MG-8048 Fourth Session -T hirty- Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 42 Eliz abeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLII No . 98 • 10 a.m., FRIDAY, JU LY 9, 19 93 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE J'SSEMBL Y Thirty -Fi fth Legisla ture Members, Constituencies and Poilltlcal Affiliation NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky GARST AIR S, Sharon CE RILLI, Marianne CHOM IAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRI EDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERN ST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonar d S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GIL LESHAM MER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis HELWER, Edward R.

HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATH LIN, Oscar LAUR ENDE AU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALL ISTER, Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROGAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE, Jerry SVEIN SON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WASYL YCIA-LEIS, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant Vacant Vacant CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Vi rdtm Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon Eatst Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boni facE• Minnedosa Crescentwcood Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elm wood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon W1�st Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Em erson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Gla dsto ne Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Flin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River Rossm ere Rupertsland The Maples PARTY.

Lib eral NDP NDP Liberal NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Lib eral PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Lib eral NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

5300 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBL Y OF MANITOBA Friday, Ju ly 9, 19 93 The House met at 10 a.m. PRAYERS ROUT INE PROC EEDINGS PR ESENTING PETITIONS Mr. George HI ekes (Po int Do uglas): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Bonnie DePauw, Craig Spencer, Kelly Lounsbury and oth ers reque st ing th e Min ister of Health (M r. Orchard) consider restoring the Children's Dental Program to the level it was prior to the 1993-94 budget. Mr. Cllf Evans (I nterlake): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Lorna Temple, Murr ay Lee, Melba Stewart and others requesting the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) consider restoring the Children's Dental Program to the level it was prior to the 1 993-94 budget. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Santos). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed) Mr.

Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Mani toba humbly sheweth that: WHE REAS Man itoba has the highest rate of child poverty in the country; and WHERE AS over 55,000 children depend upon the Children's Dental Program ; and WHER EAS several studies have pointed out the cost savings of preventative and treatment health care programs such as the Children's Dental Program ; and WH ERE AS the Children's Dental Program has been in effect for 17 ye ars and has been recognized as extremely cost-effective and critical for many fam ilies in isola ted commu nities; and WHER EAS the provincial government did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing plans to eliminate 44 of the 49 dentists, nur ses and assi stants provi ding this service; and WHERE AS preventative health care is an essential component of health care reform.

WHEREF ORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Leg isla tive Assembly of Manit ob a may be pleased to reque st the Mini ster of Health (Mr. Orchard) consider restoring the Children's Dental Program to the level it was prior to the 1993-94 budget. Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member (Mr. Dewar). It complies with the privileges and the practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [agreed) Mr.

Clerk: The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that: WHERE AS Manit oba has th e highest rate of child poverty in the country; and WHERE AS over 55,000 children depend upon the Children's Dental Progr am ; and WHER EAS several studies have pointed out the cost savings of preventative and treatm ent health care programs such as the Children's Dental Program ; and WHERE AS the Children's Dental Program has been in effect for 17 ye ars and has been recognized as extremely cost-effective and critical for many families in isolated communities; and WHERE AS the provincial government did not consult the users of the program or the providers before announcing plans to eliminate 44 of the 49 dentists , nurses and assis tants pro viding this service; and WHERE AS preventative health care is an essential component of health care reform.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that th e Legislative Assembly of Manitoba may be pleased to requ est th e Minis ter of Health (Mr. Orchard) consider restoring the Children's Dental Orogram to the level it was prior to the 1993-94 budget.

5301 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMI TTEES Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Acting Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Fifth Report of the Standing Co mmittee on Law Amendments. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Your Standing Co mmittee on Law Amendments presents the following as its Rfth Report. Your com mittee met on Wednesday, July 7, 19 93 , at 7 p.m. in Room 255 of the Leg islative Building to consider bills referred.

Your committee heard representation on the bill as follows: Bill 3- The Oil and Gas and Conse quential Amendments Act ; Loi concernant le petrole et le gaz na tu ral et appor tant des modifi cati ons correla tives a d'autres lois Written Submission: Samuel Doyle -Association of Mani toba Land Surveyors Your committee has considered: Bill 3- The Oil and Gas and Conse quential Amendments Act; Loi concernant le petrole et le gaz natu ral et appo rtant des modif ications correlatives a d'au tres lois and has agreed to report the same with the following amendments: MOTION: THAT

section 6 be amended by striking out "June 30" and substituting "December 15 ". MOTION: THAT subsection 24(3) be amended by striking out "and thereafter until the appointment is revoked and a successor is appointed". MOTION: THAT

section 49 be amended by adding "and dispose of" after "remove". MOTION: THAT subsection 53( 5) be amended by striking out ", in accordance with the regulations,". MOTION: THAT

section 57 be amended by striking out "is not renewed under subsection 52(3) or". MOTION: THAT subsection 59 (1 ) be struck out and the following su bstitu ted: ReqLIIIrement for survey 59(1) Where the director considers it necessary or advisable to have a survey made of a reservation area or lease area to settle a dispute respecting the position of the area, or where no plan of survey exists for a reservation area or lease area or any part of it, the director shall require the applicant for, or the holder of, a disposition in respect of the area to obtain a survey of the area or any part of it, as the director may determine, in accordance with The Surveys Act. MOTION: THAT clause 70(1 )(

c) be amended by adding "or the transfer document is executed by a person who has autho rity to execute it on behalf of the corporation" after "document". MOTIION: THAT subsection 70(2) be am ended by adding "of the disposition" after "a duplicate copy". MOTI40N: THAT subsection 74(2) be amended by striking out •a cav,eat or other" and substituting "an". MOTICON: THAT subsection 79(1 ) be amended by striking out "this Act" and su bstituting "section 91 ". MOTI<)N: THAT subsection 79(2) be amended by striking out "this Act" and subs titu ting •section 91 ". MOTI<>N: THAT

section 12 5 be amended by adding "and The Surface Rights Act" after "the regulations". MOTIC>N: THAT subsection 15 1 (2) be amended (

a) in the part preceding clause (a), by adding "or relocation" after "construction"; and (

b) in clause (a), by adding "or relocated" after "constructed". MOTIC>N: THAT clause 16 8(1 )(

d) be amended by adding "property or" after "impact on". MOTICIN: THAT 1the English version of su bsection 16 9(2) be ame nded in the part preceding clause (

a) by striking out "license" and substituting "licence".

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 5302 MOTION: THAT subsection 17 1 (1 ) be amended by striking out "The holder of a license or permit issued in respect of a well or oil and gas facility that is abandoned" and substituting "Where a licence or permit issued in respect of a well or oil and gas facility is cancelled, or the well or oil and gas facility is abandoned, the holder of the licence or permit". MOTION: THAT subsection 17 1 (4) be am ended (

a) in the part preceding clause (a), by striking out "rehabil itation required, within five years" and su bstitut ing "re pair or rehabil itation required, within six years". (

b) in cla use (b), by adding "or property damaged" after "cont aminated". MOTION: THAT subsection 17 2(3) be amended by adding", and interest earned on those amou nt s," after "1 84(7)". MOTION: THAT subsection 17 2(4) be amended by striking out "or" at the end of clause (b) , by adding "or" at the end of clause (

c) and by adding the following after clause (c) : (

d) mak e an expenditure from the Abandonm ent Fund Reserve Acco unt to defray costs arising in relation to any adverse impa ct on proper ty or the environment resulting or that might result, in the opinion of the minister, from a well, oil and gas facility, or geophysical operation. MOTION: THAT sub

section 17 2(6) be struck out and the following substituted: Recovery of expenditure from reserve account 172(6) An expenditure ma de from the Abandonment Fund Reserve Account in respect of a geophysical operation, well or oil and gas facil ity (

a) is a debt due to the Crown by the holder of the licence or permit, as the case may be, issued in respect of the geophysical operation, well or oil and gas facility; and (

b) is recoverable under

Part 1 7. MOTION: THAT su bsection 192(1) be amended by adding "under this Act or The Oil and Gas Production Tax Act" after "by a person". MOTION: THAT

section 208 be amended by stri king out "or" at the end of clause (a), by adding "or" at the end of clause (b) , and by adding the following after clause (b) : (

c) makes application to be registered, or is registered, as an oil and gas lease agent; MOTION: THAT

section 242 of the French version be amen ded by stri king out "con stit ue nt" and su bstituting "constitue". Your comm ittee has also considered: Bill 20- The Social Al lowances Regula tio n Vali dation Ac t; Loi va lidant un regl ement d'application de Ia

Loi sur l'aide sociale and has agreed to report the sam e witho ut amendment. All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Laurendeau: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honour able member for Ni ak wa (Mr. Reimer), that the report of the com mittee be received. Motion agreed to. * * * Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Seventh Report of the Sta nding Commit tee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources. Mr.

Clerk: Yo ur Standing Co mmittee on Public Utili ties and Na tu ral Resour ces presents the following as its Seventh Report. Your com mittee met on Wednesday, July 7, 19 93, at 5 p.m. in Room 254 of the Legisla tive Buildin g to consider the An nual Report of the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission for the year ended March 31 , 19 92. Mr. Derek Smith, president and chief executive of ficer, provided such in form a tion as was requested with respect to the annual report and bus iness of the Mani toba Liquor Control Commission.

5303 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 Your co mmit tee has consider ed the annual report of the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission for the year ended March 31 , 19 92, and has adopted the same as presented. All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Laurendeau: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the ho nourabl e member for Niak wa (M r. Reimer), tha t the repor t of the com mittee be received. Motion agreed to. * (1 005) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Unem ployment Rate Provincial Com parisons Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. Mr.

Speaker, Canada's unem ployment rate drop ped slightly this mon th , but unfortunately Manitoba's unemployment rate went up. In fact, onl y three pro vi nces had an increase in their une mployment rate -Manitoba, Quebec and Newfoundl and-but by far, Manitoba had the highest increase in their unemployment in the June stati stics. Mr.

Speaker, every ti me we raise questions about jobs and unemployment the Premier says, next year things will be great, next year we will be first out of the chute, next year we will have the best econom ic performance in the country, next year we will be this, next year we will be that. Canada's unemployment rate is going down. Manitoba's rate is going up. I would like to ask the Premier: Why are we going in a different direction than the rest of the country in terms of jobs and unemployment? Hon. Gary Fllm on (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the member opposite always twists the figures to meet his particular political need, which is always to be negative. When we have been running at the lowest or second lowest unemployment rate in the country, he has said it is because people are not attempting to re-enter the workforce, that nobody is coming back to try and re-enter the workforce. This month what we did have was 3, 000 additional people employed, and what we did have was 7,000 more people come back and register because they see some optimism in getting back into the workforce.

Then he turns that into a negative, turns around the positie>n he has been taking for the last four mo nths and says, well, something is wrong with it. The fact of the matter is, those people who have not been seeing any opti mism, who have not been regist1:�ring to try and find employment are now there because they see some opt imism, and that is, more people registered to try and find work, and the num b1ns are there. He should be happy about that, Mr. Speaker. Our numbers of employed people are up.

We continue to be in the lowest half or fourth lowest in the c�Ju ntry, and mor e people are seeking employment in this province and have been for a while. We think that is a positive thing, Mr. Speaker. Mr. D1oer: Mr. Speaker, there are always more peoplE! who join the labour force in June. The PremiEir knows that. We have never had 55,000 peoplE! unemployed in June in Manitoba since 19 66, E�xcept last year, aga in, when the Tories were in offic•e. Mr. Speaker, we are now for the first time ever since we have maintained sta tistics in last place in unemployment in western Canada.

The labour force is increasing in British Colum bia. The labour force is increasin g in Alberta. We are behind British Col umbia, Alberta, Saskatc hewan. We are in last place in western Canada. Winnipeg is in last place of all cities in western Cana da, in spite of much greater popul ation increases and mu ch greater increases in the labour force in those provinces, and that is before we have calcu lated the layoffs that took place and job reductions that have taken place at Hydro last month, in mining last month, at Cortelco last month, at Great-West Life last month.

I would like to ask the Premier: Why is this the first tim•e ever? Why are we in last place in western Canada? Mr. Fllmon: Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, the member opposite takes great delight in being as negativ·e as he can possibly be. He is the king of gloom and doom . The ·fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, this­ [interjec:tion] The member opposite does not want to hear the answer. * (1 01 0)

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 5304 Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I have asked the Premier why- An Honourable Member: Stop trying to shout me down, you fool . Mr. Doer: When the Premier grows up, I will proceed with my question. [interjection] Well, if the members opposite do not think it is a seriou s problem when Canada is reducin g its unemploymen t rate and Manitoba is increasing its unemployment rate much higher than any other province in Canada, if they do not think it is serious, a lot of people outside of this building think it is very serious. They are star ting to lose touch with reality, Mr.

Speaker. Em ployment Creat ion Strategy Federal Assistance Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Premier has invested $7,000 of taxpayers' money in meeting with Kim Campbell for the swearing-in ceremony. Federal-provincial relations are very import ant to Manitobans. When can we expect some of the job dividends in the relationship with the Premier and the new Prime Minister? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the member opposite talk s about the com parison bet ween Canada and Mani toba.

Ma nitoba continues to have a lower unemployment rate than Canada as a whole, than all of the provinces to the east of us. That is the question the member opposite will not face. The reality is, we continue to be better than the country as a whole. We continue to be better than all of the provinces to the east of us. Econom i c Growth Em ployment Creat ion Strategy Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon Eas t): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for either the Premier or the Minister of Finance. The fact is, we compa re Manitoba usually with the western provinces.

Even Saskatche wan is far better off than Manitoba in terms of unemployment, and if we look at the figures, this figure we have for this month is the highest level of unemployment ever realized in the province of Manitoba in the mo nth of Ju ne-the highest ever. So there is something very structurally wrong in this province. My questi on, therefore: The economy is in rough shape. We compare very poorly with the rest of western Canada in most major cities.

Will this government now recognize that the No. 1 problem facing this province is unemployment and the lack of economic growth, and will this government now finally begin to st imula te the economy and make it the No. 1 priority so Manitobans can get back to work? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I do not know if it is because the member for Brandon East is with us again today, but this is the first question we have had on the economy, I believe, in three weeks, so I think that speaks volumes. The absence of those questions speaks volumes as to the interest of the NDP party in the economy.

Let it be said that employ ment and unemployment is a big issue with governments throughout the country and, indeed, governments around the world. As a matter of fact, I know, for instance, that having talked this issue over with former Minister of Finance Mazankowski at the G-7 meetings, indeed mo st of the time was directed toward the unem ployment question across the western world. It is the big issue. It is not interest rates. It is not necessarily levels of debt or deficits. It is the level of employment. It is the big issue everywhere.

So the members across the way do not have to stand on the pretext that it is only an issue with them, but if the member is going to be selective with his statisti cs, why does he not indicate that much of Manitoba's recent job growth has been in full-time employment? For the fi rst six months of '93 , ther e were 388,000 Manitobans working full time, 8,000 more than the same period last year. That is a gain of 2.1 percent, four times the national growth rate in full-time jobs of half of 1 percent. Why does he not select those sta tistics? * (10 15 ) Econom i c Growth Infrastr u cture Renewal Mr.

Leonard Evans (Brandon Eas t): Mr. Speaker, the key figur e is the rate of unemployment, and we do very, very poorly in terms of unemployment in this province. I want to ask the Minister of Finance, because we have asked him this months back, weeks back, but

5305 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MANITOBA July 9, 19 93 we are going to ask him again in view of the seriousness of this. I would trust the government would recognize this is a serious problem and not try to push it under the mat by selecting their par ti cular fig ur es that par ticularly suit th eir purposes. Mr. Speaker, will this government establish a joint mu nicipal-provincial infrastructure program to stimula te our economy?

It is recognized that the rate of econo mic gr owth is related to the development of basic infrastructure and even, I might add, the G-7 leaders are now recognizing tha t job creation has to be a priority in our econom ies. I would simply ask this Minister of Rnance (Mr. Manness): When will we get some acti on? When are we going to get some action in creating jobs and developing infrastruc ture ? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): It is interesting that the member opposite shoul d make tha t point now that he has lost his other points, Mr.

Speaker, because the fact of the matter is, last week, as we had the discussion with the First Ministers in Vancouver, I pointed out to them--{interjection] No, it was last Sunday. Your memory is failing you. You better be careful. Mr. Speaker, as we talked about the com parisons of appro ach and investment in long-term infrastructure and job creation through that vehicle, I pointed out to them that on average, across the country in all of their budgets, they had reduced their capital spending by over 18 percent, all of these provinces on average. Manitoba's was the lowest.

We had reduced our capital spending by 5 percent year over year, and that was the first time in five budgets. We had done everything possible to keep that capital spending up, but they had all gone down, particularly New Democratic administrat ions, who had slashed highways and capital spending by close to 20 percent. This New Democrat does not understand that in of fice, his New Democratic colleagues are not following that policy, Mr. Speaker. Social Assistance Employment Creation Strategy Mr . Leonard Evans (Brandon East) : A supplementary, Mr.

Speaker: Obviously, if we have 4,000 more people unemployed in Manitoba today than a year ago, the economic policies of this government are failing. There is no action plan. Them is no plan to put people to work in this province. I have a question, a very specific question, for the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst). Because we have 16 ,000 cases of people on welfare in the city of Winnipeg, people who want to work, has the Min is1ter of Urban Affairs made any progress in developing a job program for welfare recipients in the city?

We want it in other cities too-Brand on, Portage and so on-b ut there is this one particular initiative taken by the city, and I note that Winnipeg has the highest level of unemployment in western Canada, 11. 8 percent unemployment. Wh•en will this minister come to an agreement with the city and start putting some people to work? * (1 020) Hon. Clayton Mann ess (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, as the First Minister (Mr.

Filmon) has indicated, we take some pride in having maintained our level of capital spending at the highest levels basically in relative terms across Canada, certainly in the course of the last numb er of years. Mr. Speaker, if stimul ating the economy means you spend mo re than you tak e in, I can tell the-[interjection] Well, there, that is the number I was going to use. See, the members show the numb •:H, $862 million last year. That means, in essence, we stimu lated the economy by using their num� Hs, $862 million. That was not enough.

This year, in this budget, we are going to sti mul ate the economy, again, by the definition, spending more than you are taking in, by $367 million . That obviously is not enough for the members. How much more do they want to stimul ate the economy, how many hundreds of millions of dollars mo re because , Mr.

Speaker, when I table the unau dited Fourth Quarter Report of last year, when ultimately the final numbers as to the deficit are brought in, and I will be tabling that in the course of the ne·xt couple of weeks, the members oppo site will notice that the greatest increase over budget in a department was in the Department of Rnance service costs and, indeed, those service costs when they increase, they do not employ one more Manitoban. So ho w ma ny fewer Manitobans does the member want employed as a result of service costs

July 9, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 5306 going up because of a higher deficit? He cannot have it both ways, Mr. Speaker. Student Social Allowanc es Program Reinstatement Mr. Paul Edwards (Lea der of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Pr emier (Mr. Filmon) of th is province has on a number of occasions said that the best social program is a job. I agree with him wholeheartedly. I have said that before, and I will say it again. But, Mr.

Speaker, last night, I sat on a comm ittee lo oking at Bil l 32, The Social Al lo wances Amendment Act, which eradicates, eliminates, the ability of the very needy children in our com mun ity to continue to go to school. We heard very clearly, we heard from every expert who came, who worked in this field, it is going to send them down the street to the welfare offi ce to regular welfare, which they canno t go to school on. It is a bill which is dedicated to making it harder for these children to get an education, which is their only hope of getting a job. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the minister.

Will he reconsider this act? Will he un derstand and explain why we are going to make it harder for young adults to get educated in our society? Why are we doing that? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, it is obvious, even though the member sat through part of the hearings on this yesterday, he does not understand that this has nothing to do with children. Children are educated in the public school syste m. We have programs for children in the public school system and in the child welfare syst em.

The bil l which we have been discussing and which was passed at com mit tee last night is dealing with adults who want to return to the high school system to pursue their education. I indicated to the member last night that this gov ernment has put forward numerous reforms in the whole social allowance syste m. I told him last night, and I will reiterate it again, this is a very dynamic area now. The Province of Ontario ma de some ma jor, major changes, annou nced some major changes yester day.

Gove rnments all over North America are looking at new ways to provide income for people without jobs, whether they are in the United States or Canada. There are dramatic changes taking place here, and I indicated to the member we are involved in many discussions to look at ways in which we can put programs in place for people to receive an education but also to avail themselves of that basic safety net that is required for some of th em. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, if I used the word "children" inadvertently, I apologize. I also used the words "young adults", and I understand that this deals with young adults.

I do not want this issue skewed by that distinction. The reality is, the people told us last night-who work with these people, who teach them, who deal with th em, who have never been in this building before but came last night without a political axe to grind to tell us that this is a very, very bad mistake, because it makes it more difficult for people to get educated, and it makes it more easy for them to continue to get welfare do llars withou t being educated. In fact, they cannot be educated when they go on the other syst em. Mr. Speaker, this does not save the province money.

It pushes it down the line, but it does not save us money, either in the short term or the long term. The minister talks about a dy namic syst em, about discussions. What can he tell us today that we can pass on to these people as a hope for them to continue their education, to keep going to school to give them the only chance, the only hope they are going to have to have a job in our society? * (1 025) Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I accept the member's apology and certainly his admission that he does not fully understand the syste m.

I think the member shoul d also recognize that there were a number of opinions expressed there yesterday. Some of the lack of understand ing that he sh ows was also par t of some of the presentations that were made, that there was not an understanding of Workforce 2000. There were some who, as the member, though t this referred to 16 -and 17 -year-olds. I have gone through the number of reforms we have brought to the social allowance system on a number of occasions, and I woul d simply say to the

5307 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 member that there are discussions going on to look at ways of enhancing the syst em. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, what we heard last night was that people who are on welfare between 18 and 24 months generally do not come off. That is what we heard. We also heard that the vast major ity of these people, and this is com ing from people who work with th em, who are on this program will end up on the regular welfare syst em, which pays them more , and they cannot go to school. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I want to ask the minister: Can he produce a study, can he produce anything which subs tantiates his view that these people are somehow going to stay in school and be as well off or better off? Can he produce anything which sugg ests that what the experts told us last night was wrong? That is the nub of this. These people are not going to be able to go to school. They are going to cost us more. They are going to cost us more for the rest of their lives, and the human cost is going to be immeasurable.

What has he got to show us, to defend this action in his role as a minister of this government, su pposedly acting in the interests- Mr. Speaker: Or der, please. The honourable member has put his question. Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr. Speaker, certainly, some of the experts, members of the public who spoke, spoke on both sides of the issue. There is no question that people across this country who are on social al lowances are staying on for a longer period of time. You have a province like Ontario with 2 million people on the social allowance syste m. We are constantly looking at ways to reduce our caseload.

In fact, Manitoba has the thi rd-lowest incidence of social allowances across this country. I want to assur e the member, though, that we are in discussions with the muni cipal government in looking at ways to address th e issues he has raised. Home Care Program Reinstatement Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has not been forthright in his description of the devastating cutbacks to the Home Care budget. He woul d not reveal the criteria for those cutbacks, and he did not tell us that the Home Care budget in the city of Winnipeg will bt� less this year than last year. Mr ..

Speaker, I am asking the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to step in and ask this Minister of Health to put the se Home Care cutb ack s on hold and reinstate the program as it existed prior to this budgElt. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minis ter of Health): Mr. Speaker, over the course of Estimates, Question Period, for the last five years, Manitobans have been sub jec ted in Question Perio d to this accusation of cutbacks in the Home Care Program, and atll the while, the program has increased, increased, increased, with the exception of one area.

That one area, Sir, is in domestic services as provided by home suppor t workers , such as laundry and housek eeping. Those services started to decrease in the Home Care Program in 19 85 by a policy put forward by the NDP. My honourable friend says, put a halt on it. Is my honourable friend not speaking to his Leader, who sat at a cabinet table that put that policy in place, that started to work in 19 85 by remo v in g government and taxpayer paid-for housecleaning services, including la undry, and inv esting the mone�· into personal care services? Mr.

Speaker, we have contin ued with that prog ra m, and that is why today in this year's budget, we are going to buy almost 4 percent more servicElS from Victorian Order of Nur ses, almost 1 0 percent more hours of registered nursing services, almost- well, not alm ost-1 1 percent more hour s of home care assistance workers, which helps with the personal care needs of Manitobans trying to maintain an independent living style in their homes. That is hardly a cutback, Sir. • (1 030) Budget Reduction Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr. Speaker, I will ask tht� Premier (Mr. Filmon) again. Perhaps he knows.

Will he confirm that there is a $3-million cutback in Home Care homekeeping services and that the budget for the city of Winnipeg home care, which constitutes about half of the home care in the entire province, is reduced from $31 million last year to $29 mililion this year?

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 5308 Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the Home Care budget at the end of this year will reflect an increased spending of over $1 million in needed service provision. Now, part of the 4 percent increase, alm ost, of VON service will be in the city of Winnipeg. Part of the 9.5 percent increase in registered nursing services will be in Winnipeg. Part of the 11 percent increase in personal services provided, such as helping an elderly citizen dress in the morning and ba the, with personal care needs, will be in Winnipeg. Mr .

Speaker, there will be in Win nipeg, as I announced in the budget April 7, in subsequent questions, in the Estim ates process which my honourable friend has before him, that in terms of domestic services of housekeeping and laundry, there will be a decrease in that service, primarily in Winnipeg, as has happened throughout all of rural Manitoba, Brandon and the north end of Winnipeg, but needed personal care health needs will increase in Winnipeg. Housekeeping Serv i ces Criteria Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr.

Speaker, the minister, to my mind, has confirmed that there will be a decrease in the overall Home Care budget in Winnipeg from $31 million to $29 million. My final supplementary to the minister: Will the minister at least outline the new criteria which indicate amongs t other things, Mr. Speaker, that if you are incontinent once a day, you will get laundry service to clean up the mess, but if you are only incontinent two or three times a week, you will no longer get the laundry or homemaking services? Will he confirm this is part of the new criteria, and will he put it on hold? Hon.

Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): No, Mr. Speaker, I will not confirm that because that is part of the fabricated information my honourable friend tries to put out. Let me understand what my honourable friend is saying. Do you realize that in the Home Care Pr ogr am , the ma ximum, th e mo st frequent provision of housecleaning and laundry service is once every two weeks to a maximum of two hours? That is to assist people who are not incontinent. That is to assist people with modest housecleaning and laundry needs who have those services as part of their service delivery menu or in isolation.

Incontinent individuals, Mr. Speaker, will not have th eir lau ndry services reduced if that is required to maintain their independent living. What we are talking about are individuals who once every two weeks ha ve been provided with a two-hour laundry and housecleaning service; in other words, four hours per month at an average cost to other Manitobans who, since 19 85, have been purchasing this service on a policy put in place by Howard Pawley and the NDP at a cost of some $24 to $36 per month. Home Care Program Employee Gag Order Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels (St.

Johns): Yesterday in this Chamber, I gave the Minister of Health a letter with information about a constituent who had been told she would be cut off health care. Since then, we have learned about the difficult situation staff are facing, the gag order they are under, the fact they were ordered not to tell clients anything about the changes un less they were asked by a client, the fact they canno t put anything in writing to clients and the fact they have to wait for the nod from on high before they can actually communic ate to clients these changes that are underway.

I would like assurances from the minister today that the workers involved with the client whose name I gave to the minister yesterday will not be sought out, singled out or face any consequences for trying to carry out the government's orders. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I simply want to point out that in the rhetorical flourish of the NDP yesterday, they tal ked about hundreds of people. Now the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) says thousands of people complaining.

My honourable friend had a list of pink phone slips which she could have given to the Clerk to have photostated and delivered to me immediately, but I received one name-one name. Mr. Speaker, I take the circums tances of that one in dividual ver y seriously, and my staff are investigating the circumstances. I will provide my honourable friend with a report as quickly as I have it. Mr. Speaker, again, I can simply close my eyes and go back to four years ago when the New Democrats, as the second opposition party in 19 89, made the same accusations about cutbacks in

5309 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 Home Care while the program was increasing, when the Leader of the opposition party, the New Democrats of the day, sent me a ticked-off survey name that he sent o ut to constituents, presumably of his, who had no Home Care services at all but were concerned about it. When we investigated it, we found that they did not even have the service. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: Mr. Speaker, the minister himself said at least 2,000 people wou ld be affecte d, so we are talking about a significant number of people who are going to be cut off home care.

I would like to ask the minister, before we give him mo re names and information about clients affected by these changes, if he will giv e us absolute assurances that the workers involved with those clients will no t be singled out, will not face punitive actions and will not see their jobs placed in jeopardy. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, maybe my honourable friend is reflecting on the good old days when she was in cabinet and had that kind of an attitude toward civil servants, but that is not the attitude today.

My honourable friend keeps raising these fears that she cannot identify an individual who phones her because the individual is afraid to make the com plaint to gove rnment. Well, that is phony. That is absolutel y phony. We have investigated every single name that has been delivered to us by the NDP in six years, and that totals about 15 so far in five years, not the thousands the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) talks about from his seat or the hundreds that were promised yesterday, but the single name we got. Now we are investigating that.

As I have said all along, if the professional assessors in the Ho me Care department or in my divi sion of Home Care have erred in the assessment or in com muni cation with the individual, and the service needs to be reinstated or otherwise altered, that has happened. Mr. Speaker, I would say in roughly 20 percent of the individual complai nts that have come in, we have made adjustments. In the other 80 percent, the assessment by the professionals has been accu rate , but we have still investiga ted the complaint without compromising anyone. Impact of Service Reduction Ms. Jludy Wasylycla-Lels (St.

Johns): I am only reflecting on the fear and paranoia in his department and on the rampant concern among Hornet Care clients. Mr. Speaker, will the minister then provide some very specific information to the House today and tell us thE� exact number of clients affected? He said 2,000 yesterday outside the Chamber. Will he tell this House what the number is we are dealing with? Will he tell us the specific criteria and table that information? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, it was not only yesterday outside the Hous E�.

It was in the House, June 21 , 19 93, page 4499, where I give that com plete detail ed informa tion to th e member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), and now he says, well, no, you did not. Obviously, my honourable friend

a) cannot hear and

b) more importantly, canno t read, because it is here, and it has been here ever since we dealt with this is:sue in Esti mates. Mr. Speaker, my honourabl e friend knows, as I indicated in the figures I gave to my honourable friends in Estimates, that those are our estimates. Those are the best estimates we can come up with. We will not have the final figures un ti l the professional assessment is done, as has been the case since 19 85. We expect the decision on domestic services of vacuuming, housecleaning and laundry, two hours per WE�ek every two weeks, will affect upwards of 2,000 clients per month.

That is a projection made on the experience that has happened since 19 85 in rural Manitoba, in Brandon and in the north end of Winnipeg. That is the best estimate we have, Sir, given to us by the professionals who make the program work. • (1 04 0) Social Assistance City of Winnipeg Discussions Mr. Paul Edwards (Le ader of the Secon d Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I am going to return to the subject area of my first question, because I think it is very important today. I do not accept the answers of the minister that sometime down the

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MANITOBA 5310 line we are going to have some answers for these people. Last night at the committee, we had a councillor from the City of Winnipeg who came before us who was the chairperson of the appropriate committee at the City of Winnipeg. He was there at the una nimous request of the com mittee members, which included people from all political persuasions who had unanim ously told him to come to our committ ee.

He said last night in response to questions from me that he would meet with the minister, and the minister said nothing in response to this, to find dollar for dollar the same sa vings for the Province of Manitoba within the welfare syst em, within some other relationship between this government and the city. He would work toward finding dollar for dollar the same sa vings if this governm ent would withdraw this bill and sit down with him and the members of the city. He also indicated he spoke for the mayor.

Why will the minister not take the city up on that and find a different way, a better way, a more hum ane way to save the doll ars which are the genesis behind this bill? Hon. Harold Gllleshammer (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, indeed, we did have a city councillor at committee last night. I have met with city council lors on a regular basis. They also meet with the Minister of Ur ban Affairs (Mr. Ernst) to discuss issues within the city. I know the councillor speaking last night is well aware of the financial difficulties and economic problems that gove rnments ha ve.

They very publicly go through their budget exercise every year, and he announced last night they are starting on their next year's budget. Certainly, we listen to him and meet with him, and I look forward to meeting him in the near fut ure. We know they have difficulties keeping libraries open yet are able to find money for other initiatives they want to lobby government on.

I do not pretend to want to give advice to the City of Winnipeg on how they ar e goin g to resolve their financial difficulties and work on their budget but, certainly, I accept the councillor's invitation to meet, and I expect we will be meeting in the near futu re. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, he indicated he made that offer months ago. It is interesting to me that the minister today says he is willing to meet. Mr. Speaker, the other thing he indicated on behalf of the city was- Mr. Speaker: Or der, please. The honourable Leader of the second opposition party, with his qu estion . Mr. Edwards: Mr.

Speaker, the indication from him was that he had proposed to the province at least 12 options for dealing with the welfare system in this province to make it more efficient, more cost-effective. He said he had proposed 12 . I would like to have from the minister, because he did not say anything at the commit tee last night­ can he indicate whether or not that is accurate? Can he produce those options? Can he tell us what options he has canvas sed, as opposed to- Mr. Speaker: Order please. The honourable member has clearly put his question. Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr.

Speaker, the member indicates that requests for a meeting occurred months ago, and I do not want the member to leave the impression on the record that I have not met with him. I would suspect that it was about six weeks ago that the councillor and I met over a number of issues. He currently has brought before government a proposal for infrastructure renewal that is being considered by government, that has been sent back to council to look at a number of portions of that proposal that we find not acceptable. It also involves getting the third level of gov ernment, the federal government, involved as well.

I would say the city is well aware of that. Mr. Edwards: The minister has indicated in his former answers that he would have some answers. He would be dealing with this issue. It was a dynamic sys tem. He has now told us he is willing to meet with the city to work toward a solution. My question for the minister is: Why are we taking this precipitous action now? Why are we doing this now to cut people off of education, to cut people who need- Mr. Speaker: Or der, please. The honourable member has put his question. Po int of Order Mr.

Speaker: The honourabl e Leader of the second opposition party will take his bench now.

531 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA July 9,19 93 Order, please. I will remind the House that when the Speaker is standing the members will take their benches. Order, please. There seems to be some growing concern here that even though the Speaker is stan ding, members can carry on, keep putting their questions or keep putting their answers. Now, let us get this straight right here and now. When the Speaker is stand ing, the members will take their bench. * * * Mr. Speaker: Now, the honour able Minister of Family Services, to answer. Mr. Gllleshammer: Mr.

Speaker, the Department of Family Services was in Estimates this year for some 30 hours and a multitude of critics came in. I am sorry that the new Leader of the Liberal Party failed to appear there, because it is difficult for him to un derstand these complex issues at this late hour. I would remind him of numerous reforms we have brought into the syste m, and I would be pleased not only to meet with the councillor but also the Leader of the Libe ral Par ty to give him a bet ter understanding of these complex issues. Wine Boutiques Government Advertisements Mr . Jerry Storie (F IIn Flon): Mr.

Speaker, yeste rday in com mitt ee, the president of the Manitoba Liquor Commission confirmed that the commission had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars creating wine boutiques in Manitoba Liquor Commission stores across the province, confirmed that th e com mission has spent thousands and thou sands of dollars tr aini ng staff in those boutiques. Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Liquor Commission then explain why in the Free Press the go vernment has been advertising for the creation of private wine stores, private wine bou tiques, given the fact the comm ission has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayers' dollar s crea ti ng this in their own operations? Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): Mr.

Speaker, the member seems to have become very interested in this topic and wants to debate it everywhere except in comm ittee, which is where I wish he would send the bill, because I am patiently waiting for them to do second reading, send it to com mittee, so we can discuss all these details about the rationale for the establishment of private wine boutiques and all of that detail. I 1trust that someday we eventually will get in comm ittee and do that.

As to the answer to his specific question, that answer was given to him in the Liq uor Control annual report, the amount of upgrading we have done to try to provide better customer service to those Manitobans who frequent the MLCC stores. Do,es the member not wish us to provide that kind of go od cus t omer servi ce? I do not un derstand the inten t behind the que sti on. Certainly, the addition of the private wine stores, Sir, will be an enhancement and an addition to that which we are already doing. Mr. Sitorle: Mr.

Speaker, given the fact that cabim�t is going to hand out four or five of these plums, can the minister explain why there is a minimum $250,000 liquid-1 hope there is no pun intended-assets which a re going to be required beforEt someone gets one of these plums? Can the minister explain which Tory friend she is going to give these plums to? Mrs. Mcintosh: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my first answer, if the member would cease stalling on this and give second reading and let us get to comm ittee, we can go into all of those details. Certai nly, we have already had numer ous, numerous inquiries.

We are now asking for people to specifically let us know if they wish to receive an application; $250,000 in liquid assets-and there is no pun inten ded-is the minimum requirement. I think if the member investigated what it would cost to set up these stores, he would find you have to pur cha se inventory and do a numb er of other things. As to the accusations of patronage, well, we know what they are trying to do there, and it is not appreciated and not accurate. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Ques tions has expired.

July 9, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 531 2 ORD ERS OF TH E DAY House Business Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, firstly, on House business. The Standing Committee on Law Amendments will sit today at 1 :30 to consider clause by clause, Bill 29. The ot her com mittee that is called for next week is Law Amendments, sitting Tuesday, 9 a.m., to consider Bills 25 and 34. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that is the only business that the standing comm ittees have at this time. Mr. Speaker, would you call the bills in the following order: Bills 37, 31 , 36, 45, 49 and 33.

DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS BIII 37-T he Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amen dment an d Conse quential Amen dments Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed mo tion of the honourable Minister responsible for the Manito ba Public Insur ance Co rpo ra tion, Bill 37, The Mani toba Public Insu rance Co rpo rati on Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi mo difiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Societe d'assurance publ iqu e du Mani toba et appo rtant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois, standing in the name of the ho nourable member for Transcona (Mr. Reid). An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that the matter remain standing? (agreed] * (1 050) Committee Change Mr. Speaker: Or der, please. The honourable member for St. Bo ni face wants to mak e a committee change at this time. Mr. Nell Gaudry (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Crescentwood (Ms.

Gray), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments be amended as follows: Osborne (Mr. Alcock) for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry). Motion agreed to. BI II31 - The Health Services Insurance Amen dment Act Mr. Speaker: On the propo sed mo tio n of the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchar d), Bill 31 , The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'a ssuranc e-maladie, standing in the name of the honourable member for Wellington. Stand? An Honourab le Member: No. Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on Bill 31 , The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act,

an act brought in by the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) in response to a Court of Appeal ruling I believe in March. The court ruled that the province mu st immediately pay for therapeutic abortions performed in free-standing clinics. The court also ruled that these procedures are as safe as and more cost effective than tho se performed in hospital s. Mr. Speaker, the Court of Appeal ruling was fairly clear in this regar d . It also sta ted that the Department of Health, by regula tio n, did not have the authority to determine where medical services can be provi ded.

In ot her words, the Court of Appeal ruled that the go vernment legislation could not be changed simply by changing regulations and that the go vernment was required, by its own legislation, to provide for these services in a clinic, that the services were efficient, effective and particularly cost effective. Bill 31 is this government's response to that appeal court ruling. It, in effect, is an attempt to am end The Health Services Act to allo w the province to have the authority to determine where medical services can be provided. Mr.

Speaker, this is an interesti ng piece of legislation, because it is clear, and everyone who has an interest and a concern in this piece of legislation knows, that the only reason the bill was brought in was to enable the government not to fund the services that the Court of Appeal said should be funded and mu st be funded, and that the go vernment did not have the authority not to fund, i.e., th ose medical services prov ided by the Morgentaler Clinic. Everyone knows that this bill was brought in specifi cally to enab le the go vernment not to fund those services.

So we are disappointed that the go vernment would respond in this manner to the Court of Appeal ruling. (Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Speaker, in the Chair)

5313 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA July 9, 19 93 On the ot her hand, Mr. Acting Speaker, there is potential here that I ho pe the government, should this bill pass, will take advantage of. That is, this bill does allow the go vernment to determine where medical services shall be provi ded, medical services that will be paid for by the Mani toba Health Services Commission. We would hope that the government will use this piece of legislation in its broadest context, Mr.

Acting Speaker, and no t simply implement it and then stop paying for services or continue to not pay for services provided out of the Morgentaler Clinic. We hope that the government will use this piece of legislation to, for example, staff midwifery clinics. If I may be allo wed a very minimal detour here, we are waiting-! believe the minister said that this mo nth the midwifery report would be prepared and would be given by, I believe, the deputy minister to the minis ter. There ar e ma ny people in this province who are anxiously awaiting the results of that report.

I would hope that the midwifery report would su ggest and reco mmend to the minister that midwifery clinics be established in this province for a broad range of reasons, and I will no t go into them because they are no t particularly germane to this bill. But this is the kind of clinic, the kind of medical supervision, the kind of medical health service that could be undertaken by the go vernment using the authority granted to the government under Bill 31 .

We hope that the go vernmen t will take advantage of this piece of legislation to do that kind of progressive, forward-thinking, proactive kind of medical service provision. We hope that it is not, as I stated earlier, simply a situation that the government found itself in and that it is a knee-jerk response to a particular case, to a particular type of medical procedure, to a very specific clinic in this province, Mr. Acting Speaker. It can allo w on the ot her side-1 have given an example of where Bill 31 coul d allo w for the proactive provision of services.

On the ot her hand, I as sume, and I am not up on the legalities of implementation of legislation, that this legislation could give the government the authority not to fund as it is ob vio usly go ing to no t fund services provided by Morgentaler. It could also be used to say we will not fund ot her services provided by ot her people who were at tempting to provide health services. Situations where we are concerned in this on this side of the House, as are most Manitobans, with the privatization and the American ization of our health care system as a whole, with the fact that waiting lis ts are extr emely long.

We have a proliferation of walk-in clin ics . We have huge demands placed on our entire health care syste m. The government has not in any way, shape or form instituted any health reform. They brought in their paper in May of last year, a paper which on the su rface appeared to be very positive and had some excel1lent ideas in it. But, as we have seen as we alerted the public to the clay the qua lity health care document was tabled in this House that this government was not intere•sted in true health care reform, that they were interetsted in cost cutting and that alone.

Not only are they interested in cost cutting, but I would suggest that in th eir heart of hearts this government really does think that the best kind of health care system is the health care system similar to thE! United States system which is, if you can afford it, you can have it; if you canno t afford it, too bad. This is the way this go vernment has been reacting in the social services area.

It is the way the government has been reacti ng in many ot her areas: their lack of job creation programs, their lack of understanding about the need for education and training as evidenced in the government's callous implementation of the stud ent social allowances bill last night in com mittee. Thi�s bill has a potential for that happening as well, and we are worried that the government will use this piece of legislation in a narrow and reactive and n3gressive manner rather than in a positive way that we think potentially could be the outcom e of a piece of legislation such as this.

Bill :31 is an example of the power that legislation has. It is a very small bill with enormo us potential implications and ram ifications. We want to put on record that while we un derstand and to tally disagree with the genesis of this piece of legislation , that it is a reactive piece of legislation dealin!g with a very narrow situation and concern, and one that the minister was unable or felt that he could not follow the legal requirements of the Court of Appeal-and made this legislation retroac tive, I might add, so that the actions of this go vernment, from the time of the appeal court ruling to the time

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 5314 of this bill's passage, should it pass, would be legitimized. We are on record in general opposing retroactive legislation, and we have had several examples of that kind of behaviour and that kind of legislation today in this session. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) We abhor the reason for the government bringing this piece of legislation in; however, we also see so me positive po te ntial implic ati ons of this legislation should it be acted upon in a progressive manner.

We look forward to the public hearing process and to any concerns that are raised by groups and individuals in our community. We wish that this government had not brought this piece of legislation in as a cowardly kind of response to a Court of Appeal ruling and look forward to its being taken to a comm ittee and the public response to it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to put co mments on the record in regard to Bill 31 , The Health Services Insur ance Amendment Act.

We , as a caucus, are qui te prepared to have this bill go to com mittee so that members of the public will have an opportunity to express their concerns and co mments about Bill 31 . * (1 10 0) Mr. Speaker, this is a very interesti ng bill , because the potential for this suppo sedly benign change in regula tions cert ainl y has gr eat implications as to what kinds of services can be provided, and also the authority and the ability of the Minis ter of Health (Mr. Orch ard) to ma ke decisions in regar d to co mmu nity cl inics and com munity servi ces.

So ther e is a po si tive potential of this particular bill, and of course there may be negative potential as well. It is certainly no secret that in the province of Manitoba that this particular change in regulation -and I do not think the Minister of Health would disagree with this-that this particular regula tion was bro ught in specifically to ensure that the abortion services which are currently carried out at one

part icular clinic, the Morgentaler Clinic, that this regula tion would allo w the minister to not pay fees for the performing of those particular services. No w, Mr. Speaker, the Court of Appeal has determined that abortion services are legal and that regardless of what one personally believes about the issue of abortion, that they are safe, they are legal, and if that is the case, this bill will and can limit abortion services. As I say, it has already been determined that they are legal. It has already been determined that they are safe, and those kinds of services could be provided in a commu nity setting.

This particular bill will allo w the Mi nister of Health (Mr. Orchar d), which I am sure he will do, to bas ically li mit women's ability of access to these particular clinics. I think that is wrong. I think that if this minister and this go vernment have difficulties with the issue of abortion and whether in fact there should be those types of services provided, they should deal with that issue directly. They should deal with that issue aboveboard and bring the debate out into the public.

This particular bill, this particular amendment, actually is a backdoor way of changing a regulation so that they can decide to no t allo w access of women to the clinic, because in fact there will no t be any payment of fees for this particular clinic. So it is really a very backdoor way of doing things, Mr. Speaker. I would have preferred that the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) and his go vernment and his colleagues would have decided to deal with the issue of abortion, because that is I believe what they are trying to do in this regula tion.

Deal with it abo vebo ard and tal k about the issue, have a debate in the public. Now there is potential for this bill, as well, for some very positive impacts in regard to com mun ity clinics. I know that the minister in his remarks talk s about a new facility proposed by the Canadian Red Cross and that he will use that type of facil ity to-it will be covered in this type of am endment. So there is certainly the potential for very positive impacts of this particular type of regulation.

The ques tion will be, ho w will the Minis ter of Health decide that he is going to use this regulation in regard to any type of expansion of com mu nity clinics, of facilities in the community. That will be the question, Mr. Speaker, which we will judge the minister on. We have hear d about the minister's health reform docu ment. Certainly, as one goes through the principles of the health reform document and lo oks at the foundations that are laid out in that action plan, the discussion of commun ity-based services, co mmuni ty-based care is mentioned th rough out that particular document. Again, this

5315 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 particular regulatio n change in Bill 31 can allo w an increase of commu nity-based clinics, and we would like to see that. We would like to actually see where in fact the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) will start to lo ok at mo re co mmunity-based clinics, because in fact you of tent imes can provide a servi ce-if it can be pro vided sa fely -more economically, it can be mo re accessible if it is provided in the community. Again, Mr. Speaker, I will keep my remarks short.

We would like to see this bill go to co mmittee so that the public, interested citizens, will have an opportunity to debate this particular bill. Again, we see positives of this bill in terms of potential expansion of community services and community clinics. On the ot her hand, we are qu ite aware of what the minister plans to do with this regulation in regard, in specific, to the Morgentaler Clinic, and we have difficulties with his backdoor approach to the issue of abortion. With those few comments, I will leave it at that, and we will certainly be having mo re discussions about this at the comm ittee st age.

Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Minister of Health will be closing debate, as understood . Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that this bill will proceed to comm ittee. Ho wever, I do have to take some modest exceptions with some of the comments, particularly by the last speaker. Mr. Speaker, the last speaker to this legislation indicated that this amendment could be used, for inst ance, to restrict access to services of th erapeutic ab orti on for women. That is no t factu ally correct.

My hono urable friend the previous speaker appeared to base her state ment, in which she made that conc lusion, on the basis of the Court of Appeal decision. In fact, the Court of Appeal, on maj ority decision, found that the provisions of therapeutic abortions in the province of Man itoba were in no way in contravention of the Canada Health Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. My ho nou rable fri end the member for Crescentwood (Ms.

Gr ay) ought to read the ju dgment, because the sta tement she made that this amendment, if imposed on the Morgentaler Clinic would restrict women's access to therapeutic abortion, in fact is not an accurate state ment. Of course, if my honourable friend chose to accu rately relatE! the Court of Appeal decision, she would have to change her position that she presented this morning.

I accept my honourable friend's co ncerns, but as I indicated in bringing in this legislation, this allows the formalization of a process that governments, no t o,nly ours but the previous New Democrat adm in istrations and previo us Co nservative administrations, have used since we have provided insurance health care services in the province of Man itoba to determine where services can be safely and economically provided within the budget frame1work that Ma nitobans have put at their dispo!3af through taxation and borrowing to provide needetd health care services in Manitoba.

This amendment we believe will alleviate the conce'rn expressed by mino rity op inio n on the Court of Appeal that we did not have the regula tory autho 1rity as crafted in legislation to make those determinations by regulation. This will give us that authority which has been used, Sir, for 25 years by governments of a number of pol itical affi liations and no t narro wed as my honourable friend the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gr ay) , the member for We lli ngton (Ms. Barr ett), would indicate as being an amendment solely on therapeutic abortions which is factually inaccur ate. Thank you. Mr.

Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The qLJestion before the House is second reading of Bill 31 , The Health Services In sur ance Amendment Act ; Loi mo difia nt Ia

Loi sur l'ass urance-ma ladie. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed] Comm ittee Changes Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimll): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render) that thE' compo sitio n of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments be amended as follo ws: The membEir for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik) for the membt�r for Roblin-Russell (Mr. Derkach) ; the membetr for Emerson (Mr. Penner) for the member for Minnedosa (Mr. Gill eshammer); the member for Gimfi (M r. Helwer) for the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McA lpine); the member for Niakwa (Mr.

Reimer) for the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render); and thet member for Morris (Mr. Manness) for the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey). Motion agreed to.

July 9, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 5316 • (1 11 0) Bill 36- The Highway Traffic Amen dment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed mo tion of the honourable Min is te r of High ways and Transportation (Mr. Driedger), Bill 36, The Highway Traffi c Amendment Act; Loi modifiant le Code de Ia route , standing in the name of the honourable member for Transcona (Mr. Reid). Some Honourable Members: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Sta nd. Is ther e leave that that matter remain standing? [agreed] Mr. Paul Edwards (Le ader of the Second Oppos ition): Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill 36, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act. This bill in principle brings in mandatory safety inspections for all motor vehicles upon the change of ownership, and the extension of the legislation programs which are currently in place to deal with vehicles sold by motor dealers and the periodic inspection of commercial vehicles. No w in that sense it replaces the rando m in spectio n system tha t we no w have in the province. Mr.

Speaker, this is, in principle, an idea and an approach that our party has been on record as supporting and recommending and asking for, for a long time. I know that, the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) , it has been a large issue for him. It is one that I believe firmly in. I have one overriding concern with this bill-not the principle behind it but the way that it is done, and I look forward to a discussion at committee about that.

I do not intend to hold up the legislation at this point based on that concern, but I will lo ok forward to some discussio n at comm ittee about that, and that is, I want to ensur e-a nd ot hers have stated that it is a concern of theirs-that the same restrictions that apply to private vendors and purcha sers of mo tor vehicles also apply in the same way, no lesser, to the commercial dealers.

I want to ensure and make sure of that at the comm ittee sta ge, becau se I understand tha t commercial vendors, used car dealers in the city, in the provi nce, will mo st often sell vehicles which are much less likely, perhaps, to be dangerous, but the same safety requirements, the same proto col, and the same necessity for proof should be applied. Mr. Speaker, I see the members opposite saying that is in there. It may well be. I have looked at the bill; I have not been convinced as yet that it is abundantly clear, but I will wait for the committees to clarify that point. Mr.

Speaker, I also to want to discuss how it is going to be administered and how it is going to be done. As we all know, there is a lot of trade in used vehicles. The pur chaser is no t intending the vehicle to be driven ever. It is simply being bought for par ts. It is being bought for some ot her purpose. In my view, the way it should be done is that it is the obliga tion of the purchaser to ensure that the safety in spection is do ne, because then the purchaser decides, do I want to license it? If so, then I have to get the safety inspection.

If not, then I do not have to worry about it, and maybe I have bought this vehicle for parts. So, if that is the case, if that is the way this is to be administered, then I am in agreement. I think it is an appropriate bill. In reality, I know from spending some of my life in the province of Ontario, the way it works is, in fact, and it works quite well I think, is that-u nless the NDP have changed it since they go t into power, but knowing the things they have done, they may have screwed that system up since I left.

But, when I was there under a go od Liberal regime, for part of the time I was there, the system worked very well. The way it worked was that in the used car ma rket the pur chaser knew that this would be required and, if he or she was intending to license the vehicle, would simply demand from the vendor that it was sold with a safety certificate. So, in fact, it became the obligation of the vendor in reality in the marketplace.

But in law it stays the obligation of the purchaser, because then the pu rchaser has the option of licensing it, in which case you get the safety certifica te, or perhaps not licensing it, using the vehicle for ot her purposes, for parts of some ot her purpose. So that is the system which I think makes sense and works.

One of the problems with the random selection is tha t-as one who ha d a numb er of vehicle s through high school and university, as I think a lo t of people do, none of which lasted very long, and not because of my driving habits, but they were just vehicles which I paid very little for and lasted a very short time.

5317 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 I know that there is a market there in vehicles which in all likelihood should no t be on the road. That puts at risk not just the people who purchase that vehicle; it puts everybody at risk, because it is a vehicle that the brakes could go, or the lights could go, or the steering shaft could go. I mean it could be very dangerous. So it serves us all to have this. There will be additio nal costs borne by the vendors to have these safety certificates, but I think it is worth it.

I think it is worth it to know that there is a minimum standard of safety on the vehicles on the road . Driving a vehicle that is uns afe, driving a vehicle where the driver is impaired, is like having someone walking around with a loaded gun. There is no ot her analogy that is mo re appro pria te, because it is something waiting to happen, whether it is a pedestrian, another driver, children in another vehicle, children in that vehic le-these are tragedies waiting to happen.

So I certainly support in principle, albeit with some of the concerns I have expressed, and our party su pports in principle, moving to a system in which we are going to better ensure that vehicles are, in fact, road worthy. Now the ot her concern, Mr. Speaker, that I will simply mention is one that we would like to discuss and confirm at committee: there still remains the random system for vehicles that have no t been sold for a certain period of time. If you rely entirely on the tu rnover of the vehicle, it may well be that a vehicle is owned by one owner for many, many years and becomes unsafe.

So we have to still main tain a random system of check, I would sugges t, based on the age of the vehicle and narr owing out those vehicles which have no t changed hands. We certainly do not need to send out random selections to vehicles which are changing hands on a regular basis, because they are being checked every time they changed hands under this syst em, but those that are not being turned ov er, are not changing hands, if we do no t main tain some random selection for them, never will be checked. So we do have to have a balance between the two systems, but I think this is the way to go.

I think it is impo rtant and makes sense to have a system whereby vehicles are checked regularly, and I think tha t the additional cost tha t will be borne by potential vendors is well worth it and is acceptable to Mani toba motorists . Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: As previously agreed, this matter will rE1main standing in the name of the honourable member for Transcona (Mr. Reid). Bill 45-- The Coat of Arms, Emblems an d the Manitoba Tartan Amen dment Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed mo tion of the hono ur able Mi niste r of Cul tur e , Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs.

Mitchelson), Bill 45, The Coat of Arms, Em blems and the Man itoba Ta rtan Amendment Act; Loi mo difiant Ia

Loi sur les armoiries, les emblemes et le tartan du Manitoba, standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Oppo sition (Mr. Doer) . An H11)nourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave tha t tha t ma tter remain sta nding? [agreed] Mr. Paul Edward s (Le ader of the Second Opp osition): Mr. Speaker, I do no t intend to make lengthy comments about this bill, but do want to indicate that I do not like the new coat of arms.

With .all due respect to the artist, to the people involved-! have every confidence that they did their best-they should be sent back to the drawing bo ar d, because I am a little embarrassed by that coat of arms. I think that it ju st tries too much by half, and the result is that it just does no t send a clear message. I am not one who pretends or purports to be any kind of an art expert or have any sophistication about art. I know what I like and I know what I do not lik19, but I do not pretend to have a sophisticated idea of what is great art, but this emblem, I do not see it so much as an artistic piece.

It speaks for the pro vi nce. It has to represent. Peo ple in this province have to be able to relate to it in some way. It is not perhaps a major issue, but it is something which is going to be used around the province, perhaps in all kinds of ways. I jus t do not think it do es the trick. With some regret, because I recognize the expense of producing it out in the foyer here, I recognize the time and effort and expense of coming up with it, but I do no t like it. I have <�anvassed with the caucus members in our party. They do not like it. Agai n, with regret, we oppose this bill. • (1 12 0) Mr.

Speaker, I want to reiterate that I appreciate the efforts made, and I understand that people may be hur t or off ended by that judgment on this, but we

July 9, 19 93 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 531 8 do have a responsibility to look at it in the context of what our constituents are likely to think about it. They are the residents of this province and I just do not think they are going to like it, and I do not. I think we are going to have to send them back to the drawing board. I am not sure what is wrong with the old one and maybe that could be explained. Maybe I have not listened intently enough on that point but I am not completely clear why we are doing away with the old one.

Perhaps that could be clarified, and if need be, we will go back and try again, but this one to me just does not cut it. Mr. Speaker: As previously agreed, this matter will remain standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Opposition. Bill 49- The

Summary Convictions Amen dment an d Consequential Amen dments Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed mo tion of the honourable Minister of Justice (Mr. McCra e), Bill 49, The Sum mary Co nvictions Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les poursuites

sommaires et apportant des modifications correlatives a une autre loi, standing in th e name of the hono urable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) . An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Sta nd? Is ther e leave that this matter remain st anding? [agreed] Mr. Paul Edwards (Lea der of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, this bill, The

Summary Co nvictio ns Amendment and Co nseq uential Amendments Act, is a bill that I oppose and that our party will oppose. The reason for that, Mr. Speaker, is that it takes away the fine option program for parking and highway traffic offences. Now, it may be sta ted, and I know the minister has said that it will save a lot of money, $250,000 annually he says. He says it will remove jail as a penalty for nonpayment of parking tickets which I agree with and that is a part of the bill that I do support . He indicates the time to pay can be granted for those with low incomes.

What he fails to mention is that the fine option program is no t a program in which people pay in dollars. It is a program in which they pay in time. It would be fine if we allo wed people to pay ov er time and required that they pay cash, pay mo ney, if they had jo bs, if they had mo ney, if they had any disposable inco me. But, Mr. Speaker, we have 36,000 people unemployed in this city. There just are no t jobs. The people who come before the courts and qual ify for the fine option program do not have mo ney. That is why they opt for the fine option program .

If the minister is saying that Highway Traffic Act off ences are not that serious, Highway Traffic Act offences can result in hundreds and hun dreds of dollars of fines. So the fine option program is a very, very important part of the sentencing regime, sentencing options available to judges. I have had the experience and I have had the opportunity on ma ny occasions to recommend the fine option program to a client and have it appro ved by a judge because it works and it is necessary in those ci rcumstances.

The fact is that it also ma kes avai lable to com muni ty clubs, com muni ty organizations, no nprofit organizations, ma kes avai lable people to do work and work off their fines. What is wrong with that? The organizations get the labour, the work. The individual involved gets the experience of doing the work, which is oft en a very good thing, especially for young people, to know that they have to work to pay off their fine. Thirdly, it sends the message to the individual, to the young person, obviously a lot of young people use this program , that for the crime, for the act, there is a consequence.

You may not have the financial resources to pay a fine, but there is a consequence. It is real, and it is going to mean that on weekends, Saturdays, you have to go to the community club, you have to put in the hours, you have to do the work. What is wrong with that? I think it is a great syst em. I do not understand, Mr. Speaker, why we would do anyth ing to undercut, to do away with that syste m. The fine opti on pro gram is a go od program. What is going to happen? What is going to happen with young of fenders and ot hers who now do no t have that program? I know what will happen.

They do not have the mo ney to pay. Their parents will pay. Someone else will pay, or they will not be able to pay at all , but they do not get the message. It is not a bad message for people to hear and stand up in front of a ju dge to tell them that there is a consequence to this. You are not going to be let off the hook. Damage occ urred, there is a fine that is necessary, and as a result, in your communi ty you are going to have to do free work. I do not think that is a bad syste m.

5319 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 Mr. Speaker, my view would be that the bill has to be opposed. I do not know why we are scrapping this sentencing opti on, which has at its root that goal which is to send a message, a sentencing message in a real way to people who, for whatever reason, cannot afford it. We do not want to simply be able to go to their parents or otherwise and get the money, so it does have that great advant age. It is used every day in our courts. I can tell you from experience. It is u sed every day.

The judges value it and use it in appropriate circumstances as an appropriate sentence. Mr. Speaker, I am very unh appy to see that the minister is proposing to delete it, to get rid of it. I also, however, have to say that "it is not a surprise, because I do not think the minister understands the correction system sufficiently to un derstand the importance of this program .

There are many other areas of the ju stice system that give me grave concern, most notably the other two acts before this Ho use , which I have discussed, dealing with the Criminal Inju ries Com pensation Board and the Victims Assistance Fund. We are seeing a polit icization of those monies. We are seeing a reduction in benefits that will be ava ilable to the victims of crime, all the while assault, robbery and sexual assault are rising dramatically in our city. So the victims of crime, grievous crime, are increasing, and now those who are the victims of crime and cannot work are having their benefits cut.

The minister stood up yesterday in this House and said: You should be happy we have a criminal injuries com pensation scheme at all; so it is being cut; you should be happy that we have it at all . Well, Mr. Speaker, I have not checked, but I have been in other provinces. They all have criminal injuries compensation schemes to my knowledge. I would stand to be corrected on that, but certainly many of them do, if not most, if not all. I do not think the minister should say it is som e grea t blessing for our soci ety to have this.

It makes sense, if you are the innocent victim of a crime, that we have some scheme that is going to compensate you. We have the same scheme if you are in a car accident, not by your fault or something else. If crime happens to someone, then they should not be thrown out on the street and put out of a job and not have any income. It is not as if they are getting thousands and thousands and millions of dollars for superficial purposes. If they get anyt hing, it is income replacement and income replacement only. It is administered by the Workers Compensation Board, so people are not getting rich on this.

They are gE�tting compensated when they have been the victim of an assault or a personal crime that results in them not being able to continue to work. * (1 1 ::10) So the justice system generally, Mr. Speaker, under this minister's gui dance, I think is being eroded and on the Vict ims Assistance Fund ju st outright being politicized. The money is now being taken out of the hands of the Victims Assistance Committee and given to the government. That is basically it. They are politicizing those funds, and they will bring them into the fold a nd bring them into the government general revenues.

That has been the agenda for a number of years, and it is culmin ating in Bill 53 which is before th is House currently. They are mo vin g away from com mu ni ty in volve ment in that decision making, from invol vE�ment of the experts in a nonpolitical way in deciding how to fund victi ms. They are mo vin g away from that. They are moving more and more and more and bringing those mo nies into the minister's offi ce to be directEid as he sees fit.

It is fundamentally as a result of a disrespect and a dislike, I think, of consulting the public and of allowing nonpartisan people to have any real control ove r any gov ernment funds. The in teresting thing about the Victi ms Assistance Fund, it is not taxpayers' dollars. It is not revenue generated in the normal tax syste m. The Victims Assistance Fund is as a result of tariffs on finos. If people are given fines federally or provinc:ially, they pay an additional percentage of top-up which goes into the Victims Assistance Fund. So it is not as a result of income tax or corporate tax or some such thing.

It is put into the fund as a result of payme nts to people who have been convicted of crimes and pay a top-up on their fines. So the politicization of th ose funds and bringing them into general revenues is regrettable indeed, in my viE �W, Mr. Speak er, and this bill, which eradicates this option for the courts, is also very regrettable. I repeat that the provision that says that jai l will not be made an option for in these

July 9, 19 93 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 5320 cases, I do not have a probl em with, but the provisions which get rid of a sensing option for jud ges which helps the comm un ity , helps the person before the court know about this crime, deal with it in a way, they get experience doing the work, it is a good program . Why is the minister getting rid of it? I do not see in his comm ents any real defence for what he is doing, and as a result, Mr. Speaker, believe that this is a bad piece of legislation . Thank you. Mr.

Speaker: As previously agreed, this matter will remain standing in the name of the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) . Bill 33- The Provincial Railways an d Conse quential Amen dments Act Mr. Speaker: On the proposed mo tion of the honourable Min ister of High ways and Trans­ portation (Mr. Driedger), Bill 33, The Provincial Railways and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi concer nan t les chemins de fer provinciaux et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'au tres lois, standing in the name of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk). Stand? No, leave is denied. Okay. Mr.

Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, we are prepared to let this bill go to committee, but I did want t �nd much to the relief of the Gov ernment House Leader (Mr. Manness) perhaps, we are trying to work through these as quickly as we can. I think the Government House Leader understands that some of this legislation has not been around very long and some of it is very important. Mr. Speaker, this is one of those bills that I think has the potential for both some good and some bad in terms of the rail trans porta tion system in the pro vinc e of Mani toba . As my colleague the member for Transcona (Mr.

Reid) suggested, this is really an attempt by the government and perhaps an at tempt by oth er gov ernments across the country to make the best of a very bad and a very difficult situati on. There are very few communities, if any com mun ities in the province, who want to see their rail lines abandoned by our national railway companies. For many communities, one line or the other is the only means of access. Certainly the CN line that goes into northern Mani toba and up to Churchill is a good example of that.

So the idea that ov er the next few year s we are going to continue to see rail lines abandoned is a legitimate reason for conc ern. So, Mr. Speaker, we, I guess, are faced with the prospect of having to deal with Bill 33 because of the apparent willingness of the gov ernment, the apparent desire on the part of our national railways, to abandon and continue to abandon some of the thousands and thousands of miles of line that connect our province and bring people toget her, provide supply lines for our commun ities. Mr.

Speaker, I want to relate to the House one of the most frustrating experiences I have had in my almost 12 years in this Legislature, and it had to do with the use of our rail syst em. In 19 81 , after I was elected, one of the first- An Honourable Member: Why did you leave a $500-million deficit ... ? Mr. Storie: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member for Pembina (Mr. Orchard) is chirping about deficit again, and I guess representing a government that has the highest deficit in the province's history, he knows a lot about deficits.

Perhap� An Honourable Member: Yes, but you said they were manageable, Jerry, so you should have .... Mr. Storie: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member said that I said a $500-million debt was manageable. I su ppose tha t means that his $862 million is unmanageable. Well, of course, that would speak of bad management, incom petence on the part of the gov ernment, so perhaps the minister wants to get up and debate that at some point. I think that if a $500-million deficit is not man ageable, then it is pretty clear and pretty obvious that $862 million is not manageable either.

In 19 81 , shortly after I was elected, I contacted the CNR and talked to the Na tional Transportation Agenc y about the prospects of introd ucing a communit y-based rai l service bet ween the communi ties of Cranberry Portag e, Sherridon and Pu katawa gan. There are some 2,500 people approximately who are served by that rail line, and at that time it was their only access to the outside world. There was no road into Sherridon as there is currently, and there was no winter road system which opera ted bet ween Pu kata wagan and Sherridon and attached them to the provincial highway syste m. Mr.

Speaker, I did some research and found that, yes, there were in fact in other parts of Canada, in oth er par ts of the world, shor t-line rai lways

5321 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 opera ting. Some of them were operati ng for passenger service. Some of them were operating freight services, and it was certainly the opinion of the communi ties, Sherridon and Pu katawagan at least, that this communi ty-based service on that line would be extremely valuabl e. Mr. Speaker, at the time and to this day, CN ran trains on that line three times a week, so any given inch of that rail way was used for about three seconds in a week. There were days when there was no traffi c on the line at all.

It was predictable when there would be traffic on the line, and so I felt that it was reasonable that CN would be willing to lea se the line at vir tua lly no cost to a small commuter railway company, lease time on the line to a commun ity-based company. I then said, okay, let us see what kind of a service we could provide. I went to the Greater Winnipeg water services railway syste m, and for members here who do not know that, Greater Winnipeg water services has operated a little commuter vehicle on the rail line that goes out to Shoal Lake, and they have done for many, many years.

The vehicle that I test drove was, I believe, a 19 80 Ford Econoline van that had been conver ted to use rail way wheels, a conversion that cost, I was told at the time, some $6,000. An Honourable Member: A rail bus. Mr. Storie: It was a rail bus, a rail van, actually, a rail Ford van. The conversion actually cost $6,000 and that van on the line could travel approximately 40 miles an hour. At the end of the line it had a little mechanism on it that allowed the van to turn around and head back. I said, there is the kind of model that we need to apply on the rail lines in northern Manitoba.

You could simply form a co-operative. You could form a communi ty-based corporation to operate that small co mmuter to bring freight into the commu nity, to take passe ngers out. It could operate on the comm unity schedule. It would ha ve been a non profit commun ity-owned service. It seemed like such a rational solution given the fact that the people of Cana da had invested millions and millions of dollars building that rail line and it was not being used. When it was being used, certainly for passenger service for Sherridon and Puk atwagan, it was being used inefficiently. It was not even a good service.

It was not meeting the commun ities' needs. It seemed like we should be able to find a way around that. • (1 14 0) Well, Mr. Speaker, as luck would have it, the federal government got involved, and as they oft en do, destroyed the concept. Therein lay the proble m. The Honourable Lloyd Axworthy was then the federal Mini ste r of Transp or t­ [interjection] Well, I do not want to be critical of Mr. Axw<>rthy because I think through his department­ and I will not pin the blame or the credit on Mr. Axworthy -there was an agreement to atte mpt to resolve the problem.

What happened was it went from a concept of having a small van on the line, a simple concept that would cost in total for the van and the modifications that were necessary, about $20,000. All of a sudden, it became a million-dollar pilot project. Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister of Labour): How? Mr. Storie: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member for Lac du Bonnet quite rightly asked how did that happen?

Only a government that had endless amounts of mo noy to fr itte r away as the federal Liberal gov ernment did at that time would have turned a simpl'e project that would have met the commun ity needs into a pilo t project that cost millions of dollars. (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) Not only did the federal government move the project from the line that was originally discussed, they created a project that was destined to fail. The federal government decided, in its wisdom, to have a demonstration proj ect that connec ted the comm unities of Thicket Portage and Pikwitonei with Thompson.

Madam Deputy Speaker, first of all, the service between those two com mu nities was alr eady much better than the service available in Sht�rridon and Puk atawag an. Secondly, what the federal government did is decide to buy a motor coach, a huge motor coac, which cost something lik e $2 50,000. [inter jection ] The Minis ter of Highways (Mr. Driedger) may be correct that they actually bought it in England; however, they did buy a motor coach, and then, of course, it cost them a considerable amount to operate it. Then they insisted on operating it on a

schedule which did not fit the needs of the community. In stead of turning tha t vehicle ove r to the communi ty and saying, here operate this, they tried

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 5322 to operate it on a sc hedule, not understanding apparently and not listening when they were told that these comm unities wanted to have this vehicle to operate when they wanted to operate it. Then it would have been viable, because people would have paid when they wanted to go. They already had trai n service, a mu ch better train service, certainly, than Pu kata wagan. Madam Deputy Speaker, not only that, there was not the same population base .

The population base of those two communi ties was mu ch smaller than the popula tion ba se of the li ne that we originally suggested they should use. Anyway, the long and short of it-and some people want this to be short er than longer-is that the project did not work. People did not use the service as much as we would have hoped. The line and the operating costs of operating that larger bus was significant. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I did have a chance to ride on the bus on its inaugu ral run.

I was at least pleased to see that the federal government, the provincial government, could get together on an idea and try and make it work, but unfortu nately, as I said to the federal government at the time, this project was designed to fail. It was not designed to succeed. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have to find a way to help Man itobans better use the infrastructure that is in place. There is no reason why the taxpayers of Canada should have put rail lines all over the province and then everyone be denied access regardless of how mu ch sense it makes for the province to use that syst em.

So, Madam Deputy Speaker, if I may get back to the bill, that is why I say we are about to, I guess, ma ke the best of a bad si tuati on. Wha t the government is now proposing to do, of course, is to privatize some of those lines. Now, I did not read the minister's remar ks, in all fairn ess to the minister, but I hope that there is st ill the opportunity for non profit groups, for com muni ties to get involved and use these lines.

Even if these lines are transferred to private ownership, I think that there necessarily has to be a right of access to the communities and in fact the people who paid for the line in the first place. The people of Canada paid their taxes and paid for the line.

If the government, out of necessity­ we will hope not out of perhaps ideology as well-wants to sell or privatize these lines, then the least we can do is ensure that if we mu st privatize these lines to get some use out of them, if there is a better use than abandonment, that the comm unity still have access, that we will not have the line run past the comm unit y and deny them access to it. If we are going to privat ize any

section of Manitoba's rai l infrastructu re, then we have to make sure that it is better used than is cur rently allowed under the National Trans porta tion Act. [interjection] Well, I have read the notes on the bill, and I certainly hope that if that is the intention of the minister, that it actually comes to pass, that it does not get bogged down, as our national railway system has, in regulations that make absolutely no sense, absolutely no sense. Madam Deputy Speaker, the only oth er comments I have is that obviously we would prefer, I think, a national railway system that was operated in national interests.

We would prefer to find a way to utilize these lines in a way that made economic sense . We would prefer to have our province develop to create economic opportunities, rather than have to be here discussing the need for finding a way to use rail lines that are abandoned. Unfortunate ly, in the last 10 years in Canada, we have had no commitment to national transportation sys tems real ly, no comm itm ent really to our highway syste m, no comm itment to our airline syste m, no com mitment to our rail syst em, no commi tment to our ma rine system either, our seaway.

So we are prepared to let this bill go to committee. I indicate we are willing to see where this takes us and what the people at com mitt ee have to say. We do this without any joy. We think that there was a better way, but on the other hand I com mend the minister for at least looking for options. I know this minister, and I respect that he has the interests of the community at heart.

I hope that ideology does not pervade what ac tually happens after this bill is implemented, if it should pass, and it becomes an ideological tool to simply privatize it without regard for the fact that Canadian taxpayers paid for this system and they deserve to have it serve their interests and not ju st some private individual's interest. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is second reading of Bill 33, The Provincial Rai lways and Consequen tial Amendments Act (Loi

5323 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 concernan t les chemins de fer pro vinciaux et apportant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois). Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed) Committee Change Mr. Cllf Evans (Interlake ): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Burrows (Mr. Martin dale), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments be amended as follows: St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia­ Leis) for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen). Motion agreed to. * (1 15 0) *** Hon.

Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, will you call Bill 30 to be followed by Bill 41 . Bill 30-- The Vulnerable Persons Living with a Mental Disability an d Consequential Amen dments Act Madam Deputy Speaker: To resume debate on second reading of Bill 30 (The Vulner able Persons Living with a Mental Disability and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi concernant les personnes vulner ables ayant une deticience mentale et appo rtant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois) , on the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mr.

Gilleshammer), standing in the name of the honourable member for Burrows. Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Deputy Speaker, I plan to speak for a few minu tes and then we will pass this bill to committee. I know there are people in the communi ty who are anxious to ma ke public presentations, and we are anxious to hear them. This is a very important bill and a very long bill and one tha t has been in the making for a number of years. A great deal of consu ltation with the comm unity who are affected has been undertaken. I would even like to commend the minister for his efforts in consulting the community.

Not everybody agrees with everything in this bill, but I think that the government did make a good atte mpt to consult with as many people as possible. Our society's atti tudes have changed over the years with regard to people with mental disabilities. In fa,::t, just in my short lifetime, I think we have come1 full circle. I can remember that, when I was in ele1mentary school, there was a student a year or two ahead of me who was in a regular classr oom , whom now we would call mentally disabled.

At that time, the teachers probably did not mcognize the kind of student who was in the class and tried to deal with her as if she were like any oth er student in the class, and with really terrible consequences for that individual, because when she was unable to learn something, she was dealt with the same way that other students were, name,Jy, she was given the strap repeatedly for not being able to learn. That was most unfortunate. Th1m these students were taken out of the school system and put in special schools. They were segre,gated.

Of course, over the years, many of these individuals have been in institutions. Now we have a swing that has come back, or we have gone full circle, and many of these individuals are being mainstreamed, to use the jargon. Many of these individuals are living in group homes or living in apartments or living in supportive living settings, and many of them are back in the regular school sys tem. It is good to see that, wherever possible, people are reintegrated into our society and treated like everyone else. I guess that is the result of increstsed understanding on the part of our society.

Bill 30 brings about ma jor changes, main ly having to do with conf erring rights on these individuals. I suppose that is partly a result of lobbying that various groups have done. I sup pose it is a result of things like the Charter of Rights and Freedoms whereby all people have rights, and it is only in exceptional circum stances that these rights can b�� taken away. In fact, it is my understanding of the history of this legisla tion th at, had this legisla tion not been forthcoming , there was a group that was prepared to go to court and challenge the existing legislation.

So thi:s is a bit of a tradeoff whereby that group did not go to court, and, in stead , we have this legislation to replace it. The government had a review committee, and we have their discussio n paper on possible changes to legislation affecting Manitobans living with a mental disability which was-1 guess this repor t is dated September 19 91 . It is a very interesting report and a very comprehensive report, and, of course, the people who had the greatest in put in to this were hoping that all of th eir

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 5324 recommendations would be in the legislation. That is probably not the case. In fact, that is probably the usual case when people are on a review committee, because the gov ernment is in the position of having to balance different interests. I appreciate how difficult a task that is to be in gove rnment because you have special interests lobbying you, and you also have groups that consider that they are speaking for everyone, putting forth a case as to what should result in legislation.

The government has to strike some kind of balance, and, ultimately, it is the government that has to make those very difficult decisions in terms of what gets into the legislation and what it says. I would also like to thank the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gille shammer ) and his staff , particularly his staff, because the minister was not at the meeting, but his staff who briefed myself on this very lengthy and com plicated bill . His staff also briefed the previous critics. The government also put out a

summary of this bill in more understandable language called A State ment of Go vernment Pol icy Regar ding Legislation for Vulnerable Persons Living with a Mental Disability, and it is dated May 19 93. It is a very helpful little document to help understand this bill.

In their summ ary, they have summ arized the guiding principles of the new legislation which are as follows: Vulnerable persons are presumed to be competent to make their own decisions, unless demonstrated oth erwise; "vuln erable persons should be encour aged to ma ke their own decisions"; "the vulner able persons' su pport network should be encour aged to assist the vulner able person in making decisions so as to enhance his or her independence and self-determination"; "any assistance with decision making that is provided to a vulner able person should be provided in a manner which respects the privacy and dignity of the person and should be the least restrictive and lea st in trusive form of assis tance that is appropri ate in the circumstances"; "subs titute decision making should be involved only as a last resort when a vulnerable person needs decisions to be made and is unable to make these decisions by himself or herself or with the involvement of members of his or her su ppor t network." We think these are go od principles.

We have a problem with this bill in that I believe these principles show up in the

preamble. They are in the form of WHERE ASes. They read well. We agree with their content. One concern I have about this bill is that it might make more sense to have the

preamble as a part of a bill, to incorporate it in the actual bill itself rather than as a

preamble. My understand ing is that makes a difference if somebody should go to court under any

section of this bill as to how a judge interprets the bill. I am advised that ma kes a difference, whether the principles are in the

preamble or in the bill itself, as to how a judge would interpret the act. That is something that could be changed at the comm ittee stage or by amendment, and I would like the minister to consider that. The Vulner able Perso ns' Comm issioner is something that is new with this bi ll. It is an individual who will have a lot of responsibility and a lot of authority. In fact , I have al ready heard some interesting speculation about who it is that will be appoi nted to that position, and we will wait and see with great interest. I am sure the community will as well.

Because this individual will have considerable power, I th ink that also raises questions of accountabi lity. Right now the Vulner able Persons' Comm issioner would report to the Min ister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer). We have seen how that works in other situa tions, for example, the Chi ldren' s Advo cate . The opposition parties rec ommen ded tha t the Children's Advocate not report to the minister but repor t to the Leg isla tive Assem bly, as the Ombudsman does under The Ombudsman Act.

This would be an alte rnative that this minister could consider tha t the Vulner able Persons' Commissioner report to the Legisla tive Assembly. The minister would be correct in saying, well, why would you recommend that, why is it necessary? Let me give an example from the Children's Advocate . We were in Estimates this spring and I asked the minister repeatedly if the Children's Advocate had made any recommendations. The minister talked in generalities. The minister skated all over the map.

He talked about concerns and how, yes, he had meetings with the Children's Advocate and the Advocate raised concerns, but he would not use the word "recommendation."

5325 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA July 9, 19 93 The Children's Advocate had written a letter to people who belonged to the Fost e r Famil y Association. We received a copy of that letter. In it the Children's Advocate said he ha d ma de a recommendation to the minister. So we raised that in Question Period. We said, why did you not tell us in Estimates that the Advocate had indeed made a recommendation? I guess that was a judgment call that the minister made, a bad judgment call in our opinion.

We are concerned that the same thing could happe n in this case, tha t we ha ve a Vulner able Persons' Com missioner who has considerable power, considerable authority, and ther efore we believe it would be better if this individual was account able to the Legis lative Assembly. * (1 200) Another concern that we have is with support services. Now support services are spelled out in the bill.

There is a question of whether this is an entitlement or a right, and therefore an individual mus t get all of th e support services which they requi re, or on the oth er hand, whether the government would say there are limits. We cannot provide all the services that an individual requires because the government would say, we need to take into consideration the fiscal capacity of the government or the abil ity of government to pay, and I guess there is a trade-off there; in the view of the government, I suppose it is a trade-off.

I would say that this is a very legitimate concern which people in the community are raising. If you are going to say that people are entitled to su pport services, then you need to ensure that the services which people need are actually going to be there. Next, I would like to talk briefly about different parts of this legislation but also government policy and the regulations. There is a concern that has been raised with me as to how policy and principles in the act and the regulations will fit together, and I think that is a legitimate concern.

I suppose it is partly a matter of time, because eventually we will see the regulations, but we may not know very much detail about the government's policy till we see it in practice. There is also the concern about the principles, whether they belong in the bill itself rather than in the

preamble. People want to know which is more important and which will take precedent. Will the principles take precedent? Will the policy take precedent? Will the act take precedent? I am sure the· min is te r would say the act would take precedent, but then quite often regulations are very significant. Sometimes governments hide things in the regulations that they do not want in the act, because regulations are much easier to change. You ju st need an Order-in-Council. In court, which will take precedent, the principles, the act, the regulations or the policy? We are also concerned about education.

This is really a change in how governments and really how our society views disabled people, me nta lly disabled people, how we provide for them, and whs1t their rights are. Although part of this bill is consequential amendments from many oth er statJJtes that had to be amended, and the total bill is 1 09 pages, the vast majority of this bill is still the bill itself on vulnerable persons which is 79 pages. So it is very compl icated stuff. It is going to take a while to inform the public, and so we would like to know, what is the government's plan on educating the pub lic?

Because of the magn itude of these changes, there is going to have to be considerable educati on. There is a need to educate vulnerable persons. There is a need to educate professionals, and there is a need to educate the general public. It is not easy to explain to people concepts like empowerment.

In fact, we just have to read in the Free1 Press this morning about the com mu nity devetlopment people and church people working in the Langside district who were trying to empower people in their comm un ity to tak e more responsibility, take more control over their lives and show more concern and responsibility for their neig 1hbour hoo d . So they engaged them in a process of naming their new community centre. What happened when the suggestion got to City Council? The councill ors tot ally ignored it and said,. well, we know what we want to call it. We hav• 3 a name for it.

Now the people in the community are very frustrated and saying, look, we tried to empower people and you did not listen to us. Em powerment is a very difficult concept for a lot of petople. A lot of people are not familiar with it, have not heard of it, and it is also difficult to give pow,iH to people who were previously without powe1r and without rights. Now they will have some of bc•th. Of course, this education will need to be done in very simple, plain language. Finally, Madam Depu ty Speaker, we ar e intemsted in knowing how the government plans to

July 9, 19 93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 5326 review the implementation of The Vulne rable Persons Living with a Mental Disabil ity and Conseq uen tia l Amendments Act . Does the gov ernment have a plan in place whereby they are going to mo nitor and review the implementati on, and will they be doing that over six months or a year, or two years, or do they have a five-year plan? What is their plan for reviewing this new legislation? Perhaps they need some sort of formal mechanis m in place in advance to review all aspects of the act.

Of course, if they are going to do that, which would be a good idea, then they probably need a public review commit tee so that they have input from the community as to how this legislation will be reviewed. Madam Depu ty Speaker, tha t finishes my remarks. I am looking forward to this bill going to committee so that we can hear presentations from the public and see what concerns people have. I already know that some people think this bill is just fine; other people are not willing to support it; and other people are very upset.

We have people taking various different positions, and we will get a chance to hear all of them at the committee stage. Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is second reading of Bill 30, The Vulnerable Persons Living with a Mental Disabil ity and Consequential Amendments Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [agreed] Comm ittee Change Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkst er): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), that the composition of the St anding Comm ittee on Law Amendments be amended as follows: St.

Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) . Motion agreed to. BIII 41- The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendments Act Madam Deputy Speaker: To resume debate on second reading of Bill 41 (The Provincial Parks and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi concernant les pares pro vinciaux et appor tant des modifications correlatives a d'autres lois), on the proposed motion of the honourable Minis ter of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), standing in the name of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowc huk). Is there leave to permit the bill to remain sta nding? Some Honour able Members: No.

Madam Deputy Speaker: No? Leave has been denied. Point of Order Mr. Jerry Storie (F IIn Fl on): Madam Deputy Speaker, on a point of order, traditionally in this House when another member is prepared to speak, we do not deny someone the right to speak unless it is their will to have that happen. The member for Swan River (Ms. Wowch uk) , ob viously, has important business to attend to in her constit uency. There have been, as members of the House should know, some serious problems in Swan River. I do not think- Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Hon.

Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, on the same point of order, I acknowledge what the member has said. Certainly, we will recant on this side, but I will serve notice to the members opposite that, as of the passing of Estimates on Monday, Bill 41 will not be al lowed to stand whatever excuse, and, indeed, most of the other bills will not be allowed to stand . I am serving no tice to the House tha t the government will not allow any standi ng of bills as of next week. *** Madam Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to revisit the previous question?

Is there leave to permit Bill 41 standing in the name of the hon ourable member for Swan River (Ms