Manitoba Hansard — 29 June 1995 (Sitting 28, 36th Legislature, 1st Session)

36-1-28

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First 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. XLV No. 28-1:30 p.m., Thursday, June 29,1995

� ASHTON, Steve BARRETI, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUA Y, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Alben, Hon. DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILM ON, 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, Rosann MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-8ixtb Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Aff"iliation Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-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. Norben 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 Kirkfield Park Dauphin La Verendrye Ross mere Turtle Mountain Fon Garry Swan River lam 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. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

2923 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, June 29, 1995 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING PETITIONS Funding Model for Quality Public Education Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, I would like to present the petition of Sylvia Fillier, Virginia Davis, Shannon Achter and others requesting the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Mcintosh) to reconsider the funding model to ensure that Thompson and other communities in this province are able to maintain quality public education.

READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Funding Model for Quality Public Education Madam Speaker: I have reviewed the petition (Mr. Ashton), and it complies with the rules and the practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read (by leave)? Some Honourable Members: Yes. Madam Speaker: The Clerk will read. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba humbly sheweth that:

WHEREAS funding for public schools by the provincial government has been cut twice in the past three years; and

WHEREAS provincial funding for the school district of Mystery Lake has dropped by nearly $2 million over the same period, more than 10 percent; and

WHEREAS funding for private schools has increased by over 110 percent under the same provincial government; and

WHEREAS Thompson was faced with a 48 percent increase in the education support levy tax as a result of reassessment in 1993, resulting in $500,000 leaving our community; and

WHEREAS the Thompson school district is also now faced with a massive $1.8-million deficit equivalent to a 48 percent increase in local school taxes; and

WHEREAS unless the minister reviews this funding the Thompson school district will be forced to consider both a $500,000 tax increase and severe program cuts totalling over $1.3 million. WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the Legislative Assembly request the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Mcintosh) to reconsider the funding model to ensure that Thompson and other communities in this province are able to maintain quality public education. *

(1335) PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Standing Committee on Law Amendments Third Report Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): I wonder, Madam Speaker, if the House would grant leave to consider the report of the Committee on Law Amendments from this morning. Madam Speaker: Is there leave of the House to present the report of the Committee on Law Amendments from this morning? [agreed] Mr. David Newman (Vice-Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the Third Report of the Committee on Law Amendments. Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Your Standing Committee on Law Amendments presents the following as its Third Report.

2924 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 Your committee met on Thursday, June 29, 1995, at 10 a.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider bills referred. At that meeting, your committee elected Mr. Newman to fill a vacancy for the Vice-Chairperson position. Your committee has considered: Bill 35-The Elections Amendment, Local Authorities Election Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia Loi electorale, Ia

Loi sur /'election des autorites locales et apportant des modifications correlatives and has agreed to report the same without amendment. All of which is respectfully submitted. Mr. Newman: I move, seconded by the honourable member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. Committee of Supply Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Chairperson of Committees): Madam Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the honourable member for Turtle Mountain (Mr.

Tweed), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery, where we have seated this afternoon forty Grades 1 to 10 students from New Haven School under the direction of Ms. Margaret Mozdzen. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Health Sciences Centre Budget Reduction Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader ofthe Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the acting Premier. Before the election, the government, based on questions we raised on numerous occasions, would not confirm any cuts' to the Health Sciences Centre and reductions in staffing pursuant to the government cuts.

Madam Speaker, we have learned that the Health Sciences Centre has informed staff that they will have to implement a 7.5 percent reduction in their budget or a $19-million reduction in their budget effective April 1, 1996-bad news after the election campaign, completely inconsistent with government statements in this Chamber before. I would like to ask the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) to confirm the reductions of7.5 percent, $19 million, at the Health Sciences Centre. *

(1340) Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, for this fiscal year, last November, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) met with representatives of the hospitals, personal care homes and community health centres to announce the level of funding for 1995-96. The honourable member would be quite incorrect to suggest that there was anything other than an early and open approach to the discussion of the various financial plans for the hospitals.

There is also no question but that the next fiscal year will be another challenging year for the health sector and the year after that and the year after that. As long as the federal government continues to turn the tap off on transfers for health care, we will be challenged. I say that in the context that we continue, Madam

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2925 Speaker, to contribute 34 percent of our budget to health care, the highest level anywhere in this country. Mr. Doer: I would like to table a letter in the Chamber today from a director of human resources at the Health Sciences Centre stating that effective April 1, 1996, we will be required to reduce our operating budget by $19 million or approximately 7.5 percent at the Health Sciences Centre. Madam Speaker, this is a question we asked in December to the provincial government which they refused to answer, long before the federal budget.

I would like to ask the minister to confirm the number today, and will that be the target reduction for other hospitals in the province of Manitoba? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I will not immediately comment on a letter written from the Health Sciences (Mr. Stefanson), ample funds available for the Winnipeg Jets, $37 million for the Winnipeg Jets? How can he justify the priorities of this government to cut health care and subsidize hockey, Madam Speaker? Hon.

James Downey (Deputy Premier): Madam Speaker, I do not know when the members opposite are going to realize what happened on April 25 of this year, when we went to the people of Manitoba, clearly indicating that this government was putting $500 million more in health care than was put in under his administration in 1988-$500 million more. Madam Speaker, to put the debt on the people of Manitoba, as he did in spending money in Saudi Arabia, $27 million-absolute waste. This government is managing the affairs of health care very well.

Centre to somebody else, so I will look further into the * (1345) letter the honourable member refers to, and I do not confirm that for the other hospitals, each of which work with their autonomous boards and work to serve their mandates.

As I said to the honourable member, all hospitals in Canada, except for the seven that have been shut down in Montreal, except for the 52 that have been shut down in Saskatchewan, except for the 10,000 hospital beds shut down in NDP Ontario, formerly NDP Ontario, all hospitals in Manitoba will be continuing to restructure, Madam Speaker, to continue to put emphasis on not for-admission surgeries, day surgeries and to continue to look at the technologies that are available, many of which the honourable member might be interested to know also help patients to recover faster and to experience less intrusion with respect to surgical procedures.

Mr. Doer: I would like to ask the Deputy Premier who is also, allegedly, according to Order-in-Council, a member of the government's Treasury Board, how can this Conservative government, this provincial Conservative government, justify cutting $19 million out of the Health Sciences Centre after the election, when they have, according to the Minister of Finance Health Care System Child Psychiatric Services Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, I have a new question to the Deputy Premier.

Of course, the Deputy Premier will confirm that all the way through the election campaign, the government had the audacity to promise to limit, to limit their contribution to the hockey arena and team at $10 million and cancel the operating loss agreement, words that fall like a house of cards in terms of the light of day after the election campaign. I would like to ask the Deputy Premier, in light of his newfound commitment to the health care system of Manitoba, will they be keeping the beds at the children's psychiatric centre at the Health Sciences Centre open, the beds that they opened on March 23?

Will they be keeping the beds open?-because, already, as we have raised in the House day in and day out, children have been turned aside because the beds are scheduled to be closed by this Conservative government.

2926 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable Leader of the Opposition knows very well, and I believe supports, the mental health reform plans of the government and much of its implementation. He picks and chooses, of course, to meet his needs on occasion. I would like to see those beds closed, because I would like not to have to need them. If there is an indication that they are needed, they will be there for us to use.

The honourable member and I should probably agree on that point, but here again there is an opportunity for him, and he is not going to miss out on such an opportunity. Madam Speaker, the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) has very eloquently put forward an important matter. If it was not for that particular member, the Leader of the Opposition, when he sat on this side around the cabinet table, we might not have to put out $634 million in interest charges.

Madam Speaker, can you imagine how many hospital beds we could have open today, how many community programs we could have in effect today, if those honourable members and their friends in the union movement had not forced us to pay $634 million this year in interest charges? Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, again the minister has not answered the question. He did not answer the first two questions we raised with him. The Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) has not answered the question about the cuts at the Health Sciences Centre. I want to ask the minister again.

In light of the fact that two doctors at the Health Sciences Centre have stated that closing the psychiatric ward and not admitting young patients, some as young as four years old, Madam Speaker, will put those young people at risk, what impact will a further $19 million and a further 7.5 percent cut have on young children who need children's psychiatric service and are being turned away callously, because this government's priorities are hockey teams, not health care for children here in the province of Manitoba? Mr.

McCrae: This is the same type of rhetoric that I recall vividly experiencing for 35 days in a recent election campaign, most of it not true, but a lot of it high-powered rhetoric, aided and abetted financially by their union-boss friends in the buying of television time, using actors to try to put across what the honourable Leader of the Opposition is trying to put across today.

I have no interest whatsoever in subjecting a four year-old to a lack of mental health services, and in our discussions and working relationships with Health Sciences Centre, I am not going to allow the kind of situation the honourable member and his actor friends in the union movement want to portray. *

(1350) Mr. Doer: Well, the minister did not answer the question again. The ward is slated to close tomorrow. Children, right now, are not being admitted. Dr. Vickar and Dr.

Steinberg have both said that children as young as four years old will be put at risk by the Conservative government, this Minister of Health's decision on this children's psychiatric unit at this Health Sciences Centre in this province of Manitoba Will the minister listen to the psychiatric experts who say that we need those beds for our children and keep those beds open for our young children, so that they can get needed psychiatric help at the earliest possible age, when it is most effective for those kids, or will he deny those children those opportunities and allow the closure of those beds to take place tomorrow, as scheduled by his government's decision?

Mr. McCrae: Of course, we will listen to those doctors, Madam Speaker, and we also-is the honourable member suggesting that we turn our backs on the Winnipeg Regional Mental Health Council that says close the beds? I mean, these are the kinds of different points of view that we get in the health system. But, Madam Speaker, I am not going to allow children to go without service. I give the honourable member that commitment, and if that means having beds available to be open or if it means leaving beds open, that is what it means. -

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2927 We have said consistently before the election to which the honourable member wants to refer, and we have said consistently after, patient care is the No. 1 priority. Health Sciences Centre Budget Reduction Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, the only thing consistent is that a number of beds opened before the election, and they are now slated to close, and waiting lists were reduced before the election, and now they are stopping those programs. It is pre election rhetoric from this minister, and then they close it after the election.

My question for the minister: I find it extraordinary the minister is not prepared to answer the question about the $19-million cut to the Health Sciences Centre. Either the minister does not know what is going on in his department, or is the minister saying the Health Sciences Centre made up this figure of $19 million to reduce their own budget by $19 million? Is that what the minister is saying by refusing to answer the question, that somehow they pulled this number out of the air, and it did not come from the Department ofHealth? Bon.

James McCrae (Minister of Health): I think, Madam Speaker, the only area that I could learn any lessons from the honourable member and his Leader would be in the area of rhetoric. I may not be as good at rhetoric as they are, but I hope we can persuade and demonstrate to honourable members that when it comes to commitment to health care, we have certainly done a better job than they ever had dreamed of doing. Their commitment to health care, as measured by the budget, was nowhere near what the present commitment to health care is in the budget of the government of Manitoba.

Their commitment to health care, if you want to measure it in the amount they are prepared to send off to the bankers and the creditors of Manitoba, to the extent of $634 million this year and hundreds of millions of dollars every year, rather than spending them on areas where we could use them far more productively, I suggest that is an area I do not want to copy, Madam Speaker. The letter the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) tabled spoke about how there will be a reduction of this amount and that percentage. It is all anticipated.

The honourable members know very well, Madam Speaker, there is a lcmg planning process in budgeting in hospitals, and there are targets that are looked at. Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, given that the minister has confirmed that there is a $19-million reduction to Health Sciences Centre in anticipated targets, will the minister advise this House whether or not he will outline for the House what programs are being cut, since this memo talks about programs that must be cut by the Health Sciences Centre?

Will that include the cardiac waiting-list program, and will that include the psychiatric children's care program that is now being cut, Madam Speaker? *

(1355) Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, the Health Sciences Centre has a budget of approximately $250 million. They have hundreds of programs in operation at their hospital, and they are like other hospitals in Canada, not like the 52 in Saskatchewan that got closed, not like the seven in Montreal that are getting closed. They do not have to worry about budgets there anymore.

The ones that are open in Manitoba, all of them, all have budget challenges year in and year out, and is it not interesting that, in the days when honourable members opposite were dealing with double-digit revenue increases year over year and still borrowing hundreds of millions of dollars, we had the same kinds of debates then, Madam Speaker? Personal Care Homes Safety Standards Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): My final supplementary to the minister is in regard to the personal care homes report that he released this morning.

2928 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 Can the minister explain how Manitobans can have any confidence that the recommendations in the area of safety and personal staffing will be quickly dealt with as a result of this report, insofar as this matter was brought to the minister's attention a year ago? He set up a committee. The committee reported before the election. The report has come out now after the election, and, now, finally, they have recommendations that will be worked on, not now, not next month, not until next year, Madam Speaker.

How can we have any confidence that staffing and security are being dealt with? Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable member will not have confidence in any plans that we announce, but the confidence that I have rests in the consultation approach that we use, the fact that so many stake holders were part of the consultations-professionals, care providers, recipients of care and their families and the consultations that happened as recently as yesterday with various organizations which expressed satisfaction with the report and the actions that the government intends to take.

Bell of Batoche Theft Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, as an important historic object, indeed as a national treasure, the bell ofBatoche must become accessible to all Metis, perhaps again at Batoche, and must be treated with the utmost of respect. In the fundamental understanding that two wrongs do not make a right and that there must be a swift and legal return of this treasure to a rightful place, I ask the Minister of Justice, would she tell Manitobans when she or her department first received information as to the likely whereabouts of the bell ofBatoche? Bon.

Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): In answering that question, I would like to answer a question taken as notice on my behalf yesterday. Yesterday, on the question taken as notice, I was shocked and surprised that the honourable member for St. Johns raised the matter of a police investigation into the bell of Batoche. This House has a history of respecting the integrity of a police investigation for these reasons; first of all, fairness. In the interests of fairness, we do not enter into public discussion on any of these issues because the people, in fact, may be innocent.

Secondly, not for a moment do I nor any member of this House want to interfere by way of discussion into a police investigation. However, I would note that the Winnipeg police have provided some comment in this matter. In these circumstances, I think it is important to provide the honourable member with some information on this situation for the purpose of dispelling any notion of impropriety on the part of our Crown attorneys in Manitoba. Madam Speaker, I can confirm the police have contacted our Crown attorneys with respect to the bell.

This is a normal part of the responsibilities of Crown attorneys in this province for the purpose of giving advice. Madam Speaker, as this allegedly took place in Ontario, we have forwarded all materials, all materials, to the Ontario Attorney General's department. Mr.

Mackintosh: My supplementary, Madam Speaker: In the interests of fairness and in the interests of the people of Manitoba through its representatives in this House asking questions of public concern which she is well aware is our obligation under Beauchesne's, I ask this minister to explain why the Crown in Manitoba has not proceeded with charges or search warrants, and who is delaying the legal process, especially search warrants, which by now may be useless? *

(1400) Mrs. Vodrey: I am shocked again today by the member of the other side. Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, Beauchesne's

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2929 Citation 417 is very clear: 11 Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate. 11 We need no lectures from this minister either on the process of law or on the process of this House and I would ask that you call her to order and ask her to answer the questions put forward by the member for St. Johns. Madam Speaker: Order, please. In my opinion, the honourable member for Thompson does not have a point of order.

I was of the opinion that the minister was about to respond to the question posed by the honourable member for St. Johns. *** Mrs. Vodrey: As the member across the way knows, in a general sense and in all cases, the police have the opportunity to consult with our Crown attorneys, but it is the police who make a decision regarding the application for a search warrant which is, of course, granted by the judiciary. Mr. Mackintosh: Well, has the Justice minister received a report from the Minister of Northern and Native Affairs (Mr.

Praznik) about information that minister has in his possession, and has she demanded that the minister aid in the investigation by immediately reporting that information to the authorities? Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, the member makes very strong allegations regarding a member of this House. I have confirmed today that all materials in relation to this alleged incident have been forwarded to the Attorney General of Ontario. This is allegedly where the incident took place. Decisions will be made within the Province of Ontario. St Germain-Vermette Secession Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Urban Affairs. When asked to comment on the possibility of secession, of St. Germain and Vermette potentially seceding from the City of Winnipeg, the minister had suggested that secession is only a concern of those communities that are, in fact, contemplating it. Given that the Minister of Urban Affairs is charged with the responsibility of protecting the interests of the City of Winnipeg, will he acknowledge that communities seceding have a tremendous impact on the entire city of Winnipeg? Bon.

Jack Reimer (Minister of Urban Affairs): Madam Speaker, the member is referring to a situation that is in the preliminary stages of report finalization regarding the St. Germain-Vermette study. I have not been presented with the final report or any recommendations on it. I cannot comment as to what their decisions are and what their recommendations are on that report. Mr. Lamoureux : Madam Speaker, I am asking the Minister of Urban Affairs, does he not believe that if a part of the city of Winnipeg wants to secede, that it is going to have a dramatic impact on other communities in the city of Winnipeg?

Will he at least acknowledge that that is, in fact, the case? Mr. Reimer: Madam Speaker, the member for Inkster is asking a hypothetical question and to give an answer on what a certain area of the city would do or would not do, these are opinions that I cannot speculate on in a sense of any type of finality. Mr. Lamoureux : Headingley is not hypothetical. Headingley- Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Inkster, with a supplementary question. Mr.

Lamoureux : Can the minister indicate whether any mechanism might be put into place to ensure that other communities within the city of Winnipeg which will be negatively affected in the event that the city starts to disintegrate, Madam Speaker, will have their voices heard in a process that is leading to secession? Will he ensure that there is a mechanism that will allow other parts of the community of Winnipeg to have input?

2930 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 Mr. Reimer: Madam Speaker, in doing research on prior ministers of Urban Affairs, I look sometimes back to them for the wisdom of decision making and some of the precedents that they have formed. In regard to Headingley, I went back into the archives to look at what some of the former ministers of Urban Affairs had said. I would just like to quote, if Madam Speaker would give me a moment here, regarding a question that was posed to a former Urban Affairs minister.

He replied: We are going to study the issue regarding Headingley, whether they should or should not, and then what options they have as residents. They are going to have to decide themselves the benefits that they are not living with and the drawbacks. We are not going to do that for them. We are not going to tell them whether it is good or bad to stay there. That is their decision. That is from the honourable member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) when he was the Minister of Urban Affairs.

For me to speculate at this time what decisions people are going to make, what the situations are going to be and the choices they are going to make, those are up to the people to make. Bell of Batoche Theft Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St Johns): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Northern and Native Affairs. Would the minister tell Manitobans where, at what function and when did he see the bell he told a serum of reporters and myself about yesterday? Hon. Darren Pramik (Minister of Northern Affairs): Yes, Madam Speaker, I believe the Attorney General has spoken about the investigation.

As this House has been told, any investigation into a criminal act in Ontario is certainly being properly conducted by police and the appropriate authorities in respect to the Attorney General's department, and I believe, Madam Speaker, that the information I provided yesterday is certainly there on the record today. Mr. Mackintosh: Would the Minister ofNorthern and Native Affairs tell Manitobans where, at what function and when did he see the bell he told a serum of reporters and myself about yesterday, and, indeed, would he tell this House whether, in fact, he rang this bell or dealt with it in any way? Mr.

Pramik: Madam Speaker, I say to the member, first of all, I have not rung the bell ofBatoche. I do not even know ifl have ever seen the bell ofBatoche, as I have indicated. I do not know how large the bell of Batoche is or what is on the bell of Batoche. [interjection] Well, the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) says, there are a lot of events for bells. One of his colleagues had a bell in the House today. Am I supposed to go to the police and indicate that may be the bell ofBatoche? That is a silly comment, Madam Speaker. Mr. Mackintosh: I have a fmal supplementary.

After seeing the bell that the minister referred to yesterday, did the minister report the sighting to the police or to authorities? Did he confer with government officials or any members of this government, rather than treat the Metis and the law with contempt by condoning and allowing this national treasure to remain in the hands of a very few under a legal cloud, Madam Speaker? Point of Order Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, the member for St. Johns has made allegations in this House now on two occasions, allegations that heretofore I have not seen any evidence for.

If he has allegations to make, let him make them and let him prove that his allegations are correct, either that or withdraw. It is not the purview of this House, Madam Speaker, to have a member raise questions or raise inferences or -

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2931 make accusations in this House that are unfounded. If * (141 0) he has evidence, let him table it. If he does not have evidence, let him withdraw. Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On the same point of order, Madam Speaker, first of all, I believe the minister is debating the issue. Second of all, the member for St. Johns is basing his question on statements made by the minister and is asking for specific dates and specific circumstances on facts that have already been confirmed by the minister.

The essential test which we always have in this House of members bringing forth information which is factual, the member for St. Johns, the facts that he is basing his questions on are the statements by the minister himself. Madam Speaker: On the point of order, I, indeed, do want to review the transcripts of Hansard, and I will, if necessary, report back to the House. *** Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Northern and Native Affairs, to respond to the question. Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Speaker, I would like to. First of all, Madam Speaker, what I have heard from the member for St.

Johns is innuendo about a lot of different people, and I think that is most appropriate. I want to say to the member, as well, that he makes accusations about me. I have to tell the honourable member, Madam Speaker, in answer to the member's question, I have had occasion as an MLA where I have had information provided to me or was aware of information that I had to provide to the police in an investigation. I take that very seriously, Madam Speaker, and I would never condone

an act of theft in retrieving an historical document. I would never want to do that, but I am glad to see that the member for St. Johns today also agrees that the bell of Batoche has a rightful historical place in Batoche. Yesterday, that was not his view. University of Manitoba Sexual Harassment Report Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Education, and they are in regard to the chilly climate in the Political Studies department at the University of Manitoba.

Chilly climate is a continuum that can include sexual harassment, stalking, threats and sexual assault, as well as conditions that affect employment. At the University of Manitoba, insinuations abound, but nobody has presented an open and public account of the contents of the ad hoc committee's investigation. My first question for the minister is, since the minister has a copy of the report, could she tell us if it contains allegations of sexual assault, stalking or threats? Bon.

Linda Mcintosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I have to indicate to the member that I have the report, and I have discussed the report with the president of the university. He, like me and like the members on this side of the House and, I believe, like members opposite, is also concerned about the chilly climate, which is the terminology that is being used to indicate a climate in which certain groups of people, in this case, women, are left to feel outside the normal scope of things.

As well, of course, I had indicated my concern that I wanted to know what kinds of actions were being taken, if there were any particular allegations about specific individuals. The president of the university is going to be responding to me, and, as well, I believe that the dean of that particular faculty is referring the matter to the Human Rights Commission, any allegations that came to him. Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, can the minister assure us here today that to the best of her knowledge, there have been no allegations of sexual assault, threats or stalking?

2932 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, I do not know if the report is a public report that the member has. I do not know if the member herself is referring to any specific individuals or incidences. What I can tell the House is that I have discussed the matter with the president and asked that if there is anything of that nature, I would like to see that followed up on, and the president has indicated that he also will ensure that if there is anything of that nature, that it will indeed.

In the meantime, they have already started upon action concerning the chilly climate at the university, and I assure the member of my continued monitoring and dialogue on this particular issue. Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, my third question is also for the Minister of Education. If members of the university administration or members of the ad hoc committee had heard allegations of indictable offences, what onus is on them to report these incidences? Mrs. Mcintosh: Madam Speaker, there are two points in response to that.

I assure the member that any allegation of criminal wrongdoing would certainly never go ignored by any member of the faculty or of the diaconate or the president or the government. I also wish to indicate to the member that because there was a lot of confidentiality aspect around conversations concerning that report, that in respecting people's privacy, it is difficult to say so-and-so said this and so-and-so said that, because we do not wish to intrude upon people's privacy.

That is always a dilemma on this side of the House, whether it concerns a pupil, a patient, this type of incident or things before the courts. There are certain things that it is just not appropriate to discuss. What I can say to the member to get at the root of her concern, which is, I believe, if there is any wrongdoing, will it be dealt with, the answer to that is yes. Health Care System Child Psychiatric Services Mr.

Conrad Santos (Broadway): Niccolo Machiavelli once said that the great majority of mankind is satisfied with appearances as though they are realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem rather than those that are. Public appearances of fiscal prudence in health care spending cuts cannot hide human sufferings, particularly of young people, mentally disturbed youth, who are being denied psychiatric attention due to the misplaced priorities of this government.

Madam Speaker, my first question I would like to ask the Minister of Health is, what is the reason why a young man who had been placed in confinement since May 31 and of whom I wrote on June 12-I have not received an answer to this point. I do not know what is happening and what is going on in there. Is it still the policy of this government to deny psychiatric assistance to those people needing help? Bon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): No, Madam Speaker, it certainly is not, never has been, never will be. I appreciate the concern expressed by the honourable member.

He has, indeed, written to me about a young fellow who is receiving psychiatric care, although in a location which I think is not appropriate. I think the honourable member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) asked about that same case recently. The care is there, Madam Speaker. It would more optimally be provided in another location, and we are trying to arrange for that. Mr. Santos: Madam Speaker, even the authorities in the youth centre were saying that they have no facilities to take care of this youth, and they have no guard sometimes to attend to his needs.

My question is, how many more days must this youth be detained in the wrong facility such that he does not have access to psychiatric and medical attention? Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, the honourable member is wrong. This individual does have access to psychiatric and medical attention. As I have said, however, I believe it should be provided in another place. I agree with the honourable -

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2933 member on that point, and we are making every effort to make that other place available, but twice now the honourable member has said he is being denied service, and he is not. Just in conclusion, I am advised that Machiavelli once said that those who most resist change are those who have the most to gain from the status quo. I think the honourable members representing their union-boss friends, as they do, are more like- Madam Speaker: Order, please. Point of Order Mr.

Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I would point out once again that answers are supposed to relate to the matter raised. While the minister may wish to discuss Machiavelli, and quite obviously their election campaign in terms of Machiavelli's Prince-we can get into those literary debates if the member wants, but we would appreciate it if he would answer the very serious question raised by the member for Broadway, instead of engaging in those kinds of comments. Mr. McCrae: On the same point of order, the honourable member for Broadway raised a very serious matter.

I gave a very serious answer. The honourable member for Thompson wants to criticize me for doing precisely what the member for Broadway did. Madam Speaker: On the honourable member for Thompson's point of order, there is no point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts. The honourable Minister of Health also does not have a point of order. *** Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Broadway, with one very short supplementary question. Mr. Santos: If this government is to choose between the value of human compassion or saving money, which one will this government choose? Mr.

McCrae: Madam Speaker, our record over the past seven years suggests the former, that being human compassion, rather than the latter, because we are spending 34 percent of our budget on health care, a higher level than anywhere else in this country. I sure wish we had $634 million more, but the NDP denied us that money. *

(1420) Winnipeg Jets/ Arena Government Briefmg Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Deputy Premier whether on Monday evening of this week past, they received a briefing with some substantive detail from the Dominion Hunt-Spirit consortium in cabinet, where certain documents were left with members of cabinet. Can the minister confirm that that briefing took place this Monday evening past or at some other time this week? Point of Order Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I will find the exact quotation. It is 409-I cannot find the exact quotation alone, but it is

Section 409 in Beauchesne's which clearly indicates that questions of cabinet confidence ought not to be addressed in the Chamber here. Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs was up on a point of order? Mr. Ernst: Yes, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable minister for that clarification. Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Yes, on the same point of order, I think the minister was

2934 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 probably referring to 41 1, Citation 2, but I believe, Madam Speaker, if you were to listen to the question that was placed by the member, he very clearly indicated that he was asking a question as to whether the government had been briefed, was not referring to cabinet per se, and, in fact, I think he made that very clear. He clarified that in his final question. He clarified that he was not referring to cabinet being briefed but whether the government had been briefed.

It is clearly out of order to make reference to proce edings in a cabinet meeting, but it is not out of order to ask if this government received a briefing on this report on the arena. Madam Speaker: Order, please. To be absolutely certain that the ruling is fair, I, indeed, will take this under advisement and confirm that, indeed, there was reference to cabinet in the question from the honourable member for Crescentwood. *** Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescent wood, very quickly, a supplementary question. Mr.

Sale: I would like to ask the members opposite whether there has been a meeting at which the discussion has taken place as to the building of the new arena, the design of the new arena and the details of that process at which they were given information as members of the government. Hon. James Downey (Deputy Premier): The answer, Madam Speaker, is yes. Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): I move, Madam Speaker, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr.

Cumm ings), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Madam Speaker: Order, please. Does the honourable government House leader wish to withdraw that previous motion? Mr. Ernst: With the permission of my seconder, Madam Speaker, yes, I do. I got ahead of myself here. Madam Speaker, would you call for second reading of Bill 18 and Bill 26? SECOND READINGS Bill 18- The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act Hon.

Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Education (Mrs. Mcintosh), that Bill 18, The Housing and Renewal Corporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia societe d'habitation et de renovation, be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Reimer: Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak on Bill 18, a bill to amend The Housing and Renewal Corporation Act. During the recent election campaign, our Premier (Mr. Filmon) spoke of the need to adapt our institutions to modem times, to make them more responsive to the citizens they serve and to seek greater economies in the conduct of public business. The Premier also committed this government to reduce the number of separate Crown entities delivering public services.

The Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation was created in 1967 as a separate Crown corporation that operated within general policy and fiscal guidelines issued by government. In 1982, the Department of Housing was created. Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation became a Crown corporation with no employees and only civil servants on its board of directors, with the Minister of Housing serving as chair. -

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2935 A great deal has changed since 1982. Three years ago, the Manitoba Housing Authority was created to consolidate the operations of over 90 separate housing authorities in this province. This measure was designed to improve the efficiency of providing social housing to those Manitobans that need it and to introduce greater equity and consistency in the manner by which our tenants, our clients access these services. Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation has been the institution which has funded and monitored the activities of the Manitoba Housing Authority.

Both the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation and the Manitoba Housing Authority are served by civil servants within the Department of Housing. The various working relationships between a department of government, a Crown corporation and a Crown agency have introduced a certain degree of ambiguity in reporting relationships, responsibilities and accountability for performance. There may be a certain amount of duplication in the current situation, and this bill will give the government som,e flexibility m clarifying these roles and responsibilities.

Indeed, as recently as June 15, 1995, the Provincial Auditor's office has commented on the need for some clarification in the working relationship between the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation and the Manitoba Housing Authority. I quote from a letter that was sent to me: We are also concerned with the reporting relationships which result from the existence of two separate boards of directors, one of MHRC and one of the Manitoba Housing Authority. It would appear that with both boards there is not always clarity as to the responsibility and authority.

We recommend that you review the existing governance structure. Bill 18 removes the existing limitations on composition of the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation board and gives the government the option of opening board membership to noncivil servants, to consolidate the Manitoba Housing Authority and Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation if that is deemed to be appropriate and to clearly clarify accountability in the management of tax dollars for social housing. We are committed to change, to improvement and to delivering social housing as effectively as possible.

Madam Speaker, that concludes my introductory remarks. I look forward to a fuller discussion of the bill at committee stage. Thank you. Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Barrett), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. Bi1126- The Liquor Control Amendment Act Bon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Mcintosh), that Bill 26, The Liquor Control Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur la reglementation des alcools, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Gilleshammer: Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce for second reading Bill 26, The Liquor Control Amendment Act. The Liquor Control Act is one which must from time to time be examined in order to understand the changing needs of the customers of the MLCC, both licensees and the public.

Prior to these amendments coming forth, there have been discussions with interested groups such as the Manitoba Hotel Association, the Restaurant Association and the Royal Canadian Legion to ensure that the changes genuinely reflect the needs and wishes of Manitobans. * (1 430) This bill contains three amendments. The first one proposes to allow the service of liquor in licensed establishments on Remembrance Day. Currently, service is allowed only in licensed dining rooms and on a permit basis in veterans' clubs.

This bill will extend that service to beverage rooms, cocktail lounges, cabarets, sports facilities, private clubs, spectator activities and others. Manitoba's tourism and

2936 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 hospitality industries continue to grow and this bill will allow Manitoba's licensees to provide services to their clients as is now the case in all other Canadian provinces. This amendment has been discussed with the Northwestern Command of the Royal Canadian Legion who are in agreement. No new service will be permitted before 1 p.m. to prevent any conflict with memorial services taking place. Secondly, the bill proposes to allow veterans' associations to have up to 50 percent of their permanent local membership as guests.

Curr ently, veterans' associations are allowed to have up to 10 percent of permanent local membership as guests. This bill will enable veterans' associations to continue to serve their members and their communities, despite declining membership in many branches. Finally, the bill proposes to allow hotel beer vendors to sell beer to licensees within their communities. Currently, licensees may purchase beer only from the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission distribution centre, Liquor Commission stores or from private beer distributors.

This bill gives licensees more flexibility in making those purchases, particularly in the case of rural licensees who are often at a great distance from the nearest current outlet. The hospitality industry will have an opportunity to improve the level of service they provide to their customers. Madam Speaker, I look forward to the debate in this House on this bill. These amendments recognize our changing times and the changing needs of Manitobans, while continuing to provide liquor service in a socially responsible manner. Madam Speaker, I do have spreadsheets for opposition party critics. Thank you very much.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), that debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to. REPORT STAGE Bill 35-The Elections Amendment, Local Authorities Election Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), by leave, that Bill 35, The Elections Amendment, Local Authorities Election Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant Ia Loi electorale, Ia

Loi sur I' election des autorites locales et apportant des modifications correlatives, reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, be concurred in. Motion agreed to. House Business Mr. Ernst: I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cumm ings), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty, with the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY Supply-Capital Supply Mr. Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): We are considering the following motion: THAT the Committee of Supply concur in all Supply resolutions relating to the Estimates of expenditures for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March 1996, which have been adopted at this session by the three sections of the Committee of Supply sitting separately and by the full committee. Shall the motion pass? Is the committee ready for the question?

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2937 Ms. Rosano Wowcbuk (Swan River): Mr. Chair, I have questions that I would like to ask the minister responsible for disaster assistance. I would like to begin by saying that people in rural Manitoba are worried when they elect a Conservative government. When they elected the Conservative government in 1988 we in the Swan River Valley were struck by a serious flooding situation. In 1989 we had fire situations. They have elected another Conservative government now in 1995, and we have fires and floods all over again.

I am not sure what the gods or who is trying to tell us something here, but certainly there is a serious situation. On a more serious matter, I would like to ask the minister- An Honourable Member: They do not vote right. Ms. Wowchuk: The minister says they do not vote right. I think someone up above is telling all of us that those who voted did not vote right and we are being punished with fire and floods. More seriously, to the minister responsible for disaster assistance, I have some questions with respect to the flooding that we had earlier this spring along the Assiniboine River.

The minister has received calls and has heard from farm organizations with respect to the compensation that farmers are going to receive. The situation has resulted in crops being under water for long periods of time, farmland that is not being able to be cultivated. I want to ask the minister responsible whether any consideration has been given to the requests that have been made to his department that we look at ways of compensating farmers for the losses they are facing this year because of the flooding. * (1 440) Bon. Brian Pallister (Minister of Government Services): Mr.

Chairman, insofar as the association or the accusation the member makes facetiously about this government being re -elected and coinciding with disasters, I do believe-and I invite her to take this up with the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), because cert ainly this falls under his jurisdiction, and I share her concerns.

Insofar as the situation with the Assiniboine and the flooding along the Assiniboine this spring that the member alludes to, certainly all of us in this House share great concern about the situation and are sympathetic to the situation as far as it affects-it affects all of us, but certainly most pr ofoundly and dire ctly it affects the people along the Assiniboine basin. We have had meetings. In fact, the Ministers of Highways and Transporta tion (Mr. Findlay) and Rural Development (Mr. Derkach), myself and the Deputy Premier (Mr.

Downey) travelled to a meeting with residents of that area in Brandon appro ximately three weeks ago at which time they had a number of questions, and I think a very good dialogue ensued. Some of the questions related to compensation. Some of them related to longer-term concerns such as the management of the water in the basin itself and the outflow of abundant water from the Langenburg area of Saskatchewan due to very aggressive drainage pro jects that have been undert aken there.

Certainly, there are concerns that are shared by many of my colleagues and myself about the way in which Saskatchewan is pr oceeding on that front in terms of their draina ge appr oaches, concerns that we have both along the lines of the environmental impacts and also in terms of the sustainable agricultural pr actices that may or may not be being pr actised in that jurisdiction. Of course, our immediate concern is that there was an abundance of water this spring.

I am told the data that we have show that there was almost twice as much as the highest recorded level in our history of water that carne down that basin this spring. It is truly remark able that there was not much more significant damage that occurr ed as a consequence of that than has and than did. As far as the disaster aspect, there is a pr ocess, as the member knows, whereby municipalities and individuals utilize a claims form and bring the claims forward. Unfortunately, the member has had firsthand experience with this in her own constituency, as have

2938 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 I-not to the same degree. In Portage Ia Prairie as well, we have had some flooding problems in years gone by. The claims are forwarded to Disaster Assistance, and then the board arranges for assessment to be done. I know they are progressing. I do not have the exact numbers in front of me, but I know they are progressing very well in working with the municipalities on their claims. We are almost up to date entirely on that front. As far as the individual claims are concerned, those are still coming in.

In fact, in a meeting the other day with some of the Assiniboine Valley residents, several of them told me they have just been so busy with their seeding and subsequent spraying activities and so on, haying as well with some of them, that they have not had the opportunity yet to forward the forms to us. I encouraged them to do that at their earliest opportunity. Our department will peruse those claims, assess them and deal with them in the fairest possible way, hopefully to the ultimate satisfaction of those.

We also recognize the emotion around losing property or having property damaged, and that is an emotional impact that is very hard to appease. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chair, the farm organizations have asked for special compensation for the affected farmers. They feel that the farmers should be compensated for losses of crop land and hay land, and that is not being covered right now. Is there any consideration being given to provide special compensation for farmers in the area who have suff ered flooding this year? I believe there are areas that are not being covered by compensation right now.

My question is, what special considerations are being given? Mr. Pallister: Certainly the member raises a valid point. In the absence of limited resources such as every government is recognizing they do have in the absence of an awareness of those limited resources, it would be great to say yes and to offer compensation for virtually every form of loss, but it is not something that we have within our ability. We do not have it within our ability as a people to do that, to offer compensation for every single area of loss, in particular in areas where other insurance can be procured. This is the difficulty here.

In terms of certain agricultural operations they have availed themselves of crop insurance options for unseeded acreage that will allow them to recover a certain amount per acre in compensation through that mechanism. It is, like any insurance mechanism, one that involves sharing of risk among many, in anticipation of the consequences of an event such as this and therefore the protection of the individual by the many who pay the premiums for that benefit. In this particular instance, with the unseeded acreage coverage that was available, it was not purchas ed. There may have been good reasons for that.

I have spoken to many of the farmers in that area who have made various comments about it was not enough, it was not adequate coverage or it was not designed for their area, so it was not suitable. These are comments that have come to me, and I pass them on to the people responsible for crop insurance to make sure they hear these concerns. Hopefully they can endeavour to address them in some manner that alleviates those concerns or at least addresses them.

I think most commonly the comments that I am getting from affected residents and others is that we live in the valley and we are suffering this year, but we also know that we live in a valley. We knew that when we settled here and we knew that on occasion there would be problems with water by the nature of where we chose to live. These people, I have been very impressed with how reasonable they are and how well prepared their presentations have been when I have met with them.

Coming from a farm family, as I believe the member does as well, I just instinctively have tremendous sympathy for the circumstances that they face. The member does need to understand though that there are many others. It is not just the Assiniboine Basin that is affected, though it has been most prof oundly and obviously affected. There are many others across the province that have been aff ected by the inordinately large amount of water. I speak of, for example, the farmers in the area of Lake Manitoba, farmers in the area of the Assiniboine diversion in my own constituency who I have unfortunately had to

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2939 convey the message to that they did not purchase unseeded acreage coverage from crop insurance, and though they have been unable to seed on some of their land due to the high water, it is not something that we can offer them compensation for. I guess I just want to clarify with the member-1 think she is aware of this-there are many affected people all across the province, certainly even in the member for Turtle Mountain's (Mr.

Tweed) constituency, in the Killarney area, numerous farmers who are unable because of the high water levels there to get their crops on, certainly prior to the crop insurance deadline, which means a great deal in terms of planning practices for many farmers. It is a province-wide concern. It is not just a localized concern, although I recognize that the greatest concentration of affected people is along the Assiniboine Basin. Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chair, the minister says it is a province-wide issue.

I recognize that, because there are people in my constituency in the Swan River area, Birch River area, Winnipegosis area, Ethelbert, all of those areas, who have suffered flood damage as well. I focused on the Assiniboine area because it is the most predominant one. The minister has recognized that there is a weakness in crop insurance that we also recognize has to be addressed. We talked about that in Estimates. I think Disaster Assistance is in place to help people when they face a disaster. *

(1450) I would hope the minister would recognize that these people who cannot put a crop in, who cannot get hay up for their cattle are suffering. They are suffering partly due to the fact that the government has not managed the water properly on the Assiniboine River. There are many people who are questioning how the water at the Shellmouth Dam was handled. Those are things that have to be addressed-and also the whole issue of how the land is being drained in Saskatchewan.

I would hope this government would finally address that issue and meet with the Saskatchewan government and look at how this can be managed properly. We have raised this issue many times. We have asked the government to do that. The member across the way asks about who is in Saskatchewan. Of course, it is an NDP government in Saskatchewan, but this Minister of Environment (Mr. Cumm ings) and the members of this government have a responsibility to stand up for the people of Manitoba and ensure and negotiate with other provinces to ensure that Manitoba people do not suffer.

I would encourage the minister responsible for Disaster Assistance, who ends up paying the bills for this, that he would encourage his government to deal with this properly and resolve the problem but also look into the problems that have been caused by the way the Shellmouth Dam was handled this spring downstream, and address that issue as well.

The other question I have for the minister aside from that is that there were people who were evacuated out of the Shellmouth area when the flooding was going on, and I would like to ask the minister responsible, how many people were evacuated and where those people were housed when they were evacuated? Mr. Pallister: As far as the specifics of the latter part of the question, where the people were housed and so on, I will endeavour to get the information the member asked for in detail, because I do not have it here with me.

As to that particular aspect of her comments, I cannot respond at this time, but will get the information for her.

As to the concerns she expresses about this government standing up for the interests of the residents of the water basin, certainly that is something we have done proactively. l know that prior to my appointment, communication was made between the other ministers of this government with responsibilities in the area of Natural Resources and Environment to Saskatchewan and to express our concerns around this drainage project that is being undertaken-it is a massive project, I am told-and to express to them our desire to be assured that the best interests of Manitobans are being looked at, as well as the best interests of Saskatchewan residents.

Certainly, it is an example where co-operative approach would be most beneficial. As far as management of the water basin itself, I think probably it would be best, in terms of a more

2940 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 detailed answer, to confer with the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Driedger). I can only say that there has been action taken to get the input, and valuable input it is, of residents of the basin through the establishment of the Assiniboine River Advisory Board, which has on it stakeholder representation from along the basin. Certainly, it is, I think, a purposeful endeavour to try to get the input from these people as to how they see the management of the water body being best done to satisfy all, if that is possible.

I think it was the curr ent Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) who told me, in terms of the debate around the Assiniboine River diversion that was proposed a couple of years ago, the good Lord did not put water on this earth for us to use, he put it here for us to fight over. I think all too often that is what happens. It arouses emotional responses for many, and so having these people together in an atmosphere of sharing ideas and sharing knowledge is a productive thing, and that is what this government has undertaken to do.

I do believe that report is forthcoming in the not-too-distant future, and I look forward to seeing it, as I know the member does. Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): I have some questions for the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Pallister), and they concern three portraits, large portraits that were done by V.A. Long I believe at the same time as the portraits that we see in the committee rooms in this Legislature.

As I understand it, these three portraits, one of which is of the Honourable Colin Inkster, the other is of the Honourable James McKay, a very important Metis leader in Manitoba, these three portraits are of former Speakers of the Executive Council. They are currently in the archives, and I am wondering why they have never been placed in the Legislature itself and whether the minister sees any obstacle to hanging these portraits in a particular area, public area of the Legislative buildings, rather than having them away from public view in the archives.

Is there any obstacle that the minister sees to hanging those portraits of Speakers of the Executive Council? Mr. Pallister: Having just been apprised of this situation, I do apologize to the member, but I am at a loss to give her a response with any clarity, but I will undertake to research her comments. Ms. Friesen: I am glad to see that the minister will research it, and perhaps he might refer to letters that I have written to the Speaker on this. I was, by mistake, writing to the wrong person I think. I just found that out, and I had the opportunity to raise it with the minister today.

I understand that the location of portraits is the responsibility of this par ticular Ministry of Government Services. I do not know what the condition of the portraits is, whether it would require any conservation before they could be hanged, or as the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer) suggested to me, there should be an alternative term for that. What was the one you displayed. Displayed was the one he preferred. It is a technical term, I guess, used in galleries, and I had never thought of it in other ways.

Would the minister tell me what steps he plans to undertake and what kind of time frame he could get back to me with the initial response to those kinds of questions. Mr. Pallister: Well, I understa nd the pat answer is, in due course, but I will endeavour to do it even earlier than in due course for the member opposite. Ms. Friesen: I have a couple of other questions which deal with an issue that the minister and I have spoken on before, and that deals with the School for the Deaf.

I had asked in Question Period, I believe now at least a week and a half ago, for the minister to come back with information on what alternative sites had been examined for the Pan Am Games Committee, and I wonder if the minister has that information now. Mr. Pallister: No, Mr. Chairperson, I do not, but I am endeavouring to get the information for the member as I promised to do. Ms. Friesen: In Estimates, the minister spoke of the long-range plans for the School for the Deaf, and that is for purch ase in part or in whole by interested parties.

I wonder if the minister could give us, again, a time frame or what would be the normal time frame for the posting of tenders for that prospective sale.

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2941 Mr. Pallister: No, I cannot, but again I will undertake to get more detail for the member on this line of questioning that she is undertaking herself. Ms. Friesen: I would also like to know about the implementation committee for the new Alexander Ross School for the deaf, if the minister could tell me how his department is involved in the implementation committee of the renovations to the Alexander Ross School.

I understand that those plans are already underway, and I am looking for information as to how Government Services is going to be working with Education on this. Mr. Pallister: I am told that the process involves the outlining of specifications, and again I think the Minister of Education (Mrs.

Mcintosh) would probably be better qualified, certainly is better qualified than I, to give full answer to the member's question. * (1 500) But I understand that the specifications around the requirements for the facility itself, so that it can do the best job possible, are developed, shared with our department; and then, from that point on, discussion takes place, in this case, with the St. James-Assiniboia School Division. As far as the current status of arrangements, I am told that arr angements are being made in terms of finalizing the details as to the procurement of the property itself.

There is negotiation taking place with my department and with St. James-Assiniboia School Division. That is where things stand at this point for the member. Ms. Friesen: Further to the issue of the Alexander Ross School, I understand that there perhaps are two classes of school buildings in Manitoba, some which, in effect, are owned by the province, perhaps the more recent ones, and others which are owned by the school division, depending on the date of construction. I wonder if the minister could tell us where the Alexander Ross School fits into those categories. Mr.

Pallister: I am not sure of the accuracy of the assumption in terms of the question. I am not sure if it is quite that simple, but in spite of that I think it is probably worthwhile to revisit why this change is being looked at.

As I shared with the member in Estimates, I am told that in terms of the cost-effectiveness, and leaving aside the appropriateness of the surroundings and so on to delivery of the services to the deaf students, leaving that aside, I am told that the costs of maintaining the building itself and so on with its current location are about double or a little in excess of double what is anticipated as being the cost that would be incurred for continuing that same service in the Alexander Ross School.

Now, revisiting the effectiveness of the location, certainly the member knows, because I understand she has been in contact with some of the parents of the students, that there are some problems with the existing facility as well in terms of its ability to provide adequately for all the needs of the students involved, and so I think it is worth repeating or it is worth revisiting the rationale for looking at a change in location. Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): I have a question for the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings). Mr.

Minister, I represent the Osborne constituency, and the south and east portions of Osborne are bound by the Red River. I would like to ask you a question particularly about the area which we call Churchill Drive Park. It covers about three kilometres and borders on the Red River. What people have been experiencing or what we have seen happen over the years is that the erosion problems are eating away more and more of the park itself. I am told that currently we are losing more of the stately elms in the area to erosion than we are to Dutch elm disease.

I wonder if your ministry has ever considered remedial action or actions that could stem the erosion of the Red River in this area. Bon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): I am somewhat familiar with the questions that have been raised around Churchill Drive, not so much from the point of view of environmental concerns that were raised, but more about the structural, the riverbank stability. That aspect is really what the member is asking about.

2942 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 If the question is, does the Department of Environment have a program or an initiative that might be put to good use in stabilizing that area, I think the answer is no, but we have, from time to time, funded small projects on the Seine River, possibly even on the Assiniboine.

I cannot remember whether it has been specific small projects that have been undertaken through the Sustainable Development Fund, but probably not the kind of dollars available even if the whole fund were directed towards that cause to deal with the kind of issue the member is talking about. I had occasion to be on the riverwalk on the Assiniboine last night and I can see that there has been considerable erosion, or appears to be new erosion at least, on the south bank of the Assiniboine not far from where we are at this moment.

So there is likely an ongoing riverbank stability issue that more than likely the city would be expected to deal with. I do not think I can provide a whole lot of help in that particular direction except from the broader question about whether or not resources should be directed that way. Ms. McGifford: To return to the Red River then for a few moments, there is no solution, or the river is going to continue to erode the banks? Is there any program that could be worked out with the city? Mr. Cummings: I did not mean to imply that there was no solution.

I did mean to say, however, that I do not have the answer within the Department of Environment as to how that might be solved. I am not current on the amount of damage that may be potential along the river. I know that historically the city, the province, the federal authorities have co-operated from time to time on riverbank stabilization and riverbank enhancement. I appreciate the member is asking this from the point of view of a constituency issue.

It is no doubt an issue that will have to be dealt with in one form or another because if in fact we have a high degree of riverbank instability, it probably will cause damage in the long run that will have to be dealt with. The government has dealt from time to time with small areas of where erosion has occurred, where there is instability relating to public property, roadways, those sorts of things, but I have to say that I am not conversant enough with the Churchill Drive issue to suggest a solution. I would say, however, that it is more of a-it would begin with the city.

It certainly relates to a number of departments within government where there might be some work that could be examined, but I really cannot give you a definitive answer beyond that. Ms. McGifford: Is the minister's best advice to me then at this time that he believes the kind of work I am asking for would be best initiated by the city? Mr. Cummings: I am not trying to duck the issue by suggesting that the city has some responsibility, but I do believe that they are one of the first areas of responsibility with maintenance of normal riverbank stability within their jurisdiction.

I am indicating in the broader sense that we might look to a solution as to what has happened historically in dealing with these problems. They are very expensive, as the member probably knows better than I. I am not about to stand here and commit what might be the type of resources that could be needed in this situation except to encourage her, and I will give her my commitment that I will review anything I have in that area and provide her with some written comment, as a matter of fact. Ms. McGifford: I would appreciate the written comment.

Actually, I have spoken to a city councillor about the matter, and I am told that there was no money in the city budget for this kind of problem. It would appear, then, that there is not a solution in sight or a way of working together. I wonder if the minister could comment. Mr. Cummi ngs: Basically, I am going to have to acknowledge that, if the problem is of a magnitude that the member is indicating where there is becoming, No. 1, possibly a danger, or No. 2, encroaching on property, there is always the issue of what is public and what is private property and who is going to fit the costs into their budget.

I am suggesting that this is a problem that, if anything is going to be done, it will be done as a result of a co-operative effort very likely in the long run. However, I have to indicate that, generally speaking, there has to be a demonstration by the locally affected people as to what some of the problems are in order to have either their councillor or, as you are in this case, their MLA raise the issue. -

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2943 Because I am not conversant enough with what might be at risk here, I am a little reluctant to put on the record what would be a quick and easy fix. If you are talking major riverbank sta bilization, you are talking millions of dollars and the question will immediately be raised, are we talking riverbank enhancement for the public or for the protection of private land and property? Then the debate proceeds from there . I am more than willing to co-operate with the member in trying to understand the problem better.

If she has had some discussion with the city, then I would be interested to know where the city sees this issue in their list of prioriti es. I would have to say proba bly there is no money set aside in our budget at this point either. I would like to know the depth of the problem. Ms. McGitTord: I agree with the minister; I am sure there is no quick and easy solution. I thank him for his comments. * (15 10) Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): My questions are for the Minister of Environment.

I want to preface the question with just the dilemma that we find ourselves in and in which I think Winnipeggers fmd themselves, Mr. Minister. Essentially, the minister has committed to the House on a number of occasions in a very forthright manner that all of the environmental regulations and requirements in regard to the arena pro ject will be complied with, and I have appreciated his forthright answers when he has been asked that question.

The difficulty in which we find ourselves is that on Monday of this week Spirit of Manitoba and their builder consortium, the Dominion Hunt Company, pres ented a briefing to City Council which I believe was also presented to members of the government. I do not know how many members. I do not know whether it was the whole caucus or whether it was a select group, but in the document that was given to City Council there is a

schedule of sign-offs. Among those sign-otis are things like the following: June 30, interim letter of agreement, Spirit of Manitoba and Dominion Hunt-that is a letter of agre ement in terms of the construction-sign-off on final guaranteed maximum price, June 30, who is involved, Spirit of Manitoba. The government has said to us, again, very clearly, that there will be no pr oceeding on this pro ject without firm commitments and underst andings about costs, design, environmental applications, environmental assessment processes and so forth.

Yet this schedule, which I believe the government has, indicates that tomorrow they are going to sign off the final guaranteed maximum price commitment, which presumably is based upon agreement to the design and the process of constructing the arena. I would like to ask first, is it the minister's understanding that indeed this is the

schedule and that tomorrow there will be a sign-off on the final guaran teed maximum price? Mr. Cummings: The member is setting himself up to ask the questions about where we are in the environmental proce ss. I am not in a position to confirm or deny the

schedule that he has in his hand, but I understand the principles that he is putting forward and the concepts behind that. I am more than willing to discuss questions he might want to raise about what this means, if anything, in terms of the environmental pr ocess. Obviously, because of the way our Environment Act opera tes, and the federal process for that matter, let me reassure him that he and I may differ on how that ultimately rolls out; I suspect we might.

The fact is that any of these types of processes are always subject to environmental regulation and if something comes up that has been unanticipated, for example, The Environment Act is pretty clear and pretty broad in having precedents in those areas.

So what I have said-perhaps I can anticipate his question a little bit-what I have said in the House and what is happening is that we are working with-we being the officials in the department-the proponents, working with the federal authorities to make sure that any appropriate information is brought forward so that, first of all, a screening decision can be made by the federal authori ties and so that our own people can make a recommendation to us on what, if anything, needs to

2944 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 be done regarding any activity that would have an environmental impact on the site. Mr. Sale: I find the answer quite unsatisfactory because it gets us into the Catch 22, and the Catch 22, Mr. Chairperson, is that we are going to proceed with a project prior to there being in place the things which other members of the government have said would be in place, that is, some agreement between the new owners of the arena, who I believe to be the city and the province under a corporate structure not yet even incorporated, so far as I am aware.

I do not know how it is possible to sign off a fmal guaranteed maximum price when the owner of the building does not legally exist, so far as I understand. There is, as far as we can determine-and I would be very glad to know if the minister could tell me otherwise. So far as I can determine, there is no legal entity to own this building, so I do not know how there can be sign-offs in regard to maximum guaranteed prices. I do not understand how there can be an application for an environmental screening when the entity that is going to own the building does not exist.

Who is owning the building and how is that application process proceeding? Mr. Cummings: Well, I think the member is-I understand his approach but I do not know a better way to analyze and to say to some extent that he is mixing apples and oranges in as much as he is asking the question about the ownership and the guarantees of the minister who is responsible for the legal requirements under The Environment Act and whether or not there is an impact on me and how The Environment Act is being imposed on the site.

This is in many ways not unlike other events that unfold where environmental licensing or regulation is impacted. Nothing is final until an application and a package is in front of the regulator, and it is very much the direction that I am encouraging the department to always operate in, and that is that the department is there not to be an obstacle but to provide information and direction, the key being direction, to proponents who are faced with the requirements under The Environment Act or under federal responsibilities as well, because we always are vulnerable.

If you want to debate the larger issue, I think the member probably knows it is there as well as I do, and that is that we are always vulnerable when there is a provincial process and a federal process. You can be faced, if you are not careful, with a provincial approval and nonapproval at the federal level or, I suppose, vice versa. Because I am at the lower end of the authority in terms of hierarchy, I always see it from that end. There is nothing unusual-even if the member were implying it, I am sure he would deny it-there is nothing clandestine about what is happening here.

The city has ability to-I believe the question has been raised publicly about is there contamination on site. That would be one of the serious concerns that could arise out of that.

The proponents have been looking at that, the Department of Environment people have been looking at that, and unless something has changed in the last days or hours, there is nothing that has been brought to my attention that is a concern in that respect. * (1 520) The other aspect is, I believe the member's Leader or one of his caucus brought up a letter that had been copied to the provincial Department of Environment and others regarding the federal screening process and where we were at with that and whether or not we had responded. The federal authorities are doing pretty much the same thing.

They are acquiring the information and the proponents are putting the information forward. The federal authorities are pretty much in the same position as we are. They are not going to provide a final opinion until they have seen all of the information that they request regarding the project and the site. So I guess if the member is concerned that there is something sitting there sort of hanging over this project like a little cloud, I would have to suggest that part of that will be addressed by the competence of the people that they have put in place to help them bring the project along.

Aside from the financials, when I talk about apples and oranges, I mean the financials can be affected if something is wrong environmentally. But if their people are competent in what they are doing and have

June 29, 1995 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2945 assessed what they might be faced with and so on, then hopefully they have got good advice in terms of how that will affect or not affect the moving forward of the pro ject, but timing wise, there have to be decisions made. Mr. Sale: I understand what the minister is saying and I accept that the reality in some proj ects is that it is necessary to proceed on what might be called paral lel tracks, and this is obviously one of those pro jects because it is under enormous time pressur es.

I would say again, also for the record, that I am not implying clandestine activities. I certainly would imply a lot of confusion because I cannot remember anything that has had so many different possible approaches only to be backed off and yet another approach tried. That certainly has contributed to the confusion. The question of who owns the pro ject, for example, was only finally sorted out in June. It should have been sorted out a long time ago because essentially the proponents and current owner fmally reached a different agreement than anyone expected. I understand that probl em.

The difficulty I have is that both the city and the province have given fairly clear indications that they are going to release at least $1 million each during the month of July to forward this proj ect in terms of its design, yet we do not know whether the private sector is going to come through with its fundraising, its tax rulings or its NHL approv al. At the same time, the minister, I think, is indicating that the required package for federal screening has not yet been assembled, is in the process of being assembled I think is what he is indicating.

So far it has not been assembled and forwarded for screening. I believe that is what you have implied. However, I stand to be corrected on that. Maybe I should just ask for clarification if that is the case. Mr. Cummings: The final package, the member is correct. That does not mean, however, that the vast majority of the questions and answers have not already been conveyed. The final conveyance of the formal package-and I appreciate that this gets me into some controversy and processes into some controversy when it appears at the end of the day that all of a sudden there is some ra pidity to decision making.

It has always been my philosophy, as I said earlier about the approach to managing the concerns as they are brought forward, that the more forthright and the more aggressive the proponents are about getting the information as it becomes ava,ilable into the hands of the regulator that the process moves a little bit more smoothly. I did not mean to imply that everything was in somebody's hands yet. The fact is the vast majority of the information has probably gone forward to the federal authorities, from what I know of it, and is in the hands of my staff as well, but not in a formal signed form.

That raises the question, is there something special about the way this is being treated? I suppose that is the next part of it. I can give you numerous examples of where we have treated other pro jects in the same way. Some of them work well. Some of them hit brick walls the last day, too. Mr. Sale: Mr. Chairperson, I am not alleging special treatment. That is not the point of these questions. The point is that we will spend significant amounts of public sector money before we know whether the proj ect is a go or not. So far as I am aware, to date not one red nickel of private sector money has been spent.

They have spent $4.5 million of city and provincial money which was advanced to them for the pur poses of feasibility. My information is they have actually spent an additional million. The question is whether it is $5.5 million or $4.5 million. They have at least spent $4.5 million. They are going to spend another couple during July and early August, and not one nickel of private money is going to be spent until after the closing, if indeed closing takes place. That, I think, is improper from the point of view of pursuing something which is theoretically a joint venture. I will leave that line for now.

I want to go on to a letter that the minister, I think, is aware of. I am going to table this letter, if I may do so,

2946 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 19 95 from the law firm of Kravetsky, Hoeppner and Brennan, dated June 26. The law firm asks the minister, on behalf of Thin Ice and the Point Douglas Residents Committee, whether tlie minister will, under Manitoba regulation

Section 5, 164/88, finally give his opinion in regard to the questions that I know the minister is familiar with, the question in terms of the impact and the question ultimately of whether it will be classed as a I, 2 or 3 development or, indeed, whether it will be classed at all for the purposes of provincial review. I have that question-whether he has responded to this, whether he intends to respond.

I would appreciate knowing the time frame, if he thinks, yes, he is going to respond but he does not know quite yet when, maybe it is going to be a week, maybe it is going to be tomorrow-if he has a sense of the time frame. Thirdly, just so he can do all of these at once-I know the member has a meeting that he wants to go t<r-has there been a decision yet as to whether the federal screening will take precedence and be the only screening or whether there will be a joint process or whether provincial process will take precedence over the federal process?

Those are three areas which I am sure he can answer without a great deal of detail. Mr. Cummings: The letter of request that the member refers to from the Thin Ice representatives and others, I will respond to. In fact, it outlines a number of the questions that we need to deal with. Essentially, as we make decisions on how this will be handled, we will be also generating answers to that letter and will provide appropriate answers. Timing? The member knows as well as I do that the question becomes very much of whether or not there are environmental impacts and whether or not they are going to be dealt with.

We both know what the site looks like. It could be put to better use than it is now, obviously. If there is going to be an arena built in the city, that is a pretty good site, probably, depending on your view of whether you want it on the fringe or whether you want it downtown. That is not an argument I am prepared to get into.

In a general sense, when we look at the question of whether or not this will be classified or whether it will be screened in or out of the federal process, basically we are doing this, well, not officially as a joint process, but we are doing this hand in hand with the federal authorities. * (1 530) The member knows probably that in itself is a little bit tricky because the federal authorities are independent from ours, obviously, but the greater exchange of information there is both ways, the better job we will all make of answering the appropriate questions.

The bottom line is whether or not a decision will be made: (

a) to screen it into the federal process or out; and (

b) whether or not the province sees impacts that are environmental impacts as a result of either conditions on the site or potential new situations on the site. The reason I referenced the site and all the things associated with it, we are also very much into a planning decision. That is one of the reasons we talk about a sustainable development act in this province; it is because there is not necessarily a good mesh between environmental planning and economic decisions. Whenever you have programs of this magnitude, you are faced with some troubling decisions about process.

That is why we are doing the BFI landfill in the manner that we are, to try and have an opportunity for airing some of the questions that really are not environmental or have very little to do with the environment in some respects about policy and planning in the region. I am not trying to dodge the answer. The answer will become clear pretty soon. I do not want to pre· announce anything that I do not yet have all the facts on. I am not going to prejudge where we will go with this.

To be perfectly clear-as one of my colleagues is prone to say-how many emissions to air, water and soil is this arena going to create; what will the impacts be in terms of riverbank? It is not going to be right at the riverbank. Those are questions that would mitigate against it being an environmental issue for the province under the

June 29, 19 95 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2947 provincial act. There are lots of other questions that I know the member is being asked about and others will ask about. Some of those will be planning issues. Some of them might be environmental. We have to make sure we have them all on the plate before we make a decision. Mr. Sale: I thank the minister for his response.

I just would conclude by saying I think the minister is aware that under the federal act and, I believe, under his act as well, the impacts of a project of this nature are not simply the traditional impacts on the natural environment in terms of emissions and riverbank stability and those sorts of questions. The minister references the BFI hearings. That is one good example of the concerns that many of us have about this project. The project guarantees losses in excess of $40 million in the first two years of its operation.

The project has very significant public sector exposures, which the chief commissioner of the city has put on the record very clearly in a long briefing note to City Council. We do not know and the minister I think, to be fair to him, does not know whether the chief tenant of this new arena has any longevity at all. I would put on the record, in conclusion, that this side of the House has never been opposed to small or medium-size or for that matter large business that provides jobs, tax revenues, employment, quality of life to this city and to this province.

We are opposed to public investment in enterprises that we know beforehand are going to lose large amounts of money and which we have no knowledge of whether they will, in the long run, continue to lose large amounts of money. We have made bad decisions in that regard. So has the government of the member opposite made bad decisions. I am not suggesting there have not been bad decisions. That is not a reason to make another bad decision in this case.

I hope he will ensure that the provisions of the act for socioeconomic impacts are complied with, that the business case, which presumably is part of the federal screening requirement -because the federal requirement is very clear that where federal dollars are involved there must be a business case. I hope he will ensure that his officials and the officials of the Department of Finance scrutinize that business case and assure themselves that this is an investment which is at least reasonable on the face of it, even if they cannot say that it is going to be successful.

I think that is part of the environmental impact question the federal government has to study by law when it is going to put $20 million into any project. It does not matter what it is. I hope his department will take that same question with the same breadth they are applying to the BFI issue and raise those concerns for themselves and I hope for the public. My last question is, when does the minister estimate -and I am not asking for a hard date-the screening package might become public? As you know, under the act it has to be tabled, it has to be public and not just a private package. Mr.

Cummings: Because I know that most of the work is ongoing and fairly close to being complete, I would anticipate to see what the member would refer to as a final package quite soon. We will endeavour to make information public as quickly as possible. I am a politician as well as a member of government and I cannot let this discussion, which I appreciate, as a matter of fact, go by without pointing out that when you talk about the economics of this, I mean there is an awful lot of discussion in the media, and speculation and so on, that really creates an unfair situation around this issue.

I do not care whether you like hockey or whether you do not, this proposal has not been treated fairly by the rampant speculation that has gone on, sometimes which we contribute to in this House. You know when you look at-and I am not pointing fingers yet-the issue of the federal dollars and the financial aspects of them becoming involved, the member might also want to consider what is the opportunity for the federal authorities to recoup their dollars. They will probably get every last one of them back. I mean it ain't going to be hard, pardon my language, for them to justify doing something.

That is really why we were disappointed that they were not more generous in their willingness to participate.

2948 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 I understand that governments cannot give away every revenue back to whomever is paying revenue in the interest of creating something from that dollar. That is always a judgment that has to be made, but when we look at the social-economic impacts of this proposal, we can all wax very eloquent and very philosophical and talk about-look, I am a rural person. I am not a downtown Winnipegger, except by immigration four days a week or five.

I live right down close to the downtown area of the city, and I have learned to appreciate the downtown area and the vibrancy and the potential that this part of Winnipeg has. An Honourable Member: A core area resident. Mr. Cummings: My colleague says I am a core area resident. I guess that is true part of the time. The fact is we are selling ourselves short too often in this province and in this city.

We should not be afraid to look at the potential that this city has keeping itself prominent in the face of the continent, particularly in an area where we are well-positioned in all manner of entertainment, recreation and opportunity within this city and other cities across the province and towns. Manitoba is one of the best kept secrets in Canada in many respects, and I know the member is not ridiculing the process or he has not even really given me a hard shot on this.

I appreciate his line of questioning, but I do want to put on the record that as a rural member, I have learned to have much more respect than I had when I was elected to this Chamber nine years ago-it does not seem that long-for the potential and the really vibrant society that we can develop in this province and in this city, and we should not sell ourselves short on what the possibilities are of a project like this. * (1 540) I can tell you that walking through the fair in McCreary last weekend I had two questions raised more than once, and the one issue that was raised several times was the Winnipeg Jets and the arena project, and people said to me, what is happening?

I said, pretty much as I am saying now in a much shorter version, well, things are moving along, I am not sure of all of the details that are being talked about, I am not that close to the negotiations, but you know that the majority of the people in the presence of their neighbours said, we sent in money; we want the Jets kept in Manitoba, and I thought, standing in the middle of the fairgrounds in McCreary and people are saying that they have some pride in their province and a pride in an asset that they have had here, that that was an interesting comment. I do not know how much they sent.

I am sure it was not five bucks. I know it was a lot more than that, and they were prepared to support this city, and they were proud of the asset that was here. We have to proceed carefully with this project, but there is a lot here that we are not taking sufficient pride in. Mr. Sale: I appreciate the member's discovery of the city as those of us who have lived in cities have discovered other parts of the province, and I will not go on at length on that. I agree with the member. It is a vibrant downtown and it is more so because of The Forks development over the last few years.

The point is simply that the city is also well known around the world for the Royal Winnipeg Ballet. I do not think that we would want to invest $20 million a year in losses to keep the ballet going. Those of us who have questioned this project for two years now have not ever said that we did not want a decent entertainment centre and a professional hockey team in this city. That has not ever been said.

What has been said is simply that we want the information on which we can base a reasonable case to understand that this will not so distort the spending priorities of the city and others because of the likelihood of ongoing losses, that we want that information in clear and public terms, and every single estimate that we have made over the two years of this process has proven to be far closer to reality than any of the fair words that have come from the proponents of the process. Your government suggested $10 million was enough to make it fly.

We knew for a good year before that, that this was simply not possible. The simple mathematics of it made it clear that this was not possible. -

June 29, 19 95 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2949 We have asked questions about salary levels, about potential loss levels. None of us wish to see this city impoverished by the loss of a resource, but we do not either wish to see the city saddled with ongoing losses of the scale that we are curr ently experiencing. We do not wish to see prices for tickets at a level that most citizens cannot afford . It is not a question of opposing hockey or opposing business or opposing employment. It is a question of asking for transparency in the pr ocess, so that we might have a decent sense of the viability.

That is what has been lacking throughout this entire process, and every time information finally surfaces, it is much closer to the data that we have been putting forward and increasingly far away from the data on which the original proposals have been made. That has been the problem, a lack of transparency and a lack of solid business case that would stand more than five minutes scru tiny. I hope when the minister sees the business case, it does in fact prove that this is viable. I do not think there are any of us here who want it not to be viable, but, to date, there has been no evidence that it is.

We are looking forward to the alternative being proven, but we are not looking forward to going into the pro ject spending a lot of money, finding ours elves with a hole in the ground and then saying, oh, my goodness, now it is underway, we are going to have to complete it, we just do not have any alternative, son of a gun, we were sandbagged. That is what we feel has been coming. All the deadlines, all the, gee, we have to do it now because there is not time to do it right, have continuously put the public sector more and more at risk and the private sector less and less so.

That is our problem with the pr ocess. Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): My questions are also for the Minister of Environment. They come on behalf of constituents, and, in particular, a group of constituents who, I think, are spearheaded by a person the minister is aware of, Mr. Rod Graham, who is very concerned about junk mail and about the delivery of flyers by Canada Post. The minister may remember that I raised this issue with him the last time in concurr ence.

What I am asking for really is an update, a progress report, on what the minister has been able to achieve in the past several months on this particular issue. The minister, in one of his recent responses, linked the argument of environmental planning and economic decisions, and I think this is what Mr. Graham is trying to get at. He is a tireless individual who goes out night after night with petitions canvassing in many parts of the city. I have been able to table many of those petitions in this Legislature.

I am sure the minister has read them and is aware of the arguments that he is making about the cost in energy, the cost to the environment, the cost of labour involved in producing flyers and nonr ecyclable material that Canada Post then is obliged to deliver, of which he argues 98 percent is landfill bound adding further to the economic and environmental cost to the province and to the country .

I wanted to ask the minister, today, if he had any progress in his correspondence with Canada Post, whether he had any response from them, whether there had been any national meetings or any na tional protoc ols that might be beginning to address this issue. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Chairman, tongue in cheek, I might respond that I have not made any progress, but I do not entirely believe that is a correct characteriza tion.

While I do not have deliverables to talk to the member about, I have increasing confidence that this issue will be dealt with at a higher level and ultimately brought to some conclusion, much more confidence than I had a year ago, frankly. We have had discussions at the national level with the minister of environment, and I have to say that I do not concur with her view of how to deal with junk mail, which would be to mandate it all to be made out of recyclable produc ts. I say that in this sense, that almost all wood fibres are now recyclable as we have increasing capacity of de-inking equipment.

It is no longer as much of a debating point about whether or not you can in fact recycle this material . As the markets unfold around the new Manitoba multimaterial stewardship program, we will begin to

2950 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 19 95 collect larger and larger volumes of this. That does not answer Mr. Graham, I believe, it does not answer his concern about just getting it out of the mailbox. On the other hand, Minister Copps has said that she is more than willing to try and get Canada Post to do more about the ability of people to refuse flyers, nondelivery of flyers and try and reduce it by that method. I have had ongoing discussions with western Canadian representatives of Canada Post at a fairly high level.

First I have to point out that they have always been amicable meetings and they understand our problem, but they have not, until recently, been able to respond in a way that I consider meaningful or useful. My most recent meeting was-I think we left on a more productive note, and I am waiting for a response. The concern that Canada Post is expressing-and this breaks down to whether or not the flyers will be able to in some way contribute financially to our multimaterial recycling program which I think is most important. I said it does not answer directly Mr.

Graham's problem, but at least if we had the recycling capability and those materials are contributing to it, at least the environmental impacts are going to be reduced because the material will be going back into appropriate usage rather than being landfilled. * (1 550) Canada Post has always said that there is no way that-first of all, they would not acknowledge to a tax. I am not asking them to acknowledge a tax. I am not asking them to acknowledge a stewardship responsibility. Their argument has always been that they never actually take title to the material.

They are providing a service and they do not have title to the material. I think I am using the wrong phraseology, but the member understands what I am getting at. In our most recent discussion I challenged Canada Post to provide me with their suggestion how administratively they could simply make sure that th�I do not care if we get every last piece, but we need the majority of the pieces to provide information so that we could require some contribution to the fund. It does not have to be collected by Canada Post and remitted to us. I have made some suggestions.

One of the suggestions I have made is perhaps they should require that anyone that they are going to carry for is able to demonstrate that they are contributing to the Manitoba Product Stewardship program if they are asking to be delivered in this province. Now that would only be for those products that are being delivered here in bulk. You have another problem if it is going to come through Ontario. The next question will be, does that mean they will all go to Ontario to mail to avoid paying a fee?

The other way of approaching that, of course, is to have a recognizable symbol that can be incorporated into that type of material that they are in fact contributing and use some public persuasion. My answer is, have I got it deliverable? No. Am I making progress? I believe so. Ms. Friesen: Could the minister elaborate a little more on the multimaterial recycling project and the opportunities it may or may not offer for de-inking in Manitoba?

What will be the process if the minister argues that this is becoming more of a-I cannot remember the words he used, but more of a theoretical problem because essentially large amounts of material are made of wood pulp and can be recycled but it required de-inking, so what will be the process for that in a Manitoba context? Mr.

Cummings: Unless something has eluded me, I believe there will be de-inking capacity at Pine Falls, and I would acknowledge that we were shipping newsprint and other recyclable fibres out of this province, have been and are increasingly shipping them out, but that will change as Pine Falls modernizes and acquires de-inking capacity. They will need the paper. Manitobans do not produce enough waste paper to supply the Pine Falls plant if it were to get all that it needs.

Their business plan, and I am looking around for my colleagues to help me out on this, but as I recall their business plan, they believe that they will be backhauling recyclable paper out of the States where they are hauling some of the other products. (Mr. Mike Radcliff e, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

June 29, 19 95 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 295 1 To go right back to the very issue is that we are going to be funding the Manitoba Product Stewardship program by a portion of the PST that is established against newsprint, the subscription newsprint. That is a number that we can identify, and that money is already within government and can be redirected to this program, but what is really making this program work, and I think will continue to push it along, is the very high value of recyclables right now.

Newsprint is selling for, I am told, $14 0 a tonne, plus if you take the levy that the Manitoba Product Stewardship program will be able to top that up with, you can see very quickly that it could become a profitable venture for those who are able to collect large volumes of it. The fact is that the $5 million that we get from the beverage container industry, plus modest other amounts, will probably make this program very feasible given the direction the markets are going. Now we have the ability to get revenues from other sources.

We are still getting good feedback from the packaging industry, and we are hopeful that as the program matures and the capability to collect increases, box board and those other materials will be obviously included, and we will be looking to get some contribution. We are not looking for a penny a box for corn flakes or things of that nature. What we would be more happy with is some acknowledgement by the industry that is wholesaling that product into the province, that they would provide assistance with some bulk figure that is reflective of the tonnage that they are adding.

Frankly, it is a very small amount in the overall scheme of things, as is the two cents. I keep going back to the two cents because, in fact, two cents is cheaper in Manitoba to fund a recycling program than any other program in Canada save Newfoundland, I think, where they charge one cent, but Newfoundland has no program. They only have a litter program. A return-to-depot program on average costs three and a half to four cents per container just to fund the running of the program.

That has got nothing to do with the deposit that is returned to the consumer, so that four and a half cents that is funded out of the unreturned recyclables is really where it comes from. So we believe we are breaking new ground. There is always a risk when you do that, but the potential right now as soon as the city comes on stream, and requests for proposals have been received already as I under stand it, is that we could have a much greater volume which will enhance our prices and will, in fact, help Abitibi. Ms.

Friesen: I thank the minister for that, and I would like to follow up on the Pine Falls business plan, and that would be with the minister of-I am looking for the name of the minister with whom I should follow up the Pine Falls business plan, because, obviously, the argument for a long time has been about the Pine Falls plant, that there is a likelihood for a long time of excess capacity, and how do you balance that off in an environmental sense between the road hauling or rail hauling or whatever is going to be possible for the import of material?

The minister said he did not have the business plan, and I assume it is not his department. So I am looking for whom I should follow up with on that. Mr. Cummings: I can address most of that. If my memory is correct, the recycling capacity is included in their upgrade. The member raises the additional question of: Is there an overcapacity? I can certainly address that. The point is that there is not an over capacity, but there has to be a managed capacity in terms of where they are harvesting from and what the areas are that they are drawing from.

Perhaps this is not an argument the member and I should get into, but this has always been a sore point with me, that when previous administrations said they were going to eliminate logging in Atikaki [interjection] Well, that is part of the question and I know that you did not raise it, but it immediately comes into question when Atikaki was removed from cutting, the cutting became available in the Porcupine and the other ranges of park areas out in the north and the west side of the province. I am not advocating reopening Atikaki, but

2952 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 29, 1995 I am advocating that Pine Falls has one of the better reforestation programs. *

(1600) I had the opportunity to look at some of the burned areas as opposed to some of the cut areas, and from a point of view of forestry, we would be happier with a quicker regrowth period. But my understanding of the forest licensing process and the fact that we have not had any-right now as evidenced by where the forest fires are, we are not suffering any additional loss of harvestable forest in that part of the province, that we have that in balance and we were able to assure them during the forest licensing process of sufficient forest available for cutting on a sustainable basis. Ms.

Friesen: No, that was not my point at all. I was not talking about logging. I was raising the issue that the minister himself raised earlier, and that was the excess capacity or the limited supply of materials within Manitoba for the de-inking aspect of the business plan. The minister suggested that to make it economic the materials have to be imported, and he suggested they were going to be imported from the United States or other locations.

So my concern was, how do you balance that off, and has that been balanced off in the business plan with the environmental effects of the movement of that material from the United States, either by road or by rail? I wondered which was going to be invoked. We are getting into details of the Pine Falls business plan, which, if there is another minister that is more appropriate, I would be happy to do that.

But I am interested in the de-inking aspect because it has been talked about for a long time, and one of the crucial issues has been the very one that the minister raised-that there is not enough supply at the moment in Manitoba to make it economic. Mr. Cummings: The economic discussion has always been, where should the de-inking plants be located? You could argue that the bes

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-1-28
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 1st hansardpdf 28.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	897863b2f675fcfdbba13ef3de3c73bc29ac7b26

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