get past the anger stage, three, four, five years, some people never make it. They go into a flat spin and never recover. During that period of time it is the children who suffer, no one else. So I do not know if that answers your question. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Gowryluk. Thank you for the presentation. Mr. Gowryluk: Thank you for the time. Mr. Chairman: Thank you. That conclu des public presentation on Bill No. 11 .

I will call Bill No. 12, The Statute Law Amend ment Act . Do we have any public presentations on that? Bill No. 38, The Mental Health Amendment Act. Any further public presentations on that? BILL NO. 40- THE CITY OF WINNIPEG AME NDME NT ACT

(2) Mr. Chair man: Bill No. 40, The City of Winnip eg Amendment Act (2). Public presentations on that? We have one person listed, Mr. Wa iter Kucharczyk . Mr. Wait er Ku charczy k (Private Ci tizen) : Mr. Chairman, ladies-it is so nice to see the ladies-and you gentlemen. Wedn esda y last I was very much tempted to appear before another comm ittee. Some of you were here, but sinc e I am not very good in delivering the eulogy, you had a funeral of ManOil, so 1 give up. However, unfortuna tely, nobody even said a nice word about it. Well, I will say a couple words about you-1 mean the politicians. Mr.

Chairman, since it is my last appearance before the comm ittee, my wife and daughter said you made a fool out of you rself enough, quit. So you bear with me while I throw a few things at you. Mr. Chairman: Mr. Kucharczyk, this comm ittee and this Chairman has a great deal of flexibility in listening to you, but we would remind you that we are dealing with Bill No. 40. Mr. Kucharczyk: Yes, Sir, I will come to it- Mr. Chairman: The City of Winni peg Amend ment Act. Mr. Kucharczyk: Mr. Chairman, everything I say will relate to Bill No. 40- Mr. Chairman: Thank you. Mr.

Kucharczyk: -and you being a dean of the Members here, you will appreciate in the due course, 62 some of those young people will not appreciate or even understan d. As I mentioned before about ManOil, I just will quote to you somebody who is more knowledgeable than I am. You may have heard about the two old ladies strolling through a church graveyard. They came across the headstone inscribed John Smith, a politi cian and an honest man. Is that not terri ble, one of them said to the other, they buried three people in the same grave. I think it is self-explanatory.

Why I mentioned ManOil, a number of the worse arguments, etc., were put forward to the commit tee by people who did research and who did not worry about the votes to come in the due course of the election. The powers to be ignored the advice. They took the attitude, as the majority of people in power, that they know better what is good for the people than the people themselves. *

(2030) So you have one example, made myself quite a few enemies at the time by telling the truth about ManOil. Well, may it rest in peace, till the next election, of course. I will give you another example. You will spend many hours in the House debating the issue of the mental health and health as a whole. However, again, in the past when there was a discussion, when Bill 2,

An Act to amend The Health Services Insurance Act, June 6, 19 85, for powers to be it came to one year, through to another and there you even had a headline like that. They could have done back in'8 5. Check your Hansard way back. There is one more. Just to be on the safe side that I will not twist the name, I better look up on the card. Public Inquir y into the Admin istration of Justice and Aborigina l People-y ou should be aware that right now there are some fina ncial difficulties. No doubt they will be so. lt is not my problem. My problem is again being ignored. July 25, 19 83, when Honourable Mr.

Penner was Attorne y-General-Oh, the young one is not here, I mean the young Attorne y-General. I just have few remarks to give him the advice. Mr. Chairman: Mr. Kucharczyk, I do have to ask you to direct your comments towards the Bill that is under consideration, Bill 40, The City of Winnipeg Amendment Act. Mr. Kucharczyk: Sir, you will see that within seconds I will tie in to Bill 40. Back in July'83, when the LERA was discussed, the honourable gentlemen were- LERA, Law Enforcement Review Agency-w ell advised what should be done prior to having a band-aid approach. They did not do a darn thing other than LERA.

After all, if you polish your shoes you have to put them on your feet or otherwise you walk barefoot. Coming to Bill 40, now this is fascinating, really, just fascinating. You cannot discuss the Bill 40 without going back to the days of Mr. Schreyer and that three-ring circus -Mr . Schreyer, with all due respect to him on

Monday, December 19, 1988 that issue- Mr. Cherniack and Mr. Green, how they tried to con vince us what a wonderful city you are going to have, etc., etc. Fine. Hearing after hearing -P. A., they di d their job. Politicians say those P.R.s, they give us very sound advice, and Waiter told them, yes, sure, 99 percent sound, 1 percent advice. That is what people want to hear sometimes. So here we come to the hearings when Mr. Cherniack-rih, boy, that man should get a medal for his patience. I regret that he is not here. Mr.

Chairman, ladies, and gentlemen, just visualize for a minute how enthusiastic the people of the City of Winnip eg have been. That Mr. Cherniack and four others, they were no t glo rified poli ti cians with a backg ro und. They were just ordi n ary peop le with kn owledge. They have had 29 hearings, 216 presentatio ns and SO writt en briefs that were received. When I look here at the names who appeared before Mr. Cherniack- any extra charge for a drink of water? Thank you.

I see some famous ladies here, some names known, whO appeared at the time, but I did not hear their objection to the Bill yet, but maybe I missed them in the House. I believe Mr. ,Jim Ernst is a Cabinet Minister now. Mrs. lva-s orry, I cannot prono unce your name, I Will spell it. Oh, she does not give a damn anyway, so let her talk- Yeo, her last name, she attended the meetings. Mr. Taylor-a nd I see I am getting dirty looks from the Chairman so I had better quit reading. I will provid e you, Mr.

Chairman, with the list of all the people who had verbal submissions and written submissions so that Hansard will not suffer with my spelling of those names and pronuncia tions. Now all the avenues explored in that Bill, and now I want to talk about the White Paper because the previous administration made the mistake, they were too slow in their procedure because otherwise they should have put the darn thing through and be over with it. Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Minis ter, if you spend some time in the library here and go back to Mr. Roblin's days and see how he listened to the grass roots. That is why he became Mr.

Roblin, eh, well-known, including his ditch. But you people do not even advertise to those who attended the meetings with their opinions and submissions, that you are having a band-aid approach or cosmetic touch-up to that Bill. I urge you, give it to kids, let them play with it as a kite and just forget about Bill 40 and have the whole issue debated in the House at once. Do you agree with me, Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman: The Chair has a neutral position, Mr. Kucharczyk. Mr. Kucharczyk: Oh, my, I feel sorry for you, Sir.

Before I wear out my welcome completely, I only in conclusion will say that you were elected no t as Members of the caucus, you had a platfo rm, but people should be first, not your political goal, not what your Leader said. So perhaps one day, if you will have nothing better to do and your people from your constituency 63 will not be bugging you, when you will have peace of mind, ask yourself a question: what am I supposed to represent and what am I supposed to do? Is my caucus No. 1? Is my politic al Party No. 1? Is Canada No. 1, or perhaps the Province of Manito ba?

I would urge you to put people first and put Canada first. Thank you. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Kucharczyk. Do we have any questions of our presenter? Mr. Doer. *

(2040) Mr. Gary Doe r (L eader of the Second Opposition): Thank you, Mr. Kucharczyk. You are talking about the grass roots. As I understand it, there have been public hearings on the proposed two sets of boundaries that have been di st ribu ted by the Min ister for the Independent Boundaries Commission established under The City of Winnip eg Act. Are you aware of those public hearings on the configu ration of those boundaries in terms of the 23 versus 29? Mr. Kucharczyk : Sir, it is news to me, period. I never heard that they have had. Mr.

Doer: So, you cannot confirm what we have heard that most of the majority presentations when they were presented with the two maps wanted the old boundaries, the 29, rather than the 23? Mr. Kucharczyk: In that connection, since Mr. Chairman acted like a dictator, and I am putting that in a mild way, I overlooked to mention about cutting down City Council. That would tie into the boundaries. Now, since we do not know as yet about the size, division on the wards or whatever the cor rect English is, how can we discuss logically how many? The only thing, one thing, Mr.

Chairman, I say that good things come in small doses and when I had the trouble with Mr. Cherniack in his committee, I suggested that he would take a look at Mrs. Pawley and that would prove my point. Mr. Chairman: Hearing no further questions, I thank you for your presentation. Mr. Ku cha rczyk: Do you mean it? Mr. Chairman: Yes. Mr. Kucharczyk: Thank you. Mr. Chairman: I really mean it, Waiter, and Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you on behalf of all the commit tee. Mr. Kucharczyk: And I wish you good health, Sir. From time to time, you have lessons for those juveniles. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr.

Kucharczyk. We have one more Bill, or two more Bills. Bill No. 47 of The Liquor Control Amend ment Act. Are there any further public presentations?

Monday, December 19, 1988 Bill NO. 52-AN ACT TO INCORPORATE "THE WINNIP EG CANO E CLUB" Mr. Chairman: Bill No. 52,

an Act to amend

an Act to Inco rpor ate "The Winnip eg Canoe Club. " Any presentations? Hearing none, thank you. I will now call the comm ittee to the clause-by-clause conside ration. I recognize the Attorne y-General, Mr. McCrae. Ho n. James McCrae (A ttorne y�G eneral) : Mr. Chairman, I believe there would be agreement to proceed with Bill No. 52 first, since it is basically a non- contr oversial type of Bill. Mr. Chairman: The suggestion is made that we deal with Bill No. 52. I take it that there is concu rrence in that suggestion. (Agreed) We will deal with Bill No. 52. Mr.

Gary Doer (L eader of the Second Opposition): ! would like to declare that I have a very small share in the Winnip eg Canoe Club and, in light of the conflic t of-interest legislation today, I will disclose and withdraw from the meeting. Mr. Chairman: Your declaration of potential confl ict of interest is noted . Order, please. Bill No. 52,

An Act to amend

An Act to Incorp orate "The Winnip eg Cano e Club." Pardon me, I have to have a report read into the record by-wha t is your official title, the law officer? Ms. Sh irley St rutt (l egis lat ive Counsel) : Mr. Chairperson, as required by Rule 10 8 of the Rules of the House, I now report that I have examined Bill 52,

An Act to amend

An Act to Incorpor ate "The Winnip eg Cano e Club" and ha ve not noted any exceptional powers sought or any other provision of the Bill requiring special consi deration. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, comm ittee has heard that. We can now proceed legally with consideration of the Bill.

Section 1- pass;

Section 1( a)- pass;

Section 2- pass;

Preamble- pass; Title- pass. Bill be reported. Thank you. Mr. Bob Rose (St . Vit al): I would just like to briefly state, and I have a problem here, I would like to say that- Mr. Chairman: Pardon me, Mr. Rose, can you ind icate what you are dealing with? Mr. Rose: Bill 52. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, we are now dealing with Bill No. 52. Mr. lflose: Still. I just wanted to say that in Hansard it came out that I was commenting on how many people belonged to it, saying tradesmen and lawyers, etc., had also come out as the odd politician. I did not refer to the Leader 64 of the other Party when I said that. lt was inadvertantly meaning, you know- but Mr. Chairman, there is a

Section 10 5 that allows the fee for petition be waived and I have a motion here. My only problem is I do not seem to be able to find a mechanism that says which are appr opriate and which are not and in perusing Webster's I feel in my own mind that this certainly covers the

section that calls them a benevolent organization. So therefore, I move THAT this commit tee recommend to the House that in accordance with Rule 10 5.3, the appropria te fee be refunded to the Winnip eg Canoe Club. Mr. Chairman: Has everybody heard the motion? Agreed? (Agreed) The motion is to waive the normal fee for the petition. Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Mini ster of Urban Affairs): Just a question on that. What has been previous practice when it is a profit maker usually? I know this one is a private club. What is the usual procedure on this? Mr. Chairman: I can just ind icate, Mr.

Ducharme, from the Chair that it is not unusual for this to be entertained by the comm ittee for these kinds of Bills. I would beg for some support from staff as to whether or not that is the case. My understanding is that that is the case. Perhaps we could have the law officer come and join us for a moment and indicate. Ms.

St rutt: The rule expressly provides where the petitioner is an institution, organization or association with charitable, religious or benevolent purposes and is not carrying on or intendin g to carry on business for gain, the deposit may, subject to various rules, be remitted to the petition er. Mr. Chairman: I think we can safely conclude that the Winni peg Canoe Club is a benevolent association or instituti on. Mr. Ducharme: I wanted to make sure it was on the record that it was not making money right now and just wanted it clear.

So that in future when other organ izations come forward that have and are making a profit, that they not be-tha t we use this as a precedent. We have to watch. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Ducharme. The motion, Mr. Rose, has been carried. Mr. Kevin la mo ureux (l nkster): Mr. Chairperson, on this point, at this point, I would like to ask the committee to consid er, with unanimous consent, to replace Mr. Rose with Mrs. Charles on this commit tee. Mr. McCrae: That is agreed, Mr.

Chairman, and in the same vein, it may be necessary to ask for similar leave of the House to allow the Honourable Min ister of Cultur e, Heritage, and Recrea tion (Mr s. Mitche!son) to replace the Honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard). Mr. Chairman: Agr eed. Thank you . Mrs. Charles replaces Mr. Rose.

Monday, December 19, 1988 Bill NO. 11-THE CHILD CUSTODY ENFORCEMENT AMENDMENT ACT Mr. Chairman: Will the commit tee members turn their attention to Bill No. 11 , The Child Custody Enforcement Amendment Act, for clause-by-clause considera tion. Turn to page I,

Section 1. Mr. Ga�y Doer (L eader of the Second Opposi tion): Is there going to be any debate on this Bill? Mr. Chairm an: I thank you, Mr. Doer, for the reminder. Perhaps if the committee is willi ng, I would ask committee members to consider making any general remarks about the Bill at thi$ stage, and then reserving specific comments about specific sections at the point in time that we actually arrive at those clauses. The Chair will entertain any representations at this point. *

(2050) Mr. Doer: This is a very, very difficul t situation for us, and anybody that did listen to the presentations that were made la!;;t week. I would ackno wledge that it would be diff icult for any Attorney-General and any Min ister responsible for the Status of Women to resolve the conflic ting opinio ns on what this Bill will mean to Mani tobans that are effected by the Bill. I, quite frankly, think it raised a lot of questions, certainly in my mind, and not about the intent of programs.

Certainly our Party has a tremendous deal of respect for the administra tion in the Attor ney General's Department that I believe under the leadership of Ms. Diamond over the years has been the best in the countr y. I think it has been acknowledged that way, notwithstanding changes in Government, etc., and changes in Attorneys-G eneral, etc., the programs we have pioneered have been exemplary in their nature and have been in the leadership role. I have read all the briefs very seriously. I have tried to engage in as much discussion as possible with groups on the Bill over the weekend. lt was not a lot of ti me.

We are just getting another

article today about it. I have some serious concerns that have been raised by the Status of Women's commi ttee in their brief last Thursday night, and their call for caution, perhaps in the next few months, to hold the Bill and work it out to a somewhat greater degree. I know that one must have the wisdom of Solomon in terms of dealing with this issue in terms of the way it was presented to this commi ttee. But it seemed to us, I do not believe you could ever get consensus on something that groups see in such different ways in our society.

But I am not so sure that the advice given to us by the Status of Women's comm ittee is not the corr ect advice to take at this time, to spend some more time reviewing this issue and reviewing the legislation and its implications on some very tough situations for Manitobans effected by this law. lt is not as easy to debate as normal Bills. There is no question about that. But we certainly had a lot of bells rung, in terms of our Members, last Thursday night. We were very conce rned about the Bill and what it will mean.

We 65 think that perhaps maybe the prudent way to deal this is to wait a couple of months, try to deal with some of the conc erns that were raised, not necessarily in legislation but the conc erns and fears that the groups have. Perhaps they should, to some degree, be put more to rest before we as legislators proceed with this Bill, whether it is in the present form or an amended form as the Attorney-General has suggested or in another form as may be possible. I just raise that as a concern and I recognize that it would be a very difficult issue for any Atto rney-Genera! to deal with.

But I was very concerned about the presentations we received last week and the speed at which we were passing this Bill even though it has been introd uced at an early stage in the Legislature. But one must admit that the public presentations have only come to us in the last, literally, 10 0 hours, in terms of the very, very well thought out briefs from both sides on this obviously very important issue. Hon. James McCrae (A ttorne y-G ener al} : This legislation is not something new, not something foisted upon the Legislature at a late date as the Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr.

Doer) himself has said. lt has been on the Order Paper for some time. I might remind members of the comm ittee that Manitoba can take pride and does, I suggest, in having the best Maintenance Enforcement Program in this countr y. Very soon we are going to be able to claim to have the best unified Queen's Bench Family Court in all corners of our province. We are now workin g towards have an Access Assistanc e Program. I ask the members of the comm ittee to recognize the difference between Ma in tenance Enf orcement and Ac cess Assistance. There is quite a difference.

The presenters who came before us, detailed for us very adequately the kinds of differences there should be in such programs. In terms of the consulta tion that brings us to the point we are at, I remind the commit tee that since 19 85 this matter has been in the consultation stage which brings us to the stage we are at now. The previous Government was very much involved in terms of negotiations with the federal Government to provide the funding for this program.

The previous Government was involved in this matter and suppor tive of this type of thrust right up until the time they were removed from office and the new Government took over. Now, Mr. Chairman, this has been the subject of extensive community discussions and consultations with the groups who attended before this comm ittee, includin g the fathers' group that was here, incl uding the Advi sory Counci l, including the Association of Women in the Law, the City Police, and cer tainl y the Family Law Subsection of the Manitoba Bar, the YWCA, The Manitoba Commit tee on Wife Abuse.

So that it is no t that we are here tonight without adequate consul tation. The comments the Leader of the New Democrat ic Party (Mr. Doer) made about the director of the Family Law

Section are, I suggest, true. The dir ector has worked very hard in terms of the consu ltation process. Now, what we are trying to do with this is to round out the range of fam ily services that we provide in this

Monday, December 19, 1988 province, so that we can justifiably say that we not only have the best system but the most complete system of family services av ailable to Manitoba ns. If it is necessary, I can run through with Honourable Members the careful steps that are taken from the time a case comes before a counsellor under this propo sed program. I do not think I need to go on all night, but I should not stop before I say to Honour able Members that this is being entered upon as a pilot project. We are going to be extremely careful and sensitive with the way this program is handled.

There will be an extensive monitoring and evaluation of this pilot project. When I annou nced this project, I said that I hoped that it would be successful, and that if it were successful that we would be able to extend this program as well provi nce-wide. When we annou nce a program and say we hope it is successfu l, we are obviously talking about a pilot project, and I cannot stress this enough to Honour able Members. lt is a project which has enjoyed the support, I sugge st, of all the Parties in our leg islature. Certainly there are reservations.

There should be reservations, I suggest, before we embark upon any pilot project. If we knew exactly how the evaluation and the monitoring was going to turn out, we would not need a pilot project. We would go right into it.

But no, this province is taking a more careful and sensitive approa ch, and I suggest that the program should be given an opportun ity to see how well it will work to serve the children of this province who are the people who are at the most focal point of the discussion here tonight, the children of the parents in this province who do have difficulti es with family relationships. lt is becoming more common than we would like to admit but, let us face it, Mr.

Chairman, the children of this province are going to need the kind of support we can give them more and more in the days ahead and the months and the years ahead . So I suggest that there should not be a problem with proceeding on a pilot project which will be as carefully monitored and evaluated as I have suggested. In addition, Mr. Chairman, we will be proposing an amendment which will take some of what Hono urable Members may be conc erned about out of the Bill in terms of security being put up in order to secure the performance of certain things.

So, as we go along this evening, Honour able Members will see what we are proposi ng. But basically, we are trying to get a program into place that we can make better and build on, so that we can round out the services we provide to families in Manitoba. Mr. Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Angus? Mr. John Angus (S t. Norbert): I will pass to Mr. Edwards. * (2 10 0) Mr. Paul Edwards (S t. James) : I have looked at this Bill and looked at the amendments many, many times and I have taken a lot of time to look at them.

I have 66 been looking at this since it was first intr oduced into the House and, I daresay, even before that I was looking at the issue. This issue, as my honourable friends have pointed out, has been discussed in this province for some years. I believe, sinc e at least 19 85, it has been being looked at seriously as a potential program and pilot project, as I am sure the Member for Concord ia (Mr. Doer) knows well. The program, no doubt, has its flaws. The legislation, no doubt, has its flaws.

I think what we are doing here tonight is looking at an initiative which will, hopefully, be monitored closely in the coming years, which no doubt will be changed, perhaps substantially, with the continue d inpu t and coopera tion of the various interested parties. I think the level of concern shown by those parties and the quality of their presentations bodes well for this program in that they have shown a high level of interest in this issue.

I recognize that the Action Comm ittee on the Status of Women and the Charter of Rights Coalition and the Women in the law groups all suggested that there was not a sufficient need to proceed. I dispute that. They relied on the Attor ney-General's (Mr. McCrae) study, which cited some 15 percent of non-cus todial parents who were surveyed did say that there were problems. I think that the Attor ney-General's Department has admitted flaws in that report. I think that there is a need and that it is some thing that needs to be addressed.

I think that we have been talking about this for three years and it is time to go ahead with the pilot project. If we have made mistakes, they will become apparent. I think what we can look for is the continu ed monitoring by the communi ty and by the department. I have an enormous amount of faith in Ms. Diamond's abilities. I kn ow that she has monito red the Mai ntenanc e Enforc ement Program and has made many changes to that program on a regular basis.

I think that is the type of thing that we can hope to come out of this new init iative, which indeed is new for this jurisdiction, but not just that, it is fairly new for the countr y. I think that Manitoba will, no doubt, become a leader. I also looked at the presentations, and there were many. I listened closely to the presentations, and I looked at the documents which were put to us. I spent some time this weekend going over them. They were extremely informative. I agree 10 0 percent, and I think we all agree, that the child has to come first. lt is important that this be a child-centred program.

If I leave any lasting comments that are remembered, I hope it is that this program, as it goes on, be monit ored with that goal in mind always and tha t goal at the foref ront. I believe that our Family law Branch has made that commitm ent clear, and I look fo rward to them mon itoring it in that vein. I note that the security for cause aspect of the Bill, that is Subsection (

b) which was in the proposed Act, which required the respondent to give security for the performance of his or her obligation to give the applicant access to the child, has been dr opped in the amendments. I think that it is good that it has been dropped . lt is not something that we want to use. We can hope to look to more progressive remedies.

Monday, becerriber 19, 1988 I also note that it has been replaced in the propo sed most recent amendment by the ability to req uir e supervision of the access where the court is satisfied that a person or agency is wi lling and able to provide proper supervision. lt remains to be seen, of cou rse, whether or not this statute will be sufficient. I think they have taken the initial step, keeping in mind the most important aspect of this whole subject and it is an aspect which we have heard again about tonight, and that is the need to serve the best interest of the child, whatever that means.

The hope is that the Attorne y-General's Department will have a role but that the bulk of the program can in fact be done by the Community Services Department. t hat is the assessment and the mediation, and time will tell whether or not that is the case. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I simply want to say that I thank the many groups that came to speak to us and !-c ont rary I think to what the Member for Concord ia (Mr. Doer) suggests that we have just gotten their presentations recently, these groups have been involved for a long time. They have been invo lved way back with the Attorney-G eneral's Department.

They have been invo lved with me. I met with the Manitoba Action Comm ittee on Status of Women months ago. I met with the Concerned Families months ago. I have made myself available to all groups wanting to make input on this issue, and I have been informed that the Attorne y-General (Mr. McCr ae) has also made every effort to make himself available to speak to those groups, both this Attorney-General and past Attorneys General. To that extent, I think that we have gone through a fairly extensive consulta tion process.

I doubt that this is the perfect Act, but I look forward to the pilot project and a regular review of it by all interested Parties. I have been encou raged by the advice from the Family Law Branch that invitations have been extended to, in particular, the four major groups that presented to us last week in opposition to this legislation. I would hope that even given their opposition to this Bill that they will take up that invitation and work to create a successful program.

We will monitor it at the end of three years and, hopefully, the monitoring process will be thorough and tell us whether or not it is a needed program . At this point, I think that it should go ahead and I thank the comm ittee for this time. Mr. Angus: I also listened with interest and some concern as the representations were made by the groups as to their input and to their partici pation in the propo sed legislation. I admit I had some concerns.

I was concerned about the amendments and the lateness of the amendments, the effect they would have and the whole general direction of the Act but, after conside ration and consulta tion with my colleagues, I believe that it is a positive step to address a very icky issue. lt is an uncomfor table issue that was very easily avoided and it is very easy to stick your head in the sand and hope that the problem will go away or will rectify itself, but it will not, it simply will not.

While I believe that this prog ram will req uir e adjustments and would like to see a vehicle and some 67 assurance for regular review so that those adjustments can be made, I will have to rely on the compassion, I guess, of the Min ister and the ability of the Opposition to bring to his attention areas where we see flaws and see required improvements. I am very supportive of the initiative that is being made and would like to see it work the way the authors have desired that it will work, and I hope that it will.

I think it is a very, very positi ve step to try and resolve a problem that would much more easily be avoided and has been avoided for a long time. * (2 1 10) Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley) : I have followed this issue with some keen interest since the time it was actually annou nced in the Throne Sp eech. I h ave had discussions with staff, I have had discussions with the Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae). I have had discussions with interested parties on this matter. I guess the question is how rhany more years do we as a society have to go on before we start dealing with this issue?

How many more families have to live through artificial and, I might say, illegal separated status In the sense of access not being permitted when ordered by law? One has to be sensitive to the needs of the children, quite obviously. One has to be sensitive to the interests of the mothers and the fathers. Also, I think and it was brought out by a number of delegations, the extended family as well, because there have been far, far too many cases of grandparents cut off from access to grandchildren for no good reason .

I have had some questions about the amendments that were brought forward and as to whether there was basically questioning being put in by the thrust of the amendments as to whether the variance orders that are in existence were going to be put up to question. lt would appear that maybe there is some question along that line that is valid, and the drafters have suggested as much. That would not be a norm but, where necessary, yes, there should be a review.

That is one of the things that does happen is that court orders on access are not maybe varied sufficientl y freq uently, whether that is to do with an increase on access or a limitation on access given the circumstanc es of the children.

I found it Interesting that there were very few statistics offered as to the justification of the program, the real need, and yet at the same time we heard from a number of experts who would say, given the practice that they were fa cing, be it a psychiatrist, be it a lawyer representing the Manitoba Bar Association or others like that, that the scale of the problem is there. lt is rather interesting that we are dealing with a social issue with maybe not as much do cumenta tion and yet everybody can cite hundreds of cases per year for Manitoba, and Manitoba not being a terribly large province.

I find that rather interesting. I think that maybe says something about the state of maturity and maybe the state of the sensitivity of our society that we are not dealing with an issue like this. I would commend the NDP for having init iated the Maintenance Enforcement Program and put it in place and made it work. I think also though I would like to

Monday, December 1 9, 1 988 commend them as being the initiators of this program on the access assistance, because I believe it was in 19 85 under their admin istration that this program was in itiated and, for well over three years now, staff have been deal ing with vari ous in terested groups and individuals on the matter of access assistance. I think what we have here is a vanguard program for Canada. I think, though it will have its fla ws, there will be things in it that we learn that maybe are not quite as they should be and should be improved.

The reassurance that we have had is that there is to be not a review at the end of three years, but a review on an ongoing basis. I think that is rather exceptional, because I cannot say that there are that many Government programs that operate in that fashion.

I think that is very, very important to a subject like this. lt is very much a pilot program, it will not cover all of Manitoba. lt will not answer all the needs, but it is a start in the direction of answering the needs of parents and children and extended family that are crying out to be listened to and who do not have the thousands of dollars to go back to court now, which is the only way that there can be an insurance of complia nce with an access court order. There is no mechanism in place today in which the Government offers assistance to enforce the orders of the Family Cou rt judges.

Most families, whatever side they are on, whether they are the custodial or the access parents, do not have the money to start putting out $1 ,000, $1 ,200 for each court appearance. That can gobble up very, very small reserves if they even exist in the family pocket book. I am not sure that I am fully assured as to the amendments that have been put forward and put forward late, but in any case, I am prepared to suppor t this legislation as it now stands, and will be a keen supporter of the princi ple of the program, but also a keen vigilant as to its performance.

I had a concern about the performance aspect originally prop osed in the original legislation, talking about the use of dolla rs only to assure performance. I think performanc e is something that maybe should be still on the table. But I am not certain those are the sort of mechanisms that we wish to see to try and ensure perfo rmance by either side in a manner like this.

I think there are other things that can be used, if necessary, to encou rage compl iance with court orders on a matter that people have not decided to bring back to cour t, but I certainly do not think tapping into the family income is the way to go about it. So I will be looking forward to this program.

I hope we will do some learning on this, that the review process will be a keen review process and not lip service, that changes will be made during the three-year program and, at the end of the three years or maybe even sooner, when we feel that we have as a province a handle on this issue, we will see a permanent program provi nce wide brought in place. I hear some nervous ness on the part of the other Opp osition Party . I am sorry that they have the 68 reservations that they do because, as the initia tor of this type of a program, I would have thought that they would have the conviction to proceed on this.

I think we received varying information the other night. I would suggest that the reference for the most part with Dr. Richardson's report, a report that is not always held up in the highest esteem all across the countr y, in fact in which the federal Government itself had reservations, that seemed to be the main defence that there is not an issue, or certain other studies in other jurisdictions. I think you can take varying interpr etations of studies done, be it that one or the Crane study that was also referenced. I have a lot of trouble dealing with the statement that there is not a problem.

There is a problem, and there is a crying need, and it is time we dealt with it. I am very pleased to support this initiative and we will be watching it keenly. Thank you. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Ms. Maureen Hemp hill (L ogan): Just a few points since a number of references have been made to the initiation for this program by previous Government, so I think we want to make it very clear that we are not opposed at all to the intent and principle of this program. At the time that we were looking at implementation, we were not looking at legislation.

We were looking at implementing a program without legislation. I think that is an important point, especially when you are talking about the importance of a pilot project that can and is open to change with experience. lt is a heck of a lot harder to change legislation that is companion legislation that goes along with a program than it is to alter a program as you go along. I feel this is one of the most difficult things that is coming before us in this Session because of its importance and knowing whether we should go ahead with it now or not.

If there is one thing that I felt at the end of it-f irst of all, I think I want to say that there was information that came out in the public hearings that I think we had not thought of or had not heard or discussed before, and that is what public hearings are for. They are so that people can come and present varyi ng experiences and in forma ti on, so we ca n consider and decide, albeit at the last minute or not, that there should be some amendments or there should be some changes made in the legislation that is before us.

I would hate to think that we were going to argue that because it had been negotiated with the federal Government and we have been looking at it for a long period of time that if something came forward that suggested we should take another look at it, not that we should scuttle it or not bring it in but that just simply we should take a little more time, I think we should be open and prepared to do that. I think that what we are saying on this piece of legislation right now is that it needs more time.

I am not sur e it needs a lot more time, but I think there were enough questions raised about the legislation and . the program that we should just try to deal with them to see if some improvements can be made. I think in terms of the program, there were a number of rather

Mond ay, December �9, 1988 serious questions that were raised about the volunteers who are going to do the supervi sion. Where they are going to come from is not I think the critical thing because volunteers always come forward when we need them, thank goodness.

But the question of screening of the volunt eers and trai ning of the volunt eers and the amount of time they stay with supervision, it being a three-month period and that it may need to be longer, and that flexibi lity should be built into the program. • (2 12 0) I think they were, first of all, saying do not bring it in or delay it and giv e us a little more time to look at some of those issues but, if you do bring it in, make some of these changes in the program . That seemed to make a lot of sense to me. The Attorne y-General (Mr.

McCrae), in bringing in amendments and changes, does not seem to have dealt with any of those things which I think are very serious issues, the question of trai nin g and supervision of the volunteers. That is not the only issue that was raised. So I would like to have seen if he was prepared, wanted to cont inue to go ahead right now and not give what may only require another few months of examina tion before it is brought in, that there would have been some more serious conside ration in some of the elements of the progratn . (lnt erjection)- There is a considerab le caucus meeting gOing on, Mr.

Chairman, as I atn making my remarks. If you want to caucus, perhaps you could do it after. lt appears to be a caucus meeting going on.

If I came out of the hearings the other night, and I think we were all listening very carefully because we all consid ered it to be such a serious issue, I ended up being very confused about the dif fere nt sta tis tics an d in formation that was presented and not being at all sure about the quality of any of the studies, not the original study that said all kids should be with both parents un der all circumstances, and then was refuted by the later study that came in saying it appears now that it may not be good for kids to be with both parents, particularly where there is serious conflict between the two parents.

One of the presenters said that the empirical data in all of the studies is at question which means what is the basis upon which we are movi ng. I just think, once again just to end, it was very conf using about the survey information and about whether or not the need is there and to what degree the need is there. Even the Attorney-General's (Mr. McCrae) own statistics which were supposed to give us the snapshot at this time, the latest information we had, pointed out there were 15 .9 percent who did not make any attempt to verify the degree of difficulty.

These were people who said, we had some difficulties. lt did not say two things. lt did not say how they were resolved, sinc e a number of them were resolved. One of the poi nts that was clear is that often the difficulties with custody ease over time and I think that a further, more detailed examination or breakdown of that should have been made and maybe you have it. But what percentage of the 15 .9 eased up after the first few. months of the separation when people settle down and became a little more accom modating?

What 69 was the degree of difficulty was that I had trouble getting my kid one weekend because she did not like something I had done, or on an ongoing basis the other spouse does not follow through with the time that I have been allocated. In how many cases were there significant and reasonable reasons for denying access, which I think was admitted by most parties, that we should not assume that when access is denied there are no reasons and no times when access should be denied because there probably are.

So, if those questions had been answered in the 15 .9 percent, I think we would have a lot stronger feeling about how serious the problem was. Given all that, we would just like to see that we would agree to a delay, not for a long period of time, for a few months, so that we could work out some of these questions and improve the program that we all agree to in principle and intent. Mr. McCrae: With all due respect, may I suggest that In my submission one of the best ways that we could think of to improve the program is to get the program going and to monitor and evaluate every aspect of the program.

That includes the dimension tha t the Bill presents the program with, every part, whether it be the judicial part, what we find in the Bill, con ciliation part, supervised access part . All of that will be part of intense scrutiny and evaluation. I suggest the best way for us to learn about how this program will operate is to operate the program and' to see it in real and practical terms. I want to assure the Hono urable Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill) and her Leader that part of that evaluation will include an evaluation of what part this Bill plays in the whole Access Assistance Prog ram.

The department unde r both admin istrations has attempted to be sensitive in its consultation proc ess and I think the department will also handle itself in a sensitive fashion in evaluating this. Let us not forget, part of this program is to give us, to give the people, certainly of the City of Winnip eg un der this pr ogram, access to concil iation and mediation services, more than there are now. The program Itself gives that to families, or makes that service available to families, so that what remains is to see how it all works.

I would ask the Honour able Member and her Leader to bear with us and to take an interest in the progress of this program . The best way to get that going is to get it going with the assistance that the Bill can provide. Do not forget, judges still have discretion. Do not forget also that this Bill provides that discretion through the use of the word "may." In our family court, our Que en 's Bench Fam ily Division, our judges are specialists to a large extent and trained in family law matters. I would be surpris ed to see the provisions of this Bill recklessly applied by our judicial system.

I just ask the Honour able Member to watch with us and to watch us as we evaluate this program. Remember, also, it is a pilot project and the best way to learn is to see it working. Mr. Edwards: I will be brief. I listened with interest. Despite the comments during the speech by Ms.

Mond ay, December 1 9, 1 988 Hemphill l did listen with interest to her comments and I want to respond briefly to them . I feel compelled to pick up on her final statement, which was that we wait for a few more months to try and impr ove this program . Of the four major presenters who presented large briefs last week, th ree did not feel this program had a basis for existence. They did not ask for a delay to impr ove it. They asked that it not go ahead, period.

So I do not think that we should be misled into thinking that this is some kind of accommodation for the Man itoba Action Comm ittee on the Status of Women, the Charter of Rights Coalition or Women and the Law. lt is not. They feel confident in their studies, and they said to us they feel confident. There is no need, so the position that we should wait a few more months to study it does not in any way assuage their concerns, I would suggest, and should not be put across with that purported goal.

If the need is not there, I would suggest the pilot project will show that. lt will show flaws in its own bei ng, but it will also show jf the need truly is not there, and I suggest that we all hope that would not be the case. If it is not a needed program in any way, shape or form , then that suggests we do not have a p roblem, and I think we would all be happy about that but at this stage I think my colleagues and I are convi nced that there is a problem to be addressed. Mr. Chairman: Bill No. 11 ,

Section 1-M s. Hemphill. Ms. Hemphill: We do not want to spend all night responding to each other but I do just want to pick up on- Mr. Chairman: The Chair feels compelled to intervene, while there is a great deal of latitude allowed at this commit tee hearings, I would remind and ask Members to refrain from debating the Bill in principle which is our position that we take on the Bill at second reading. Committee is for further clarification of the actual details of the Bill, for utilization of staff who are present, for further clarifica tion of the Bill.

I would simply ask that it would appear to me that what is beginning to take place is a debate between Opposition Parties, which is quite legitimate at its appropria te time, namely at second reading of the Bill. * (21 30) Ms. Hemphill: I just wanted to comment when we are discussing how we feel about this Bill, all of us tonight have referred to the presentations that were made in the hearings. I did just want to say that I do not quite have the same feelings as my col league does about the position of the presenters who were opposed to the Bill.

I believe, and I talked to them too, I believe their first position is that they would prefer not to see it brought in but that in the absence of that being a possibility, their second position is a delay and that they would find it useful to have a delay, to talk out and try and get some impr ovement in some of those areas. Mr. Angus: The editorial comment I might have made, if I was given the chance was that in the House dur ing 70 the whole time we were doing principle on the Bill, they said wait until you get to the comm ittee, then you will be able to discuss it.

Now we got to the comm ittee and you turn around and say, well look, let us pass this through because you should have talked about it then. As a newcomer, I find the whole process quite conf using. But I will not say that. Mr. Chairma n: I certainly did not mean to conv ey that impression to the Members of the committee. lt is the oppor tun ity for an informal setting to discuss the Bill a little more informally. Bill No. 11 ,

Section 1- pass;

Section 2- Do we want a recorded vote on

Section 1? For info rmation of the committee Members, if it is the will of individuals to oppose the Bill, the title, Bill be reported, they may do so when I call that section, not necessarily to call it to register your prot est on every cause. Mr. Doer: We will register our vote at the report . Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Doer. lt be noted that these sect ions passed are passed with the Opposition as voiced in the voice vote.

Section 2-Mr . McCrae. Mr. McCrae: An amendment for

Section 2. I move- Mr. Chair man: Could I also jus t simply ask the Attorne y-General to ind icate that the amendment applies in both official languages. Mr. McCrae: Indeed it does, Mr. Chairman. Absolutely. I move THAT Clause 14 .1 (1) of The Child Custody Enforcement Act, as proposed in

section 2 of Bill No. 11 , be amended as follows: (

a) by striking out "where it would be in" and substituting "taking into account"; (

b) by striking out clause (

b) and substituting the following: (

b) require supervision of the access where the court is satisfied that a person or agency is willing and able to provide pr oper supervision. (F rench version) 11 est propose que le paragraphe 14 . 1(1) de la Loi modifiant la

Loi sur !'execution des ordonna nces de garde, figur ant a !'article 2 du project de loi 11, soit modifie: (

a) par la suppression de "si l'interet veritable de I' enfant le justif ie" et son remplacement par "en tenant com pte de l'int eret ve ritable de l'enfant"; (

b) par la suppression de l'alinea (

b) et son remplacement par ce qui suit: (

b) une ordonnanc e dans laquelle il exige que l'exercice des droits de visite soit assujetti a la

Mond ay, Dece mber 19, 1988 supe rvision d'une tier ce personne s'il est d'a vis qu'une personne ou que l' office a !'intention d' exercer un e supervision ade qua te et est capable d'e xercer cette supervi sion. Mr. Chairman: Comm ittee has heard the amend ment pass, as amended ;

Section 2, as amended - Mr. McCrae: I have another amend ment to Sect ion 2. I move THAT subsect ion 14 . 1(2), as proposed in

section 2 of Bill No. 11 , be amended as follo ws: (

a) by st riking out all th at po rti on of the su bsect ion that pr ecedes clause (

a) and substituting the fol lowi ng: Order on failure to exercise access 14. 1(2) Where the court, upon appl ication, is satisfied tha t a person in whose favour an order has been made for access to a child at specific ti mes or on specific days has wrongfu lly failed to exercise the right of access or to return the child as the order requir es, the court may make one or both of the follo wi ng orders, taking into acco unt the best in terests of the child: · (

b) by st riking out "and" in Clause (

a) and substitut ing "or"; (

c) by stri king out Claus e (

b) and substit uting the followi ng: (

b) req uir e super vision of the access where the court is satisfied that a person or agency is willing and able to provide proper super visio n. (F rench version) 11 est propose que le paragraphe 14. 1( 2), figurant a !'article 2 du projet de loi 11 , soit mod ifie: (

a) par la sup pression du passage intr oductif et son remplacement par ce qui suit: Defaut d'exercice du droit de vis ite 14. 1(2) Le tribunal peut rend re l'un e ou l'a utre des ordonn ances suiv antes, ou les deux, en tenant com pte de l'i nten�t veritable de !'enfant, dans le cas ou le tribunal, sur req uete, est conv aincu qu'une perso nne ayant un droit de visi te d'un enfant a des momen ts precis ou a des dates precises, aux termes d' une ordon nance, a omis ill egalement d' exercer ce droit ou de retourner I' enfant conformement aux termes de cette ordonna nce: (

b) par la suppr ession, dans la version anglaise, de "and" et son rempla cement par "or"; (

c) par la suppr ession de l'alin ea (

b) et son rempla cement par ce qui suit: (

b) une ordonna nce dans laque lle il exige que l' exercice des droits de visite soit assujetti a la supervi sion d' une tierce personne s'il est d'a vis qu'une personne ou que l' office a !'intention d'e xercer une super vision adequa te et est capable d' exercer cette supervision. Mr. Chairman, I move this amend ment with respect to both the English and French texts. Mr. Chairman: Thank you , Mr. McCrae.

Section 14.1( 2), as amen ded- pass;

Section 3- pass;

Preamble- pass. 71 Bill be reported -all those in favour, please raise their hands? I remind commit tee Members only voting. Clerk will take the count. Clerk of Committees, Mrs. Janet Summ ers: Seven. Mr. Chairman: Those opposed ? Madam Clerk: Two. Mr. Chairman: Two. I decl are the motion passed. Bill be report ed. Mr. McCrae: I would like to correct the record before we get totally off Bill 11 . One thing the Ho nourable Mem ber for Wolseley (Mr .

Taylor) said that needs correcting for the record, and that had to do with the Mai ntenance Enforcement Program put into pla ce by the previous Cons ervative Govern ment. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. ll(lcCrae. BILL NO. 12-THE STATUTE LAW AMENDME NT ACT (19 88) Mr. Chairman: Mem bers of the comm ittee just ind icate for the Chair how we in tend to deal with this somewhat larger Bill.

I am in formed by the Clerk tha t he does wish for the Chair to call out the claus es or sections by num ber if we are deal ing with them in a greater num ber. lt wou ld be my intention to pass this Bill page by page, but I will be referring to incl usive cla uses that we are passing. Mr. Gary Doer (L eader of the Second Opposi tion): Yes, Mr. Chai rperson, we would appr ove the expeditious manner in which the Chair has suggested we review the Bill and pass it. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Doer. Sect ion 1- pass;

Section 2- pass;

Section 3- pass; Sect ion 4-pass;

Section 5- pass;

Section 6-pass; Sect ion 7- pass;

Section 8- pass;

Section 9-pass; Sect ion 10- pass;

Section 11- pass;

Section 12- pass;

Section 13-pass.

Section 14- Mr. Doer. Mr. Doer: I have a qu estion on 14. Has the Attorne y General (Mr . McCrae) reviewed the amendment that was pl aced by the Min ister of Finance on the enabl ing Acts and the taxation Acts last Thu rsday in rela tionship to the statutor y law amen dments? Has he cond ucted tha t review to ensur e that we are not proceeding with one amend ment in the Ho use and another amendm ent in this comm ittee tha t runs in any way techni cally cont rary to each other? Hon. Jam es McCrae (Attorne y-Gener al): Mr. Chairman, that review has been done, and I can tel l the Hono urable Member I kno w of his extreme inter est in The Health and Post-Seconda ry Education Tax Levy

Monday, December 1 9, 1 988 Act and I know others call it by some other name, but I un derstand tha t this is a corr ection of a drafting error. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. McCrae.

Section 15- pass; Sect ion 16- pass; Sect ion 17- pass;

Section 18- pass;

Section 19- pass; Sect ion 20- pass;

Section 21- pass; Sect ion 22- pass;

Section 23- pass; Sect ion 24- pass; Sect ion 25- pass;

Section 26- pass; Sect ion 27 -p ass; Sect ion 28- pass;

Section 29- pass; Sect ion 30- pass;

Section 31-p ass; Sect ion 32- pass; Sect ion 33- pass;

Section 34- pass; Sect ion 35- pass; Sect ion 36- pass; Sect ion 37- pass; Sect ion 38- pass; Sections 39- pass; Sect ion 40- pass;

Section 41- pass;

Section 42- p�:�ss; Pream ble- pass; Title- pass. Bill be report ed. BILL NO. 38- THE ME NTAL HEALTH AMENDM EN T ACT Mr. Chairman: Bill 38, The Mental Health Amend ment Act . We will proceed in the same mann er. On page 1, Sect ion 1- pass;

Section 2- pass;

Section 3- pass; Sect ion 4- pass;

Section 5- pass;

Section 6-pass;

Section 7 -p ass.

Section 9-Mr . Taylor. Mr. Harold Tay lor (Wolse ley) : Excuse me, Mr . Chairman, I did not realize you were alr eady in to Bill 38. I have prop osed amendme nts, and I belie ve the legal cou nsel has copies for the commit tee. While they are bei ng distri buted , Mr. Chai rman , I will continue with comments to facili tate your time management here. There was a presentat ion by a volunte er mem ber from the Mental Health Association and, in particul ar, reference was made to Sect ion 5 and the aspect of consent by the Public Trustee, and a few points rela ting to th at.

There was also thoug h, I have to say, many other points brought forward which would rel ated to, I would suggest, a much larger -scale review of the whole aspect of mental health in the province. The Mental Health Associat ion is aware of the larger review which will be coming in a few months and tha t there will be a full public input to tha t process. I think in all fairn ess they, to some ext ent, jumped the gun. If you will, however, look -and I am going to, with you r indu lgence, ask the legal counsel to also sit at the table so we might ask qu estions, Mr.

Chai rperson, there are some changes that were drafted this weekend by legal counsel staff tha t will answer the aspect that the consent by the Public Trustee, tha t authority is not too wide -ranging. lt will also make the se amendments cons istent with the rest of the Act and, I think, any other Acts that do relate. So I would ask then if Mr. Carnegie will make referenc e to the chan ges propo sed in appli cation for authority to treat which is

Section 24(5)- * (214 0) Mr. Chairman: Mr. Taylor, may I just, first of all , ind icate to you tha t the Chair will entertain these amendments 72 at the appr opria te pla ce in the Act. Certai nly any Mem ber and yourself are free to speak to the particular amendment at tha t time, as well as Legisla tive Couns el. I hear Mr. Doer wishing to make a comment. Mr. Gary Doer (L eader of the Second Op position): The presentation, .1 think, was an in structive one in terms of the comm ittee heari ngs the other day, and I am sure that Mr.

Taylor's amendments are positiv e initia tives in terms of The Mental Health Amendment Act. I am a li ttle concerned that the Min ister of Health (Mr. Orchard ) is not here. Have these amendments been arrived at with the Min ister of Healt h, hopeful ly. I am not trying to breach parli amenta ry procedur e in terms of the absence issue, but I am very concerned about The Mental Health Act because, with all legisla tion but this one in particul ar, it is very im portant not just to have the proper princip les but the abili ty to im plement them in the proper way.

I would at least like to kno w whether the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orchard ) agrees or does not agree, and the reasons for not agreeing to the amend ments being propo sed by the Memb er for Wolsele y. We have a fairly open mind on impr ovi ng the rights of people in our mental health system .

I am sure a lot of these points will be phi losoph ically areas that we could probably support, but I wou ld like to kno w from the Min ister of Health, whose work I respect even though I do not always ag ree with him, but I wou ld like to kno w his reasons if he is oppo sed to these, and I find ou rselves in a bit of a vacu um tonight. So I do not kno w what we would do, but I think it would be unfair to an Ac ting Min ister on a very complic ated Bill to try to gue ss what they would mean .

I do not like passing anything in haste and I kno w that the Mem ber for Wolsele y has worked very hard on these amendments. I see they are very detailed. Perhaps ther e should be a way of having some consultations with the Mi nister of Health prior to the comple tion of this in second reading so we know where we are going and what it means, not just amendments presented at 9:45 p.m. Hon. Jam es McCrae (A ttorne y-Ge neral): Mr.

Chairman , mental health reform is, I suggest, something tha t is going to be ongoing for some time, until we have what we think is the cl osest thing to perfect, and then we are going to turn arou nd and make more chan ges again after tha t. I share the concern put forward by the Hono urable Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr . Doer). I would have to ask the Ho nourable Mem ber for Wolseley (Mr.

Taylor) before I cou ld agree to accept his amendments, which I have no qu estion are intended very much to assist and to help, but I would have to kn ow if the Depar tment of Health has been consult ed about these amendments with regard not only to whether they are the kind of amendments tha t are workable but also as to cost. The Depart ment of Health has to kno w what costs are going to be with respect certainly to the review mechan ism, whether more meetings are going to be requir ed which are going to call for mor e cost.

I am certainly not at all attem pting to be difficult with the Honour able Mem ber for Wolsel ey, but I do have

Monday , Dece mber 19, 1988 to kn ow if the department has been consulted and if the Honour able Mem ber can gi ve us an idea of what these amendments would be costing the taxpayers of Manitoba. Mr. Taylor: Yes, I will answer. There are two points I want to bring up. The first one, in respons e to the quer y from the Attor ney-General (Mr . McCrae), there was consultation with his department and with the Mental Health Association. There was not specific consultation with the health depart ment, because what is being done here is tigh tening up the review process to ensure tha t it happens. Tha t was the goal. Right now, the

section at the top of the second page leaves fairly sign ificant looph oles and there is not an assurance that the review will take pla ce or if it takes pla ce in a time ly fashion and/or the report be coming out in a timely fashion. So really the goal of that change, for example, and you could talk to other sections in there, was not in a way construed as to in creased worklo ad and hence cost . lt was to ensur e that the intent of the Act can be follow ed through on and tha t there are not going to be any problems. There will be trip wi res to say, this is what is to happe n .

The concern tha t I have as well in the absence of the Health Min ister (Mr . Orchard) and with one of his propos ed Acts here is that do we have any assurance tha t the Min ister will either join us later this evening, knowing tha t it is going to be a very late session, or is there going to be an opportun ity to make change to the Bill in another fashion, i.e., another sitting of this com mit tee tomo rrow, for ex ample, becaus e I li stened very intently to that presentation that was made by the Mental Health Association last Thu rsday evening.

I went back over it a numb er of time s and I consu lted legal counsel a numb er of times, including on the weekend, with the conclusion we came to that, yes, they, while jumping the gun on some of the bigger , broader issues, and th ose should wait. There are some very de fin ite looph oles in the leg islation and it can be imp roved and should be before it is put through in final form. Hence, my concern and my motivation. So I am loo king to you, Mr.

Chai rperson, for some guida nce of how we may deal with this fairly without it just being pushed aside because we happened to miss the very im portant presence of the Health Min ister (Mr . Orchard ) at this moment. Mr. McCrae: If I may make a sugge stion to the Honour able Mem ber, I am not aware whether the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orchard) will be here tonight. I did come here with instructions to repl ace on the commit tee, the Mini ster of Health (Mr . Orchard ) with the Honourabl e Min ister of Cultur e Heritage, and Recreation (Mr s. Mit chelson).

I have no particular reason to think tha t the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orchard) is going to show up here in the next little while as we deal with this. Still as for another sitting of the commit tee , this is the second meeting of this comm ittee. I think wha t we ha ve brou ght forward in the amendments, the 73 Government is bringing forward , are amendments that were requ ested by the Public Trustee, so that the Pu b!ic Trustee is abl e to do his work and represent those who need his assistance.

With all due respect to the Hon ourable Mem ber, this Session is not going to be over in techn ical terms till it is over. There would be another oppor tun ity to bring recom mendations to the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orchard), if not for this Session, then for next Session. Certai nly, at this stage, my part of this is to put forward amendme nts reque sted by the Public Trustee. I reaily wonder about the suggestion though at this time of a further sitting of this comm ittee. Mr. Chairman: I am sorry ther e was too much nois e going on. Wha t was the last point that you were sugg esting? Mr. McCrae: Mr.

Chairman, I am just saying, I am wonder ing, of cou rse, no one is qu estioning the Hono urable Memb er's wish to help out in this proc ess and to help im prove The Mental Health Act. I wonder if the Honour able Mem ber would be in a position to hold his amend ments until the proper time in the Legis lature. I suggest this is-w el l, we all kno w this is the second, somewhat lengthy sitting of this comm ittee and the Min ister of Health is not here . Even if he were, his departmental officials are not here for him to consult so that everyone is work ing in the same di rec tion.

I think this is the kinds of amendments th at we should as a mino rity Government or as any Leg islatur e should be able to work together on. I am just saying tha t it is un fortuna te that perhaps tha t consulta tion was not done befor ehand. Then , I suppo se there is a reason for th at too, and it is an un derstan dable reason. I just say to the Hono ur able Mem ber at this !ate date in the Session, I sugge st there are a num ber of reasons to look again at The Mental Health Act and perhaps that wou ld be better done at the next Session or at the tail end of this Session in a consensual kind of way. Mr.

John Angus (S t. 1\iorbert): Is the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orchard) in the building or arou nd or avai lable or li kely to be able to show up tonight to talk about this at all? I ask thr ough you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. McCrae: Well, Mr. Chairman, we cou ld find that out for the Honour able Memb er, but are the Min ister's officials in a position at this time of the day to consult the Min ister and to assist him in arriving at decisions about the amend ments being brought forward by the Honour able Mem ber, wou ld be my concern . Mr.

Chairman: The Chair can only comment on this matter that it is, of course, open to any member of the comm ittee to move amend ments to any particula r claus e of any Bill at any time subject to the app roval or disapproval of the same comm ittee. Mr. Angus: I am sorry, I just was not qu ite finish ed. it seems to me that we are spend ing an awful lo t of

Mond ay, December 19, 1988 time arguing procedure. When the Government brought forward a Bill on this, it behooves them to have the resources here to at least talk and answer questions on behalf of the other members of the comm ittee. With respect, Mr.

Chairman, if we spent as much time addressing the content of the Bill, we would have good legislation coming forward. lt smacks of an error in procedure that should be addressed as oppo sed to, before we even get to the legislation as to whether it is good or bad. * (2 15 0) I would propo se if it is the will of the comm ittee that we stand this down, deal with a couple of the other Acts that are on the" table tonight and see if we can find the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard).

If he generally can not answer these issues, if he can point out fla ws that could allow us to wait, then perhaps we could discuss it at that time. Mr. Doer: Well, I agre e that the abil ity to have amendments forward will poten tially help the Bill.

I also know that a Minis ter running a department should have the oppor tun ity to -1 happen to believe they should have the opportun ity to let us kno w what the imp lica tions are from their perspective, especially some thing deal ing with mental healt h. lt is very important. lt is true the Min ister is away tod ay, but we know that he would be on Government business or something similar and I respect that. lt is just unfortu nate in terms of the timing.

We have tried to- and it has happened with all Parties-i dentif y weaknesses in Bills in our debate stage, second reading stage, so the Minis ter can look at that and talk about it informall y along the way. Then you can either agree to disagree, or agree to agree. In this case, I am sure that these have been well researched by the Member for Wolseley (Mr. Taylor). I am sure they are philosophically consis tent with a better Mental Health Act. I just do not know what the other side is, and I think that is very important in this area. I would agree with the Member for St. Norb ert (Mr.

Angus) that we deal with the- try to find if the Min ister of Health (Mr. Orchard) is going to be here or not today. If he is not, I am prepared to come in-a nd I do not like coming in the morning, at a ridiculo us time in the morning -k nowing tomor row could be a late day, because I know he comes in in the morning usually. So he can have a chance to look at it. I think we should know what his position is prior to us doing anything with the amendments. I also do not want the Member for Wolseley (Mr. Taylor) to lose all the work he has put into this amendment.

Then those of us on the comm ittee who do not have a strong position either way can know why we are voting which way we are voting, which I would like to have in our hand when we are sticking our hand up in the air, and we try to do that on most occasions, Mr. Chairperson, as you would expect us to do. So I am not in a panic to get everything done tonight if it means not knowing what we are doing. And so if that means 74 getting the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) here, good . If it means early in the morning, it goes with the territory. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Doer. Mr. Taylor: If 1 could respond, Mr.

Chairperson, to the members to please realize that the initia tive to make these amendments that I think are right in line with the thrust of the Act, that I think improve it somewhat and is in line with some of the concer ns-ha rdly all, but some of the concerns of our own Mental Health Association - has taken a lot of time to try and see that Mental Health is improved in the Province,

whereas a direct result of the presentation made here, in fact, I think it was the first or second delegation here on Thursday night. Now, until I heard that presentation, until I took that brief away and read it, I was not before that point convi nced that there was a problem. So please bear in mind we have these committee hearings, we do listen to public delegations, we do take away a written documenta tion, statistics and things like that. That has an effect on the Members and I think it should be.

As a result, you see these amendments here, and I want to thank the legal staff for the work put in, in what would normally be their off time. I wonder at this time of year if they have any off time. But in any case, I think they have made a good effort here, and there has been consultation back and forth. If there is any chance, yes, the Attorne y-General (Mr. McCr ae) has suggested we could do it at a different stage in the House, if I am understanding him corr ectly, and maybe he can clarif y that.

The other point though is, is brought up, if it is not going to be harmful in any way, if we can defer at least 38 to the bottom of the order for this evening, that might help. If there is any chance of the Minister of Health (Mr . Orchard) joining us, that wou ld be appreciated. Mr. McCrae: I have a suggestion that I will put to Honourable Members. But, before I do, I really must protest a little bit.- (Interjection)- I will do my protestation first. There seems to be a protestation that somehow the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) should be in this committee at this time.

I would like to point out to the Honourable Members that surely if amendments are coming forward that affect his department, he is entitled, I should suggest, to be consu lted about them. The other thing is though, the thrust of Bill No. 38 is strictly a thrust which comes to us and relates to the office of the Public Trustee. The amendments the Ho nour able Mem ber brings for ward relate to the Department of Health. That being said, I think it is entir ely reasonable that the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) would be somewhere else tonight and that I would be here to put the Bill forward in order to assist the Public Trustee in getting some amendments that are needed. That being said, may I suggest that the Honourable Member try to find the Minister of Health and between

Monday, D�c�mber 19, 1988 no\111 anq the report stage of this Bill work out whatever needs to t:>e worked out ana we could take it at that time. Th£!t way we would not lla ve to sit this commit tee ano ther heari ng. The Honourable Memb er cou ld sit down with the Min ister of Health (Mr . Orchard) and whatever officials of the Hea!th De partment are requir ed and if something can be Vo(Orked out, work somet hing out and brjng it to the Hous e. Would that sug gestion be suitable to Honourable Members, Mr. Cha irman? Mr. Chair�an: Honour able Memb ers hav e heard the sugg estion from the Gove rnment Hous e Leader.

Is that pro ce(fu re acceptable? �r . �ngqs: Mr. Chairml.ln. just �o I am abs olutely clear on th is, is the Attorn!'ly-Generat (Mr. McC rae) suggesti ng tllat I !)r f'!ly Co!le<!g!-leS fl-!n Qr!)!Jnd looking for the Mini ster of He<!ltt"! (Mr . l)rchard) and ask him if these amend ments that we are propo�ing on the tab le are accept�l:>le to him? Is tlll.lt What he is suggest in g to yo!J, Mr. Chairma n? The Attorney-Genera! is suggesting that we run aro!Jn!f look ing for tJ'le Mini ster of Health to 8$k !lim if toe arnenclwents that we llre pro posing to hi s Bill are f.lCceptabl e to hif'!l.

Is that what you are suggest ing? Mr. McCr�Mt: Just to PE! ctear, tile amendm ents come from the office of the P!.!!:>lic Tr!Jstee, not the Departm�:�nt of ·Hee�lth. !f there !s consultation req ujrea, whicll I suggest there wou ld be, witll the Ho nourable ME�mber's afll end ments, that should be done. not only with the Min ister alone but wit h the department. That woul d be better done durin g work ing hour s and I afll m akin g thCit as a h elpfu l S!Jggestion to Honourable Mem bers, that they could conduct tha t consultation process with the Mini ster of Hea lth.

I will lend my offices in trying to track him down any time, day or night , if tha t would help Honour able Mem bers. But it seems to fll e, I do not tl1i nk we can (feal with that in this comm ittee tonight and there !s another opportun ity when the Ho use sits tom orrow at the repor t stage of this Bill. Mr. Chairman: What is the will of the comm ittee? Mr . Ang11s: Mr. Ch airman, I will bow to the wisdom of col leagues who have more experience in the procedure than I do. You are sugges ting tha t we do not deal with this Bill in any way, shape, or form at this

part icular stage or we pass those thin gs that we can, we include the amendments then at this particular stage? Mr. McCrae: Mr. Chairman, I am sugges ting that we pass the Bill.

I assume the Bill without the amend ments is not ob jectionable to Ho nourable Mem bers and tha t they could pass this Bill at comm ittee stage and ha ve it go to the House tomo rrow and when it reaches report stage, which wou ld be the fir st stage that it reaches after the Bill is called , the Honourable Mem ber, after having consulted with the Min ister of Healt h, cou ld, depending on the results of th ose cons4ltations, move amend ments to the Bill. Mr. Angue: May I presume, Mr.

Chairman, tha t we can conversely do it in exact ly the oppo site fashion, 75 including the amend ments at this particular stage, and then put the onus upon the Government to remove them if they are offensive? Mr. Chairman: Mr . Angus, I bel ieve there is a procedure. Comm ittee can pass what is before us if we are not prep ared to deal with the amendments now, then tho se amend ments cannot be put l:>efore this comm ittee. Mr. Doer: We kn ow that if the Bill is passed, amending it at the next stag!'! is mor e difficult than amending it at this stage.

Secondly , we do not kno w what the Mini ster of Health's opjnions on these amendments are going to be. I th ink we should know that. I would suggest we do try to find out, we not deal with this Bill at this point. WE! have lots of other work to do tonight. We hold it, we try to find out when the Minis ter of Health (Mr. Orchard) is available, we reschedule thi s committee perhaps for a half an hour , eit her early tofll orrow morning or some ottter time and then we can deal with it in the fairest way possible, rather than the two options of amend fll ents. That would be my recommendat ion. Mr •.

Taylor: I would just like to point out, for the record, that on the first page of the prop osed amend ments there are matters that rela te to bottt the Attorne y General and the Min ister of Hea lth. However, on the second page it all refers to the Attorney -General . Mr. McCrae: Mr. Chai rman. I do. pot mind stan ding this Bill down to thf;! foot of the list. We have now req uested staff fro fll my office to see if they can find the Min ister of Health and, if so, to bring him in if possi ble. Mr. Cha irman: Tha nk y!)u, Mr. McCr ae.

Hansard will recall, althougtt we passed several claus es of this Bil l, the y are withdr awn . The Bill is no w stood for considera tion by this comm ittee at a later stage. *

(2200) BILL IIlO. 40-THJ: CITY OF WINNI PEG AMENDI\IlEN T ACT

(2) Mr. Chairman: Bill 40, Sections 1 to 4, pass?. Mr. Angus. Mr. John Ang us (St. Norbert): Does the Min ister wan t to intr oduce this Bill? If so, I wou ld bow to him and then I wo uld reserve, if I may, a second kick at the cat. Hon. Gerald Ducharme {Min ister of Ur ban Affairs): Fi rst of all, maybe I will in troduce, because the fir st, the main cont roversy right now would seem to be, in any delega tions we have had, the first part of the Bill, so I will make my com ments on the first part of the Bill and then we can leave the rest as we go thr ough it. (The Acting Chairman, Mr.

Parker Burrell, in the Chair.) First of all, there have been qu estions by some delega tions in the last cou ple of days in regard to why

Mollday, December 19, 1988 we in troduc ed the No. 23, and there also has been information that we !lad establi shed and confusion on t)avin Q a 23 and a 29 map. First of all, the reason for tt)e 23 and 29 was tha t t he confusion would not be ttler e. The commi ttee meeting knew we would be somewhere probably in the vicin ity of November and Decem ber wtJen we proceed ed, that I felt it wou ld be fair to the people and felt it to be fai r to the legislation tha t tt)ese two be brought forward -or the other on e be brought forwa rd.

They were warned back in early Ju ly that this would happen, so they 11a ve now gone around the city expl aining the two maps. The reason why we as Government intr oduc ed the 23 wa s, fi rst, The City of Winr1 ip eg Act Revi ew Comm ittee had recommended in the Act the 24 wards to cr eate the six community comm ittees of four wards each, but beca use the Government does not want to see drastic ct)anges, and tha t was part of our condition to the communjty bo un daries, it ch ose 23 wards, four per com mu nity except in St. James-Assi nib oia where it has been reduced to thr ee.

To make it clear for the record , if four wards would have been maint!l in ed in St. Jame s-Assinib oia, 0ne would have seen the dr�tic shrin kage in the size of Ci ty Cent re-Fort Rouge and an enla rgement of the St. James-Assinib oia bound ari!i!S beyond those of historic al comfJluni ty grouping s, due to the lim ited gr owth to the St. James-Assinjboia communi ty. We did not want to go int o ttJe scenario of 18 or 12 wards, strictly �ecause we felt that there was a Wl1ite Paper. Some th ing had to be done now.

There was a time elemen t of lookin g and reviewi ng, not only the White Paper th at was introd uced by the previous Go vernme nt, but also take into consid eration the Chernia ck Repor t and !Tiany reports and histories tha t have happened sin ce 1971. I just wanted to cl arifY for tile record. There hav\9 been many comments, not only in the media but many comments by Mem bers in both Parties, and what I will say tonig ht is probably not going to convince anybody to ch ange their minds.

The Governm ent of Mani toba had introduc ed changes to the city wards at this time beca use these amend ments would have to be dealt with as a result of the Bounda ries Comm ission . Just some br ief remarks. I have al ready gone on record durin g the second reading, expl aining some of our problems. The main thing, when we were looking at the wards and the num bers, was that let us try to stay away from in terfering with what we kno w as the hi storical boun daries that we know toda y because communi ty commit tees, everything seems to be by tho se particular bounda ries.

Remember tha t when you ha ve the population change s th at we are going to have, tha t even if you move boundaries over two or three streets, those people are used to using the programs tha t migh t be in tha t particular commu nity comm ittee's Parks and Rec. They might be used to the Pol ice Depart ment districts. They might be used to-e ven garbage day cycles and things like that, that will happen as a drastic result.

So to be fair, that is the partic ular reason why we-when we did sugge st or when we sat down with the Bound aries, the 76 only thiiJfj l said to them at the time was, pl ease avoid a drastic change in these boun daries. So just in that particula r first part of Bill 40, I will submit to the other Members and let them make their comments. The Acting Chairman (Mr. Burrell): I bel ieve Mr. Angus had a deal with the Chairman, and I do not want to get in bad with him. flllr. Angus: I had the floor first and I gave it to the Minis ter, M r. Acting Chairman.

My com ments are going to addr ess the enti rety of the Act and then as we get to them ther e can be piecemeal discussion, if it Is desired or req uir ed. Mr. Acti ng Chai rperson, while we support a more efficient, responsive and effective City Counci l, we find it i nco nsis tent with good planning and good management to arbitrarily select one

section to im pose change upon withou t measuring the cause and effect of that cha nge to other repor ting relationship s. To decide to reduce the size of cou ncil without ind icati ng the rul es and func tions of various standing comm ittees and the role and the power of the Mayor, the autho rity of the communi ty comm ittees, the particip ation of the resident advisory groups and so on is not consistent with go od mana gement, as far as we as a group are concerned . Alt hough ther e are some sections that can be dealt with effectively in isola tion, the num ber of cou ncill ors canno t.

Whi le a reduction may seem popular and may evert ually be supp orted as a po sitiv e step, what toe popul ation desires more is good positiv e respo nse and a responsible Government. The size of co uncil is on ly one small cog in the total effectiveness of City Counci l. (Mr . Chai rman in the Chair.) Not only is there no ind ication by this Government of an overall master plan for the Cit y of Winnip eg but they do not add ress unique needs of Inn er City cit izens.

Ther e is a general supposi tion that the problems in the Inn er City are the same as in the suburbs and that a cou ncil lor can equally represent the same numb er of cons tituents. In fact, the problems in the core area are sign ificant and inv olve considerable participa tion by council lors. While toe sub urbs have important problems that must be addressed, they are usually of a less im media te nature. This generally means that people can be more effectively served in the suburbs than in the core. We have a larger num ber of pe ople. They can more effectively be served.

But let us address representat ion by popu lation. When I first became inter ested in politic s, ther e were five cou ncillo rs representing the Fort Garry area in totalit y. Cu rrent ly, just as an example, there are 79 school trustees representing the same numb er of people that city councill ors represent The recent Electoral Division Boun daries comm issioned the cities to be represented by 3 1 ML As with an average consti tuenc y of just over 19 ,000 people.

Councill ors will be as participa tory or as busy as they want to be and no amount of legislation will improve their in terest in paying attention to their constituents, nor will a red uction of the numb er of mem bers

Monday, December 1 9, 1 988 automatically improve the efficien cy. The voters will decide and, especially in the city, will reward good politic ians and re-elect them and will defeat poor representation. Final ly, Mr. Chairman, on two points, City Council has gone on record as supporting the existing 29 members. While this may appear to be self-serving, it is for sure a slap in the face to ram it down their throats without any dia logue, espec ially when the former Government led them to believe there would be no chang es. The Go ve rnment Bo unda ries Review Comm ission has not reported.

While this committee is to report on the names of wards and the bound aries, where the bounda ries are to be located, it nonetheless behooves the Legislature to receive the report before making a decision on the size of council. While a dif ferent system of repre sentation may effectively reduce the number of council lors, to deal with this one point in isolation is fundamentally wrong. Mr. Chairman, I would like to suggest that it is our intention to introd uce amendments to the powers of the Auditor .

The Min ister will remember that during the summer in Question Period, I specifically asked the Minister if he would strengthen the City Auditor's power and provide for value-for-money types of audits. The Minister responde d that he would discuss this with the city, in a process that I respect by the way. In November, the Minister brought forward the proposed amendments to the Auditor's power. While these amendments are a step in the right direction, in my opinion, they do not go really far enough.

I can only assume that the Minister discussed these changes with the of ficial delegation, including my earlie r asked que stions regarding operational audits and, for reasons that are unknown to me, the Min ister has decided not to extend the Auditor's powers. * (22 10) The Liberal Caucus believes that strengthening the Auditor's powers is a good business decision and is prepared to int roduce further amendments now that will strengthen the role of the Auditor.

Generally, without limiting the power of the admini strat ion or the Board of Commissioners or any of the employees in the system to carry out their functions, we want the Auditor who works for and reports to cou ncil to assure council that money has been expended with due regard to economy and efficien cy, that satisfactory proced ures have been established to measure and report the effectiveness of programs where such procedures cou ld appropria tely and reasonably be implemented, and to report to council any irregularities that are incons istent with the efforts of A and B above.

These extended investigative powers are comparable to the Provincial Auditor's and the federal Auditor's existing power. As a matter of informa tion, the cities of Edmonton and Calgary report savings in excess of $ 1 mill ion annually by uti lizing similar types of mana gement aud its. I bel iev e these min utes are cons istent with good management and will lead to an improved and more effective investment of taxpayers' dollars in the City of Winnip eg. Finally, Mr. Chairperson, the business tax. Business tax proposals give the city the right to establish by by- 77 law the busine ss ta x rate to be charged .

The Government has put a 15 percent ceiling on the amount that can be charged and while this is con sistent with what The Municipal Act calls for, it nonetheless provides a substantial reduction for some of Winnip eg's largest corporations. This will effectively reduce the business tax charged to banks, insurance companies, trus t compan ies, oil and gas compan ies, and save t hem in excess of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

This money will have to be recouped from somewhere and it means the smaller organizations will pay more. lt means that big business gets a break at the expense of the little guy and it concerns me when they bring this in. There is a problem with the reassessment. That is a fairly well-known fact . lt is in an awful state right now. The fact that the legislation is dealing with a report that went through council on July 10, 19 85, that decision was based on a 19 83 report, leads me to be conc erned in 19 89 when we start to implement tax reform, if you like, at the city level.

I would like to know exactly what the dollar amount is that we are going to be for giving the bigger businesses, and what is the total plan for the business tax in the city. Also I would like to know all of the facts affecting the city's decision whether they are still relevant or not. However, having said that, I believe the city can and should be responsible for their own decisions and the existing legislation is outdated. This is an improvement. So we are prepared to support the autonomy of the city in terms of their business tax.

We think that it is a step in the right direction, but again there was a lack of explanation as to the requirements. I felt fortunate that I was part of the city and knew it. I would like to say I had some concerns expressed to me in relation to the Auditor's propo sal. I have circulated a letter which said in part what I have just read to the committee to all members of City Council asking them to make representation to me if they had any concerns about that. I only heard posit ive things back from counci llors.

I also have double verified with the legal department and the administrat ion in the province as to whether or not the Auditor would be able, all owed to, or encou raged even, to comment on political decisions. lt was not my intent to allow the Auditor to comment on the decisions that politicians make, only on the effectiveness of those programs being carried out and that proper procedures are put in place. I have been assured by the legal department that is what the prop osed amendments will do. So with those remarks Mr. Chairperson, I am prepared to pass the Bill. ' Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): Briefly, on the Bill, I spoke at second reading. First of all, I would like to say to the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ducharme) we are pleased that some of the pol icy issues are consistent with the previous Government's dealing with a decision that you made on urban sprawl, I think was a correct one. I think the decisions, some of the priorit ies of the Inner City, pr oceed ing with those priorit ies in the Inner City, I think have been valuable and we want to go in a posit ive way on record on those issues.

I think the Winnip eg Education Centre, we were pleased that the Min ister proce eded with and I want to take this opportun ity to say that.

Monday, December 1 9, 1 988 We have already stated our position on the size of City Council at the second reading stage. We cannot make a decision on the size of City Council without a discussion paper, a White Paper, or legislation ltseif in terms of the other part of the equation and the Minister knows that. I think we have discussed that in entirety. We would have actually welcomed that presentation from the Minister.

We know he has quite a bit of kn owledge in terms of ur ban pol itics, urb an administration, in the City of Winnipeg, and the workings of City of Winnip eg, and I look forward to the day when he does present that paper. I know that with two portfolios and a new Government he has been very busy. I am sure that he is working on something like that. I think, at that point, we can deal with his vision Of the size of City Council. To do so beforehand is to put the proverbial cart before the somewhat dead horse in this case, and I think it would be a mistake. I think we have said that, and we do not have to repeat it.

One councillor per 22,000 people is a lot. Potentially up to one councillor per 30,000, I think, is starting to take away from grassroots partici pation in the democratic process and really at a cost of the wages and benefits of one commission er, so I do not believe it is a cost-effective move in the city and I think it should be dealt with in terms of the relationship between the city and its elected representatives. We bel

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-1-la3
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 1st hansardpdf la3.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	80e4548afd8efe11040aa3aaf06b1502b82c0550

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