Manitoba Hansard — 11 March 2004 (Sitting 19B, 38th Legislature, 2nd Session)

38-2-19b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Eighth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LV No. 19A - 10 a.m., Thursday, March 11, 2004

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

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

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

Boniface N.D.P. SMITH, Scott, Hon. Brandon West N.D.P. STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. TWEED, Mervin Turtle Mountain P.C. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

797 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, March 11, 2004 The House met at 1:30 p.m. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PETITIONS Minimum Sitting Days for Legislative Assembly Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legis- lative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: The Manitoba Legislature sat for only 37 days in 2003. Manitobans expect their Government to be accountable, and the number of sitting days has a direct impact on the issue of public accountability.

Manitobans expect their elected officials to be provided the opportunity to be able to hold the Gov- ernment accountable. The Legislative Assembly provides the best for- um for all MLAs to debate and ask questions of the Government, and it is critical that all MLAs be pro- vided the time needed in order for them to cover constituent and party duties. Establishing a minimum number of sitting days could prevent the government of the day from limiting the rights of opposition members from being able to ask questions.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Legislative Assembly of Mani- toba to consider recognizing the need to sit for a minimum of 80 days in any given calendar year. Signed by Natalie Pollock, B. Lawton and Dennis Dempsey. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 132(6), when a petition is read it is deemed to be received by the House. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 23-The Red River Floodway Act Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Water Steward- ship): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minis- ter of Labour and Immigration (Ms.

Allan), that Bill 23, The Red River Floodway Act, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I introduced a very important bill which established the Red River Floodway Authority. Today I am introducing legis- ation that will establish in-legislation compensation for artificial spring flooding. Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that the expanded floodway will greatly improve protection for residents of the city of Winnipeg up to a one-in- seven-hundred-year flood.

It will also provide improved protection upstream of the floodway up to a one-in-two-hundred-and-fifty-year flood but in the rare circumstances where there is artificial flooding, that is flooding that is a result of the floodway and is above the state of nature, we will be giving statutory coverage for compensation. Once again, Mr. Speaker, this floodway is about flood protection for the city of Winnipeg, but it is also about ensuring improved flood protection in parts of rural Manitoba and making sure that rural Manitobans are considered in this legislation. Thank you very much.

Motion agreed to. * (13:35) Bill 35–The Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Amendment Act Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Lathlin), that Bill 35, The Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Amendment Act; Loi modi- fiant la

Loi sur les caisses populaires et les credit unions, be now read a first time.

798 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 Motion presented. Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, this bill will amend The Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Act, last amended in '96, to facilitate credit unions carrying on business, streamline administrative requirements, provide greater protection to consumers and depos- itors and to clarify some other sections with respect to voting. Thank you. Motion agreed to. Bill 38–The Fisheries Amendment Act Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Water Steward- ship): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal an d Northern Affairs (Mr.

Lathlin), that Bill 38, The Fisheries Amendment Act, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Ashton: The fisheries of Manitoba are very important in terms of being a natural resource and certainly are a very signifi cant part of the economy of this province. This act is aimed at a number of things and in particular at tougher fines and at crack- ing down on illegal fishing. This act will significantly increase the maximum fine for contravening any provisions of the act from $10,000 to $100,000. It will bring in new abilities for us to enforce our legislation, in particular to track the movement of fish.

The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is we will not tolerate illegal fishing in this province and this act will bring in much tougher sanctions. Thank you. Motion agreed to. Bill 39–The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Ms. Mihychuk), that Bill 39, The Resi- dential Tenancies Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la location à usage d'habitation, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Selinger: This bill makes several amendments to The Residential Tenancies Act, most of which clarify existing provisions of the act or streamline the operations of the Residential Tenancies Branch and Residential Tenancies Commission. Mr. Speaker, one significant amendment it makes is to remove from the definition of rent the municipal taxes and licence fees on mobile homes that are not owned by the landlord. Motion agreed to. Bill 40–The Planning Amendment Act Hon.

MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Inter- governmental Affairs and Trade): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Conservation (Mr. Struthers), Bill 40, The Planning Amendment Act, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Ms. Mihychuk: This bill makes a number of changes to The Planning Act related to municipal decision making on livestock operations. Each muni- cipality or planning district will be required to adopt a development plan with a livestock operation policy which will determine if, where, and under what conditions livestock operations will be considered.

The bill also establishes enhanced public notice and hearing provisions for applications to develop or expand such operations. Motion agreed to. * (13:40) Bill 41–The Profits of Criminal Notoriety Act Hon. Gord Mackintosh (M inister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 41, The Profits of Criminal Notoriety Act;

Loi sur les profits découlant de la notoriété en matière criminelle, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, the object of this bill is to prevent criminals from financially exploiting the notoriety of their crimes. Motion agreed to. Bill 42–The Mines and Minerals Amendment Act Hon. Scott Smith (Minister of Industry, Economic Development and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I move,

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 799 seconded by the Minister of Transportation and Gov- ernment Services (Mr. Lemieux), that Bill 42, The Mines and Minerals Amendment Act, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this bill. This bill addresses three items. One deals with the making of payments from the Quarry Rehabilitation Reserve Account. The second allows for the grouping of claims in the southern part of the province. The third is the removal of a

section of the act that requires a holder to submit information each year that is submitted under another

section of the act. Motion agreed to. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Is there leave of the House to revert to tabling of reports, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to revert back to tabling of reports? [Agreed] TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minis ter of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Communities Economic Development Fund Quarterly Financial Statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2003. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us from Linden Christian School 23 Grade 9 students under the direction of Mr. Mark Glor. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen). In the public gallery we have from Winnipeg Mennonite Elementary 20 Grade 5 students under the direction of Mrs. Marlene Wagner. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Murray). Also in the public gallery we have with us today, Mr.

Scott Augusta of Transcona Collegiate Institute. This visitor is a guest of the honourable Member for Transcona (Mr. Reid). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Health Care Services Reforms Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Oppo- sition): Mr. Speaker, Manitobans must have been stunned a few days ago when this Premier predicted that the health care system would collapse by 2010 if the federal government does not contribute more money. In the 1999 election campaign, this Premier guaranteed, Mr.

Speaker, that he would end hallway medicine and fix health care in six months with $15 million. Now, just four years later, he says it is going to take six years and hundreds of millions of dollars. When will the Premier recognize that just by throwing more money at the problem is not the solu- tion? It is meaningful reform that is the key, that will ensure we get the best, the safest and the most effici- ent health care system in the world. When is he going to do the right thing? * (13:45) Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the mean- ingful reforms we had under members opposite was Connie Curran and her proposal to fire a thousand nurses that cost us $4.5 million U.S., and Smart- Health. They bought the SmartHealth system for $100 million. They paid $36 million and there was only $3 or $4 million left. They are the kinds of scandals they left behind when they were in office.

At the last meeting of all premiers from all different political parties, from all regions of Canada, the Communiqué very clearly stated that failure to implement the Romanow report will have very, very serious consequences in every province in Canada, and medicare as we know it would not survive in the same way by the change of the decade, Mr. Speaker. That is a statement made by Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats on the basis of the fact that Canada needs to implement the Romanow report.

800 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 We need to implement the short-term strategies, the innovations that this Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) is well on the way to implementing here in Canada. I hope that all political parties can join their ideological soulmates in other provinces that have joined us and joined other Canadians in saying let us start investing in health care for the future of maintaining medicare. Public/Private Partnerships Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Oppo- sition): Mr.

Speaker, when this Premier was in opposition, he repeatedly said that the Province had no right blaming the federal government for Mani- toba's health care problems. Is it not funny what they find on the road to Damascus? Mr. Speaker, considering that the previous Pro- gressive Conservative government was dealing with massive reductions in transfer payments from the federal government, and this Doer government is getting massive increases from the federal govern- ment, this Premier has no credibility on this issue. What he has is a spending habit. Mr.

Speaker, the Premier seemingly has no problem working with the private sector when it comes to such things as ed ucation and tourism. Will he put his ideology aside and increase public-private partnership in health care so that we can get timely access and quality care to all Manitobans? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Yes, Mr. Speaker, the federal government did not hire Connie Curran. The members opposite did. The federal government did not enter into the so-called SmartHealth agreement which ended up being a large boondoggle and drain on our health care system.

When we came into office, they had made a decision in January of '99 that they withheld from the public to write off some $33 or $32 million that they had misspent in the ill- fated SmartHealth system. Mr. Speaker, we did say, when the Budget was presented in February 1995, we were the ones who said this was the equivalent cut of every rural and northern hospital in Manitoba being reduced by the federal Liberal government. We were on page with members opposite about the lack of priorities in making that reduction.

In fact, I have used the ter- minology that we went from 18 percent under Mulroney to quite a bit less under the present regime. In fact, we have not even gone up to the 18% funding. Mr. Speaker, we are not talking about going back to 50-50 funding that was the original basis of medicare. The Romanow Commission, actually they looked at the evidence that Gary Filmon initiated with the policy alternative group here at the Uni- versity of Manitoba, Noralou Roos. Noralou Roos identified the fact that there would not be any savings at all to go to the model suggested by mem- bers opposite.

It would actually cost more money to have that kind of system, and it would increase the waiting lists. In Manitoba the waiting lists for cancer care are going down under this Minister of Health. That is progress. Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, what we get whenever we ask questions is some kind of a history lesson from this Premier. If he wants a history lesson, let me give him one. It was he in 1999 who said: Elect me and I will end hallway medicine in six months for $50 million. That is what he said.

Now he is out fearmongering that our health care system is going to collapse unless the federal govern- ment pours millions and millions of dollars more into the health care system. Better does not always mean more, and if the Premier would stop acting like a Luddite and work with the private sector, we might find that the health care system improves. He does it with tourism, he does it with education, do the right thing and do it with health care. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I am only following the evidence of the former Premier, Mr.

Gary Filmon, in terms of the report that was presented to this Legis- ature. l * (13:50) Members opposite want to use extreme ideology. We are using evidence, evidence in the Noralou Roos report, evidence in the Romanow report, evi- dence from the American doctors– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: –evidence that was contained by the Canadian Medical Association, evidence that has been produced by nurses across Canada.

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 801 The member opposite, I guess he is getting ready for the federal leadership convention. I know Belinda Stronach has taken the view the member opposite has. Mr. Speaker, I even think Stephen Harper has been more moderate than the member opposite, dare I say that. I do not know who the member is sup- porting, but maybe he is getting ready for an endor- sation. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was really proud to see the results, just this week, on prostate cancer, cancer waiting lists.

I know when we came into office we had to send some of the patients south to the United States even to private facilities because they were not getting treatment. Mr. Speaker, I am proud of the fact now that in the public non-profit system the waiting lists have gone for cancer radiation treatment from nine weeks down to two weeks. We certainly are proud of the fact that we are making some progress. Diagnostic Testing Waiting Lists Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Today is Canada Day in Grafton, North Dakota, and do you know why it is Canada Day in Grafton, North Dakota?

It is a day that is set aside in their private clinic for patients from Ma nitoba to come for diag- nostic tests because the waiting lists in Manitoba are too long for CTs and for MRIs. Mr. Speaker, I would like to table this particular picture of the Premier who was going to shut down Grafton, North Dakota, in the last election. I would like to ask this Minister of Health: Why did he and his leader mislead Manitobans in the 1999 election when they said they were going to shut down Graf- ton, North Dakota, and they were going to slash waiting lists? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I thank the member for that question because in a recent intervie w the director of that clinic said that business is way down since this Gov- ernment came to office, as quoted. I would also like to indicate that the headline from 1999 that the member tabled says and I quote: Doer vows to cut waits. And you know what? That is why we have cut cancer waiting lists in half. That is why the heart surgery wait-lists are down 30 percent from when that member was walking around the hallways of St. Boniface Hospital.

That is why MRIs are down and that is why we are No. 1 in hip and knee replace- ments in this country. That is the fact. Mr. Speaker: Order. Before recognizing the hon- ourable Member for Charleswood, I would like to once more ask honourable members when making reference to other honourable members that are in the House, to address ministers by their portfolios and other members by their constituencies. Mrs. Driedger: Well, happy Canada Day, Grafton, North Dakota. They promised that they were going to totally shut down Grafton, North Dakota. Mr.

Speaker, the waiting list for CT scans, MRIs, ultrasounds and maybe stress tests have all risen significantly since the first day this Govern- ment became government. In the last three years, waits for bone density tests have more than tripled, no comfort to women who are awaiting a bone den- sity test, fearful of osteoporosis. Mr. Speaker, when is this Minister of Health going to do his job and deliver the health care system that he promised? Right now, we do not have a one- tier system, we do not have a two-tier system. We have a no-tier system for a lot of patients in this province. Mr. Speaker: Order.

I have not recognized the honourable member. I would just like to remind all honourable members about exhibits in the Chamber. The honourable member has already tabled the docu- ment, so there is no need to be waving the document, because it has already been tabled. Exhibits, as we all know, are not allowed to be used for questions or for answers. * (13:55) Mr. Chomiak: Everett Butler, CEO of Grafton clinic, said business is down 75 percent since 1999. An Honourable Member: Of Canadians?

802 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 Mr. Chomiak: Of Canadians, Mr. Speaker. In Manitoba, the actual wait for radiation treat- ment for breast cancer is now 2.5 weeks and for prostate cancer, 2.4 weeks. It was 12 and 15 weeks and we were forced to send patients to the States when we came into office. They had that option and they chose not to. We have dropped the waiting list more than in half for lifesaving treatment. In fact, there is a club that has been formed where people get together who have been saved by that lifesaving treatment. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, the member was not at the Health Sciences Centre when we opened another MRI today, but I hope she is at Pan Am and Brandon soon when we open additional MRIs, or in Stein- bach. Health Care Services Quality of Care Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, the Health Minister is all too aware of Sharon Horn, who, after being in care due to serious mental illness all her life, had to fend for herself. She was left to live on her own. She received no follow-up care. Then, in January, she was found dead in a field, frozen to death.

Does the minister agree with a statement made by a health official, and I am sharing: I do not find any evidence of neglectful practice or any oversights. I really think it is a misconception to think that we have people who are wholly dependent on caregivers to get through the day. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): We have put in place programs that were not in place ever in this province. We have a program called Program for Assertive Community Treatment that has taken a hundred schizophrenic patients off the street and wrapped the program around them.

We have put in supportive housing for schizophrenic patients. We have put in school programs to teach children about mental health issues, Mr. Speaker. Mental health patients who suffer from mental illness have the same rights of the act that was passed by members opposite, that we agreed with, that Sharon Horn took advantage of, Mr. Speaker. That act was passed by this Chamber in terms of rights of patients and rights of caregivers. I would appreciate if the members opposite would look at some of the incredible things that we have done and we can continue to do in mental health. Mrs.

Rowat: For all the wonderful things that the minister is sharing about what he has done to help, what happened to Miss Horn, what happened to the situation that the family now has to deal with? The minister's staff then went on to lay the blame at the door of Sharon Horn's family by saying that this incident has given us some indication that we need to be more engaged with families if we can be. Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: How can he allow the mental health system to have such a dis- graceful attitude towards families? Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, this June, when I was given a mental health hero award by the mental health community on behalf of the Province of Mani- toba representing what we have done in mental health, one of the reasons that we were given that award– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. We need to be able to hear the questions, and we need to be able to hear the answers. We all know that supplem entary questions are to seek information on the initial question, and the honourable Member for Minnedosa will have to hear the answer so she can construct her supplementary question.

I ask the co-operation of all honourable members, please. Mr. Chomiak: One of the reasons that we were given that award, Mr. Speaker, was for the work that we have done with families by putting families on the Mental Health Advisory Committee, by putting in place procedures for all RHAs to engage families and participate with families in terms of the pro- vision of mental health services. * (14:00) I think it is disgraceful that members opposite have not raised the issue of mental health in this Chamber in a positive sense over the past five years and are using particular instances, Mr. Speaker, to try

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 803 to get headlines. Yes, this case deserves review, but mental health patients have been looked at, and been required to be looked at in the system for years, and we are working on that. Workplace Safety and Health Regulations–Cemeteries Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, Mani- tobans discovered that this Premier was going to add some $30,000 to the cost of a new home by enforc- ing new workplace safety and health regulations on the residential housing industry.

We asked this Gov- ernment to scrap these plans and instead work with the industry to develop reasonable regulations, but they refused. Mr. Speaker, we have now learned that this Premier's regulations may end up doubling the amount it costs to bury our deceased loved ones, because his Government is going to classify graves as trenches, which would require an extra staff to oversee a grave digging. Will the Premier put an end to this heartless cash grab? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, Mr. Speaker, I noted the false statements of the member opposite about the fact of the regulations that we have imple- mented.

There are some draft regulations being circulated in the industry. Implementation of a regu- lation requires a legal document. The member may not know this. It requires an Order-in-Council signed by the Lieutenant-Governor. There are none in place. The reason for that is there is a discussion paper of various proposals being circulated in the various industries. Their comments will then be incorporated into advice to the Govern- ment. There are no regulations that need implemen- tation that the member is citing, because there are none that have been signed off. Mr.

Speaker, the advice we receive from the industry will be carefully considered, and we are going to make sure that regulations dealing with workplace safety and health are a balance between the affordability and common sense of four various industries and the safety of workers. No regulations have been passed, and the member opposite should retract the statement because he is wrong, wrong, wrong. Mr. Murray: Well, Mr. Speaker, his regulations could double the cost of burials, and that is a straight-out attack on the poor. This Premier is literally taxing us from the cradle to the grave. Mr.

Speaker, many Manitoba cemeteries are non-profit, and the Premier to impose outrageous regulations, that is unconscionable, Mr. Speaker. It is a heartless cash grab. It is an attack on the poor. Why does the Premier not do the right thing and put an end to it? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, all Order-in-Council regu- lations are legal documents signed by the Lieutenant- Governor. Can the member opposite table any of those regulations that he says I passed? Can he table those? You know why he cannot? Because they do not exist. They are not regulations unless Cabinet approves them. You may not know this.

You did not even know what

summary financial statements were when you asked your first question of the House. You do not even know what you are talking about with your last question of this session. You do not know what you are talking about. I repeat– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. I would just like to remind all honourable members, questions and answers should be put through the Chair. Mr.

Doer: Yes, and I want to say to the people of Manitoba that we are not going to implement or pass, rather, any regulations that will not be affordable for the people of Manitoba, including people that are working in cemeteries or people that are building houses. I remember the members opposite talked about the sky is falling when we made another change on housing. The new housing starts have gone up way more in four years under our Government than eleven years under members opposite. We need no advice from members opposite. Mr. Murray: Ah, for the good old days in the union hall. Mr.

Speaker, this Premier's regulations would require cemeteries–

804 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 An Honourable Member: Wait, wait, sorry. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Murray: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this Premier's regulations would require cemeteries to have a permit for trenching for each burial. They may not find this important, but some religions require a burial within 48 hours. We know the system does not always work as it should. Clearly, this Premier's proposed workplace safety and health regulations need a lot of work. I would ask him this much, Mr. Speaker. Will he consult with the industry instead of insult them? Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, that is exactly what is happening. The various draft– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, when we came into office, the number of people dying at the workplace and the number of people injured at the workplace was the highest rate in Canada. Members opposite may find that funny, but members on this side do not find that funny. We do not find it funny at all. Mr. Speaker, we have passed new legislation. There are drafts of various forms of regulations being circulated.

I want to guarantee the public that we are not going to pass any regulations as a legal document in Cabinet that put undue stress or distress on people that have lost their loved ones. We are not going to put any kind of increase on home inspections like $30,000, and I do want to say to the public we also will balance off the unnecessary deaths that have resulted in this tragic record. We have lowered the number of people that have been injured in the workplace by 25 percent since we have been elected.

This whole Legislature, instead of playing poli- tics, should try to work together to have more of our loved ones return home, Mr. Speaker, and not be killed at the workplace. Education System Funding Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): In the current Budget, the Doer government is expecting a 12% increase in transfer payments from the federal gov- ernment. Despite receiving over $250 million year over year from the federal government, the Doer government has decided to offload the costs of providing the education system to the property tax owner.

I would ask the Minister of Education to explain why he has chosen to underfund education, forcing school divisions to raise the tax load by as much as 8 percent. Hon. Peter Bjornson (Minister of Education, Citi- zenship and Youth): From 1990 to 1999, inflation was 22.8 percent and members opposite funded edu- cation at 10.7 percent. From 1999 to 2003, the infla- tion rate was 8.8 percent and we funded education at 13.5 percent. Mr. Speaker, we made an election promise to fund education at the rate of economic growth. We are funding it at 2 percent this year, which is above the rate of inflation.

We are committed to funding education at that rate. We put $105 million in the base, compared to $15 million from members oppo- site in the same time frame. Mr. Loewen: Mr. Speaker, he gets 12 percent, and he gives 2 percent. That is simply not fair. Rural Manitobans are suffering greatly under the stress of BSE and the drought. The Doer government is pun- ishing people in rural Manitoba by underfunding education. They are just adding to the stress load. Mr.

Speaker, tax increases of 6.6 percent in Prairie Spirit, 5.5 percent in the Interlake, 7.4 percent in Portage La Prairie, 7.1 percent in Border Land, 8.5 percent in a forced amalgamation of the Sunrise School Division. These types of tax increases are only going to compound the problem. When will the minister go back to the Cabinet table and fight for proper funding? Mr. Bjornson: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a letter that I received from the Manitoba Association of School Trustees. Marijuana Grow Operations Police Resources Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr.

Speaker, the marijuana gr ow operations are con- trolled by the street gangs and the motorcycle gangs– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 805 Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on a point of order. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the honourable minister was tabling a document, after which he was going to respond to the question. I am sure the member opposite wants an answer. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on the same point of order. * (14:10) Mr. Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order.

Members who have been in this House for any length of time know that when a minister sits down after he has responded to a question means that he has com- pleted his response, and we have a member who was up on another question. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, my practice and all Speakers' practice has been when a member is standing to answer a question, when they sit down, they are finished. All I heard him say was, I will table a letter, and he sat down. That has been a prac- tice of this House. I recognize the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. *** Mr.

Hawranik: Mr. Speaker, the marijuana grow operations are controlled by the street gangs and the motorcycle gangs like the Hells Angels in Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker, police are saying there are too few officers breaking up the marijuana grow operations. They are aware of a number of grow operations but cannot get to them because they are too busy. Will this minister take the matter seriously, heed the advice of police and commit police resources to fight the growing drug trade in this province? Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (M inister of Justice and Attorney General): I am pleased to confirm for the House that on coming into office, indeed, as early as our first Budget, we increased resources for policing across Manitoba to unprecedented levels. We have enabled the RCMP to staff to full complement for the first time, I understand from the RCMP, in about a decade or so. Mr. Speaker, we have also increased supports to other police forces in Manitoba. We recognize, unlike the former administration, that it is important to support law enforcement in Manitoba. Mr.

Hawranik: The minister has a unique oppor- tunity to stamp out the marijuana grow operations in Manitoba, many of which are in the suburbs and in our residential neighbourhoods. Instead, he prefers to allow the Hells Angels and the street gangs to oper- ate without any real opposition. The police know where they are. They just can- not get to them because of a lack of resources. Will this minister commit police resources or will he simply sit back and let the Hells Angels continue to control the drug trade? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, I regret that the member opposite would be denigrating the suc- cesses, the very key role that law enforcement, that our police forces have had in Manitoba in countering marijuana grow operations. Almost every week we are witnessing the successes of Manitoba police in their efforts to crack down on this drug trade. I do not think the kinds of words that I hear from the member opposite is what the police deserve to hear. They deserve to hear our support. Meadows West Subdivision Development Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, the Premier is talking big: 3000 acres, 13 000 homes.

This new city will be known as Waverley West and would be three times the size of Portage la Prairie. At the same time, Meadows West Phase II has been put on ice since this Government has taken office. First, Mr. Speaker, in the early nineties, the Government entered into an agreement which in essence froze any form of development because the Province and Qualico owned a ll the land in the area. Then, in 2001, the Province just walked away with no penalties or anything of that nature.

806 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 Mr. Speaker, my question to the Premier: Will the Government commit to either selling the property attached to Meadows West or begin the development of Meadows West Phase II in sections starting 2004? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the issue of land banks and the reality of the land banks existing, owned by the Province of Manitoba, at the same time we have massive development outside in the Capital Region, sometimes subsidized by provin- cial tax dollars, as in the case of Headingley.

We find that as a practice over the long haul that is not sus- tainable for population growth in the city of Win- nipeg. We have discussed with the City of Winnipeg and at their initiative freed up the land bank that is in question. We have also at the same time invested money in the inner city. So to us it is not an either/or.

The other land bank situation, we will certainly look at that, but any zoning of that land, the land banks, any development of those land banks, any approval of development of those land banks will be dealt with by the City of Winnipeg, but the owner- ship of those land banks and the kind of rigidity that we had with that, we want to work with the City to give them more freedom to zone more land and more housing in a sustainable way in the city of Winnipeg to redress some of the imbalance on the revenue side. Mr. Lamoureux: Shame on the Premier, Mr. Speaker. The Premier has ignored northwest Win- nipeg.

I have individuals in the constituency who have no choice but to move out of Meadows West because there is nothing there in terms of future development. The Province owns the property, Mr. Speaker. There are certain se rvices that are already there that could be hooked up. The provincial gov- ernment has been negligen t in developing Meadows West Phase II, which is to the detriment of the peo- ple that live in the Maples, the people that live in Meadows West, Tyndall Park and Garden Grove.

It is a simple question: Will the Government move this year and develop Meadows West Phase II or get out of it and privatize or sell off the property? You have no right in delaying the service of this area. Mr. Doer: The member opposite is part of a political party that with his leader withdrew from all housing across Canada in the mid-nineties. We have to repre- sent some of the very seri ous issues and all housing challenges in Manitoba, including in the city of Win- nipeg. Our first priority when we were elected was to start to rebuild some of the inner city, downtown areas of the city of Winnipeg.

Our equally important priority was to have a quote: inner city strategy expanded to the community of Brandon, because it was not included by members opposite, and the com- munity of Thompson; to have Neighbourhoods Alive! in all of those communities. We will work with the City of Winnipeg. The mayor asked us to start developing the land banks. If the mayor has a plan on the projects that the member opposite is talking about, we certainly believe that land banks should be developed inside the city of Winnipeg. I was involved in changing the urban limit line with Whyte Ridge and Lindenwoods.

To me that is not an either/or. We want to develop downtown, inner city housing and we also want to have oppor- tunities to develop inside the city of Winnipeg, including in the area the member referenced. But the City of Winnipeg has to work with the various devel- opment agencies. We are no t surrogate city council- lors in this Chamber; maybe the member opposite is. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, the province has forgotten about our inner city and our older com- munities. I have never seen as many homes that have been boarded up or in dilapidated condition. They have failed miserably, miserably.

Will the Premier– [interjection] the Government is a little sensitive on the issues of housing, you can tell. For good reason. They should be. Mr. Speaker, they have failed miserably. Drive out to the North End. I will take the Premier on a tour and you will see all the boarded-up homes. The question is: Will the Premier act today and agree for the need of all stakeholders working as a group that would make recommendations to the three levels of government to address this very serious problem? It is a working group that is needed with recom- mendations. All three levels of government need to be involved in this.

Will the Premier at least take some sort of leadership in dealing with this serious issue? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we initiated Neighbour- hoods Alive! and brought together the federal and civic governments. We are pleased that we did it in not only Winnipeg, but Brandon and Thompson.

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 807 Mr. Speaker, we know that the quote: progress and changes in the inner city are very, very positive. I do not need to have any kind of tour from the mem- bers opposite. We are in every quadrant of this city every week. Mr. Speaker, the whole issue of the Meadows West I will look at as a separate issue. We have talked generally with the mayor and council about selling land banks inside the city of Winnipeg. That is what we are trying to practise with the Waverley West project, but let us be very, very clear. Mr. Speaker, we have been developing the inner city.

We are the first province in Canada that has brought in TIF, that is tax incentive financing. We are the first province in Canada to bring in TIF financing. It was recommended by The Globe and Mail to all the provinces. We actually brought it in last year to make sure that we would have greater financial investments in inner city housing in Winnipeg. We need no lectures from the member opposite. Cancer Treatment Wait Times Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

In The Globe and Mail newspaper, there was a report that wait times for cancer radiation therapy in some parts of Canada are as high as two and a half months. Can the minister please update the House on what is being done to reduce wait times for life- saving cancer radiation treatment, and what results have been achieved to date? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I want to indicat e that the situation in Québec where the population has launched a class- action suit is very similar to what was in Manitoba when we came to office, that the wait times were beyond standard times and members opposite had a chance to do something, and did not. In fact they lost radiation therapists. In 1998, Manitoba graduated only one radiation therapist; in '99 all three left the province. Now, as a result of our increased training and more competitive salaries, we have no vacancies for radiation therapists in Manitoba. * (14:20) Mr.

Speaker, we have been recognized across the country as having the lowest waiting list for those issues, across the country, and that is lifesaving treatment. We have gone from the longest in the country, when members opposite were government, to now the lowest in the country, lifesaving treat- ment. I think all the citizens of Manitoba should be thankful for that. Red River Floodway Expansion Master Labour Agreement Mr.

Ron Schuler (Springfield): As the Premier has clearly already met and consulted with his union- boss friends, will he now extend the same courtesy to the industries that will be affected by his forced unionization of floodway workers? Will he do that today? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Water Steward- ship): I want to indicate, Mr. Speaker, and I think it is important to put on the record, that one of the key functions of the interim floodway authority has been to meet with Manitobans. We have held open houses throughout Manitoba.

I know that the staff has been working with the engineers proceeding with a project design, environmental assessment and, indeed, have committed to ongoing meetings with both con- tractors, unions and others. In fact, I have met with contractors as recently as last week. We are com- mitted to consultation. We are going to build the floodway to protect Winnipeggers and we are going to do it on budget and on time. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS John de Graff School Mr. Harry Schellenberg (Rossmere): Mr.

Speaker, John de Graff School is promoting community-based programs and activities for children, youth and their families. I was very pleased to attend the opening of the school's family room earlier last fall, an initiative developed as part of the Manitoba parent-child coalition program. The family room at John de Graff School offers programs such as the open gym nights for families and the preschool literacy program Rock and Read. There is also an after-school seminar for parents about child development issues.

808 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 Mr. Speaker, this summer the Literacy Links program will send education students for some visits with new kindergarteners to encourage family liter- acy activities. Mr. Speaker, the school's action team comprised of teachers and parents working with principal Andrea Hammond and community connector Sharon Fonseca, have done a fantastic job of offering programs for families. They encourage families to be in the school, to use the school as a resource. Mr.

Speaker, with the help of Healthy Child Manitoba funding, a total of seven schools in the River East Transcona School Division are reaching out to their families and communities. They are Polson, Lord Wolseley, Sherwood, Prince Edward, Bertrun E. Glavin, Vall ey Gardens Junior High Schools and, as I mentioned, John de Graff School. I am delighted to see that the River East Trans- cona School Division is an active coalition partner with Healthy Child Manitoba. All over Manitoba, the community schools initi- ative is helping to bring parents, schools and com- munities together.

In 12 areas of Winnipeg and 11 regions across Manitoba, parent-child coalitions are being formed to bring together local resources through partnerships. As a natural community meet- ing place, schools are making efforts to reach out and build bridges with parents. In my community, this initiative has allowed parents and schools to work together on behalf of our children. Together we strive to develop resilient, community-minded chil- dren. When parents and ed ucators work together, there are better results for children. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to recognize the suc- cess of the parent-child initiative at John de Graff School in River East Transcona School Division and, in fact, across Manitoba. Grafton Clinic Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): It is Canada Day. Lest you think I have misplaced my calendar, please allow me to clarify. Mr. Speaker, it is Canada Day at the Unity Medical Center in Grafton, North Dakota. It is a day set aside for Canadians seeking certain diagnostic tests.

The members opposite may remember the Grafton clinic from the 1999 election campaign when their illustrious leader boldly posed beside a homemade highway sign showing the distance to Grafton. That leader slapped a sticker on the sign proclaiming: Closed for business. He vowed to put the diagnostic clinic in Grafton out of business. He promised to reduce waiting lists for diagnostic services such as MRIs and CT scans. The now-Premier (Mr. Doe

r) said and I quote: We believe Manitobans should get diagnostic tests in Manitoba. The bottom line is Manitobans have paid for out of their taxes a health care system. Where are we today more than four years later? In spite of the Premier's grandstanding, Manitobans continue to make the trip to Grafton because they cannot get timely access to diagnostic services here. They hit the road using their own resources to pay for tests they feel they ca nnot defer any longer. They resent the Premier's hollow promises to reduce wait- ing lists for clinical diagnostic services. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, since the Doer government took office, waiting times are longer for four out of the five diagnostic procedures for which they had promised reduced waits. These include CT scans, ultrasounds, MRIs and maybe stress tests. When we think of Canada Day we think of happy times with families, celebrating life. But when we think of Canada Day at the Grafton clinic, we think of fami- lies who feel fearful for their loved ones' lives. So many hopeful promises from this Government. So many dashed hopes for Manitoba families. Thank you. École Christine Lespérance Ms.

Theresa Oswald (Seine River): It is my pleasure to rise today to pay tribute to the hard work and joie de vivre that is ever present in the com- munity of École Christine Lespérance. Le jeudi 12 février 2004, l'école s'animait dans une célébration locale en l'honneur du Festival du Voyageur. Plus de 400 parents, enfants et membres de la communauté se sont réunis pour goûter à l'excellente cuisine canadi enne-française, pour jouer à des jeux sous la direction experte d'étudiants et pour écouter des pièces musicales jouées par les élèves du programme de musique des sixième, septième et huitième années.

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 809 C'est grâce aux efforts exceptionnels du conseil des parents, sous la direction de Sylvie DeSerres, des enseignants, en particulier M. Richard Comte et M. Guy Michaud, et des administrateurs, Dolorès Beau- mont et Marco Ratté, que l'événement a remporté un tel succès. L'ambiance qui régnait pendant toute la fête témoigne de l'esprit de communauté et de coopération qui existe dans cette école. La présence de la famille de "Voyageurs officiels" a ajouté une note de distinction et de cérémonie à cette soirée spéciale.

Translation On Thursday, February 12, 2004, the school was alive with a local celebration in honour of the Festival du Voyageur. Over 400 parents, children and community members gathered to sample the excellent French Canadian cuisine, to play games under the expert leadership of students, and to listen to the entertainment provided by music students in Grades 6, 7 and 8. The outstanding efforts of the parent council under the direction of Sylvie De Serres, the teachers, in particular Mr. Richard Comte and Mr.

Guy Michaud, and school administrators Dolorès Beau- mont and Marco Ratté truly shaped the success of the event. The atmosphere throughout the event was a testimony to the spirit of community and co-opera- tion that exists in this school. The presence of the "official Voyageur" family added a note of distinc- tion and ceremony to this special evening. English spoken Once again, I congratulate the planning com- mittee, the parents, and the students involved in la Soirée "canayenne" and look forward to an undoubt- edly even larger celebration next year. Well done. Félicitations [Congratulations].

Kenaston Underpass Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): I was intrigued by a picture I saw in the Wednesday edition of the Winnipeg Free Press showing the Premier (Mr. Doer) of the province and th e Member of Parliament for Winnipeg South, Mr. Alcock, the recently appointed President of the Treasury Board in Ottawa, schmoozing at a reception that was held in Ottawa. Mr. Speaker, I am absolute ly convinced that they were deep in the throes of discussion about how they would finally live up to their last election promises to build the Kenaston underpass.

That is the only thing that they could have been talking about because, as we have heard from the Premier, they have nothing, nothing. They have nothing that they could share, nothing that they believe in other than in the construction of the Kenaston underpass. Mr. Speaker, the Premier promised it in May of this year. After saying for four years that it was not a priority, the Premier has finally promised to build it. I am sure all of us in Winnipeg can wait with bated breath because, over the course of the next few days, I am sure we are going to hear an announcement from the Premier.

I just hope it does not match what I have heard from other sources that the Premier is in fact withholding the fund s from the infrastructure project so that he can spend $5 million of the remaining $8 million on a study of a rapid transit system. I would use this opportunity to implore him to do the right thing. Get on with announcing when this underpass project will start and when it will be completed. I would ask him to do it today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. West Broadway Skating Rink Mr.

Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): I would like to inform the House of the tremendous work done this past winter by the Broadway Neighbourhood Centre. Working together with individuals, organizations and businesses in their neighbourhood and with their elected federal, provincial and municipal repre- sentatives, these community-minded residents gave new life to a neglected but valuable area resource. I am talking about the rebirth of the West Broadway skating rink.

Two years ago, this skating rink was closed and kids of all ages in the West Broadway neighbourhood lost an accessible and popular form of recreation. * (14:30) I think we can all agree that this is an important time for our children to have every opportunity for recreation. The community response to this challenge was very impressive. Assistance came from our Gov- ernment's Lighthouses program and from the PACE

810 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 program, Positive Athletic Cultural Experiences run by Mamawi. Cash donations came from Winnipeg Centre Member of Parliament Pat Martin, City Councillor Jenny Gerbasi and me. On January 24, the hard work paid off as the skating rink was officially reopened with a great deal of excitement. Hundreds of com- munity members attended the reopening celebra- tions, which were officially opened with a beautiful, traditional song by Michael Esquash of the Spirit Sand Singers. Since January, Mr.

Speaker, many local resi- dents have donated ice skates to the Broadway Neighbourhood Centre. I know that these donations have allowed everyone the chance to enjoy the ice and the rink was very busy throughout the winter. Special thanks are also owed to Zeids Foodfare for providing everyone with hotdogs, to Little Red Spirit Headstart program for providing hot chocolate and to Art City for the remarkable sign that they created for the skating rink. Mr. Speaker, I especially want to recognize Tammy Aime, co-ordinator of the Broadway Neigh- bourhood Centre for bringing everyone together on this project.

Special thanks also go to her amazing volunteer, Parnell Williams, who flooded the rink on a regular basis. Their support and commitment to the development of their community makes the West Broadway neighbourhood a safer, healthier and stronger place. Thank you very much. ORDERS OF THE DAY Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Russell, on a point of order? Mr. Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): No, on House business, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order. I am just dealing with a matter with the honourable Member for Russell. He said he was up on House business, but he cannot.

It is government business. Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Russell, you are up on a point of order? Mr. Derkach: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. I know that sometimes the House leader gets busy with other duties, but the business of the House must go on, and we are prepared to debate Bill 21, if that were the will of the Government. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Official Oppo sition House Leader, he does not have a point of order. GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, would you please call the following business today: Debate on second read- ings, Bills 21, 6, 17 and 18, and then would you please call debate and third readings so that there is report stage, by leave, 7 and 8. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 21–The Non-Smokers Health Protection Act (Various Acts Amended) Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on second reading of Bill 21, The Non-Smokers Health Protection Act (Various Acts Amended), standing in the name of the honourable Member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger). An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Stand?

Is it the agreement of the House for the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Charleswood? [Agreed] The bill will remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Charleswood. Also, the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) has five minutes remaining on Bill 21, The Non-Smokers Health Protection Act (Various Acts Amended). Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I welcome the op portunity to continue where I left off yesterday w ith respect to this bill, and that was with respect to jurisdiction.

It has been said by members opposite that we do not have jurisdiction to deal with applying this bill

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 811 on First Nations reserves. I quote from Professor Schwartz, who is a constitutional law expert from the University of Manitoba. He states that under

section 88 of the federal Indian Act it provides an oppor- tunity for provincial laws to apply in certain circum- stances, and the circumstances in which provincial laws apply could be provincial legislation that is of general application throughout the whole province. So, as long as it is a law of general application in the province of Manitoba, Manitoba can introduce legis- lation which affects our First Nations reserves. I bring to your attention the fact that we do have many laws of general application in this province, beginning with drivers' licences.

We do have laws in the province that license drivers throughout the whole province, and it does apply to First Nations reserves and First Nations people. * (14:40) We also have laws that correspond to Criminal Code offences such as impaired driving. Impaired driving, of course, is a federal statute, but we complement the impaired driving federal Criminal Code offence with our own legislation which is of general application on First Nations reserves as well. So we have jurisdiction with respect to the suspen- sion of drivers' licences when someone is convicted of impaired driving.

It not only applies to non- Aboriginal people in Manitoba, it applies to Abo- riginal people in Manitoba as well. Those two types of laws, and there are many of them that we have passed in the past, licensing and the suspension of driver's licences are only two. With those two, they apply to all Manitobans. It is my submission that, of course, the non- smoking by-law can apply to all of Manitoba and can apply to Aboriginal reserves, because it can apply to all public indoor places wi thin the entire province, not just off Aboriginal reserves but on Aboriginal reserves as well.

There is jurisdiction, I believe, Mr. Speaker, that we can follow. I think there is jurisdiction. Professor Schwartz agrees with me, and as long as it is a law of general application it certainly would apply to an Aboriginal reserve. In fact in that interview he had with CJOB at the time he was of the view that perhaps it could apply. Mr. Speaker, let us step back and take a look at the situation in terms of what the Province can do for sure. What we know for sure is that the Province does enter into gaming agreements with First Nations reserves. It enters into gaming agreements under certain conditions.

It can grant the right for a First Nations reserve to construct and operate a casino. That we know for sure. That is within the jurisdiction of the Province and that is recognized by Aboriginal reserves and Aboriginal people to be the case. Mr. Speaker, under those gaming agreements, under the agreement between the Aboriginal com- munity and the Province with respect to the casino, conditions can be laid. One of the conditions that ought to be laid is the fact that they ought to make it a non-smoking casino. Otherwise, we are treating Aboriginal people differently than we are other Manitobans.

We are not saying that their health is important if we do not do that. Of course their health is important to all Manitobans, just as it is important to non- Aboriginal people. I think it is incumbent upon the Province. It is incumbent upon members opposite to, in fact, when they negotiated a gaming agreement with Aboriginal communities, to include that as one of the conditions in the agreement. It is very impor- tant for the health and well-being of the Aboriginal people within reserves. Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Oppo- sition): Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to speak on Bill 21, The Non-Smokers Health Protection Act. I very much find it interesting that we have not heard from the government side yet on this. We are delighted to speak on it for a number of reasons. I think the first reason that we want to speak on this bill is because we do think that this is a historic occasion for a number of reasons. First and foremost, we think it is historic because it is the first in our country. We think it is historic in the fact that this rose from the Member for Carman (Mr.

Rocan), the MLA from Carman, who had an idea, who believed that, in Manitoba, there was an issue on second-hand smoke and the damage that it was causing. I believe the MLA from Carman will say that he used to, in his youth, be a smoker. I think he believes that the toxins and the carcinogens that are contained

812 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 in tobacco are harmful. Of course, we know that medical records and medical research show that, this issue really was an issue that dealt with the health of those workers that were working in places that there was smoking. This bill really rose out of the ashes, if I could use that term, on the sense that we believe that we should be protecting those workers that were work- ing in enclosed smoking places. I would also, Mr. Speaker, like to talk a little about the fact that this was a private member's bill.

I think the fact that this MLA from Carman who was able to stand in this House, introduce a private mem- ber's bill and hopefully see it through, I should say, in the sense to a fruition on the basis of what his understanding was, the Member for Carman's under- standing of what he signed. I will get that in a couple of minutes. I also want to say and pay tribute to the fact that when this bill became before the House, there were certain steps that got us to the position that allow us over the past number of days to rise and speak on Bill 21.

I think it is interesting to note that when the Member for Carman brought this bill forward, I would have to say that he was not sure whether it was, in fact, going to see the light of day. He knew that there would be some controversy around the issue. But, again, his principle of bringing it forward was to ensure that the work ers that were subject to second-hand smoke would, in fact, not have to be put in that position. So, Mr.

Speaker, what we have, then, is a member who believes in something very passion- ately, very strongly, that brings forward a bill or a private member's bill in this case, to this House on the hope that there may be some recognition from the government side that this is a bill worth pursuing. Mr. Speaker, we know the government side decided that maybe there was some merit to this. I think the Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) used the words that the government side gave some con- sideration to the merit. I think that was a huge break- through. I think it was very important.

I think it gave the Member for Carman some hope that this bill would have a chance to get through this Legislative Assembly and ultimately become law in the province of Manitoba. What is interesting about it, Mr. Speaker, is that when the government side put together a committee, and I believe that on that committee, of course, chaired by the Member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers), I– An Honourable Member: Dauphin-Roblin. Mr. Murray: Dauphin-Roblin. I am sorry, I always get a little confused because we are both Maple Leaf fans, so we are maybe a little bit more intimate than we should be.

That is because we are Maple Leaf fans. I do know that he chaired the committee. There were other members on that committee, but I would like to pay attention and also I would like to com- mend the Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen) who also was part of that committee. Mr.

Speaker, I think that our two members on this side believed very strongly that this was a good process to go through; that by going around the prov- ince of Manitoba, and basically having an engaged discussion, hearing different ideas, but understanding that the premise of this bill, or the private member's bill, was to ensure that we were going to protect the workers in a workplace from second-hand smoke. Well, Mr. Speaker, I know that as these discus- sions were going on and as the Member for Carman was trying to work with the government side to move this process forward, I had a chance through Dr.

Mark Taylor to meet Heather Crowe. * (14:50) I was quite taken by her story, as I am sure every member in the Legislative Assembly was. I believe that anybody who has met Ms. Crowe would be absolutely spellbound by her story. Of course, her story is simply that she worked hard. She worked long hours in a restaurant, and during that time, Mr. Speaker, she suffered the consequence of second- hand smoke, which means to say that she became ill through cancer, which was put to her by second-hand smoke. I would say that, personally, I used to be a smoker.

I am sure there are a number of members in the Chamber that currently are, or currently were. I do not look on the basis that, as a reformed smoker, somehow there should be separate rules. I am not going down that path because I know sometimes

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 813 when people get religion on a subject, they go overboard. That is not the purpose for me bringing this forward. I just want to put on the record that, yes, growing up in a small town in Saskatchewan, I think it is one of the things that we used to do on the farm– a lot of people, in that time, were smokers. So I am delighted to say and I am very proud to say that I have not smoked a cigarette in decades. I feel good about it. But I do not look at people who are smokers–I do not look at them as anything negative. I only hope, Mr.

Speaker, that people who smoke, where I have some lack of compassion is people say, gee, I wish I could quit. Well, I think if people really believed th at they could quit, they would quit. But I also know a few people, not many, but I know a few people–I would never mention names, because I think that is not what this dis- cussion is about. But I think there are people that enjoy smoking. So, to them, I say, God bless you. You are enjoying something of what you do. But this whole debate is all about protecting the rights of those workers who are exposed to second-hand smoke. Mr.

Speaker, we have heard a number of things from the government side. I think one of the issues that needs to be brought forward in this discussion is that, from time to time, and I recall one time speci- fically in Brandon at the AMM meeting the Premier (Mr. Doer) got up in his place and spoke to the AMM convention at which there were all numbers of people, men and women from all across Manitoba in the audience. That is a chance for the Premier to talk about his vision for Manitoba, his relationships with the municipalities and some of the ideas that he has in terms of working with AMM to improve their lives.

So I was quite surprised when the Premier got up and started making comments and identified the Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan), who was at that dinner, identified him in the crowd and said you know, the Member for Carman wants to bring in a bill that would prohibit smoking in enclosed public places. He said we will call it the Denis Rocan bill because, he said, I think that it is quite acceptable to have a cigarette and a beer in a bar.

I thought that was very interesting for the Premier of the province to say that, because at that time the all-party committee, members from the government side, members from the third party and two members from the Progressive Conservative caucus were part of this all-party task force, and the Premier of the province was standing up in front of 600 or so people in Brandon and sort of casting aspersions about those that would perhaps prohibit smoking with a beer in bars.

So he made that comment and then he made numerous comments like it on the radio, always with kind of I guess a bit of a chuckle, as if somehow, was it serious or not. We are not sure. All I know is that is the Premier (Mr. Doe

r) of the province of Man- itoba basically saying that he disagrees, publicly disagrees, with what is being proposed by the all- party task force as they are going through the pro- cess. So we find ourselves in a position now that the all-party task force has done their work, and I congratulate the all-party task force for the work that they did.

I think they travelled across the province, albeit it would have been, I think the members for Fort Whyte and Carman have said they wished that there had been more dialogue with people in more places, perhaps in Aboriginal communities would have been somewhat beneficial to the process.

I think that we now see that the government of the day has brought forward a bill, and they wave it around, and when we bring issues forward, which I am going to get to, when we bring issues forward such as the fact that this bill, this private member's bill, Bill 21, does not cover a potential Aboriginal casino that is being built by Brokenhead– An Honourable Member: Not a private member's bill. Mr. Murray: At this point it is not a private member's bill, and I thank the honourable member for that correction.

The bill that we talk about that has been brought forward does not protect the workers in an Aboriginal casino. So, Mr. Speaker, I think that where we have to have the discussion about this bill is the day that it was introduced into this House. It was a historic day when it was introduced, and I was delighted to be in my place to be part of a very important process and to see this bill being introduced into this House.

814 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 One of the reasons I was so proud of Bill 21, being historic as it was, is that right behind me in the gallery was one Heather Crowe who really was one of the public people that came forward with this initiative and basically reached out across the coun- try to try to find some government, some party, somebody that would stand up with her and say, you know what, Ms. Crowe, you are absolutely right. We are going to stand shoulder to shoulder with you and ensure that as you have said, Ms.

Crowe, that you will be the last person to die in Canada because you contracted cancer through second-hand smoke. Mr. Speaker, that to me is a very, very powerful and emotional image that she brought forward. On that day in this Chamber, when Bill 21 came for- ward, that was, I believe, the essence of everybody sitting in this Chamber, including Heather Crowe, who was sitting up in the gallery. I am sure she thought: This is fabulous. This is incredible. This is historic, that all of Manitoba, all of Manitoba, will not allow smoking in closed public places. Well, hold the phone.

It is not quite as it seems, apparently. No. Apparently, if an Aboriginal casino that this Government has the ability to grant a licence to–that casino will not ban smoking. I then go back to the original premise of what it is we were trying to do in Manitoba. My under- standing was, and I find it always fascinating the way that this Government operates, because first and foremost, they figured they–"they" being the Doer government–thought, okay, you know what, we are going to jump on this non-smoking bandwagon.

We are going to outlaw smoking in provincial jails, because we really want to protect those workers who work in the provincial jail system. Mr. Speaker, that was a pretty good move. But it took this side of the House, the Progressive Con- servative caucus, to question the Government on their motive, and said, wait a minute, let us follow your logic. You are going to protect the guards in provincial jails from second-hand smoke. We agree, well done. But, at the same time, the City of Win- nipeg had imposed their own smoking by-law ban- ning smoking in public enclosed places.

But the provincial casinos, somehow those–I do not know how they could fall between the cracks but, accord- ing to the Doer government, they did not qualify. So we asked the government of the day: Just so we understand your position, you are basically say- ing that we will ensure that we protect the rights of those workers in provincial jails, but the workers in the provincial casinos operating in the city of Win- ipeg, that already has a smoking ban, do not qualify. * (15:00) Mr. Speaker, there are so many double standards in that approach, it is hard to know where to start.

The premise has got to be either you are there to pass laws to protect the workers from second-hand smoke, or you are not. That was the part that had us all on this side wondering exactly what was the motive of the Doer government when it came to talking about the health, the protection of health of workers in enclosed public places. I am not much of a gambler, Mr. Speaker, but I think I could bet and double-down on this one. The Doer government was afra id to make the right decision with the casinos because they were afraid of losing revenue.

They looked at this not as a health issue, at that point, no, they looked at it, in fact, as, well, wait a minute, if we do not allow people to smoke in casinos we are going to lose revenue. I believe that it took a while for the Doer government to figure out that their Government does not have a revenue problem, they have a spending habit. So they need to have more money. And by outlawing smoking out of those casinos at that time, it would ensure that they would be shooting themselves in the sense that they would be potentially having less revenue come in. Mr.

Speaker, we asked the question again in the House very simply: What is with the double standard with the Doer government? At some point, it became evident, even to the government side, the hypocrisy of their statement: well, we are prepared to protect the workers in pro- vincial jails, but not the workers in provincial casi- nos. So they changed their mind. They saw the right thing to do and, in fact, we applauded them eventu- ally for doing the right thing. Mr. Speaker, I then bring that back to the pre- mise of Bill 21, which th e Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) signed; just he did.

He very eloquently spoke yesterday about his concerns, because when he signed, he believed that he was signing on to a

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 815 committee that was going to ensure that there was protection of all Manitoba workers. All Manitoba workers. All of those people that worked in enclosed public places in Manitoba would be protected from second-hand smoke. The Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen) did not sign on the all-party committee. Why? He was concerned, and had an inkling that this bill that would come forward would not fully mirror what it was that was taking place during the all-party committee hearings, that there may be some kind of a loophole. So, Mr.

Speaker, to his credit, and I say that on the basis that the Member for Carman signed it, because he believed he was signing a document that would protect all Manitobans. The Member for Fort Whyte did not sign it, because he had some concerns that there would be some loopholes, or that they might not protect all Manitobans from second-hand smoke. Mr. Speaker, we are at a position with this bill, Bill 21, where, in fact, the government of the day is prepared to stand back and say: well, there are juris- dictional issues, and so, on that basis, we really do not have a say.

If you have ever seen somebody fold like a cheap suitcase, on that issue, it was the Doer govern- ment. Because clearly, when you look at what Heather Crowe brought to Manitoba, what Mark Taylor talked about on the issue of this around Manitoba, what it was that the Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) talked about with respect to banning smoking in public enclosed places. What, in fact, it was that the City of Winnipeg did, the City of Brandon did. They were basi cally saying that clearly this is a health issue. If it is a health issue in Win- nipeg, then surely it must be a health issue in Brandon.

If it is a health issue in provincial jails, then it surely is a health issue in the provincially run casinos. Mr. Speaker, the difficulty that I have with what really is a piece of historic legislation is that the Doer government does not have the spine nor the commitment to stand up and do what is the right thing to do. That is to ensure that every single, enclosed public place in Manitoba is smoke-free. Surely there can be no difference between some- body who would be working in an Aboriginal casino, or somebody who is working in the casino on McPhillips or Regent. Why would there, somehow, be a difference?

You have to wonder if the only evidence, despite all of the reams of health evidence, all of the reams of the medical community, all of the reams of the public, saying that second-hand smoke is dangerous and can kill you. Then why would it be different in that one location? I do not see the reason for it, unless, as the Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen) correctly says: Follow the money. Mr. Speaker, we believe that we have something very special.

To stand up and trumpet throughout Canada and North America, on the basis that we have become a province that understands that we want to protect the health and safety of workers in enclosed public places from second-hand smoke. We believe in that. We think it is the right thing to do. We think that the health of those workers, in those environments, should, and must be protected. Bill 21 is a good bill. It is a good bill.

But, just as this Doer government has had some difficulty, some trouble, with measuring the difference between the right thing to do and the political thing to do, they now found themselves in the same quagmire. What should we do? I am sure is a question they ask around the Cabinet table. I think what you probably see is a lot of hunched shoulders saying I do not know. What do you think? Mr. Speaker, we think the right thing to do is what the essence of this bill was created for. That is to ensure that all workers in public enclosed places are protected from second-hand smoke. That was the intent of it.

That was the direction that the committee heard, yet the Doer government is now saying, well, you know, on the basis of jurisdiction that, you know, we really do not want to sort of get into this debate–again, the hypocrisy. The Healthy Baby program, which they put into our Aboriginal reserves, they had no difficulty with that. Jurisdiction was not an issue. It was the right thing to do. Well, I argue with the Doer government, I argue with Bill 21 in the sense that my argument is the right thing to do is to include it for all publicly

816 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 enclosed places in Manitoba. That is the right thing to do. Are there politics in this discussion? Perhaps, but that is an issue that the government of the day has to live with.

That is an issue that government has to live with, because my question would be simply this: If Heather Crowe did not live in Ontario, say she lived in Manitoba, and she did the same thing that she did in Ontario, but worked at the Broken- head casino, is the Doer government trying to con- vince Manitobans that because she is subject to second-hand smoke, somehow she would not get cancer? Well, that is pretzel logic to an nth degree. Mr. Speaker, what I do think is it is robbing this debate about the merits of what it could be.

It robs this debate about the importance of protecting work- ers that are exposed to second-hand smoke. I think that is the unfortunate undoing of the Doer govern- ment, because they cannot make the right decision. Politics plays too much of a part of how they decide the legislation. I think that we have got to look at how we set out a path, and indeed I will say that a province-wide smoking ban in enclosed public places, I would have to call that very bold. I would have to call it radical.

I would have to call it common sense, because it is those decisions that are not politi- cally motivated that become bold and radical. It is decisions that are right because they make sense, because they are part of ideas, part of ideology. They are part of a collision of those sorts of things that we all believe and those ideas that come together and debate, and then, at the end of the day, we agree on doing the right thing, not the political thing some- times, but the right thing. I believe in this situation, Mr.

Speaker, the right thing to do would be to ensure that all Manitobans are protected in the workplace from second-hand smoke. * (15:10) In conclusion, I would like to say that I am delighted, on Bill 21, to stand and put a few words on the record because I think that this is historic, that a member from Carman could, and I think the term he used was "The Little Train That Could" we all know that book. The Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) started with a private member's bill. We now see a bill in the House that we think is, in essence, a very strong bill, a historic bill, a first for this country.

We are very proud of it except for that one side where the Doer government refuses to protect all Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, we think that that is a flaw, and I would just like to say that we hope that as this bill goes to committee that people will come forward and express their honest opinion, their gut feeling about where this bill is, can it be improved, and perhaps if there is an amendment to improve it, we hope that the Government does not worry about anything poli- tical, but they do the right thing. I look forward to attending those committee hearings. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I too was wanting to put some words on the record before Bill 21 passes into committee. I know that yesterday when we were inside the Chamber, I had the oppor- tunity to listen to the Leader of the Manitoba Liberal Party speak on this bill. I was actually just quite pleased with the background knowledge throughout, right from the explanation of some of the deficien- cies in the legislation to the actual minority report that was put together.

I can tell you that amongst the three parties–I do not think I am sharing any secrets here–the Leader of the Liberal Party has the scarcest of all resources. Having said that, his sense of commitment was very strong, in terms of ultimately being able to contribute in a very powerful way to what was an important issue for him and for our party and, ultimately, for all Manitobans. I just applaud the efforts that would have been involved on his

part in allocating out the type of resources that he needed to do, in order to be at the meetings themselves; to meet with the many Mani- tobans that he did in putting together the minority report. It was, in essence, through his leadership that we even had the minority report from the party's per- spective, which really dealt with a lot of the deficien- cies that we saw in the ultimate all-party task force report. Mr. Speaker, at times there is legislation that comes before us that is quite satisfying. What I like about this particular bill is, outside of stating the obvious, the manner in which it came forward.

It was an initiative that was started off from the Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) as a private member's bill. Quite often, in the past, you do see governments take action on a private member's bill. This is an excellent

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 817 case in point, not only for today, but also for the future. As at times in the past, we have seen other private members' bills being incorporated into legis- lation, or even possibly the reason for a government legislation. That is a great thing to see. I applaud the efforts from the Member fo r Carman that he put together in ultimately leading us to the bill that we have before us. The task force. There were a number of individual MLAs that were assigned the responsi- bility of touring our fine province. There were some concerns that we had.

My leader made reference to the need to be able to go into Aboriginal com- munities. Unfortunately, the government members did not see the merit to going into the Aboriginal communities to get that direct feedback. Having said that, the task force people did participate directly on the task force, did sacrifice a great deal in order to be able to provide us the report, Mr. Speaker, and I applaud their efforts. I know I was given the privilege to attend at least one formal task force meeting. I found it to be exceptionally enlightening.

The level of presentation was of an excellent calibre, and truly believe that I benefited personally as a result of it. One of the touching presentations that I had heard at that time was an elderly gentleman who was not a war vet himself, but came to express his concerns about not allowing our legions to be able to have cigarettes. The argument–I must say, I was exceptionally sympathetic to it–was that, you know, you have these war vets that have fought abroad for the rights that we have today.

A part of their life today is being able to go to the legion, and to have their drink and have their cigarette and so forth. It was a very difficult issue and it was quite silent when this particular individual said: Do not take away the right that they have, that they believe they have when they fought for the rights that, in fact, we do have. I had raised that particular pre- sentation to my leader. Again, just being sensitive to that particular issue, it is an issue which was incorpo- rated into the minority report to a certain degree.

I know the Leader of the Liberal Party has given a lot of special attention to that particular issue. In fact, we are quite concerned in terms of the impact it is going to have on our legions. If people looked at the minority report, in appendix 13, and I will quote right from the report: "Legions in Winnipeg and Brandon are experiencing financial difficulties as a result of the smoking bans in these cities." The Liberal Party has long supported the exten- sion of the Dauphin exemption for property assess- ment to all Legions in Manitoba.

We believe this should occur in recognition of the contributions of veterans to Manitoba and to Canada and to assist with the financial difficulties facing our legions. I think that in listening to the presentations, to some of the follow-up, it was interesting, Mr.

Petrinka, who, I am sure all of us know, had shown me one letter that had indicated a Legion pointing out the concern, again, of their inability to be able to have cigarette smokers, some of the vets being able to smoke and the impact it is going to have and appealing once again for that property tax exemp- tion, something which other provinces have done. I am told that the Premier himself has indicated that not only was he in favour of it but he would do it for 2004.

The presentations that were made, whether it was, as this particular individual was, sympathetic to the legions, to health care workers, to former smokers, current smokers. There was one individual that owned a hotel. I found that the task force worked. It worked and it worked quite well. I know that in the speech that my leader gave yesterday he pointed out one area in which a presentation was made to the task force, yet the task force did not necessarily reflect in its report, a very important component.

That component is something which we are debating today as one of the potential problems of this Legislation. Mr. Speaker, I will just quote right from my leader, who, in essence, quoted a gentleman by the name of Lloyd Martin, and it goes, from Lloyd Martin in Thompson: Each of us individually and collectively have a role to play in creating conditions that support health. From a Judy McKinnon in Selkirk: "All workers have a right to a smoke-free workplace." It is important that she said all workers in Mani- toba, as the leader had pointed out.

818 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 * (15:20) Mr. Speaker, there are some shortcomings. Was the report that was provided from the task force all- encompassing? I would argue, as my leader has, that there were some problems with it. This is one of those areas. We know ther e is a valid argument that needs to be made in terms of protection of all work- ers, the issues of provincial laws that are general in their application and the importance to not only recognize that and respect it, but to practise it, not to have selective cherry-picking.

There are certain things that maybe the Government could have done such as work with some of the Aboriginal leadership to make sure that they were in tune or having an understanding in terms of the general direction the Government was inclined to go or the chairp erson of the task force. I think that what we really want to do is protect the health and welfare and well-being of all Manitobans.

There are some shortcomings as a result of the Gov- ernment overlooking, whether it was the recom- mendation from the Liberal leader that we go on to some of the reserves as a task force, to some of the comments that were made by Aboriginal individuals that articulated exceptionally well as to the impor- tance of it even applying to Aboriginal people as a whole. Those are the types of issues that I was wanting to make mention of. There is one other area and that more so reflects on the changing of time.

It says that we could see that time changes opinions and we have seen huge strides of public opinion taking momen- tous shifts, that what is acceptable today or unaccept- able today was quite acceptable even 10, 15 years ago. You know, I never smoked myself personally, but I have seen a significant shift in attitudes both in the public as a whole, even in my home. I can recall when people would think nothing of lighting up a cigarette, not thinking in terms of the individual beside them and their health and well-being, but just lighting up the cigarette and having that smoke.

Even within my family, at one time my wife, Cathy, would have a cigarette and think nothing of it, and then after having our first child became a little bit more aware of the importance of second-hand smoke. To this day now I never really see Cathy smoke. If she has a cigarette, she goes outside, does not even smoke inside our home. Mr. Speaker, that is on a very personal note. When you look at the general application of how attitudes have changed, I can remember being in high school, and the right thing to do was to have a cigarette. It was the cool thing.

You would hang out by the little corner store and you would light up your cigarette. At one time cigarettes were a big part of the media image. The cool actors and actresses, they would have that cigarette in hand. It is just amazing to what degree things have changed for the better because of a higher sense of public awareness or public education as more and more people realize the problems of second-hand smoke. So we are moving in the right direction, but there still is room to go.

That is why I think that we should do what we can in terms of trying to facilitate that continual progress, because at the end of the day all of society benefits the more people become aware. Having said that, the last part that I was really wanting to comment on was where we go from here in terms of Bill 21. There is great interest on the part of the Manitoba Liberal Party as expressed from our leader that the public continue to have the oppor- tunity to see and comment on this legislation.

What would be a wonderful opportunity, we believe, is to see this particular bill pass before we rise into the committee stage so that between now and whenever we do get in, because we are told that it will be 12, 13, 14 April, we would be a whole lot happier if we just continued on, I must say, until at least the spring break that our kids get in school and then rise inside the Chamber.

Having said that, at the very least I think there is a strong argument to be made that what we do at this point is we see this bill ultimately go to committee before we rise so that Manitobans then would be provided and afforded the opportunity to have input as opposed to waiting until we get back and then seeing the bill passed at whatever time, because we all recognize the importance that once this legislation is passed, ultimately, through third reading and given Royal Assent, that there is a time period that clicks in.

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 819 You need to provide people as much as possible the opportunity to adjust to laws that are, in fact, being passed. This bill actually acknowledges that need by saying that it will in most part take effect on October 1, 2004. Again, it is something in which we within the Liberal Party, in particular the Leader of the Liberal Party, have emphasized the importance of allowing for proper time, the proper process. Process is so critically important here.

That is why we ultimately think that if we provide Mani- tobans the opportunity while we are in recess, of sorts, to come and have presentation, I suspect we would even be open to taking the committee beyond the Manitoba Legislature and going out to, let us say, a community like Thompson and allowing for indi- viduals such as in Nelson House, possibly even going there, because we do believe it was an over- sight by not going as a task force to some of the reserves.

When I say an oversight, it was not an oversight from the Manitoba Liberal Party's position because that is something which we believe should have taken place. That is what we had advocated while the task force was still in the setting up of dates, times and locations. With those few words, it is our belief that this particular bill should pass before we recess in hopes that the Government would allow for debates and a clause by clause during the recess so that Manitobans will be afforded another opportunity to be able to add a comment and contribute to the ultimate passage of this legislation. Mr.

Speaker: Any other speakers? When this matter is again before the House, it will remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Charles- wood (Mrs. Driedger). Bill 6–The Cross-Border Policing Act Mr. Speaker: Resume debate on Bill 6, The Cross- Border Policing Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik). Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I again welcome the opportunity, in spite of the fact that members opposite are not participating in many of our debates, to participate in the debate and my caucus members do as well.

I thank them for all their input during the last couple of weeks in the debate on bills in this House. On behalf of the residents of the constituency of Lac du Bonnet, I welcome the opportunity to debate on Bill 6, The Cross-Border Policing Act and Law Enforcement Review Amendment Act.

I think the first thing that comes to mind when we think about this particular bill, Bill 6, is when as a child I watched old western movies and frequently you would see, on television, criminals crossing the Rio Grande River between Mexico and Texas with law enforcement officials, sheriffs, deputy sheriffs and posses, in hot pursuit, pursuing criminals, going between Texas and Mexico. The criminals always got to the river well ahead of the law enforcement officials in every movie that I saw.

They crossed the river into Mexico and always turned around before escaping smiling at those law enforcement officials, the posse, the sheriff and the deputy sheriffs, because they knew that the posse and the sheriffs could not chase them into Mexico. They were free. In many ways, that is the principle of this bill. It is to avoid that kind of problem. * (15:30) When I watched some of the serial programs on television like "The Dukes of Hazzard," it was very similar. Those who were rum-runners and those who were also breaking the law simply had to cross the county line. I do not know if you recall, Mr.

Speaker, but all they did was cross the county line ahead of the sheriff and then they were home free. The sheriff was then forced to stop his pursuit of the criminal and let the offender go free. Again, this bill kind of addresses that particular issue. Bill 6, however, does not change the law with regard to hot pursuit. There is a body of evidence in law that is not embodied in legislation but is part of the common law. In other words, the judges and courts have made decision s which have defined the common law position of hot pursuit.

The criminal being pursued in Canada can still be apprehended, say in Saskatchewan, by a Manitoba police officer without a problem, if they are in hot pursuit, in other words, if they are in a police chase. The law of hot pursuit does not apply between countries, only between the provinces of Canada. I think we witnessed this recently when a criminal in Michigan sped through the United States- Canada border at very high speeds chased by the Michigan police. Ontario police finally apprehended

820 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 the criminal, but an international incident occurred because Michigan police pursued the criminal into Canada. The same hot pursuit rules do not apply between Canada and the United States but only between provinces. This incident, I remember watching the news, created quite a stir because of the issue of sovereignty for Canada. The bill, Bill 6, Mr. Speaker, is based on model legislation that was prepared by the Uniform Law Conference, a collection of provinces that got together and drafted model legislation to be passed throughout all of Canada.

I think the Justice Minister is quite pleased because in fact Manitoba, as I under- stand, will be the first province to pass this legis- lation, although there are other provinces that are drafting their legislation and preparing to pass the legislation prior to the end of the year.

The decision to grant police officer status to an out-of-province police offi cer rests with what is called "an appointing official." The legislation allows for more than one appointi ng official for the prov- ince and the Government, as I understand it, the government of the day, the Justice Minister, antici- pates appointing an appointing official from the RCMP, the Winnipeg Police Service and the Bran- don Police Service to accommodate requests from out-of-town and out-of-pro vince police officers for jurisdiction in Manitoba.

A Manitoba officer who is appointed as a police officer in another province or territory has to co- operate as part of the conditions of his appointment. He has to co-operate with investigating officers in the province of Manitoba. That, I think, is important. A Manitoba officer who is also appointed as a police officer in another province or territory also must co- operate with that existing jurisdiction. Our officers' conduct, if a Manitoba officer goes to Saskatchewan, for instance, our officer from Manitoba has to ensure that he abides by the rules of conduct that are here in Manitoba, and vice versa.

If a Saskatchewan officer came to Manitoba, the Saskatchewan officer would have to abide by the rules and regulations and the terms of conduct in their home province. Mr. Speaker, the bill allows provincial, muni- cipal and Aboriginal police officers, from outside of Manitoba, status in Manitoba. That status can be subject to a number of conditions. The out-of-prov- ince police officer is expected to co-operate and not interfere with the investigation of Manitoba police officers on the same matter, and it requests to have status in Manitoba.

Out-of-province police officers in fact have to be either accepted or rejected with con- ditions within seven days of making the application. I noticed in the bill that there is provision for an emergency. In case they need emergency status, that emergency status can be granted. Manitoba is the first jurisdiction to pass this kind of legislation. However, we expect that all other provinces will be on board, passing their own similar legislation before the end of the year.

The discipline with respect to officers entering from one province to another and getting authority to act within different provinces, the discipline of those officers is in fact controlled by the jurisdiction which they come from. That is a bit of a concern to us. The reason it is a concern is because nine out of ten prov- inces have what is called LERA, the Law Enforce- ment Review Agency, which is a public complaint body in which citizens can actually make a com- plaint about the conduct of an officer in our jurisdiction or any jurisdiction. Only nine of those jurisdictions have LERA.

Our concern, of course, is if an officer from one of those jurisdictions came into Manitoba that does not have a public complaint body, then we would have a problem in terms of trying to discipline that officer. That is a bit of a concern. I can understand why the minister is introducing this bill and why other provinces are introducing this bill. It is simply for the fa ct that crimes do not fit within provincial boundaries.

What we are seeing, over the last number of years particularly, is that organized crime is increas ing, the number of cri- minal organizations that are out there and the gangs and the street gangs that are terrorizing our towns and villages and cities is also increasing and gaining in strength. Because of that, they flow between jurisdictions very quickly and create crimes in one jurisdiction and then go to another jurisdiction to avoid detection and prosecution.

I think it is impor- tant that we have a law that gives officers the authority to go between jurisdictions similarly as criminals are travelling be tween provincial bound- aries. Mr. Speaker, I think this type of legislation will make it easier for officers to investigate crimes. If an officer in Alberta is investigating a crime in Alberta, and the criminal moves to Manitoba, all the evidence

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 821 by which the Alberta officer was investigating the particular crime may be in Alberta. It may very well be necessary for the Albe rta officer to come to Manitoba in order to investigate the individual him or herself. It is important that we have continuity of that investigation to ensure that those who leave from one jurisdiction to another are properly investi- gated, and there is some continuity to ensure that police have tools.

This is a tool which they can use in order to properly investigate crimes that are com- mitted within their jurisdiction and within other provinces. I think the most notorious criminal organization that is out there in Canada at this point is the Hells Angels. The Hells Angels do not exist in one prov- ince. They are not simply existent in Québec or in British Columbia or in Alberta or in Saskatchewan. They in fact exist in Manitoba. Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair I know that members across the way do not always agree with me when I say that the Hells Angels moved into Manitoba in the year 2000.

They seem to think that they moved in earlier, but there is documentary proof in the Winnipeg Free Press in the year 2000 that they to ok over the Los Brovos motor- cycle club in the year 2000. They moved into Mani- toba then. I know that members opposite do not agree with that, but the documentary evidence is there that they did. * (15:40) The Hells Angels are existent in almost all states in the United States and in all provinces in Canada.

It is important that we have the ability for police officers to not only investigate the crimes that may have been committed by members of the criminal organizations in Manitoba but have the ability to go to another province to investigate that same indi- vidual. As I say, that only promotes the continuity and the effectiveness of the investigation. It also improves the ability of the police to go after criminal organizations because they know no provincial boundaries and police should not either, at least with- in Canada. I noticed, when I did a search on the Internet with respect to cross-border policing, an

article on the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Web page that described the fact that there is a program federally already in terms of allowing RCMP to go into the United States and American officers to come into Canada. We already have federal legislation. There is a process by which officers can proceed from the United States into Canada or into Manitoba to investigate crimes on certain conditions and vice versa. I think that is important. We already had it between the United States and Canada but we do not have it between provinces in Canada. This bill will in fact address that situation.

It is important that we do pass the bill. We do support the bill, in principle. It could lead, as I say, to greater continuity in our investi- gations by police and law enforcement authorities. There is a greater likelihood that criminals will actually be brought to justice. This is another tool that we can use, that police officers can use to take on the gangs and criminal organizations that in fact have operations throughout Canada and operations not only in Canada but in the United States and abroad. I think it is an important piece of legislation that in fact will help do that.

Our concern of course is that one province in particular, Prince Edward Island, does not have a law enforcement review agency. Because they do not have a law enforcement review agency they do not in fact have the ability, if they do come into Manitoba under this bill, to be able to publicly scrutinize the officer's conduct or misconduct in the province of Manitoba if in fact it occurs . It is a bit of a concern. We also have the territories, Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon Territory, who are in the same situation. I think that that is a bit of a concern as well.

When we allow o fficers from those juris- dictions within Manitoba, we have no way to moni- tor and to publicly scrutinize the actions of those officers within Manitoba if they are not proper and they are not adequate. I think those concerns, I believe, should be addressed. We may be looking at some kind of amendment perhaps at the committee stage. Personally, I look forward to hearing the com- ments at committee of people who may be interested in coming to support the bill. I know that we do have several groups that would be interested, I am told.

I look forward to their comments on the bill and per- haps a further amendment beyond that. Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and that concludes my remarks on that bill.

822 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): I hope I am not up too fast. I do not know if there is any member from the Government that wanted to speak. Maybe you want to canvass the House. Oh, no, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it looks like again the Government is going to pass the opportunity or let the opportunity go by without speaking on very important legislation as they have done for the entire session. It is most unfortunate that members in the Gov- ernment have chosen not to speak to their legislation.

In fact they are quite willing to allow the Opposition to do all the speaking on the legislation, and they can sit and read notes from each other and read corres- pondence and do everything but speak to legislation. In previous opportunities to speak, I think I have mentioned that I believe it is a privilege to be able to stand in this House and to speak to important legis- ation, to put the comments on behalf of the citizens of Springfield on the record.

My colleague the member from Lac du Bonnet mentioned that back in his youthful days he used to watch television and the criminal would get to a border and there the law enforcement would have to stop because law enforcement agencies at that time were not allowed to cross borders. This legislation is going to be dealing with that particular issue, thus of course the title, The Cross-Border Policing Act.

It is very important that in an era now when the criminals respect no border, no boundary, no nation, they respect no police authority whatsoever, whether it is contraband, whether it is dope, whether it is any other illegal activity or even a transferring of illegal monies from illegal activity. The transfer and the movement is unlike any other time in the history of the world. It was really time for this Chamber and for this Government to get moving on this bill.

It is time to get caught up with the times and see to it that those who enforce the laws, that enforce, on behalf of us, safety in our communities, have the tools to be able to pursue individuals who wish to have a criminal life, that they have the ability to chase them down and catch them. Without getting into too many of the details, clearly this is legislation that was a long time in coming. As our criminal element in society gets more and more modernized, so do we have to get more and more modern in the way we go after them and chase them.

As I mentioned, they respect no border, no boundary, and our laws have to be able to enable our law enforcement agencies to pursue them cross border. The Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) has laid out the technical issues and the technicality of the bill in an almost, might one say, ministerial way. Clearly, he understands the legislation far better than the members opposite, or for that matter, the minister himself. I think it is appropriate that the Justice critic of the Official Opposition, the Pro- gressive Conservative opposition, laid out the ele- ments of the bill. I want to echo my sentiments.

Clearly, it is a long time in coming that this piece of legislation be presented to the House and be debated. We look forward that, at some point, perhaps we will get one of the members of the Government up and debating on this bill, but in the mean time, I will pass this on to my other colleague and give her the oppor- tunity to put a few comments on the record. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Deputy Speaker, just prior to the bill possibly passing into committee, I just wanted to put a few words on the record.

This bill would permit the police officers from other areas of Canada to be appointed as police officers in Manitoba for the purposes of investi- gation, and it affords them all the powers and pro- tections that peace officers have by law within the province. These appointmen ts are temporary, which should be emphasized, and there are a number of conditions that can be imposed on such an appoint- ment if deemed necessary. This bill also requires that the local police officials be made aware of any of the officers from another province starting these duties.

My understanding is that this legislation is something which we are hoping to see of similar natures in other jurisdictions as well. With those few words, we are quite prepared to see it go to committee. Thank you. Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): We have given the other side of the House every opportunity to rise. We do not see anybody doing so, so I would be pleased to take the opportunity to put a few words on the record in regard to Bill 6, The Cross-Border Policing Act, and Law Enforcement Review Amendment Act. * (15:50) Mr. Deputy Speaker, crime knows no bound- aries.

Essentially, this bill will allow police officers from other provinces the authority to enter Manitoba and continue their investigation. For example, if an

March 11, 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 823 officer from Ontario is pursuing a case, and the suspect moves here to the province of Manitoba, the officer from that province can make application to continue his or her investigation in this province. The application applies only in Canada. Manitoba is the first jurisdiction to present a bill of this type for consideration. It is expected however that similar legislation will be enacted in the other provinces. We are in support of this bill, but I just want to put on the record some areas that may be trouble- some.

Nine out of the ten provinces have indepen- dent police complaint tribunals like the Law Enforce- ment Review Agency. Prince Edward Island does not have this, nor do the territories. This could be proble- matic, because who will be responsible for disciplin- ing those officers who come from other jurisdictions where no independent police complaint tribunal is found. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I just want to say in conclusion that I ask, really, again, why the members on the other side of the House refuse to stand and debate their bills. They do not support their own bills, it seems.

They do not stand, they do not debate and they do not even want to listen to what we have to say, it seems. It has been left up to us, the Oppo- sition, to speak, and we welcome that opportunity, but the introduction of bills provides room for healthy debate, something which Manitobans expect and deserve. Unfortunately, again they are being disappointed in this regard. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (M inister of Justice and Attorney General): To close debate, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable Minister of Justice will now be closing debate.

Are there any other members of the House who want to speak before he does so? Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I certainly welcome the new-found interest of members opposite in taking

part in debates on bills, but, of course, as members opposite know, the norm of this House is for the minister and the critic and perhaps the independents and maybe there is a sprinkling of other interest. I am very pleased and welcome participation of members opposite. I want as well, at this point– Mr. Speaker in the Chair Point of Order Mr. Speaker: The Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Mr.

Leonard Derkach (Official Opposition House Leader): This is not so much a dispute of the facts, but it is a point of order, because I do not know that there is a tradition or a rule in this House where members of the Government should not speak to bills, Mr. Speaker. I think in the past we have always passed bills on the basis of people who have an interest in the bill, whether they are ministers of the Crown, back- benchers, Opposition expressing their views on a bill, their support or their opposition to a bill. Mr.

Speaker, when our party was in government, many, many times, whether it was in the passage of such controversial legislation as the Manitoba Tele- phone System to privatization or other bills, we were always happy to engage in debate. We always were more than pleased to put our remarks on the record. Mr. Speaker: Before ruling on the point of order, I would just like to remind all honourable members that a point of order should point out to the Speaker a breach of a rule or departure of Manitoba practice. The honourable member on this point of order does not have a point of order. * * * Mr. Mackintosh: Mr.

Speaker, I certainly recall the record. I just want to at this point recognize some of the people who have put a lot of effort into this legis- lation. I think I will also recognize that the Oppo- sition Justice critic has certainly been diligent in attending to the legislation and performing his demo- cratic role in this Chamber by the review of the bills that have come here. I appreciate any positive input that he or indeed any member in this Chamber has in terms of strengthening the legislation. Mr.

Speaker, I do not have much more to say except this: I thank the Canadian Professional Police Association and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police in particular for their advocacy with regard to this kind of legislation. We know this legislation is

824 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA March 11, 2004 very important to police officers and to police leadership right across th is country. I am very pleased that it appears this matter is now moving to committee. Manitoba is the first jurisdiction to bring in this legislation, most likely to be followed by every province, and, I believe, territory in Canada so that we can have a new system of facilitation of cross-border policing in Canada. I am glad we are proceeding on a timely basis. I thank members of the House for their support on the principle of the bill and having the matter move forward at this time. Mr.

Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 6, The Cross-Border Policing Act. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Bill 17–The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Amendment Act Mr. Speaker: Bill 17, The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Amendment Act, standing in the name of the honourable Member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire), who has 14 minutes remaining. An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker: Stand?

Is it the will of the House for the bill to remain standing in the name of the hon- ourable Member for Arthur-Virden? [Agreed] Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to put a few words on the record about Bill 17, The Domestic Violence and Stalking Prevention, Protection and Compensation Amendment Act. Legislation that does improve the circumstances surrounding domestic violence and stalking is welcome if in fact it does actually make that happen and it does put the proper checks and balances in place to ensure that those types of issues do not continue to dominate in society.

We look forward to having the proper protections continue to be enhanced. Certainly from the appearances of the bill and from the comments that have been put forward to this point, it does appear that this legis- lation is moving ahead in the right direction. Manitobans in certain circumstances may need protection orders against others, even though they are not married or cohabiting. This bill expands the category of people who may be entitled to protection orders.

Those who can obtain protection orders now include those who are in dating relationships and those who are family members such as brothers, sis- ters, grandparents, parents, adoptive parents, and children. Some of these people may be in need of a protection order. This amendment allows same. A few years ago I had an opportunity to spend some time with a young woman, who, in a dating relationship, had been severely

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	38-2-19b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	38th 2nd hansardpdf 19b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	85a7f71b825b938d7c51af105243bee8473b1bbd

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