Manitoba Hansard — 19 November 1996 (Sitting 83, 36th Legislature, 2nd Session)

36-2-83

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLVI No. 83- 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, November 19, 1996 - 92

Name ASHTON, Steve BARRETI, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HEL WER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. McGIFFORD, Diane MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon.

MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEWMAN, David PALLISTER, Brian, Hon. PENNER, Jack PITURA, Frank PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RADCLIFFE, Mike REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack, Hon. RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis SALE, Tim SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STRUTHERS, Stan SVEINSON, Ben TOEWS, Vic, Hon. TWEED, Mervin VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosano MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-sixth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Rob lin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Pembina Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St. Johns Elmwood Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Osborne Assiniboia St. James River East Riel Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Morris Lac du Bonnet River Heights Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Crescentwood Broadway Kirktield Park Dauphin La Verendrye Rossmere Turtle Mountain Fort Garry Swan River Pa.ri)' N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. Lib. Lib. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. p C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D P. PC . N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

5093 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, November 19, 1996 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Manitoba Telephone System Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Bernice Enns, Richard Enns and R.N. Gooding requesting that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) withdraw Bill 67 and not sell the Manitoba Telephone System to private interests. Mr.

Steve Ashton (fhompson) : Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Karen Hamm , Maria Arevalo and Ann Rietze requesting that the Premier withdraw Bill 67 and not sell the Manitoba Telephone System to private interests. Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Mae Allen, James Brown, Ed · Allen and others requesting that the Premier withdraw Bill 67 and not sell the Manitoba Telephone System to private interests. Ms.

Rosano Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Winona Struthers, Neil Brown, Louise Hudson and others requesting that the Premier withdraw Bill 67 and not sell the Manitoba Telephone System to private interests. NDP Youth Crime Action Plan Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): I beg to present the petition of Ed Gelhom, Phillis Gelhorn, Dietrich Lessing and others praying that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Minister of Justice (Mrs.

Vodrey) to con sider using this action plan, that is, the NDP's gang action plan, as a basis for provincial policy and organized criminal gangs. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Guaranteed Annual Income Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Dispense.

THA T in 1976 Canada signed the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which recognized the right of everyone to make a living by work which is freel y chosen, recognized the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living, including adequate fo od, clothing and hous ing, recognized the right of everyone to enjoy a high standard of physical and mental health, and provided fo r the widest possible protection and assist ance to the fa mily; and THAT poor children and adults in Canada continue to die at a higher rate and earlier age than people with adequate incomes; and THAT Bill 36, The Social Allowances Amendment Act, will create even greater poverty in Manitoba by eliminating government responsibility to ensure that everyone who lacks adequate fo od, clothing, housing and health care has these needs met; and THA T the bill will punish people by cutting them off from social assistance or reducing their benefits if they fa il to meet employment expectations; and WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY that the Legislative Assembl y of Manitoba urge the Minister of Family Services to consider repealing Bill 36 and replacing it with improved legislation which provi des fo r a guaranteed annual income that allows people to have adequate fo od, clothing, housing, child care and health care and that this annual income increas es as prices increase and that this new legislation provides fo r the creation of real jobs with the goal of creating fu ll employment so that individuals on social assist ance can find saft, meaningful work of their own choosing that allows them to meet their needs and the needs of their fa milies and that this new legisl ation provides adequate supports so that individuals with disabilities receive appropriate assist ance in finding meaningful work

5094 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 1996 Manitoba Telephone System Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Yes. Madam Speaker: Yes. The Clerk will read. Mr.

Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth: THAT the Manitoba Telephone System has served this province well for over 80 years providing province-wide service, some of the lowest local rates in North America, thousands of jobs and keeping profits in Manitoba; and THAT MTS contributes $450 million annually to the Manitoba economy and is a major sponsor of community events throughout the province; and THAT MTS, with nearly 4,000 employees, including more than 1,000 in rural and northern Manitoba, is one of Manitoba's largest firms, headquartered in Manitoba and is committed to Manitoba; and THAT the provincial government has no mandate to sell MTS and said before and during the 1995 election that MTS was not for sale.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) withdraw Bill 67 and not sell the Manitoba Telephone System to private interests. Mada m Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? Dispense.

THAT the Manitoba Telephone System has served this province well fo r over 80 years providing province wide service, some of the lowest local rates in North America and thousands of jobs; and THAT MIS has made over$ 100 million since 1990 and this money has stayed in Manitoba; and THA T MTS contributes $150 million annually to the Manitoba economy and is a major sponsor of community events throughout the province; and THA T MIS, with nearly 4, 000 employees including more than 1, 000 in rural and northern Manitoba, is one of Manitoba's largest firms and headquartered in Manitoba is committed to Manitoba; and IHAT the provincial government has no mandate to sell MIS and said bef ore and during the 1995 election that MTS was not fo r sale.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembl y of Manitoba request that the Premier (Jvfr. Filmon) not sell the Manitoba Telephone System. *

(1335) Mada m Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Dispense.

THAT the Manitoba Telephone System has served this province well fo r over 80 years providing province wide service, some of the lowest local rates in North Amer ica and thousands of jobs; and IHAT MIS has made over $100 million since 1990 and this money has stayed in Manitoba; and THA T MTS contributes $150 million annually to the Manitoba economy and is a major sponsor of community events throughout the province; and THA T MTS, with nearly 4, 000 employees including more than 1, 000 in rural and northern Manitoba, is one of Manitoba's largest firms and headquartered in Manitoba is committed to Manitoba; and IHAT the provincial government has no mandate to sell MIS and said bef ore and during the 1995 election that MTS was not fo r sale.

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5095 WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembl y of Manitoba request that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) not sell the Manitoba Telephone Sys tem. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the Annual Reports 1995-96 for Red River Community College, 1995-96 for MERLIN, the Manitoba Education Research and Learning Information Network, the Financial Statements for Assiniboine Community College as ofJune 30, 1996, plus the 1995-96 Annual Report for Assiniboine Community College and Keewatin Community College Financial Statements as of June 30, 1996. Thank you. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Manitoba Telephone System Privatization-Impact on Rates Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. The Premier has repeatedly stated in this House that there is no difference between a private and public company because the CRTC will deal with rates based on costs. The telephone system is asking for an exemption from the rate cap that is being established at the CRTC hearings in Ottawa.

I would like to ask the Premier, what are the costs that are necessitating the Manitoba Telephone System in applying for the exemption from the rate cap and the ability to go beyond the rate cap in terms of rate increases for the consumers of Manitoba? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I know of none. Mr.

Doer: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier why he has stated in this House before that there is no difference between a private and public company when his own legal counsel at the CRTC decisions, in verbal testimony, which for the November 13 hearing has stated that there will be increased costs based on privatiz ation, first because of the tax changes of the corporation and, secondly, due to the higher costs of borrowing money because the government will no longer be there to allow its credit rating or a situation on capital to be considered.

Why has the Premier maintained one position on costs and rates in this House, and why is the legal counsel in Ottawa stating that privatization will increase costs and rates in terms of the decision being made? Mr. Filmon: Firstly, Madam Speaker, the rating that the new corporation would have is expected to be at least equal to that that the corporation currently has, so there should be no reason for a greater cost of borrowing.

Secondly, as I have indicated, there may be many other factors that would lead to reductions in cost, and when you look at comparisons, the only valid comparisons are the comparisons between what exists today. As I have indicated, in the rating categories that cover rural and remote type networks for telephones, we have examples in Canada today at which on both of the categories for rural telephone service, there are at least four private com panies that have lower rates than the Manitoba Telephone System for the same size of exchanges. *

(1340) Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, whom are the public to believe, the Premier who has broken his election promise to the people of Manitoba, or Ross Nugent, the Legislative Counsel, in verbal testimony and which I have a transcript of, who is saying that MTS privatization will allow this corporation to face costs that it has never faced before, one, the income tax cost and, two, it will have to--and let me get the quote further: They will have rather substantial costs in the costs of borrowing money and capital.

Who is telling the people of Manitoba the truth, the Premier in this Chamber, who has maintained there is no difference in cost, or legal counsel in Ottawa that is saying that these are costs that MTS has never faced before and they will be substantial costs? Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, as a result of the ruling on pension funds that has been obtained by the Manitoba Telephone System, it is not anticipated that they will be facing income taxes for a considerable period of time. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, this is a new question. This government Crown corporation has applied for an

5096 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 1996 exemption to the cap being established by CR TC for the Stentor corporations. The Premier is saying that there is no difference in cost.

Legal counsel for the telephone system at the hearings in Ottawa on November 13, well after the decision was allegedly made on pensions, has stated that they will have costs that they have never faced before, No. 1, on the income tax decisions, and No. 2, on the increased costs of dealing with the capital borrowing for a corporation that no longer has the ability to be backed up by the lower rates available to a provincial government.

I would like to ask the Premier, is the testimony before the CR TC wrong, or is the Premier wrong in terms of what is coming out in terms of the facts here in the province of Manitoba? Mr. Filmon: I have already answered both aspects of that question, Madam Speaker. Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, we would suggest that the Legislative Counsel, Mr. Nugent, is telling the truth, and the Premier is not telling the people of Manitoba the truth. That is the answer to the question. Mr.

Nugent goes on to say in his testimony, his verbal testimony of November 13, in asking for this exemption to the ceiling or the cap on rates, that there will be a substantial rate shock based on privatization and cost recovery in the province of Manitoba. Can the Premier tell us what this rate shock is going to be, and why are not all Manitobans informed how much of that rate shock is due to the ideological position of this government, the extreme position of this government to privatize MTS contrary to their election promises? Mr.

Filmon: Madam Speaker, I have indicated before that the only valid comparison for rates between those telephone companies that are privately owned and those that are publicly owned in Canada today are those in their rate groups, and I refer him to MTS Rate Group 1, MTS Rate Group 2, both of which are rates for rural exchanges and their comparative exchanges throughout Canada. In both cases there are four other utilities, privately owned, that have lower rates in both categories today than the Manitoba Telephone System. Mr. Doer: That, of course, contradicts what was in the budget.

We still have not been able to figure out the Newfoundland rates, but I would like the Premier to be consistent with his own budget. I would like the Premier to answer the question. His telephone system and his Legislative Counsel are asking for an exemption from the Stentor application to go beyond the ceiling. They are saying that that rate increase to go beyond the ceiling, above the cap, is due partially to privatization where there will be substantial costs incurred with the changes based on privatization.

Can the Premier delineate for the people of this province what costs and what rate increases will be based on privatization so the public of Manitoba will know? Stop this cover-up and give us the complete information that is being contained and applied in Ottawa. *

(1345) Bon. Glen Findlay (Minister responsible fo r the administr ation of The Manitoba Telephone Act): Madam Speaker, some things will change for the corporation in terms of their costs, no question. When half of the debt is written off in the process that we are going through, obviously the amount of interest the corporation has to pay v.ill go dov.n from $90 million to approximately $40 million to $50 million. That is a significant reduction in cost. Applications that are made to CRTC have nothing to do with the ruling.

Ultimately, CRTC will rule on all applications from all telephone companies across the country. Yesterday I referred to a press release just out from the CRTC which identifies very clearly, they take very seriously maintaining telephone rates affordable for all Canadians, and that is taken into context in every ruling that they are going to do now and on into the future. Manitoba Telephone System Privatization-Impact on Rates Mr.

Steve Ashton (Thompson): We now see why the government was so desperate to pass Bill 6 7 on November 7, because on November 13 the counsel for MTS was appearing before CRTC referencing that MTs-and this is a quote-will face costs that it has never faced before. There will be a rather substantial increase in the cost of capital borrowed. There was a need to pay income taxes. Rural residential rates in Manitoba are certainly going to change more than others, and perhaps

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5097 most significantly-and this is the counsel for MTS in front of CRTC who stated that: We are concerned with rate shock. He went on to say: It is in fact one of the major problems facing the introduction and passage of the bill before our House. Residents are naturally very concerned.

I would like to ask the Premier a question here, if he will finally admit to the fact that the counsel for MTS are now approving what we have said all the way along, that there will be increas es in rates because of increased costs to MTS and that will involve a potential rate shock, particularly for rural Manitobans. Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): No, Madam Speaker. My previous answer stands. Mada m Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, with a supplementary question. Mr. Ashton: Supplementary: I would like to ask when the Premier will understand here that this is not the NDP, this is the counsel for MTS.

When will he admit to the truth, that we are going to be faced with higher costs and that rural Manitobans face a potential rate shock because of the privatization of MTS? Mr. Filmon: My previous answer applies. Mada m Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, with a final supplementary question. Mr. Ashton: What does it take for the Premier to understand that when the counsel for MTS himself states that residents are naturally very concerned, the change from a government-owned utility to a private one has everyone nervous?

When will he start giving some straight answers, some real answers to very serious questions Manitobans have about the privatization of MTS? Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the only cause for nervousness is that people might believe the New Democrats who consistently misrepresent, who consi stently put false information on the table, who con sistently look for ways in which they can frighten people in this province, and that is the only cause for concern in this province. Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, a further question. I am reminded of the story of the emperor who had no clothes.

Everybody in the province of Manitoba right now understands what we are faced with under privatization except the Premier. He is the only one left who believes his own rhetoric. I want to ask the Premier, since this has been filed with the CRTC as ofNovember 13, if he can indicate what the rate projections are in terms of MTS, including the privatization costs that are outlined in the CRTC. What are the increased rates we are going to be faced with as a result of privatization that are confirmed by the MTS presentation? Mr.

Filmon: Madam Speaker, as I have indicated before, the projections are that the increases should be no different under private ownership than they are under public ownership. Mada m Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, with a supplementary question. *

(1350) Mr. Ashton: A supplementary question. I want to ask the Premier, when the counsel for MTS states that rural resident ial rates in Manitoba are certainly going to change more than the others, what is that change going to involve? How much more of an increase are rural Manitobans going to be faced with? This, by the way again, is the counsel for MTS, not the NDP that has put this on the record. Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the counsel for MTS is stating what has already been happening because, in fact, there has been that rate rebalancing ongoing by CRTC.

It was part of the $2 charge that was placed on earlier this year by CRTC as part of rate rebalancing. So he is just stating what already exists. Mr. Ashton: As a fmal supplementary, I just want to ask once again if the Premier will recognize, when the counsel for MTS states that MTS will face costs that it has never faced before, will the Premier fmally, on the record, admit to what everybody in Manitoba knows and that there will be additional costs as a result of pri vatization? MTS knows it. The counsel for MTS

5098 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 1996 knows it. Most of Manitoba knows it. Only the Premier does not know it. Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, as has been adequately pointed out in the past, MTS will also achieve savings by virtue of the interest that it ·will not have to pay on borrowed money. That has also been adequately pointed out in the past. Health Sciences Centre Capital Projects Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, the government, through the sale of MTS, is going to be seeing a revenue increase of somewhere in the neighbourhood of $300 million to $400 million.

The Health Sciences Centre needs immediate capital infusion in order to ensure that we are not going to lose accreditation at that particular facility. Given the importance of the teaching hospitals to all Manitobans, will the Premier (Mr. Filmon) or the Minister of Health commit today to assign an amount of dollars that would be necessary to ensure that the accreditation is going to be there for the Health Sciences Centre so that all Manitobans will in fact be provided quality health through the Health Sciences Centre? An Honourable Member: He is hurting a bit today. Bon.

James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I am reminded by my colleagues to be gentle with the honourable member for Inkster in light of developments in Prince Edward Island yesterday, so I am going to try to do that. The honourable member expresses concern about capital improvements for the health system in the province of Manitoba; those concerns are shared by myself and anyone else who is concerned about the future of health care in Manitoba.

The government of Manitoba is working with proponents of capital projects to try to get those capital projects that are required on the tracks, similar to the way we have handled our requirements at the Manitoba Cancer Treatment and Res earch FoWldation. We found that very significant savings were possible while at the same time building structures that would provide for the planned and projected requirements of patients in Manitoba for the future. That work will carry on, and it is my hope that at as early a date as it is possible to do so, we will be able to get other projects on the tracks, too. *

(1355) Mr. Lamoureux: Will the Minister of Health acknowledge today that there is an immediate need for capital infusion in the Health Sciences Centre, and if that need is not met, we could look at the Health Sciences Centre losing some of its accreditation in terms of its operating rooms? Will the Minister of Health commit today to invest in capital dollars as a direct result of the sell off of MTS, as opposed to seeing that money be put into a slush fund? Mr.

McCrae: Madam Speaker, I think the honourable member and his party have a responsibility to be clear about where they stand on the issue of the Manitoba Telephone System and any funds that might be derived. On the one hand, I think that there is no support coming from the honourable member for Inkster, but on the other han d-and there always is "on the other hand" with Libera ls-here is how we want you to spend the money. Well. you cannot ha,·e it both ways, but nonetheless, we share his concern about Health Sciences Centre.

Indeed, as a result of concerns raised by the Canadian council on health services accreditation, work is being done on the electrical system upgrading there. Air conditioner replacement is underway. There is equipment inventory mana gement and O.R. slate adjustments going on. There is expansion of storage areas, and so on. Those are issues that are being addressed in direct response to concerns raised by the Canadian council on health services accreditation, and, as well, my first answer applies to this as well. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster. with a final supplementary question. Mr.

Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, then \\ill the Minis ter of Health acknowledge or state that he is prepared or this government is prepared to meet the capital requirements for the Health Sciences Centre so that they will not lose any form of accreditation into the future? Will the Minister of Health make that commitment today? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, the commitment of this governm ent can easily be measur ed in our commitment to

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5099 this date with respect to health care spending. Just yesterday the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) was asking about dialysis services in the province of Manitoba and, you know, since 1989 we have seen a 56 percent increase in the number of people who have accessed services under that program. In terms of exp enditure, and this is excluding the medical remuneration and the capital and equipment aspects of it, we have seen a 11 0 percent increase in spending on that program in a six-year period.

The honourable member for Inkster and the honourable member for Kildonan ought indeed to be able to take some comfort about the priority this government places on the health care of Manitobans. Health Sciences Centre Capital Projects Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, what the minister failed to mention, when the accreditation committee visited Health Sciences Centre, they said, and I quote: First and foremost, new operating room construction must proceed and failure to successfully complete the follow-up visit could result in the withdrawal of accreditation status.

Since then we have had fruit flies in the operating room, we have had leaky ceilings, we have had surgery cancelled at the Health Sciences Centre, and now the president says the accreditation may be in danger. My question to the Minister of Health is, when will the min ister stop playing games with the people of Manitoba? Since he announced the Health Sciences Centre is the major trauma centre in Manitoba, when will you get on with the construction that jeopardizes the acc reditation of the largest tertiary care facility in the province of Manitoba? Hon.

James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable member for Kildonan should have been list ening. The honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureu

x) just asked that very same question and I just finished answering that very same question. Just because the hono urable member for Inkster gets the floor before the honourable member for Kildonan and asks a question, it seems to me the honourable member for Kildonan ought to perhaps give over the time to a member of his caucus to ask some other question. It seems he has a question all written down and come hell or high water he is going to ask that question even if it has already been asked by the honourable member for Inkster.

I answered the question with respect to deficiencies uncove red by the Canadian council on health services accreditation. Health Sciences Centre is working towards meeting the concerns that have been made known and of course the longer term redevelopment of the Health Sciences Centre is a major, major project which in any event takes a number of years to happen, and the planning for that will begin in earnest as we develop our new regional health association system for the governance of health services in Winnipeg. *

(1400) Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, will the minister, who knows there is a proposal before him for $4.5 million to have new ICU beds so cardiac surgery and thoracic surgery will not be cancelled anymore at the Health Sciences Centre, recognize that these piecemeal solutions are not the solution to the problems at the Health Sciences Centre and will they go back to the election promise the government made? The first election promise the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) made in the election was they would redo the operating rooms at Health Sciences Centre, and will they go ahead with it so we can get on with proper care at the Health Sciences Centre? Mr. McCrae: Of course, Madam Speaker, a piecemeal approach is the inappro priate approach. That is what the previous government and governments before that were doing to try to keep up with the demands that were being placed on the health care system.

Because we reject the piecem eal approach that the honourable member says he rejects too, that is why we made the announcement we made on August 20 of this year with respect to the future of the health care system in Manitoba. Why will the hono urable member not recognize that and support, as eve ryone else does, that these are the directions that we ought to be going in in order to build a sustainable health care system for the future? It is the piecem eal approach of the New Democrats that got us in so much trouble in the fust place.

There is $600 million this year we have to spend to pay interest on the debt run up by those honourable colleagues opposite.

51 00 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 1996 Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the minister explain to the citizens of Winnipeg and Manitoba how it is that the government can promise on August 20 that Health Sciences Centre would be the trauma centre, the main centre for all the province of Manitoba and the city of Winnipeg and at the same time have cancelled the capital program, have fruit flies in the operating room and have surgery cancelled because there are no ICU beds available within the last two weeks? We have raised it over and over again.

This is ridiculous and it makes Manitoba look like a laughing stock in the rest of Canada. Mr. McCrae: It is hard to get the honourable member to understand or believe or accept anything because of the role that he plays as a paid critic in this House. That is what he does. His job is to criticize, not to be helpful. There are many, many other Manitobans who look at things a little differently. There have been over 16,000 of them that we have consulted thus far in our reform efforts here in Manitoba.

We have a plan which we laid out on August 20 which enjoys virtually unanimous approval except of course from the honourable member for Kildonan. While everybody else is working towards the solution of our problems, why does the member for Kildonan not work towards a solution of our problems, too? Education System Teaching Position Decline Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, everyone in this Legislature who listened to hearings on the education bills is aware of the pressure of classroom teachers in Manitoba who are on the front lines of dealing with the serious issues facing young people today.

They are doing so in larger classes and with fewer resources. I would like to ask the Minister of Education to explain why, according to the figures of her own government and the submitted budgets of school boards, there are 91 fewer full-time teachers in Manitoba public school classrooms this year than last year at a time when enrollments remain stable. Hon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I point out again that we have been detained in this House to deal with the Mani toba Telephone System bill, and once again the members opposite have run out of questions before Question Period is even half over on the telephone system, so they are ha' ing to ask other questions because they are tired of asking the same questions over and over on the telephone bill. However, ha\ing said that, I am pleased-[interjection] Who cares, says the member from-oh, very interesting. The member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk) just said, who cares?

I think that is very, very interesting. Clearly it is not they who care about the telephone system bill. They keep us here; they cannot even have enough questions- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, on a point of order, not only does the minister not listen to Manitobans, she did not hear what I was saying. I would ask that the minister answer the question which relates to public education which she apparently does not wish to answer. Mada m Speaker: The honourable Minister of Education, on the same point of order. Mrs.

Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, the opposition I think has established all-time records for rising on incorrect points of order. They claim to know Beauchesne, but all their points of order are incorrect. The member is in dispute over the facts. I know what I heard; she knows what she said. No one will ever be able to prove it except everybody here who knows the truth. I will answer the question now- Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for St. James, the honourable member for St. James does not have a point of order; it is clearly a dispute over the facts.

However, I would remind the honourable Minister of Education to respond to the question asked. * * * Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, I am pleased to respond to the facts and indicate to the people of Manitoba that when we took government in 1988-89 the number of teachers in Manitoba was 12,000-1 do not

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5101 have the exact figure, but I can tell you that from 1988-89 until last year, which is the last current figure we have, the number of teachers in Manitoba schools increased by 2.5 percent full-time equivalent teachers while students over the same period of time from 1988-89 until last year, 1995, when we have our last stats, the student enrollment decreased by 1.8 percent. So, in the time that we have been in office, we have 2.5 percent full-time equivalent more teachers and 1.8 percent fewer students, and that is the bottom line.

Those statistics are correct, and they tell the whole story. Mada m Speaker: The honourable member for Wolseley, with a supplementary question. Ms. Friesen: I would like to table the information from the minister's own records, the FRAME fmal budget; classroom teachers have declined in the number from 1990. Would the minister confirm that for the remaining mandate of this government Manitobans can in fact see exactly the same as is demonstrated in that chart, a continuing decline in the number of classroom teachers, in fact, 663 since 1990?

I want to know if the minister really sees that as the future for the young people of Manitoba. *

(1410) Mrs. Mcintosh: The member has been very selective in her figures. She is tabling correct figures from the all time peak high in Manitoba's history which was 1991 when there was a peak in the number of people enrolled in the schools till today when student enrollment has gone down by 1.8 percent, as I indicate. We still have an increase of 2.5 percent full-time equivalent teachers in Manitoba schools since we took office in '88.

The fact that there was a peak in one given year and she chooses to operate from the peak does not negate the fact that we have 2.5 percent more full-time equivalent teachers in Manitoba schools today and l. 8 percent fewer students since we took office in 1988. I can indicate to you as well that that equates in two ways. One is the pupil-educator ratio, which is the number of educators in the school per student, which is 14.9. We have one educator for 14.9 students in every school. Some of those are resource teachers because we are resour ce-rich.

In terms of class size, the class size is 19 on average in Manitoba, the third best rate in Canada. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Wolseley, with a fmal supplementary question. Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us whether she has inve stigated what the impact has been on Manitoba classrooms of the loss of 5. 6 percent of our classroom teachers since 1990 and the loss in fact of 663 full-time equivalent positions? Those are people who are not in the classroom. The class sizes are larger. Manitoba students are being disadvantaged compared to the rest of the country. Mrs.

Mcintosh: The member-well, I do not know whether she does not understand, does not hear or does not want to acknowledge the truth of what I have said. Only Newfoundland and the Yukon have smaller class sizes on average than the province of Manitoba. That is a very good statistic. We have on average and have consistently had fluctuating within just a one or two percentage point over time-class sizes on average in Manitoba, classroom teacher per number of students fluctuating between 18 and 20 over the years consistently in that area. That is very good. We also have an extremely rich resource base in the schools.

When I say that the pupil-educator ratio is 14.9 to one, I am indicating that there are resource teachers, guidance counsellors, clinicians in the schools to assist classroom teachers who have on average 19 pupils per class with those students in the class who require extra help, to lift that burden from the regular classroom teacher and assist them in bringing students to full productivity. Manitoba Telephone System Privatization-Head Office Location Mr.

Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, on Thursday the Minister responsible for MTS confirmed that a privatized MTS can be owned by any other company, the board can be made up of non-Manitobans and the real head office could be in Basking Ridge, New

. 5102 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 1996 Jersey, where AT&T has head office or Timbuktu if that is what a new owner wants, as soon as the government debt is paid off in four years. Will the minister now take steps to ensure that all Manitobans know his promises about the future control ofManitoba Telephone, its head office and its ownership are shams? Bon. Glen Findlay (Minister responsible fo r the administration of The Manitoba Telephone Act): Madam Speaker, I would ask the member opposite to read very carefully the bill and the amendments that were passed in committee.

If he would read very carefully, he will fmd out that statements we have made in the past, that the registered head office, 12(1) in the bill, shall be in the province and the amendment added that provides the corporation shall not continue out of the province, and 13 ( 4) the majority of directors of the company shall be ordinarily resident of the province. Those elements of the bill live on forever. They live on forever regardless of the process of continuance which is contained in the bill under

Section 14, allows for continuance of those provisions forever within the province of Manitoba as long as the bill is not amended in this House. The member chooses not to understand the process that the bill goes through, the process over time, but those provisions of board of directors and head office and not continuing out of the province requires that they stay here forever. Mr.

Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister order MTS to put out an ad to tell Manitobans the truth about the privately owned MTS and its future control and its future ownership in particular, and will he tell his own backbenchers not to write to their constituents, as Mr. Radcliffe has done, making promises which cannot be sustained by the bill as it now stands in terms of the ownership ofMTS? Tell him to cease and desist. Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, I think that member likes to say that people do not have freedom of expression and I find that intolerable. People have the right to believe what they want to believe.

People have the right to express their opinions. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System, to complete his response. Mr. Findlay: The many editorial writers in the province of Manitoba in many papers have the right to explain to the public why this is the right thing for Manitobans, it is the right thing for the government of Manitoba, it is the right thing for the Manitoba Telephone System to respond to the new world. It has the right to tell the world that they are feeble in their approach.

They have a right to say that they are foolish in their approach which many editorials have done because they refuse, they keep their head in the sand, refuse to acknowledge the world has changed and the competition level over there requires MTS to have the freedom to respond quickly and aggressively to those opportunities that exist in the telecom world. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescenrn·ood, �ith a fmal supplementary question. Mr.

Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister finally tell Man itobans that his government has planned its sham protection to expire four years from now in the year 2000, conveniently just after the next provincial election? Nice timing. Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, the member is so desperate for a third question, he repeats the first question, which very clearly I answered to him. If he would read the bill, he would fmd that the protections we have indicated are there, will be there, will continue forever. Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Prince Edward Island Election Mr.

Mike Radcliffe (River Heights): Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Premier-elect, Pat Binns, whose PC Party won a majority government in yesterday's election in Prince Edward Island, moving up from just one seat in the provincial Legislature before the election. Mr. Binns and the PC Party received a solid mandate from the people ofP.E.I. in yesterday's election. Clearly, a trend is emerging

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 03 across Canada. Voters are electing governments that bring common sense and moderation to the great challe nges that face us as a society today. All provinces are being forced to deal with the deficits and the debts left to us by our free -spending predecessors in the '80s and at the same time preserve the high quality services the public has come to expect. Madam Speaker, Mr. Binns becomes the fourth PC Premier in Canada, joining Alberta, joining Ontario, and joining, of course, our own Premier Filmon in Manitoba.

There are now PC governments in all regions of the country, maintaining the party's position as one of only two great national parties. I would also like to remind all hono urable members that there are now more provincial Con servative Party provincial governments in Canada than those of any other party. Clearly, Canadians are making their voices heard in support of the ideas and sol utions proposed by the Conservative Party. I would ask all honou rable members to join me in congratulating Mr.

Binns in his election victory and in wishing him well in the mandate the people have given his government in yesterday's election. Speakers' Portraits- Legislative Building Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Last weekend many Manitobans remembered the death of Louis Riel. November 16 is the anniversary of the tragedy of his death, but it has also become a time to commemorate the history of the Metis people of Manitoba, and I wanted to ensure that this House took that opportunity.

So I want to note formally the installation of the three Speakers, the portraits of the three Speakers of the Executive Council in the hallways of the Legislative Building. I am surprised that the government had no ceremony, no formal notification of this. I had anticipated that they would do it this past weekend, but it was not to be. Nevert heless, I want to acknowledge the role of the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pallister) in this.

I had asked him in the House last year to reinstate these portraits, and I am pleased to see that he had them conserved, restored to good condition and replaced in the halls of the Legislature. I also want to recognize the initiative of my own cons tituent, Ms. Ruth Swan, who has, as an historian of the Metis, pressed the government and her MLA over the last number of years to ensure that these portraits are restored to their rightful place in the Legislature. I hope that members of the Legislature will take the opportunity to look at them. There are three: one of Colin Inkster, one of J.H.

O'Donnell and one of the Honourable James McKay. The three portraits in themselves reflect very well the history of the old Red River: Colin Inkster, a man very much of the old Red River settlers who cast the deciding vote in the abolition of that council; J.H. O'Donnell who represented the new Ontario settlers; and most particularly the Honourable James McKay, a man who spoke Michif, Cree and Ojibway and who was the president or the chair of the executive council for many years. He was described by his contemporaries as immensely broad-chested and muscula r, though not tall. He weighed 18 stone.

Yet in spite of his stoutness, he was exceedingly hardy and active and a wonderful horseman. His face is very hand some-short, delicate, aquiline nose, piercing dark gray eyes, long dark brown hair, beard and mustaches, white regular teeth, skin tanned to red bronze from exposure to wea ther.

He was dressed in Red River style, a blue cloth capote with brass cuff buttons, red and black flannel shirt which served also for waistcoat, black belt around the waist, buff leather moccasins on his feet, trousers of brown and white striped . . . . * (1 420) I wanted to ask members of the Legislature to ensure that when they take their constituents around the Legislature they recognize these Metis leaders, these early citizens of Manitoba. Thank you. Oak Bluff Community School Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris): Just this past Saturday I attended the grand opening of the new Oak Bluff community school.

The new school is a replacement of the one that was built in 1930. This grand opening marks the completion of two years of planning and working together, governments, school and community, to develop a learning facility that we can all be proud of. The old school housed children from kindergarten to Grade 6, and students in the upper grades went to Sanford for school. The new community school is kind ergarten to Grade 8. Oak Bluff will also accom-

510 4 LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19 , 19 96 modate 17 5 to 200 children, but there is room for expansion by adding additional classrooms. Core facilities, gym, library and multipurpose room, have been designed iri such a way as to accommodate a larger student population. The school division, community and the Public Schools Finance Board worked together to make the grand opening possible. Members of the community followed the project very closely and some even got together to buy the adjacent field for use in sports activities.

One of the unique things about this school is that individual s within the community personally sponsored classrooms within the school. They also have corporate sponsors taking

part in the physical facilities of the school as well, in the gymnasium and so on. Oak Bluff community school is the first to have a complete data cabling system throughout the school. All instructional areas are centrally connected. The school is also the first to have a special place for the reading recovery program. It will allow teacher trainers to train other teachers in reading recovery strategies. Madam Speaker, this government will continue to work together with educators, parents, students and the community to make such initiatives in education possible.

I would like to congratulate the community of Oak Bluff for their dedication in this long-term investment for our children. Thank you. Restorative Justice Week Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, this is Restorative Justice Week in Canada. It is important that we take time in this Chamber not only to acknowledge and recognize Restorative Justice Week but adopt the principles that underlie restorative justice.

It means we must make, as the first and foremost consideration in corrections policy, the ch anging of behaviour for the better, rebuilding a justice system around the needs of both victims and offenders and indeed around the needs of the community. It is important that we work to transform the justice system so that the needs of victims are finally recognized, rather than having a competition between the state and the offender.

It is important that we not only pay tribute in words but through our deeds, both in our election promises and in our programs that we can usher in, that restorative justice principles be brought into play. For example, we have urged the adoption of a make-up, face up rule. We have urged the expansion of the mandate of youth justice committees and, indeed, in the constituency of St. Johns next week we will have our first annual meeting of the St.

Johns youth justice council where victims and offenders and their families will have the matters dealt with so there is accountability to the community, and there is accountability to the vict ims. Madam Speaker. I would like to quote from the brochure on Restorative Justice Week the following. This is from an incarcerated man who participated in a mediation program: Coming face to face with my victim and realizing the impact of my actions was the hardest thing, the most important thing I have ever done. Thank you. Prince Edward Island Election Mr.

Gary Kowalski (The Maples): I would like to rise and give congratulations to the new Premier of the province of Prince Edward Island. But I fmd it very strange that this government was elected, a Conservative Party that campaigned against cuts to social programs. Then I think about Bob Rae and his change of heart. a former socialist now campaigning with conservative views. I look at what is going on in Saskatchewan with cuts to hospitals and that, and I think for an outsider looking at the political picture in Canada they must feel like they have just fallen down the rabbit hole and are in Wonderland.

It is getting to the point where you cannot tell which party is which in the province s, depending who is in power, who is not in power. Though we respect the view of the people, I am starting to become cynical about politics, as politics is nothing more than obtaining power and retaining power and what happens to the values of the parties, the original values of the Liberals, the Conservati ves, the socialists and the NDP party .

I wonder that we as politicians have to get back to the roots, the values of our party, and put seeking power and maintaining power as secondary consideration to maintaining our political platforms of our parties. Thank you. Madam Speaker: For the inf ormation of the House, I have been advi sed that His Honour the Lieutenant

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5105 Governor will enter the Chamber at approximately 2:30 p.m. to grant Royal Assent to those bills which have been passed during this session. *

(1430) ROYAL ASSENT Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms (Mr. Garry Clark): His Honour the Lieutenant Governor. His Honour Yvon Dumont, Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Manitoba, having entered the House and being seated on the throne, Madam Speaker addressed His Honour the Lieutenant Governor in the fo llowing words: Madam Speaker: May it please Your Honour: The Legislative Assembly, at its present session, passed bills which, in the name of the Assembly, I present to Your Honour and to which bills I respectfully request Your Honour's assent. Bill 4- The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Societe d'assurance publique du Manitoba Bill 5- The Horticultural Society Repeal Act; Loi abrogeant Ia

Loi sur les associations horticoles Bill 6- The Veterinary Science Scholarship Fund Amend ment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le Fonds des bourses d'etudes veterinaires Bill 8- The Chiropodists Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les chiropodistes Bill 9- The Public Health Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia sante publique Bill 10- The Pharmaceutical Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les pharmacies Bill11- The Court of Queen's Bench Surrogate Practice Ame ndment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia pratique relative aux successions devant Ia Cour du Bane de Ia Reine Bill 12- The Barbers Repeal and Hairdressers Repeal Act; Loi abrogeant Ia

Loi sur les coiffeurs et Ia

Loi sur les coiffeurs pour dames Bill 13- The Highway Traffic Amendment (Lighting on Agr icultural Equipment) Act; Loi modifiant le Code de Ia route (eclairage de l'equipement agricole) Bill 14- The Manitoba Trading Corporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Societe commerciale du Manitoba Bill15- The Tourism and Recreation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le tourisme et les loisirs Bill 16- The Charleswood Bridge Facilitation Act; Loi facilitant !'application de l'entente sur le pont Charleswood Bill 17- The Government Essential Services Act;

Loi sur les services gouvernementaux essentiels Bill18-The Payment of Wages Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le paiement des salaires Bill 19-The Dangerous Goods Handling and Transportation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur la manutention et le transport des marchandises dangereuses Bill 20- The Highway Traffic Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act; Loi modifiant le Code de Ia route- modifications diverses Bill 21- The Oil and Gas Production Tax and Oil and Gas Am endment Act; Loi concernant Ia taxe sur Ia production de petrole et de gaz et modifiant Ia

Loi sur le petrole et Ia gaz naturel Bill 22- The Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les caisses populaires et les credit unions Bill23- The GRIP and Related Programs Termination and Crop Insurance Amendment Act; Loi abolissant le regime RARB et des regimes connexes et modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'assurance-recolte

5106 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 1996 Bill 24- The Agricultural Credit Corporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Societe du credit agricole Bill25- The Jury Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les jures Bill 26- The Labour Relations Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les relations du travail Bill27-The Museum of Man and Nature Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le Musee de !'Homme et de Ia Nature et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 28- The Winnipeg Stock Exchange Act;

Loi sur Ia Bourse de Winnipeg Bill 29- The Winnipeg Commodity Exchange Act;

Loi sur Ia Bourse des marchandises de Winnipeg Bill 30- The Dairy Act;

Loi sur les produits laitiers Bill 31- The Livestock Industry Diversification and Con sequential Amendments Act; Loi concernant Ia diversification de l'industrie du betail et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill32- The Council on Post-Secondary Education Act;

Loi sur le Conseil de l'enseignement postsecondaire Bill 33- The Education Administration Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur !'administration scolaire Bill 34- The Contaminated Sites Remediation and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi concernant l'assainissement des lieux contamines et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 36- The Social Allowances Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur !'aide sociale et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill37- The Ambulance Services Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les services d'ambulance Bill 38- The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant la

Loi sur l'assurance-maladie Bill 39- The Pari-Mutuel Levy and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi concernant les prelevements sur les mises de pari mutuel et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 40- The Pension Benefits Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les prestations de pension Bill 41- The Fisheries Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur Ia peche Bill 42- The Northern Affairs Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les Affaires du Nord Bill 44- The City of Winnipeg Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Ville de Winnipeg et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 45- The Consume r Protection Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia protection du conso mma teur Bill 46-- The Secwities Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les valeurs mobilieres Bill 47-The Public Schools Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques *

(1440) Bill 48- The University of Manitoba Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur l'Universite du Manitoba Bill 49- The Regional Health Authorities and Conse quential Amendments Act; Loi concernant les offices regionaux de Ia sante et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 50- The Remembrance Day Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur le jour du souvenir et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 51- The Civil Service Superann uation Amendment, Public Servants Insurance Amendment and Teachers' Pensions Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia pension de Ia fonction publique, Ia

Loi sur !'assurance des employes du gouvernemen t et la

Loi sur Ia pension de retraite des enseignants

November 19 , 1996 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 510 7 Bill 52-The York Factory First Nation Northern Flood Implementation Agreement Act;

Loi sur l'accord de mise en oeuvre de la premiere nation de York Factory relatif a la convention sur la submersion de terres du Nord manitobain Bill 53-The Nelson House First Nation Northern Flood Implementation Agreement Act;

Loi sur I' accord de mise en oeuvre de la premiere nation de Nelson House relatif a la convention sur la submersion de terres du Nord manitobain Bill 54-The Municipal and Various Acts Amendment Act; Loi concernant les municipalites et modifiant diverses dispositions legislatives Bill 55 -The Financial Administration and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi concernant la gestion des fmances publiques et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 57-The Public Sector Compensation Disclosure Act;

Loi sur la divulgation de la remuneration dans le secteur public Bill 58-The Parental Responsibility Act;

Loi sur la responsabilite parentale Bill 59- The Powers of Attorney and Mental Health Amendment Act; Loi concernant les procurations et modifiant la

Loi sur la sante mentale Bill 60-The Law Society Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Societe du Barreau Bill 61- The Statute Law Amendment Act, 19 66; Loi de 1996 modifiant diverses dispositions legislatives Bill 62-The Jobs Fund Repeal Act; Loi abrogeant la

Loi sur le Fonds de soutien a l'emploi Bill 63-The Statute Law Amendment (Taxation) Act, 19 96; Loi de 1996 modifiant diverses dispositions legislatives en matiere de fiscalite Bill 66-The Boxing and Wrestling Commission Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur Ia Commission de Ia boxe et de Ia lutte Bill 68-The Farm Lands Ownership Amendment, Real Property Amendment and Registry Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur la propriete agricole, Ia

Loi sur les biens reels et Ia

Loi sur l'enregistrement foncier Bill 70-The Animal Care Act;

Loi sur le soin des animaux Bill 71 -The Manitoba Film and Sound Recording Development Corporation Act;

Loi sur Ia Societe manitobaine de developpement de l'enregistrement cinematographique et sonore Bill 72-The Public Schools Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant Ia

Loi sur les ecoles publiques Bill 73-The Construction Industry Wages Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les salaires dans l'industrie de la construction Bill 75- The Commodity Futures and Consequential Amendments Act;

Loi sur les contrats a terme de marchandises et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 76-The Gaming Control and Consequential Amendments Act;

Loi sur Ia Commission de regie du jeu et apportant des modifications correlatives Bill 77-The Natural Products Marketing Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la commercialisation des produits naturels Bill 300-The Salvation Army Catherine Booth Bible College Incorporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation le College biblique Catherine Booth de l'Armee du Salut Bill 30 1-The Native Alcoholism Council of Manitoba Incorporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia Loi constituant en corporation "The Native Alcoholism Council of Manitoba" Bill 302-The Grand Lodge of Manitoba of the Independent Order of Oddfellows Incorporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant 1a Loi constituant en corporation "The Grand Lodge of Manitoba of the Independent Order of Oddfellows" Mr.

Clerk (William Remnant): In Her Ma jesty's name, His Honour the Lieutenant Governor doth assent to these bills.

51 08 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19 , 19 96 His Honour was then pleased to retire. ORDERS OF THE DAY Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, would you call report stage on Bill 67.

REPORT STAGE Bill 67-The Manitoba Telephone System Reorganization and Consequential Amendments Act Madam Speaker: To continue debate on report stage, Bill 67, The Manitoba Telephone System Reorganization and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi concernant la reorganisation de la Societe de telephone du Manitoba et apportant des modifications correlatives), standing in the name of the honourable member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), who has 17 minutes remaining. * (1 450) Mr.

Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, I am pl eased to rise to continue my comments, but I will try and be very brief We note from the list of bills that was just given Royal Assent here a few moments ago in this Chamber that there was one piece of legis lation, a significant piece of legislation that was missing from that list, one that I am sure all members opposite would like very much to have passed. Well, Madam Speaker, since this Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System (Mr.

Findlay) has said that he supports the first amendment that we have tabled in this Legislature, this is, I think, a significant start. We hope that this minister will show the same consideration for the other amendments which we are about to present to this Chamber through our MTS critic (Mr. Ashton). This could go a long way towards speeding up conclusion of this session if that is the government's will.

So they have the option here oflooking very favourably upon the amendments that we have tabled here today, and since this government has said that they want this bill to pass in a very timely fashion, this is the way to do it. Take a look. You have the list of amendments before you. Now all you have to do is say yes to them and that would be it. We would be out of this session, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, with those few words, I am prepared to conclude my comments, and we thank the minister for indicating his support for this first amendment and look forward to his continued support on all the remainder of the amendments, and we will table them. Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is the amendment, report stage on Bill 67, moved by the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), seconded by the honourable member for Concordia (Mr. Doer). Voice Vote Madam Speaker: All those in favour of the amendment, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea.

Madam Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. An Honourable Member: Nay. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The amendment is accordingly carried. Formal Vote Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: A recorded vote has been requested. Call in the members. * (1 500) Division A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as fo llows:

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 09 Yeas Ashton, Barrett, Cerilli, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Downey, Driedger, Dyck, Enns, Ernst, Evans (Brandon East), Evans (Interlake), Filmon, Findlay, Friesen, Gil/eshammer, Helwer, Hickes, Jennissen, Lamoureux, Lath/in, Laurendeau, Mackintosh, Martindale, McAl pine, McCrae, McGiff ord, Mcintosh, Mihychuk, Mitchelson, Newman, Pallister, Penner, Pitura, Praznik, Radcliffi, Reid, Reimer, Render, Robinson, Rocan, Sale, Santos, Stef anson, Struthers, Sveinson, Toews, Tweed, Vodrey, Wowchuk. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant) : Yeas 51 , Nays 0. Mr. Neil Gaudry (St.

Boniface) : Madam Speaker, I was paired with the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cumm ings) . Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): I was paired with the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach). Madam Speaker: The amendment is accordingly carried. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer), that Bill 67 be amended by striking out the second paragraph of the

preamble and substituting the following: AND

WHEREAS it is proposed that the shares of the Manitoba Telephone System be offered for sale to members of the public without the support of a majority of the people of Manitoba. Madam Speaker: The amendment proposed by the honour able member for Thompson is out of order. The amend ment to the second paragraph of the

preamble is out of order, because it proposes to substitute an alternative scheme to that contained in the original provision which is contrary to Beauchesne 698(9). Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I challenge your ruling. Mada m Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been challenged. Voice Vote Madam Speaker: All those in favour of sustaining the ruling of the Chair, please say yea. Some Honourable Members: Yea. Madam Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Madam Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it. Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Concordia (Mr.

Doer), THAT Bill67 be amended- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The amendment is accordingly out of order. The ruling of the Chair has been sustaine d. Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer), THAT Bill 67 be amended in the definition "land" in subsection 1 (1 ) by striking out everything after "rights of-way". Motion presented. An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, indeed I am very pleased to be able to speak on this. I am just wondering if the Deputy Premier's (Mr.

Downey) yelling out "question," indicates that now the government, after having said that Bill 67 was ready to go, to be pushed through on clause by clause at 3: 22 in the morning on November 6-now we have just seen that the government unani mously, along with members of the opposition, supported an amendment brought in by the New Democratic Party. Is it not amazing what a little bit of time can do in terms of the consideration of a bill? I realize it was difficult for some members opposite. I look at the Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh) .

I do not think we voted the same way on anything since she has been elected to this House, but we voted the same way on the first amendment. What a way to look at the business of Manitoba. The member for Riel (Mr. Newman), and I voted the same way. You know, it is just amazing. The minister responsible for MTS (Mr. Findlay), I give him credit because they had to enforce the whip. They

51 1 0 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19 , 19 96 had members who wanted to instinctively vote against anything moved by the ND P, right? On the voice vote, there were some of them who said, nay. I appreciate the minister probably felt he had to apply the whip, but do you know what? I think that is encouraging because those two or three members on the government side who were saying nay on the voice vote, just hang in there. When we get to the final vote, that is all we need, is two or three of you to say nay, and this whole bill will be defeated. So I am extremely encouraged.

To the government members, we just had Royal Assent. Now, normally that means the end of the session. I realize that we were somehow being told after the 7th that we are being punished because the government was not going to bring in Royal Assent on its bills. To the Minister of Labour (Mr. Toews), I tell you, I had a real tough time explaining that in my legion, that we did not pass The Remembrance Day Act through Royal Assent because you did not ask for it. But, you know, we voted against it, you bet. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Ashton: I think the Deputy Premier (Mr.

Downey) is going to make himself sick here. Do you know what, Madam Speaker? Exactly- I had no difficulty explaining in my legion why we voted against the bill, and we are quite happy it was not proclaimed. Mada m Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for Thompson that debate is supposed to be relevant to the amendment just passed. * (15 10) Mr. Ashton: I was only responding to the Deputy Premier.

I have not quite figured it out, but we did vote against Bill 50, and we are quite happy it was not proclaimed before November 11 , one more year in which Remembrance Day will be a true Remembrance Day. So, to the Deputy Premier, he like to chuckle sometimes-and I think that description of him in the paper where it said he takes a thought and spins it out over 30 minutes-we know, when he heckles for a minute or less, there is no thought, and I think he just proved it a few minutes ago So, an)'way, I get back to my point.

My point here is, this is the government that a short time ago was saying, that is the way it is. We are going to ram through Bill 67. Today they supported one of our amendments, the first. I \\'ish they had had the chance to support the second one. If it had been considered in order, Madam Speaker, they might. But let us try for the third. I believe-and I will just check the order paper here. I just want to make sure this is clear. There are 36 amendments remaining in my name, and one in the member for Crescentwood's (Mr. Sale) name. So it is not bad. We are batting a thousand here. We have one passed.

The other one was not in order. I felt like asking leave to see if they might consider it to be in order, given their generosity of spirit on this. What unholy alliances, I mean, the Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh) and I voting the same way on a bill. Who would have thunk it? It was, I am sure, quite the experience for members opposite. But, you know, it is not unusual on MTS for people to come together. When you have 78 percent of rural Manitobans �ing Bi11 67 is wrong, boy, is that not kind of a coalition-building exercise if you ever saw one?

I realize that the Deputy Premier still likes to think that anybody who opposes the bill is a socialist, and I mention this in the House that I thought it was quite bizarre. I think there are a fair number of socialists out in rural Manitoba but not 78 percent of the population. I mean, 22 percent supported this. That is hitting your base, 22 percent. I realize there are 22 percent diehards out there in Manitoba who think that the Conservatives can do no wrong. Wait a sec, that is 78 percent who think they can do a heck of a lot of wrong. You add it up, it just does not add up.

I do not know what kind of math now, new math that the Tories are practising, but 78 percent is pretty overwhelming. Seventy-eight percent of rural Manitobans, 67 percent of Manitobans across the province An Honourable Member: What about this rate shock? Mr. Ashton: And indeed we will talk about things like rate shock. What I find amazing though that as we go by

November 19 , 1996 LEGISLA TIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5111 and introduce amendments such as this which deal with very substantive issues, I mentioned this in Question Period, but the Premier increasingly reminds me of the fable of the emperor with no clothes. Who can forget that? Remember as a kid learning about this where there was this tailor who convinced the emperor that he was going to make this new suit of clothing.

He even convinced him that no one else could really necessarily see it, even including himself, but it was the most fmely tailored suit of clothing that had ever been created by any tailor, whether it be to a royal personage or to an average citizen. And who can forget what happened? All the courtiers, everyone in the country said initially about the suit of clothing, what a tremendous suit of clothing. They did not want to offend the emperor. They did not want to say the truth that in fact perhaps there was not anything.

So what I find interesting is, what an interesting parallel, because the conclusion of the fable was when one brave soul had the nerve, the temerity to stand up and say, the emperor has no clothes. Think about it because, first of all, I think there are a lot of parallels to this situation. First of all, the Premier and the emperor. I think I need to say no more because the Premier has been taking on rather a-I have to be careful of the words I use, but I think he has forgotten that he is the servant of the public in this province, a trustee of the public assets.

I think the Premier has been acting like an emperor for quite some time. [interjection] Well, I cannot use "dictator," I did say on the record "not a dictator" before and that phrase has been taken under advisement, and I may have to withdraw that part, particularly the "not" part, but you know, the emperor. Who are the tailors in this case? Well, it is Jules Benson probably, Mike Bessey and the Bay Street bankers. The Bay Street bankers. They have said, this is the most beautiful set of clothing you have ever seen. Now, it does not exist. But you know what?

The Premier stands there, he stands up in Question Period, it is like look, look, no rate increases, as he touches the hem of this invisible cloth. Hey, we are not going to have any increase rate shock in rural Manitoba. He touches the invisible pant leg and says we are not going to lose jobs. He says it · will all come out in the wash. All going to come out in the wash. Well, some of us can take credit. We started off-[intetjection] Well, the only thing that is going down the drain is the Conservative Party in Manitoba.

But what is interesting is we started off, some of us in February stood out in minus 20, minus 30 degree weather and we said, the emperor has no clothes. This suit of clothing that they like to wear does not exist. This privatization is a sham. It is going to lead to higher costs. It is going to lead to reduction in service across rural Manitoba particularly with the new services that are going to be coming in place. What is interesting is the first thing the emperor, in this case the Premier did, was say, oh, well, that is the ND P.

They extended that after a while, then it was labour, then it was social action groups. They must have had their caucus interne who wrote that letter churning out a number of them, because it was like-even though there was growing evidence of that. Then they ran into a slight problem.

Then it was the union, the Manitoba Ass ociation of Urban Municipalities, the union of Manitoba municipalities, a new defmition to the term "union bosses." I think Jack Nicol must have been quite surprised, but the Manitoba Society of Seniors, after a while there were more and more people saying the emperor has no clothes but still they did not stop. Then they came in and we had 18 5 Manitobans out, 182 of which said the emperor has no clothes. Then we had in this House the ultimate denial. It was like nobody out there is really against this sale, they really support us. They say get it over with, do it.

CBC runs a poll, 78 percent of rural Manitobans are saying the emperor has no clothes, 67 percent of Manitobans. But where does it stop? Now we have the comic opera, and I can think of a few Gilbert and Sullivan characters that the Premier might fit quite well here. An Honourable Member: Phantom of the Opera. Mr. Ashton: Well, the Phantom of the Opera. He is certainly going to be haunting the hallways. Today we get up and we say, the counsel for MTS made statements on the record, the CR TC. I look at the Minister of Labour (Mr. Toews) because he knows as a lawyer that lawyers do not lie.

What they say on the record and what they say in their private life is the truth, and I mean that seriously. [interjection] Well, I think it is true. I think we all trust in that word and I mean that seriously to the Minister of Labour. An Honourable Member: Is that Vic? Did he say Remembrance Day was our fault?

511 2 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 1996 Mr. Ashton: Well, we will not get into that. I am trying to inake a point in the debate here. I do not want to be distracted by my own members. When I say that lawyers tell the truth, particularly on the record, is that a fair statement? Do lawyers tell the truth on the record? I am saying that. An Honourable Member: Most do. Mr. Ashton: I will say lawyers do. The member for Riel (Mr. Newman ) gave us good advice on that. A short time ago, I thought gave an excellent view of the legal profession and I credit him for that. But we have Mr. Nugent. Who is Mr.

Nugent? The legal counsel for MTS. Speaking where? On the record in front ofMTS. [interjection] Well, we will not talk about Shakespeare and lawye rs, that is going a little bit too far. You know, he wentto the CRTC, and what did he say, Madam Speaker? He said-I am quite prepared to get into the detail of this. In fact, at some point in time, for the Minister of Labour, I probably will. I may read it into the record. An Honourable Member: I advise you to read the whole thing into the record. Mr. Ashton: Well, you would. Listen, on third reading I do get unlimited time so you may get your wish coming true.

An Honourable Member: You do not have the guts to put the whole thing on the record. Mr. Ashton: Oh, Madam Speaker, it is interesting. The Minister of Labour (Mr. Toews) says you do not have the guts to put it all on the record because if you read it-to the Minister of Labour, have you read the transcript? Read the transcript, because, in fact-[interjection] Well, I have lots of-the minister can talk about guts here. It is interesting because we heard yesterday, or a few days ago, the House leader saying they were going to debate us one for one on these amendments. So much for that promise.

I have not heard the Minister of Labour yet on this issue. I want him to speak. He will have plenty of opportunity after I am finished on this debate. [interjection] You might hear some truth because you know what is interesting, for the Minister of Labour, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) went outside of this House and said that the legal counsel for MTS was wrong. You know, I mentioned about the emperor with no clothe s. Even now the legal counsel for MTS does not know what is going on, only the Premier does.

It is interesting, to the Minister of Labour, because ifhe was to read this and I will table this document for him, he will see that this is a very serious application. [interjection] Madam Speaker, I wonder if there might be leave to have the entire document printed in Hansard to satisfY the Minister of Labour. I would be quite happy with that. Madam Speaker: Order, please. * (1 520) Point of Order Bon.

Darren Praznik (Deputy Government House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I for no moment want to impinge on any member's right to speak on these matters; however, there is an issue of relevancy, and we have many amendments with which to deal. The member has moved an amendment with respect to the definition of land under the act. That is a very specific and narrow topic. I would ask if the Speaker would call the member over to discuss the reason why in fact he is proposing this amendment to redefine or change the definition of land and to make argument around that issue.

We have heard many of his other arguments. There is opportunity to speak to it throughout the course of the process ofbringing this legislation to a final result. I think it does the House an injustice if the member is not using his time to properly address the matter that he has moved. I think he owes us that respect. Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable deputy House leader, I would indeed agree that the honourable member does have a point of order.

Rule 35 is very explicit, and I will quote: Speeches shall be directly relevant "to the question under consideration or to a motion or amendment that the Member speaking intends to move." * * * Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, in fact, I was about to end that particular discussion, which was being ably

November 19 , 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 511 3 assis ted by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Toews), by suggesting that I table the document that he wanted read- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Labour, on a point of order. Point of Order Bon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): Yes, Madam Speaker, all I was interested in was the document there, but, to the extent that I may have led the member for Thompson down an erroneous path, I do apologize to this House.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Labour does not have a point of order, but I am sure the House accepts his comments with sincerity. * * * Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I accept the Minister of Labour's apology. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, m the Chair) I want to stress, though, in terms of what is happening here, that the emperor in this case defmitely has no clothes. I mean, it is obvious to everyone.

There is hardly anybody left outside of the cabinet in this Chamber, and I do not include a lot of their caucus members who cannot figure it out; and, if they have not looked at the documents I referenced, they should. What is interesting, particularly when we deal with this particular amendment, is that this is a government that fundamentally has not done the due diligence that should be required in any kind of sale, and I have said this on the record. I know a lot of people put a lot of due diligence into small business decision making.

When you are going to sell a comer store, when you are going to sell a small business, you go through due diligence. There has been less due diligence on this bill than you would get in the sale of a comer store or small business, and this is a good example of it. I found it amazing following the committee hearings. It was bad enough that the government deemed consent on such issues as pensions, deemed consent. They had not even consulted with key employee groups until the Thursday, November 7. It was a memorandum that was drafted during that day, and it was a positive memorandum. I have said that.

Still more work needs to be done, but I gave credit on that, but what I am saying, they did not even consult with the pension groups. We know they did not consult with Manitobans, but I can put that aside for a moment. I will get back to that. But they did not consider the fact that, particularly when it comes to First Nations, for example, there is a completely different legal situation that transpires once ownership is transferred. I want to deal with that because that is very relevant to what

definitions of land are included in this act and what

definitions continue. I do note that this

section has already been amended. It has been amended to take out mines, minerals and quartz. We believe serious questions about how far the amendment goes. I want to explain the First Nations issue, because the first point is First Nations' land is not privately owned land. First Nations' land is land held, according to treaties, with the federal government. It is held in trusteeship, and anybody who knows anything about the law or even such areas as commercial lending will tell you that. First Nations will tell you that.

There is a difficulty with dealing with land in First Nations community in the same way as you would elsewhere for very real reasons. You cannot sell off a parcel of reserve land. Reserve land is part of a document, an agreement, that overrides any commercial transactions. It is held in trusteeship. [interjection] The Minister of Highways (Mr. Findlay) says, we build roads. [interjection] To the Minister of Northem Affairs (Mr. Praznik)-well, the minister says, I am stretching it. I mean, I think the govennnen t is stretching this entire bill, quite frankly.

But the issue, and I advise the members opposite to be very careful because when I see First Nations with the able legal assi stance of one Jack London-[interjection] Well, oh, oh, I would say, oh, oh, if I was members opposite. Does anybody remember Meech Lake? I mean, I want to repeat what happened with that and some of the legal advice that took place but, you know, the First Nations have a relationship with the Crown that goes back to the Royal Proclamation, the first contact between British

511 4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANITOBA November 19 , 1996 settlers and between First Nations in this country. It is a relationship confirmed in the British North America Act. Who has jurisdiction over First Nations issues? It is the federal government and the Crown. It is further confirmed in treaties. Who signed the treaties? The First Nations and, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Crown. It is further confirmed in the Constitution of Canada, signed, repatriated Constitution, 1982, once again, by fundamental contact between the Crown and First Nations. That is the basis of the way land is held in trust on reserves.

An Honourable Member: That has nothing to do with it. Mr. Ashton: Well, the Minister of Northern Affairs says, it has nothing to do with it, and I would note that he is the Minister of Northern Aff airs. One of his responsibilities, I believe, should be to talk to First Nations about the very real concerns. I want to deal with the question of easements, attachments, et cetera.

First of all, the very real legal question has been raised about the fact that the Minister of Indian Affairs and indeed Northern Affairs at the federal level has to, as part of that trusteeship, agree to any transf er of liens, easements, et cetera, rights of way that are part and parcel of this. That is the essential legal point that is being proposed by the First Nations, and I say to the Minister responsible for MTS, do not take my word for it, talk to First Nations-[ interjection] Well, the Minister of Northern Affairs, I am surprised at the Minister ofNorthem Affairs, he says, there is no transfer.

I am really surprised. Well, he says, if I knew the law. You know, if he knew what First Nations were saying right now, I think he would be out there meeting with them the same way he did with pensioners. There is a real problem, there is a real concern. An Honourable Member: No, there is not. Mr. Ashton: Oh, the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey), says that, no, there is not. Is it not interesting that once again Conservative ministers are speaking for First Nations. [interjection] Oh, now we get into the telephone poll. You know, like, I have had one call on the issue.

To the Minister ofNorthern Affairs, have you not heard about the legal action that is being contemplated on this issue? I mean, you do not have to have a lot of calls, all you have to do is one docwnent filed in court, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that is successful and you have got a problem. I mean, you have already got one lawsuit. You do not have to take my word for it. The counsel, Mr.

Nugent, stated today, put on the record that there was a lawsuit and pointed out that the Consumer Associations, the Manitoba Society of Seniors all wanted to be participants in the proceedings, has taken the matter before the Manitoba courts, trying to set aside the privatization bill on the grounds that it is unconstitutional. They have already got one lawsuit. An Honourable Member: On what basis? * (1 530 ) Mr. Ashton: On what basis?

Actually, to the Minister responsible for MTS, on the basis of a court decision that was made in Quebec which was successful, which I understand was appealed and may be subject to further appeal, the same constitutional issue. I say this to the Mini ster responsible for MTS because, do not get dissuaded by the Minister of Northern Affairs and others. This is a real concern out there. It is partly the legal, it is partly also the very real symbolic relationship for First Nations when you are dealing with matters such as this.

Do not forget that when MTS operated as a publicly owned institution, there were two key factors for First Nations. First of all, MTS has a reputation throughout First Nations communities that is impeccable in terms of providing service to those communities. It has provided services throughout northern Manitoba, throughout Manitoba generally in rural areas and it has been a leader in northern areas. I mean, when I go to Nelson House today, for example, Nelson House not only has a fully functioning phone service as part of the call areas, it has its own Web page, its own Internet site.

Indeed, it is a great community and in fact other communities are now becoming part of the mainstream. An Honourable Member: They could not have it when you were in government, they have got it now. Mr. Ashton: Oh, well, it is interesting to the former Minister of Northern Affairs who has the dubious distinction of driving the Tory vote in the Thompson constituency in the last election below the NDP vote in

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 511 5 Arthur-Virden. That is a record to be proud of. I remember him and the current Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Praznik) arguing over who was responsible for doing that, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Either way, I would be embarrassed if I was the Minister ofNorthern Affairs talking about anything to do with northern Manitoba, because the people of northern Manitoba spoke in volumes in the last election, particularly people at Nelson House. You know how bad it was in Nelson House? They barred the Tory candidate from the riding. They said, you are not walking here.

You know how many votes they got? They got five votes, five votes in Nelson House. So let the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) not lecture me. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Could I ask the honourable members if they could keep the decorum to a mild roar. The honourable member for Thompson had been staying relevant until such time as some people went on a fishing expedition, so I would really appreciate it if we would allow him to maintain his relevancy to the motion before the House. Mr. Ashton: I just will conclude on that

section by saying that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) calls it a good start with five votes. I think in the previous election they had 10 , so you can see the trend line, Mr. Deputy Speaker. But the point is there is a distinct relationship between First Nations and the Crown, and I mention this because when you are dealing with MTS, as a publicly owned corporation there is that service element. Believe you me, and I say this with no offence to Hydro but given the history of Manitoba Hydro's dealing, there is a whole lot of a different response that is received with Manitoba Hydro.

They have done a lot of work not only in terms of getting into communities, but Bob Brennan-and I give him a lot of credit for dealing with the historic distrust that Manitoba Hydro has developed in the past 25, 30 years as an institution. That is not the case with MTS. MTS has always been welcome in First Nations communities, but I want to point out that what you have essentially, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is also the fact that MTS is a Crown corporation. You cannot underestimate the significance ofthat to First Nations.

For many First Nations people, when it comes to granting easements for Manitoba Telephone System access, we are dealing with a situation for those First Nations dealing with the Crown-and I realize the Deputy Premier's concern; he cannot stay and heckle me. I will stay after we are officially closed so he can get it out of his system. I know he is just bubbling away. I know he wants to call rural Manitobans socialists again. I really know that is really important to him, and if he wants to, I will grant leave at the end of my 40 minutes.

He can get up and go on a 40-minute diatribe on how all the opponents to the sale of MTS are diehard socialists here. But I digress, Mr. Deputy Speaker. What the government has to realize with First Nations, there is a distinct issue here. For many First Nations now, if-and I say if and I say this to the Liberals. Well, theoretically, I say this to the Liberal members, who I am sure will read my comments in Hansard. When I hear them get up in the House and say, well, now that you are selling off MTS, and we are sort of against it-well, mind you, their Leader is sort of in favour of it.

She is in favour of privatizing in principle but not the way it is being done, so I do not know how that works. I do not know how she would rather do it. To my mind, it is like the Liberals are kind of firmly on the fence on this one, on both sides of the issue, but I do not think you can be on Bill 67. There are only two choices at the end of this vote, for or against it. We are against Bill 67; the government is in favour of it. But the Liberals say, their argument was-and I heard this today-well, now that you are selling it off, let us talk about the money here. They are almost rubbing their hands.

They want to spend the money before it has even been-[interjection] I have news for the Liberals. It ain't over yet. It ain't over till it's over, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Some people thought it would be over a little while ago. It is still not over. I know some people wish it was over, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but until we have dealt with every single amendment including this one, it ain't over till it's over. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable deputy House leader, on a point of order. Point of Order Mr. Praznik: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I appreciate the pressure that the member for Thompson sometimes comes under when members of this side of the House or

511 6 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 19 96 members of other benches heckle and make comment and lead him astray. I think we all have to endeavour to ensure that the member can address the matter at hand, which is changing the definition of land. In the course of his remarks, I have heard some commentary, but he seems to easily stray off to matters that he is more familiar rather than the detail of which he discussing. I would ask Mr.

Deputy Speaker to call him to order and I will hope that members on this side will endeavour not to help assist him in getting off track as he appears to so easily do. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I thank the honourable member for that suggestion, but he did not have a point of order. The honourable member for Thompson had digressed but at periodical times he has been returning to the subject matter before the House. I would ask though that the House assist me.

If we want him to remain relevant, I think it is important that we listen to what he has to say and that will help him to remain relevant to the matter before us. * * * Mr. Ashton: If I do amble at times, I would just point out that one of things we are doing by this amendment is deleting reference to paths, passages, wa ys, water courses, water orders, water rights, water powers, water privileges. So, if I do seem to amble at times, it is perhaps because that is what we want to do, get rid of the ambling in the bill. So there is some relevance even with that.

The reason I ref erenced the Liberals-oh, and I take back the theoretical-is because this bill is not over. I hope the minister responsible will inform that to the Liberals. Until each and every amendment is dealt with, this is not a fait accompli. I cannot stress that [interjection] I was talking about how the Liberals were trying to spend the money for MTS before it was even sold. [interjection] Okay, all right, and I thank you. Well, you were here, and I know you are always here in spirit too. So I did not mention anything other, so you do not have to worry about that.

But I was only focusing on the approach in that, because the Liberal approach here, and I will be interested to see, as I said- An Honourable Member: You think you can provoke me to stand up and debate. Mr. Ashton: Well. I hope I do provoke debate. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. please. The honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) might want to be aware that the honourable member is dealing with an amendment that is dealing with the definition ofland. It would be much more appropriate if we would allow him to continue his debate and be relevant to that matter. The honourable member for Thompson, to continue. Mr.

Ashton: Thank you, and actually I was appreciating the assistance from the member for Inkster. I do think it is important for all members to participate in this debate. I know he was listening to my comments, and I appreciate that I look forward to his defence of the position his leader has taken on this issue. Because this is relevant to this amendment, I am wondering when the Liberal leader says that they are in favour of this except the way it is being dealt with. For example, if this amendment is passed, v.ill they then support the bill? There are 37 other amendments.

I say that to the Liberal member because-! do not mean this personally, because I know the member for Inkster has opposed this bill from Day One. I just find it interesting because there is a problem when you get into that position like the Liberal Party has in Manitoba now, where they are sort of on the one side and the other side. If we pass this amendment, is this good enough? We have 38-how many have I got left?-36 other amendments. If they are all passed by the Legislature, is then the process improved enough that they support the bill ?

I guess one of the concerns I have is, I do not see any way of making this bill better other than-even if you pass 90 percent of our amendments, including this one, the principle still applies. The only way this bill would be acceptable to our side is if a later amendment requires that the bill be put to a vote before it could be proclaimed, if that was part of it. That is the only amendment in here that would make it acceptable to this side of the House.

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANITOBA 511 7 In fact, and if I am going out on a limb here, but I think that amendment and maybe a few others, if you were to pass those amendments, we would probably let this bill go straight through to third reading. We would not really need to deal with the others because, you know what, it goes to a vote, it is over- Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Ashton: -and that is what I am talking about, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the key amendments.

I appreciate your keeping the focus on this, because I want to know, is this one of those amendments that the Liberal s want that will change their mind on this issue? I am almost afraid to bring in amendments in case the Liberals go, aha, that is it, now we have exactly what we want, we are actually now in favour of the sale, we believe it in princip le, and now it is the right process. * (154 0) I do not want to go that far. I do not want to amend this bill, and I hope the House leader will, the member for Inkster will tell me if there are any of these amendments that mi ght trigger them to go the other way.

I may reconsider whether I bring them in, because I still have hope that the three Liberals are going to vote with the 23 New Democrats, and two members of conscience on the government side. An Honourable Member: I will vote. Mr. Ashton: He will vote. I know he will vote against it. He will vote against the bill, but you know, I have faith. I still have. I had a lot more faith too when I heard the members on the other side defy their MTS minister in trying to vote down one of our amendments. An Honourable Member: Just like the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) did in the committee . Mr. Ashton: Oh, I know.

It is interesting. The Minister of Finance in committee actually, on an amend ment, put his hand up to support our position. You heard ofFreudian slips; these are Freudian votes. Their hands just wanted to go up. I saw some of them. I am sure there was a twitch there going on, and I think a number of them were just keeping their arms from just popping right up and voting in favour of this. I heard those nays today. I really think there were some government members. Listen, I thought it was government backbenchers, but the Minister of Finance.

I would be interested to see on this amendment, we could set a pattern. What if we were to go through all 38 amendments that I have introduced and if they were to support every single one of them? My goodness, you know, would that not be an achievement? An Honourable Member: You would still vote against the bill at the end of the day, would not you? Mr. Ashton: Do you know what is interesting? The member opposite says, we would still vote against the bill at the end of the day. If you vote for the

section that says it cannot be proclaimed unless there is a referendum, then you do not have a problem anymore. [interjection] Hey, list en, let us talk about it here. We may have a way of getting consensus on this bill. I appreciate the member opposite's comments because it is interesting. He is looking for ways to build consensus on this bill here. Let us start. We can pass this amendment, but do you know what? I think it is really interesting- An Honourable Member: You would still vote against the bill. Mr. Ashton: The member for Emerson (Mr. Penner) says we would vote against the bill.

You put in a reference to-[interjection] I say this to the member for Emerson because, if he wants to put in the

section on putting it to a vote here, that may be a very interesting proposition. I am sure we would be out of here very quick, and I think everybody would be happy with it. Do you know what? You would win some, and you would lose some. I have been on the losing side of elections before. To the member for Emerson, you win some, you lose some. You have been on the winning side of some and the losing side of others. You have to accept that. An Honourable Member: You cannot raise mush rooms everywhere. You cannot leave everybody in the dark. Mr. Ashton: Well, it is interesting about keeping people in the dark-

511 8 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19 , 1996 Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Could I remind all honourable members that they will all have an opportunity to put their voices on the record at a later date and that the honourable member for Thompson at this time has the floor, and I know he is trying real hard to be relevant towards the amendment that is before the House at this time. The honourable member for Thompson, to continue. Mr. Ashton: I am trying, for the member for Emerson, to shed some light on this, because the government has not had a single informational meeting on the implications of this

section or any

section in this bill. I would say that the government might have some ability to get up and criticize us for bringing in this amendment. If they had had the courage to travel around Manitoba and have public hearings in every comer of this province-it is interesting, the Minister responsible for MTS talks about editorials. How about the Brandon Sun? I think they actually support the position of the government, but they said they had blown it. They said you are blaming people out in rural Manitoba. You are calling all New Democrats and socialists-they said, a lot of average folk out there are against this.

They said, you should have held public hearings; you should explain your position. I think the fact that they have not had a single public meeting anywhere in the province is proof positive that this government does not have a leg to stand on. It cannot make the argument. It cannot, in any way, shape or form, get public support for this bill, and I think they made that decision right from the beginning. They did not want public hearings because they knew that they would run into difficulty. They cannot get up-and I mentioned this before.

At some point in time, you go to a public meeting and the emperor has no clothes, ·someone is going to say, the emperor has no clothes. Ifthe Premier goes to a public meeting, if he dares, on MTS, people are going to say, you do not have a leg to stand on on this issue. You do not know what you are talking about. They will be waving the CR TC documents around. They will be talking about the common sense of it. Do you know what people are saying at our public meetings? They say this about the government: You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

They are saying, you cannot fool us. That is why the government-oh, they came out with a brilliant strategy. They do not want to go out and explain the impact to this, and I find it interesting. The member for The Maples' (Mr. Kowalski) father came. What was he talking about? Easements. Here is an average citizen, and I am sure he probably has a greater than average interest in the political process because of his son's involvement as an MLA. I credit him for coming out to the committee, and he stayed throughout the hearings and made a very good presentation. Those are the people who have a lot of questions .

Call a public meeting. We are concerned about this broad definition of land here. Is it necessary? You have already deleted the mines and minerals section. Do you need to pass passages, water courses, air rights, licences, liberties, pri";leges, easements, and pertaining thereto and all trees, timbers? Do we need that? [inteljection] The messuages. Yes, do not forget the messuages, and I am prepared to explain what that means if I am allowed leave to go past my 40 minutes which is one minute last. Mr. Deputy Speaker, this kind of detail is subject to real questions out there.

We have received questions, a number of people have raised questions, not just the member for The Maples' father, about easements, et cetera. First Nations are raising those questions. They are real questions. If the government is so sure they can be answ ered, why not answer them? I say to the minister responsible, for example, he can start tonight. At the Dugald Community Centre at 7:30 we have a public meeting. He is invited. I have sent him an official invitation. I hope he will come tonight and he will ask his constituents in Springfield what questions they have and will actually answer them.

You know what, I repeat that invitation. He has received a written invitation to it. We are quite prepared to give the minister all the time he needs in the world to explain to his constituents about this and other issues relating to MTS. I hope he is there. In fact, I have an open invitation to any Conservative members across the way : if you want to set up a public meeting or if you get a chance, you can get up and call me whatever you want at a public meeting. I will come. You can call me. You can blame me for this, that and the other. You can call all those people out there socialists

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 511 9 if you want. You can do that. But how about if we have public meetings throughout the province to explain what the real issues about MTS are with the people of Manitoba? You and I will have a joint meeting with all our members of the caucus. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired. Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, it is a pleasure to get up and speak in support of the amendment to delete a portion of the definition of"land" from the definition of "land" in Bill 67, the bill to privatize the Manitoba Telephone System. I would like to speak in dealing with this amendment in two areas: one is the process, and the other is the impact. Now this amendment on the surface of it, you wonder why this amendment is here. Why are we asking for the deletion of this part of the definition of "land"? [interjection] and I am wondering if the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs.

Mcintosh) would care to answer the question that I just posed. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Education, on a point of order. Point of Order Hon. Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): I wanted to indicate by what I had just said here was when she asked, the answer to the question, I think, is that their ideologically- Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Is the honourable minister up on a point of order? Mrs. Mcintosh: No, I was just going to respond to- Mr. Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much. * * * Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for Wellington, to continue.

Ms. Barr ett: I was going to say that we were raising this amendment because we are ideologically hidebound, and if I have put the wrong words on the record, I know the Minister of Education will certainly correct me, as the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk) corrected the Mini ster of Education earlier in Question Period today. It is important that when people make positions and make statements on the record that they are sure of the accuracy of those. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Let us start the debate off by being relevant to the amendment that is before us.

I do believe the honourable member has a copy of the amendment before us, so I would ask her to be relevant towards that amendment. The honourable member for Wellington, to continue. * (15 50) Ms. Barrett: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Yes, I was beginning by saying rhetorically, I guess, why would the New Democrats put in this amendment? We have a number of amendments that we have to deal with in this- An Honourable Member: Thirty-nine. Ms. Barrett: Mr. Deputy Speaker, 39 in total or 39 more. I have not even counted them. An Honourable Member: Thirty-six more. Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, 36 more amendments to deal with in this piece of legislation. Why are we dealing with this particular one in the definition? Usually

definitions are fairly straightforward, and they do not cause a lot of concern and trouble. Well, this particular amendment, as I understand it from having discussed it with my colleagues and having listened to some of the discussion here this afternoon, does have a great deal of relevance to the import and the impact ofBill 67 on the people of Manitoba, on all of the people of Manitoba in one sense and on a smaller number of the people of Manitoba in another sense.

I will get into that when I talk in terms of the impact that this amendment will have on the people of Manitoba, the impact that not voting for this amendment will have on the people of Manitoba as well as the impact of, we hope, the continuation of the government in seeing the validity of the amendments which we have brought forward and that they will vote with us in this amendment.

51 20 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 19, 19 96 I would like to speak to the process that has led to this particular amendment, the process that shows, we believe because of the elements in the definition of land that th; government has put into this piece of legislation to our way of thinking, that the process that they undertook in developing Bill 6 7 from the beginning to end was flawed. This amendment itself is only one part of that.

We have stated that we believe that the government knew before the provincial election a year and a half ago that they were intent upon privati zing the telephone system. The government has stated that was not the case, but we believe that in eff ect is actually the case.

We believe that and have been sho\\n in the process of Bill 67, the way it was introduced, the way it was handled at the public hear ings, the way it was handled in the committee when it was going clause by clause, the way it is being handled in the House as we come to report stage and ultimately after discussion of this amendment and other amendments, third reading, while the government talks about its competency in introducing legislation and dealing with legislation, the way that this bill has been handled from first to last-and I think I am being charitable here-shows the incompetency of . �e government.

If it is not an incompetency factor, then It IS a factor of-and I am trying to think of a word that I can use that will be parliamentary-puttin g things over on the people of Manitoba. It comes from the understanding very clearly understood by caucus members when they were even candidates, before they were even caucus members, that they had as their intention to privatize the telephone system. They knew that they were going to do it. They also knew that the people of Manitoba would not appreciate that, so that they did not make it as part of their election platform except when they were asked.

And seve�al of their candidates, including some who are currently m the House today said-erroneously as it turns out, and I believe erroneously knowing that it was erroneously stated-that there were no plans to privatize the telephone system. So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think that an argument could be made that one of the reasons the process has been so poorly- Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member might have to explain to me how the process is relevant towards this section. Ms. Barrett: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the connection between the process on Bill 67 as a whole and the amendment that we are putting forward in the "definition of land'" is that I believe that an argument can be made that in the defmition of land the process was not thought out. We are trying to help the government in making a definition of land that is more accurate.

We believe that the process that was followed by the government had to be done in sort of a very quiet covert marmer because thev had told the people of Manitoba they were not going to privatize the telephone system. and so thev could not act in an open, above-board manner. p� of the problem that we see in the whole process that it has gone through with this whole bill including the definition ofland in the definition

section is that the government. because it chose not to consult. because it chose not to talk \\ith people who had a particular interest in the impact of the sale of the telephone system such as the people who are affected by the definition of land in this amendment. as well as the entire province of Manitoba. Because thev knew that they were going against the wishes of the � pie of Manitoba, because they knew that they were on very shaky ground, they did not do in this definition of land what they should have done. What they should have done \\as, as the member for Thompson (Mr.

Ashton) has stated. they should have consulted \\ith the people who were going to be affected by this. They should have gone to the First Nations . They should have gone to the federal government. They should have said. okm·. this is \\hat we are going to do. We are gomg to go against our election promi se. We made a decision that we are going to do that. We are going to pnvatize the Telephone System.

In the act, one of the things we �e going to have to do is we are going to have to deal \\lth easements; we are going to have to deal wtth Cr O\\n lands; we are going to have to deal with land that is under treaty rights established between the federal government and the aboriginal First Nations. So how do we do that so that we protect our process? Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, clearly, they did not do � t. The First Nations have told the government, the Frrst

November 19, 1996 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 21 Nations have told us, that they have never once been consulted on the impact that the sale of Manitoba Telephone System will have on them, particularly as First Nations.

Now, the impact of the sale of the Manitoba Telephone System will be great on everybody in the province of Manitob a, but in the definition of land as proposed by Bill 67, it has particularly fo cused impact, we believe, on the First Nations, but because the government knew that they had to go behind the province's back, that they could not discuss this in the light of day, that it had to be done in the basements of the Legislature, metaphorically speaking, that it could not be done in good consultation. What has happened is that the entire bill is riddled with proble ms.

Whether you talk about your position, your principled position in opposition to the sale of the Telephone System, leaving that aside, the bill itself as exemplified by the definition of land which we are amending, the bill itself in its entirety is full of contra dictions, is full of things that cannot possibly take place, is full of stuff that even the government admits. To take a case in point, what actually happened in committee when the committee went clause by clause is that the government itself brought in 26 amendments-26 amendments to a bill that is only 31 pages long. Well, just to compare that, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, and I am talking about why we are proposing this land amendment, because it is part of a larger problem that the government has in this, The Municipal Act which was a brand new act, the first time in over a hundred years that a municipal act had been put together, the Minister of Rural Development went out and he consulted. He talked for over two years with virtually everybody in the province of Manitoba who would be impacted by this with one small exception and that being the City of Winnipeg, and there was a problem that was brought to the minister's attention about that.

But, by and large, The Municipal Act, the proc ess was undertaken very well. * (1 600) You know what, Mr. Deputy Speaker? Because that process was undertaken in the proper fa shion, there were very , very few amendments that were brought fo rward by the government to The Municipal Act and very fe w amendments, I might add, that were brought fo rward to The Municipal Act by the opposttion, because the process was undertaken prope rly.

Not only that, but the amendments that were brought fo rward by the government were amendments that were a reflection of and a response to the public hearings, the things that the people of the province of Manitoba said to the government in the public hear ing proce ss, were listened to by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) and responded to with a se

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-2-83
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 2nd hansardpdf 83.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	8772619fd709bee02dbdbfca9a468d5b42724f5b

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