Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 46 (39th Legislature, 3rd Session)

39-3-46

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LXI No. 46 - 1:30 p.m., Monday, May 25, 2009 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BLAIKIE, Bill, Hon. Elmwood N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon.

Concordia N.D.P. DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P.

MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P.

STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas N.D.P. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

2263 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, May 25, 2009 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee t o f r a m e s u c h l a w s a s may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom, know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen. MATTER OF PRIVILEGE Mr.

Gerald Hawranik (Offi cial Opposition House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker, on a matter of privilege. Mr. Speaker: On a matter of privilege. Mr. Hawranik: Yes, I rise on a matter of privilege today, and I'd like to put a few facts on the record before I start justifying the privilege both in terms of expediency and in terms of whether or not it meets a prima facie case, as we know the two tests to be. First of all, Mr. Speaker, I refer to Hansard's unedited oral questions on May 19, 2009, at page 2, where the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Chomiak), in response to the member from Steinbach in oral questions indicated on the unedited version of Hansard on that date, and I'd like to quote from it. It said: ". . . is like to say that a porcupine doesn't have pines–doesn't have quills." Secondly, Mr.

Speaker, I'd refer to the version of Hansard that was, in fact, distributed in the House on May 20, Wednesday, May 20, for the Tuesday May 19 oral questions, and on page 2142 the version that is printed and was distributed in this House indicates, and I quote: ". . . is like to say that a porcupine doesn't have quills." So there's a complete–not a complete difference, but there are a few words that are different between the unedited version of Hansard and, of course, the edited version of Hansard.

I understand and I'm sure all members in the House understand that the unedited version of Hansard is proofread and after proofreading it did change from what we can see in the version that was actually distributed in the House, and that was the official distributed version, Mr. Speaker, that came to all members in this Chamber, where pines was left out and it only printed what the minister said when he corrected himself. Again, I refer to another piece of evidence, another fact, Mr.

Speaker, that on May 22 of this year, just on Friday, last Friday, Tom Brodbeck in the Winnipeg Sun indicated, he highlighted the difference, differences between the two versions and implied, he implied in the

article that Hansard had a preferential policy toward comments made by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak). The final piece of facts, Mr. Speaker–and we're not indicating it at this point, and I'm not indicating at this point that that's what, in fact, took place. I'm just indicating what was said in the article. And the other piece of information is that I note, we noticed, at least I'm informed, that there has been a recent change to the Web site at Hansard to actually reflect what actually was said in the unedited version of Hansard. So there has been a correction that has taken place. Now, Mr.

Speaker, you're aware that, of course, there are two tests that have to be met to have a matter of privilege being made and accepted, and not–those two tests are: No. 1 is, it's whether the matter being raised is raised at the earliest opportunity, and, secondly, whether a prima facie case of privilege actually can be made. The first test, Mr. Speaker, is the matter being raised at the earliest opportunity?

I would indicate that it would be, because we didn't have–we did have the uned-edited version and we did have the edited version, but we didn't have any third party support for the fact that–we all knew in this House what the minister had said. The minister knows what he had said. However, we didn't have any third party support, and we did get that when we did get the news

article on May 22, on Friday, as well as the change to Hansard, to the Web site on Hansard, and I suspect that, likely, there will be an official version coming forward in the House to change that as well. So until I get that third party support–and there, really, I couldn't have made the matter of privilege before today. So I would submit, in fact, that the first test, in fact, has been met.

2264 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 The second test, Mr. Speaker, is whether the prima facie case of privilege can be made, and a matter of privilege is a very serious matter because a breach of privilege infringes and limits our ability as MLAs to effectively perform as members of the opposition. And I refer to Beauchesne's Citation 24 which defines parliamentary privilege as the sum of rights enjoyed in the House collectively and by the members of the House individually without which they could not discharge their functions or duties. Marleau and Montpetit in House of Commons practice and procedure,

chapter 3, lists individual privileges of members as including freedom from obstruction, freedom of interference, freedom from intimidation and freedom from molestation. The ability, Mr. Speaker, of members to perform their parliamentary duties is founded on information being brought to this House which is accurate and can be relied on for debate and for questions and for communications to constituents and, of course, communications in this Chamber, whether it be in bills debate or whether it be in questions and answers in question period. Manitobans expect that Hansard is accurate.

They expect Hansard to reflect verbatim what is said by members who are recognized to speak. Any changes to the verbatim transcript could change the meaning of a sentence or even an entire speech. As politicians, we rely on words to communicate to constituents, to communicate in this Chamber, and one word can change th e approaches, even in question period, whether that it changes the approach or a question in question period. It also can change an answer as well in response to any question. And I'm not suggesting, Mr.

Speaker, in any way that this one word, this particular word misspoken by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Chomiak), changed our entire approach to questions or even his entire approach to answers, but words, and can, depending on their context, can do so. We are concerned, Mr. Speaker, that if we know this happened once, it may have happened other times without anyone's notice. We're also not at all suggesting that Hansard staff are in any way at fault.

We're instead suggesting that the matter should be referred to a legislative committee to investigate this matter and provide direction from this Legislature and from this committee to Hansard with respect to the policy that should be followed in the future in the Legislature. So, with that, Mr. Speaker, I move that this matter be moved to be considered by the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs and then reported back to this House. * (13:40) Mr. Speaker: On the matter of privilege raised with the–by the honourable Official Opposition House Leader, I would like to deal with the matter immediately.

For information of members of the House, Hansard is not the–for the information of members, the Hansard is not the official record of the House. The Votes and Proceedings ar e the official record of the House. Hansard is the verbatim of what members say, but is not the–but it is not the official record. But, I want to share with the House that this was raised to my attention on Thursday, and I met with the Clerk, and I sought fu rther information from the manager of Hansard, and this is by no means the fault of anyone that's working in Hansard.

I was informed that that was always–the past practice was to help clean up statements made, and also if members make a false start or repeat, when addressing the Chair as Mr. Speaker, I'd like to raise this issue, and Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker. So I sent a letter to all the House leaders on Friday, and I had a meeting with the Hansard manager and the Clerk, and instructions are that the records from now on in Hansard w i l l b e v e r b a t i m .

That means that whatever you say will be printed the way you say it, and if it comes out differently or not the way you intended, it still will come out the way you said it. So, Hansard, in the future, from now on, will be word for word. So, the issu e that you have raised, I have already dealt with it, and I've already taken care of it, and I don't think we will see any repeats of what you're referring to. So I think–and also for the advisement of members that are raising, raising the issues, this would have been a matter of order, not a matter of privilege.

But, the issue that you raised has been addressed, and I'm sure that we will, we will not see that happen again. So whatever you say in the House, be careful, because every word will be printed verbatim, and that's the way it should be. So that's the way it, it's going to be from now on. So, that–hopefully, that should take care of the matter of privilege. Okay?

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2265 Okay, routine proceedings, introduction of bills. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 229–The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act (Justice for Victims of Serious Automobile Accidents) Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): I move, seconded by the Member for Arthu r-Virden (Mr. Maguire), that the Bill No. 229, The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, and (Justice, Justice for Victims of Serious Automobile Accidents); Loi modifiant à

Loi sur la Société d'assurance publique du Manitoba (justice pour les victimes du accidents du automobile graves), be now read a first time. Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Member for Emerson, seconded by the honourable Member for Arthur-Virden, that Bill No. 229, The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Amendment Act (Justice for Victims of Serious Automobile Accidents), be now read a first time. Mr. Graydon: This bill makes two significant amendments to The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act. As to the benefits that the corporation will allow for the victims of automobile accidents,

section 131 is an amendment to provide for reimbursement of personal assistance expenses including attendants' care to allow victims to function and contribute to the society or to a labour market; and

section 138 is amended to allow victims to receive assistance for any measures that facilitate their functioning and contributing to society or to the labour market after rehabilitation. The amendments are retroactive to January 1, 2004, and require the corporation to review its files and compensate existing claimants for any additional amounts they have spent since then that are now covered as a result of the amendments to this act. And, Mr.

Speaker, I would suggest that it's high time that we've–we take care of the individuals who have been catastrophically injured and are actually making a very strong attempt to become productive in today's society, and this bill will further facilitate that. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Petitions. PETITIONS Seven Oaks Hospital–Emergency Services Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

The background to the petition is as follows: The current Premier (M r. Doer) and the NDP government are reducing emergency services at the Seven Oaks Hospital. On October 6, 1995, the NDP introduced a matter of urgent public importance that stated that, quote, "the ordinary business of the House to be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely the threat to the health-care system posed by this government's plans to limit emergency services to the city of Winnipeg community hospitals." End of quote.

On December 6, 1995, when the then-PC government suggested it was going to reduce emergency services at the Seven Oaks Hospital, the NDP leader then asked Premier Gary Filmon to, quote, "reverse the horrible decisions of his government and his Minister of Health and reopen community-based emergency wards." End of quote.

The NDP gave Manitobans the impression that they supported Seven Oaks Hospital having full emergency services seven days a week, 24 hours a day We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Premier of Manitoba consider how important it is to have the Seven Oaks Hospital provide full emergency services seven days a week, 24 hours a day. This is signed by A. Martin, D. Cometa and J. Jaramilla and many, many other fine Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Neepawa, Gladstone, Ste.

Rose, McCreary– Family Doctors Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition.

2266 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 Access to family doctors is vital to good primary health care. Patients depend on their family doctors for many things, including their routine health-care needs, preventative care and referrals for diagnostic tests and appointments with specialists. Family doctors in Neepawa, Gladstone and Ste. Rose are unable to accept new patients. The nearby community of McCreary has not had a doctor available to take patients in months.

Without a family doctor, residents of this large geographical area have no option but to look for a family doctor in communities as far away as Brandon and Winnipeg. Residents of these communities are suffering because of the provincial government's continuing failure to effectively addres s the shortage of doctors in rural Manitoba. We petition this Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) to consider prioritizing the needs of these communities by ensuring they have access to a family doctor.

To urge the Minister of Health to consider promptly increasing the use of nurse practitioners in these communities in order to improve access to quality health care. This petition is signed by Collette Gulas, Lucille Lecunff and Bernice Drysdale and many, many other fine Manitobans. Long-Term Care Facilities–Morden and Winkler Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition.

Many seniors from the Morden and Winkler area are currently patients in Boundary Trails Health Centre while they wait for placement in local personal care homes. There are presently no beds available for these patients in Salem Home and Tabor Home. To make more beds in the hospital available, the regional health authority is planning to move these patients to personal care homes in outlying regions. These patients have lived, worked and raised their families in this area for most of their lives.

They receive care and support from their family and friends who live in the community, and they will lose this support if they are forced to move to distant communities. These seniors and their families should not have to bear the consequences of the provincial government's failure to en sure there are adequate personal care home beds in the region. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) to ensure that patients who are awaiting placement in a personal care home are not moved to distant communities.

To urge the Minister of Health to consider working with the RHA and the community to speed construction and expansion of long-term care facilities in the region. This is signed by Beverley Bestland, M. Penner, Michelle Wiebe and many, many others. * (13:50) Traffic Signal Installation–PTH 15 and Highway 206 Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: In August 2008 the Minister of Transportation (Mr.

Lemieux) stated that traffic volumes at the intersection of PTH 15 and Highway 206 in Dugald exceeded those needed to warrant the installation of traffic lights. Every school day, up to a thousand students travel through this intersection in Dugald where the lack of traffic signals puts their safety at risk. Thousands of vehicles travel daily through this intersection in Dugald where the lack of traffic signals puts at risk the safety of these citizens. In 2008, there was a 300 percent increase in accidents at this intersection.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation consider the immediate installation of traffic signals at the intersection of PTH 15 and Highway No. 206 in Dugald.

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2267 To request that the Minister of Transportation recognize the value of the lives and well-being of the students and citizens of Manitoba. Signed by Chuck Reynolds, Darlene Moyse, Doug Moyse and many, many other Manitobans. Education Funding Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: Historically, the Province of Manitoba has received funding for educati on by the assessment of property that generates taxes.

This unfair tax is only applied to selected property owners in certain areas and confines. Property-based school tax is becoming an ever-increasing burden without acknowledging the owner's income or owner's ability to pay. The provincial sales tax was instituted for the purpose of funding education. However, monies generated by this tax are being placed in general revenue. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth (Mr. Bjornson) consider removing education funding by school tax or education levies from all property in Manitoba.

And to request that the Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth consider finding a more equitable method of funding education, such as general revenue, following the constitutional funding of education by the Province of Manitoba. This petition is signed by Margit Ponit–Poncik, Don Lischka and Jim Berry, and many, many other Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Committee reports; tabling of reports; ministerial statements. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us, we have Alex Berkowitz who is the guest of the honourable minister for Water Stewardship. And also in the public gallery we have from Van Welleghem School 73 grade 4 students under the direction of Ms. Brigitte LaCasse. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. McFadyen). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today. Oral questions. ORAL QUESTIONS Photo Radar Tickets Refunds Mr.

Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, as all Manitobans know, thousands of people in this province were wrongly ticketed by the NDP photo radar–under the NDP photo radar fiasco. Mr. Speaker, some had their tickets thrown out by the court. Thousands of others paid their tickets in order to keep the NDP collection agencies at bay. Mr. Speaker, some members opposite may think that $150 or $200 is not a large sum of money, but for many Manitobans, particularly in this recession, it can make a significant difference. Mr.

Speaker, the government has said that they can't find the resources to provide for these just refunds to Manitobans, but just two years ago, in the lead-up to the election, they mailed out $60-million worth of MPI rebates to Manitobans leading into an election campaign. Why, if they can find $60 million going into an election campaign, can they not find one-sixth of that amount to do right by these Manitobans that have been wronged by this government. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Public Utilities Board ordered a rebate.

I want to point out that this continues to make Manitoba Public Insurance the cheapest insurance in North America. We're very proud of that, and we're very proud that the investment dollars primarily stay in the province of Manitoba, as opposed to the old days when those dollars went to Switzerland and New York and other foreign markets. Mr. Speaker, the decision of the Public Utilities Board is separate from the government. The timing of the cheques being mailed is separate from the government.

The only issue of timing that we controlled was the election, and even then we didn't know exactly when we would call the election in 2007, but I want to thank the member for being so

2268 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 positive about a great Crow n corporation that gives benefit to Manitobans every day, including in 2007. Support for Proposed Motion Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): They have never once said, in connection with photo rada r, that the reason they can't issue the refunds is because they weren't ordered to. They've said it's because it's too much work or too much money, Mr. Speaker.

In fact, what the Public Utilities Board did is not at all relevant when you consider that the courts in this case were the ones who said that these tickets should never have been issued in the first place. Now we have thousands of Manitobans who paid significant sums of money for their families, and we hear the government saying that they are not going to get refunds even though the money should never have been collected. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) has put a motion. It appears on the Order Paper today calling on the government to reconsider its position.

We are hearing from Manitobans, and particularly people in Winnipeg from all walks of life, who are calling on their MLAs to vote in favour of their constituents. Will the Premier confirm today that he'll allow his members, many of whom have constituents who are asking for the right thing to be done, will he allow them the opportunity to vote with their constituents on this very fair and balanced resolution? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Manitobans were asking me over the weekend, where's that cellular phone bill that you people brought in, the one with text messaging.

I said, oh, we introduced it in the House in December. Some other members were asking–just an urban activist was asking me this weekend about where's that tax increment financing bill, and I looked back an d it was introduced a year ago, and then it was introduced in December. A firefighter asked me the other day, where is that– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: –where is that fire fighter legislation? I said, well, I think, it was introduced early April. I hope some day it will go to– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order. Order. Order. Mr.

Doer: So, perhaps, that will go to public hearings at some point and be determined by the House. There's another issue dealing with logging in provincial parks. Somebody asked me this weekend, where's that? I said, well, we introduced it in early April. So I would just like to point out, there's legislation that was introd uced a year ago. There's legislation that was introduced in December. There's legislation that was introduced in April. There's legislation that was brought in, in May, Mr. Speaker. Surely to goodness, the public will have a right to speak on it in public hearings.

And, yes, we will deal with the matter raised by the member opposite, but we will deal with all issues confronting this Legislature. We're not a one-trick pony on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, it sounds as though the Premier had a far more interesting weekend than most of the members of the House, some of the conversations that, obviously, spontaneously, Manitobans approaching him from all walks of life on these issues. Mr. Speaker, the fact is that we were calling for a return of the Legislature in early January. They waited till the end of March.

We were ready in January to debate these bills. We've been ready for months. They delayed till the end of March. They waited until the last minute to bring in their bill to cancel debt repayments, cancel their minimum payment on the credit card bill. If these bills were priorities for them, they had months to introduce them and they could have moved them through the process by now. The fact is, Mr.

Speaker, their top priorities are made very clear by the order in which they're doing things: one is to cancel their minimum payment on the credit card bill; the other is to hang on to photo radar money that never should have been collected in the first place. Will he give us a straight answer? Will he give them a free vote on the resolution? * (14:00) Mr. Doer: I want to point out that our top priority is the economy, which is the top priority of Canadians and is a top priority of Manitobans.

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2269 And I did have a very good weekend. I want to thank the member for recognizing that. I'm sorry he didn't have a more enjoyable weekend, and I also didn't have any questions on the BITSA bill. I don't know why, Mr. Speaker. But the Conference Board just came out today, Mr. Speaker, still moving forward despite negative headwinds, dealing with the Manitoba economy. They talked about the surplus here in Manitoba, unlike other provinces. They talked about– [interjection] Well, you know, every bank and every independent body has the same assessment as we do.

The Conference Board of Canada, in this latest report that's just been made public, says that the GDP in Manitoba–now, hold on–is going to be the highest in 2009 of any province in Canada. There's going to be– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Doer: There's going to be–there's going to be– there's going to be four provinces in Canada that will have a positive GDP in 2009: New Brunswick at .5, Nova Scotia at .4, our good friends in Saskatchewan at .3 and Manitoba will have 1 percent. Many other provinces will have a negative GDP, and that's what we get up every day thinking about, the economy.

Remember the old saying: It's the economy, stupid. We get that, Mr. Speaker. Photo Radar Tickets Support for Proposed Motion Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, I think those GDP projections must have included photo radar revenue. Early last week, the Minister of Justice indicated that he had talked to the mayor of Winnipeg, and the mayor had not given him permission to refund the money from tickets collected that the courts said should never have been issued.

A day later, we learned that the mayor, in fact, not only had never said such a thing; he said he never would say such a thing because the City holds no such power over the Province. Will the Minister of Justice simply admit today that he was not being a friend of the truth when he laid blame for photo radar at the feet of the mayor, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, I indicated last week when I was talking about the conditions in the House that I had, in fact, stated some facts that were– actually, when I looked at the Hansard, it was true that it was Councillor Steeves who had made that statement, and corrected that. Now, having said that, Mr. Speaker, I want to make it very clear, we delegate the authority to photo radar to the City of Winnipeg. They use it in three different circumstances in which they determine and the police determine. We do not have determination over that.

Because of the difficulties that occurred, the Crown felt that the evidence provided would not support a conviction. They felt, ethically, they wouldn't go forward, the convictions going forward, Mr. Speaker, and in terms of law, the cases that had already been dealt with in terms of law, had already been dealt with. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, in fact, the minister is correct. On Thursday, he did throw the court into Councillor Steeves' bailiwick saying that the councillor had said that any money refunded would have to come out of the policing budget.

But on Thursday afternoon, that very same city councillor was interviewed by a local radio station, and when asked whether any refunded money would have to come from the policing budget, he responded by saying, I don't know, I would have to take a look at it. Mr. Speaker, instead of trying to pass the buck and confuse the record, why doesn't the minister just commit to refunding the money that the court said should never been levied through these tickets? Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I was quoting from a letter that mayor–that Councillor Steeves had sent to us, wherein he specifically said that, and so– An Honourable Member: In writing. Mr. Chomiak: –in writing. So they can speak for themselves, Mr. Speaker. I, again, want to reiterate, the Province and this Legislature and all members, except for the Member for River Heights (Mr. Gerr ard), voted for this. The Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik) wanted us to expand it. Photo radar only applies in the city of Winnipeg as designated by the police. Signage is taken care of by the City of Winnipeg, Mr. Speaker.

We've clarified the regulations with respect to signage to try to clear it up, and if we have to do more in order to do that, we will, and I clarified what the legal

2270 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 situation is, and I did indicate on Thursday that I had misspoke. It was Councillor Steeves that had said that specifically to us in the letter mailed to us on May 7. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, some time before the end of this session, each member of the NDP party will have an opportunity to stand up and be counted, whether or not they think the money that the court said should never have been taken, whether or not they think that's right and just. Today I received a copy of an e-mail that was sent to the Member for Southdale (Ms.

Selby) from a constituent of hers asking her to vote yes for the refunds because he received a ticket driving the normal speed limit in a construction zone where there were no construction workers. Will this government allow for a free vote on the resolution and allow the Member for Southdale and all m em bers on t ha t sid e t o d o what th e y were sent here to do and vote for the wishes of their constituents, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, views have changed a lot when the member asked me–the first time he asked me this question, he said, will you refund all 60,000 tickets.

The next day he said, will you refund those tickets where people were driving within the legal speed limit within construction zones. I clarified for the member that the delegated authority, the City of Winnipeg, deals with construction zones and signage. We've clarified that, Mr. Speaker. I also was frank with the media on the first day, saying we had these concerns, and the second day, saying it is a concern with respect to those that may or may not have been technically–and I think I used the word "inadvertent." In law, I was advised that, in fact, in law all of those tickets were legal.

We had a very difficult decision to make. We weighed the pros and the cons, but in the face of the rule of law and in the face of dealing with issues on this– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Chomiak: –we felt that was the correct decision. Fiscal Year Economic Statement Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, this is May 25th. Fiscal year end is March 31st. That's almost two months past. The Finance Minister must have some idea as to what the year-end financials look like. We know that revenues are much lower in the last quarter, and we know that the government continues to spend like there's no tomorrow.

How is the Finance Minister going to fudge the numbers to show a balanced statement and protect his salary? Is he going to borrow more money like he's wont to do, or is he going to transfer more from the Fiscal Stabilization Fund? Will he tell us today what he's going to do to give us that balance? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister is representing Manitoba–well, I might add–at the Finance ministers' meeting being convened–the member opposite may not be aware of it–in Ottawa.

I would say that the draw from the rainy day fund that was projected in the budget for the last three years, the draw has been less than was projected. In fact, a surplus was deposited in the rainy day fund. We've gone from $226 million when we came into office to over $800 million up until the budget of this year. There have been additional expenditures in this fiscal year. The H1N1 flu has required additional expenditures. Obviously, the members opposite would be aware that the flooding situation has created more expenditures, and we'll have to manage that. Mr. Borotsik: Actually, Mr.

Speaker, there was a larger draw from the Fiscal Stabilization Fund to balance the previous budget . I assume that there's going to be a larger draw from the fiscal stabilization, as the Premier said there's more expenditures that they have to manage. Well, why doesn't the Premier and the Finance Minister come clean with Manitobans? Why don't they make an economic statement in the House today, Mr. Speaker, so that we know, as Manitobans, where we stand financially? We know that they have less revenue. We know they have more expenses, and we know they're not going to balance their budget.

Why is it they can't come clean and tell us that it's not going be a balanced statement and that they should lose their salaries, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Doer: The projected budget surplus in the '08-09 year is a couple of hundred million, if not $300 million, in the GAAP financial budgeting

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2271 system required by the Auditor General. This year, it's projected to be $45 million. I would also point out that there's a chart in the budget from Stats Canada that points out the spending level for every province. B.C. was lowest. Manitoba, on a per capita basis, was second lowest in this decade so we take our challenges on financing, both on the revenue and expenditure side, very seriously. Second lowest isn't perfect in Canada, but we certainly believe it indicates a desire to be prudent with the finances of Manitobans in this province, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Borotsik: Mr. Speaker, prudence, financial prudence, doesn't mean borrowing excessive money. Financial prudence doesn't mean spending excessively, and prudence doesn't mean draining a Fiscal Stabilization Fund. Will the Premier stand today and tell us that we will have an economic statement before this House rises? Tell us exactly what the financials are for this past fiscal year and what's happening currently in this fiscal year, Mr. Speaker, because they can't depend on the federal government to continue to fund them with equalization payments.

Will he give us an economic statement before the House rises? * (14:10) Mr. Doer: The member opposite, in his rambling statement makes–and perhaps a question–talks about the past fiscal year. The past fiscal year will be– under all the rules of GAAP, all the rules of GAAP– will be balanced, Mr. Speaker, and be in a significant surplus. Mr. Speaker, on the issue of draining the rainy day fund, when we came into office they had put all this money in for the sale of the telephone system and then they drained it down to 226.

We took it up to over $800 million a year, or $800 million, to deal with the situation because we don't want to fire nurses like they did in the '90s. We don't want to fire instructors in the community colleges. We don't want to cut back grants. We want to continue to build a knowledge economy, and we're going to continue to do it in a very prudent way. Our spending levels in this decade, according to Stats Canada, are the second lowest in Canada on a per capita basis. We need no lectures from the members opposite, Mr. Speaker. Manitoba Hydro Government Use of Revenue Mr.

Cliff Cullen (Turtle Mountain): Under this government's watch, the Province's finances are certainly in disarray. Bill 30 indicates the government will not even meet its minimum credit card payment. This is a sign of a desperate government. Mr. Speaker, Manitobans will remember back to 2002 when this government raided Manitoba Hydro to the tune of $203 million just to balance the books that year. Mr. Speaker, will the government be resorting to the same tactics to balance the book this year? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, again on behalf of the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger), the biggest raid that ever took place in the history of Manitoba was the raid on the Manitoba Telephone System that was raided from the people of this province after they had promised to keep it in the '95 election campaign. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order. Order. Order. The honourable First Minister. Mr. Doer: And it is interesting, when you look at the affordability charts prov ided in the province of Saskatchewan, in their budget in the province of Saskatchewan, an area where we were lower than Saskatchewan 10 years ago on cost to consumers was telephones.

An area where we're higher today because of their raiding is in the telephone systems between Saskatchewan and Ma nitoba after they sold the Crown corporation and Saskatchewan maintains theirs, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Cullen: Well, Mr. Speaker, the fact is since this government's raid of 2002, hydro rates have increased four times. As a result, rates have increased 16 percent since that $203-million raid. Manitobans have every right to be nervous about this government's intention when they get themselves involved with Manitoba Hydro activities. Mr.

Speaker, we know it's an NDP decision to squander $640 million on a west-side line. Will it be an NDP decision to raid Manitoba Hydro to balance their books? Mr. Doer: I find it–you know, it's interesting for a member that allegedly represents a rural community to not recall the fact that they used to pay higher

2272 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 rates in rural Manitoba. They used to pay higher rates in northern Manitoba than they did behind the Perimeter Highway. What did the rural members under the Conservative government for 11 years do about equalizing hydro rates in rural Manitoba? They swaggered around. They did nothing. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: We've equalized hydro rates for rural and northern residents. It cost Hydro $19 million a year, and they opposed it. We stood up with rural residents in equalizing the rates and stood up with northerners as well, Mr.

Speaker. Mr. Cullen: Well, Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the Premier about his history of having the hand in the piggybank over there at Manitoba Hydro. Here are the facts, Mr. Speaker. This government raided Manitoba Hydro to the tune of $203 million. The NDP have also doubled water rental fees to the tune of $124 million a year. They've also doubled the debt guarantee fee to Manitoba Hydro to $73 million a year. Now, under Bill 30, the NDP can't even make their minimum credit card payment. Mr. Speaker, the NDP has used Manitoba Hydro to give the appearance of a balanced budget under their

summary accounting. Will the NDP be using cash from Manitoba Hydro to balance cash flow this year? Mr. Doer: And it was a Conservative government that introduced the water power rental rates in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order. Let's have a little decorum. Order. The honourable First Minister has the floor. Mr. Doer: Yes, and it was, again, the Conservative government of Manitoba that introduced capital tax on Crown corp–[interjection] Mr. Speaker: Order. Order. Order. The honourable First Minister. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, the debt ratio, it was 86 percent, the debt-equity ratio, when we came into office, and they didn't have the Centra Gas purchase on the books. Mr. Speaker, the debt-equity ratio today is 75 percent. Hydro is in a lot better financial shape today under our government than it ever was under the former government. Teen Pregnancy Rates Increase Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, in 2007 a maternal child report was leaked to us by front-line health-care workers who felt that the government was ignoring a very real crisis in maternal newborn care in Manitoba. The numbers were alarming. Mr.

Speaker, through Freedom of Information we have updated numbers which show us that it has gotten worse in maternal child care over the past four years. Teen pregnancies in Manitoba remain alarmingly high. In 2004-05, there were 1,852 teen pregnancies. In 2007-08, there were 1,975 teen pregnancies, almost 2,000 teen pregnancies a year in Manitoba. Can the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) tell us if Manitoba still has the highest teen pregnancy rate in all of Canada? Hon.

Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Healthy Living): What we've done working with our interdepartmental and our community partners is develop a comprehensive strategy around healthy sexuality in Manitoba. We have opened many teen clinics across the province, and in these teen clinics, teens are able to access services in their school settings or in community settings, and this is supporting teens and making positive decisions. We've had initiatives such as the Little Black Book, which has been well accepted across the province, where teens are getting the information that they need.

We will continue to work with our partners as we go forward. Neonatal Deaths Increase Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, the number of stillbirths and neonatal deaths point to poor maternity care outcomes in Manitoba. The number of stillbirths over the last four years has remained unchanged. It has not improved. There are between 101 and 106 babies born stillborn every year.

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2273 However, neonatal deaths have gotten worse. In 2005, 65 neonatal deaths happened, and in 2007 there was 74 neonatal deaths. I'd like to ask the Minister of Health to tell us if Manitoba still has the highest stillbirth rate in Canada and the second highest rate of neonatal deaths. Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): We know that this government is very committed to improving maternal care in Manitoba.

We know that in the reports that members opposite have referenced in the past, including in the question today, one of the–the single most important thing that that report noted was that maternal care was on a significant decline in Manitoba due to the fact that there were not as many nurses at the bedside helping mothers and families do the best that they could towards a safe delivery with prenatal care and with postpartum care. One of the single most important things that we can do is build our work force.

In addition to that, of course, we launched a strategy in partnership with the Women's Health Clinic to renew our maternal health strategy, a giant pillar of which, of course, is the construction of the new women's hospital, the building of human health resources. We're committed to this, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order. Maternal and Infant Care Hospital Re-admission Rates Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, we're hearing all talk and no action from the minister. These numbers are getting worse under her watch.

The number of re-admissions for new moms because of complications following delivery have also gotten worse since the warning flags of a few years ago. In '04-05, there were 116 re-admissions for moms. In '07-08, it went up to 137, and the number of re-admissions for newborns who ran into trouble after birth has doubled. It's gone from 147 to 303 babies running into trouble after being born. So I'd like to ask the Minister of Health: She's– she had the red flags waved in front of her a number of years ago. Why has she dragged her heels? Where's the progress in this?

Why are moms and babies continually being put at risk? * (14:20) Hon. Theresa Oswald (Minister of Health): Well, Mr. Speaker, our government's record on providing services and supports for expectant moms, for young families, is very significant in comparison to the government, of course, who cancelled and disbanded the Maternal and Child Health Directorate in 1994. We know that, as a result of that, in that report it says on page 4: fewer nurses we re available to assist women during labour and childbirth. We not only brought to the fore Healthy Child Manitoba; we introduced the prenatal benefit, Mr.

Speaker, a program which provides financial assistance for healthy nutrition during pregnancy. It's provided to 4,400 families, 25 percent of whom are First Nation. We're working to improve outcome. Drug Treatment Court Graduation Rates Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Mr. Speaker, we know that drug addiction is one of the leading causes of the high crime rate that we have in Winnipeg and Manitoba. Drug treatment court can aid in reducing recidivism if it's conducted appropriately and the right type of offenders are referred to that court.

In the Provincial Court of Manitoba report, which was tabled on Thursday, it indicated that in the year 2007-2008, ther e are 42 participants in Winnipeg's drug treatment court, but only seven graduated that year. Can the minister indicate if this level of success is what he would expect from this program? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I think, in general, any individual who's diverted from the criminal justice system into another system and doesn't have to go into the criminal justice system is a success.

Under their drug program, court success is a year, I believe, of non-involvement in drugs, et cetera. That's why the drug treatment court is both a pilot, and we're looking at it with respect to continuance as well as some observations with respect to mental health court possibly and how they might intermingle. That and the community prosecator–community prosecutor that keeps people from even getting there are two innovations that've been brought in place by this government to deal with that issue, and I should think the member would applaud the fact that we have numerous examples of success in that area.

2274 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, there are several drug treatment courts in Canada and hundreds in the United States, and they publish their graduation rates and their reoffence rates of those who do graduate. In fact, one drug treatment court in the state of New York recently held a graduation, and as part of that they indicated that they had a 75 percent graduation rate and only 10 percent had reoffended after graduation. The Provincial Court report only says that Manitoba success has been fair. It doesn't say anything more than that.

Can the minister tell us what the graduation rate is for the drug treatment court and what the reoffence rate is after graduation? Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as the report says, the program's criteria mean a minimum one-year participation period of stability, commitment to personal goals and a favourable recommendation from the drug treatment court. It has six phases and utilizes harm reduction. The information given in the report is a snapshot of the 42 individuals that are involved at the time. We continue to observe it.

We're determining whether or not there should be expansion, whether or not there should be change, how it should be interactive, perhaps, with a mental health court, and how the fact that we have the only community prosecutor in Canada that is a prosecutor working in the community with individuals keeping–keeping them away from the court, keeping them right away from the system is working in relationship to all this. So we have a number of initiatives, Mr. Speaker, and we don't simply focus on numbers. We focus on people. Mr. Goertzen: Well, Mr.

Speaker, numbers in this context do matter, and he has to provide what the graduation rate and what the reoffence rate is. I also want to know: Can the minister indicate whether there has been any review of the drug treatment court in Winnipeg in terms of the type of offenders that are being accepted, their criminal history, the types of offences they were charged with to begin with and the success they have in the program? What sort of analysis is being done to determine the success of Winnipeg's drug treatment court? Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, in addition to the drug treatment court, of course, we have the FAASD program that provides universal screening and an AFIS program at Portage la Prairie, Flin Flon, Dauphin, Thompson, and we have programs within the jails. Mr. Speaker, I, again, want to point out to the member opposite that–I want–the member is not listening to the answer, but I will indicate that the drug treatment court is a pilot that we're doing with the federal government. We're also looking at a mental health court and how that might be intermingled.

That, combined with the community prosecutor, has seen a significant change and we will continue to e v o l v e i n t h a t a r e a a n d n o t j u s t d e a l w i t h h a r d numbers that the member opposite–I doubt, I've yet to see a 75 percent non-recidivism rate in terms of addictions. Mr. Speaker: Order. Rapid Transit Funding Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Liberal Party was the first party to support major funding for the rapid transit here in Manitoba. We're pleased that the government is, after quite some time, moving in the right direction.

Today there is an open house on rapid transit, and there are some important issues which remain outstanding. The government has said that it will support phase 1 of rapid transit financially going from downtown to Jubilee. Will the government also support phase 2 of rapid transit all the way to the Fort Garry campus of the University of Manitoba? What is the government's plan? What are the time lines, and will there be, as the government has talked about so often, 50 percent funding from the provincial government for the construction costs for phase 2 of the rapid transit to the Fort Garry campus? Hon.

Steve Ashton (Minister of Intergovern- mental Affairs): Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud that this government has taken a historic step of committing not only to the original discussion of rapid transit to Jubilee but has already precommitted our support all the way to the University of Manitoba, and we look forward to working with the City of Winnipeg on the northeast corridor, as well, because our vision for rapid transit is very much based on the fact that this is important, both in terms of bus transportation but, also, in terms of active transportation.

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2275 So our commitment is there. We're working with the City, and we certainly look forward, by the way, not to just 50-50 funding but to further future potential involvement from the federal government, as well, because Winnipeg is on the map with rapid transit. This government has taken the lead. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, there's also a significant issue with the active transportation corridor.

Are there going to be separable lanes for bicyclists and for pedestrians for safety, and what's going to happen with the current gap in the active transportation route at the south Osborne underpass? Clearly, as the south Osborne underpass gap is looking at the moment, it would be rather unsafe. So I ask the government whether they are going to ensure that the design is going to be a safe one and that this gap in the active transportation route at the south Osborne underpass is going to be addressed. Mr.

Ashton: I want to stress a couple of things, that our vision for rapid tran sit, right from day one, included both bus rapid transit but, also, our commitment, our government-wide commitment, to active transportation, it also included commuter bike paths, and that's very much part of the design. The issue in terms of the interconnectivity is something that has been discussed by many people. There is going to be an open house, and we would certainly be willing to work with the City to ensure that happens.

Our commitment, again, is to have Winnipeg in the front lines of rapid transportation, including with bike commuter paths, Mr. Speaker, and we're very proud that this government has taken a historic commitment towards that. We're committed to rapid transit. Text Messaging Charges Government Strategy Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, could you imagine having to pay for incoming text messages? It's something in which one company is actually proposing and it's told Manitobans that they're going to have to do is to pay for an incoming text message.

Even if they don't want the text message, they're going to have to pay a bit extra in order to receive that text message. This has raised a great deal of concern in terms of is there anything that the government can do to prevent text messaging or people being charged in order to receive a text message. So that's the question I have for the government. What is this government prepared to do to ensure that the rights of consumers are going to be protected so that they're not going to have to pay in order to receive a text message? Hon.

Jim Rondeau (Minister of Science, Technology, Energy and Mines): I would hope that all people are con cerned about this and send their inquiries and their suggestions to CRTC that actually has the jurisdiction in this regards. * (14:30) Economy Provincial Ranking Mr. Bidhu Jha (Radisson): We all know that the world is going through a recession. We all know thousands and thousands of jobs have been lost all over, and I'm really very, very sorry, Mr. Speaker, to see members opposite do not take pride in Manitoba business. They do not take pride that we are doing well.

So I'd like to request my colleague, my minister from sci–competitiveness, trade and technology, to inform the House, particularly the friends that side, how we are doing and what is our standing. Hon.

Andrew Swan (Minis ter of Competitiveness, Training and Trade): In these uncertain times, I am pleased to have a question on the economy to speak to today, and, indeed, the Conference Board of Canada did release its recent provincial outlook, and, certainly, they see the value of the diversity of Manitoba business, the diversity of Manitoba's work force, the investments this government has made in health care, in education, and in training, as well as the–as they put it–the prudent fiscal planning of this government.

I'm very pleased their comment is that, while most provinces have fallen into deficit and recession, Manitoba is expected to balance its books and post positive GDP growth. All of these, Mr. Speaker, have led to the Conference Board of Canada determining that Manitoba's GDP growth in 2009 should be 1 percent, which is twice that of Saskatchewan in second place, and, indeed, they expect this to be the strongest performing economy in all of Canada this year. Land Value Appraisal Commission Length of Deliberations Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Carman): Mr.

Speaker, on Thursday I asked the minister some questions about the Land Value Appraisal committee, and in his

2276 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 answer, according to Hansard, it was certainly that they didn't want the government to interfere, and I certainly agree with that. But what I was–what I was asking was if the minister responsible for the Land Value acquisition– Appraisal committee would commit to reporting back to me as to how the LVAC is dealing with the matter between the R.M. of Ellice and the Fouillard family. Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Intergovern- mental Affairs): Mr.

Speaker, I think every minister, every MLA on this side is more than willing to engage in discussions of matters of interest to MLAs, and, certainly, I would be willing. I know my colleagues would be willing to talk to the member about this. I do want to stress it's important not to try and direct the activities of a arm's-length board or commission, and I don't think the member is seeking that, Mr. Speaker.

But, certainly, as Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, I'm aware of the complexity of the issue, of this long-standing dispute, and I'm certainly more than willing–any of my colleagues are more than willing–to discuss this matter and would certainly welcome the opportunity to do so with the member. Mr. Pedersen: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could be– seek clarification on this, but my understanding is that the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation (Mr. Lemieux) is, in fact, in charge of the Land Value Appraisal committee. So, perhaps, he could tell me if he is going to do this, or is my information wrong?

Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, I'm proud to be working with 198 municipalities across the province. This is a dispute that does involve a municipality directly. That's why, certainly, Mr. Speaker, I was more pleased to answer the question of the member opposite, and I certainly hope that he will continue to pursue any questions he has. I want to stress, again, members on this side, ministers in this government are always open to members of the opposition on issues, Mr. Speaker, and I'm certainly willing.

I know, certainly, my colleague the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation is more than willing to sit down and discuss matters, whether it involves municipalities or any other matter. Mr. Pedersen: So, again, I'm just seeking clarification. Is either one of them–and I'm not asking the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs to talk to the R.M.s or to talk to the Fouillard family, because that would be interfering. What I'm asking them is to check with the LVAC to see where this, where this committee is at on in their negotiations and if there are problems. That's all I'm asking.

So which of the ministers is going to report back to me about that? Mr. Ashton: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm really glad that this exchange is going to be recorded, word for word, accurately in Hansard. Mr. Speaker, we will talk to the member opposite. We're more than open. I want to stress this again; we are more than open to discuss this or any other matter. So, Mr. Speaker, once again, I want to say that I'm really glad that Hansard is going to report, three times, that the member aske d this question and the answer is: We're more than willing to discuss this with the member opposite, period. Mr. Speaker: Order.

Time for oral questions has expired. Members' statements. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Missing Children's Week Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Speaker, children are some of the most valuable persons in any society. They are also among the most vulnerable. Today marks national Missing Children's Day, a day to remember the countless names and faces of lost children and their families left behind today. Today, the Minister of Family Services and Housing (Mr. Mackintosh) is proclaiming this week as Missing Children's Week. There is, perhaps, nothing more frightening to a parent than a missing child.

The disappearance of Tori Stafford in Woodstock, Ontario, has pushed the issue of missing children to the forefront of the nation's attention in recent weeks. In 2007, over 60,000 children were reported missing in Canada. In Manitoba, we can all work together to help prevent and find missing children. Preventing the number of incidences of missing children requires an increased level of awareness among children, families, schools and the larger community. The AMBER Alert program partners the province's law

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2277 enforcement community, media broadcasting agencies and the public in locating abducted children. Organizations like Child Find Manitoba work closely with families to help facilitate the location of their child as well as provide emotional support. Child Find also focusses on educational prevention programs on child safety and sexual exploitation as well as increasing awareness and advocating on issues related to missing and exploited children. Mr. Speaker, let us remember to keep the families of missing children in our hearts today.

I would like to recognize organizations like Child Find, local law enforcement and the RCMP for the good work that they do in this area. Finally, let us each say a prayer for all those missing children that one day they may find their way home. Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of Missing Children's Week, which corresponds with National Missing Children's Day today. I am wearing this green ribbon in order to show my support and concern for missing children, and I am happy to see many members of this House doing the same. Mr.

Speaker, the issue of missing children is not only heartbreaking to those family members whose child has disappeared, but it is one that touches the hearts of and has a deep impact on all of us in one way or another. Today we join all of those whose lives have been shattered by the disappearance of a child, in hoping for the safe return of their loved ones. We sympathize and extend our best wishes right now to the family of Victoria Stafford and wish them all the best in terms of moving through this horrible situation that has been forced upon them in the missing of their lovely daughter.

Child Find Manitoba has put together a Missing Children's Month campaign that focusses on public awareness about missing children and about the issues surrounding child safety. Community members can show support for this campaign by wearing the green ribbon, a symbol of hope that was created following the abduction and murder of 15-year-old Kristen French in 1992 which shocked the nation as well as her home community of St. Catharines.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Child Find Manitoba and all the volunteers that work with them to help locate missing children and educate the public in order to prevent children going missing. A missing child is a parent's greatest fear and Child Find Manitoba works closely with police and other authorities while networking with those organizations to assist in the location of missing children. So, thank you to Child Find Manitoba for all the hard work you do to protect our children.

We stand with you and hope to fulfil the quest for the safe return of all missing children in Manitoba and in Canada. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Woman Entrepreneur of the Year Ms. Erin Selby (Southdale): Mr. Speaker, this past Thursday, on May 21st, I had the privilege of attending the 2009 Manitoba Woman Entrepreneur of the Year awards along with the Member for St. Norbert (Ms. Brick) and the Minister of Competitiveness, Training and Trade (Mr. Swan). The awards were hosted by the Winnipeg

chapter of the Women Business Owners of Manitoba and have been held since 1992. They are an opportunity to recognize today's role models who inspire tomorrow's emerging business leaders. To be nominated for an award, the woman must be an equal partner or sole owner in a business that has been registered and in operation in Manitoba for a minimum of three consecut ive years. The operation must be her full-time venture and from where she draws her main source of income. This year, eight women received the awards for their accomplishments in the business community.

The recipients of the awards were: Kim Bellmont, of Trapeze Learning, for Excellence in Service; Coree Francisco, of Girl One Interactive, for Contribution to the Community; Barbar a Chabai, of BC Creative House, for Home Enterprise; Carol Manlow, of Country Connections, for International Trade; Deb Dawson-Dunn, of Get it Dunn, for Emerging Business; Barb Chapman, of Bra Lady Incorporated, for the Lifetime Achievement; and Dr. Rhonda Gledhill, of the Linden Ridge Animal Hospital, for Building Business.

Cindy Kinkead of Eriksdale Inn was the recipient for the Impact on the Local Economy award and the Overall Excellence award. Women are increasingly entering the business work force and becoming leading moguls in

2278 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 briz-business practices. Th ey are an economic force in Canada. Four out of every five businesses are started by women. Their sense of commitment, detail and organization has led to their success, and I would like to congratulate all the women who were nominated and the recipients of the awards for their achievement and success. Thank you. * (14:40) Glenna Beauchamp Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Minnedosa): I rise today to commemorate a special constituent of mine, Glenna Beauchamp.

Glenna has provided 35 years of uninterrupted service to the United Church of Canada, and it is my pleasure to congratulate her today for this significant contribution. Glenna was born and raised in Sarnia, Ontario, and received her Bachelor of Arts in Modern Languages at the University of Western Ontario. She attended Emmanuel College in Toronto after being called to the ministry and moved to Moose Jaw after her graduation. Glenna was soon transferred to Manitoba and fell in love with the prairies as she worked in various rural communities.

Over the years, Glenna served on many commun–committees, mostly in the area of pastoral relations and education, and she has worked for a number of churches including the Northland, Birtle and Assiniboine presbyteries and have often acted as chaplain to the various communities as she served as their minister. More recently, Glenda has begun to write for devotional publications such as the Lent 2009 Worship Leader's Guide and the Puzzles of Life and our Life of Faith .

She is, she is–she has an admirable ability to transfer inspiration to the written word and has been published in a number of magazines, local newspapers and devotional public booklets. Glenna is known for her kind heart, her integrity and for her incredible insight. I have been privileged to know Glenna for all of my six years as an MLA and greatly value her input and opinions about the issues that face the Minnedosa constituency. I've also attended church services conducted by Glenna and always find her sermons relevant and inspirational.

The communities that Glenna has been a part of over the years have been very fortunate to have her. Her nurturing spirit and passionate interest in the well-being of those around her, her, ensure that those who come into contact with her are changed for the better. I would like to congratulate Glenna Beauchamp on her many years of servitude to the United Church of Canada and wish her all the best as she continues to touch the lives of many. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I Believe Premiere Ms. Erna Braun (Rossmere): Mr.

Speaker, I rise today in praise of the world premiere of I Believe , and the powerful message delivered by this dramatic musical concert. I Believe is an exceptionally emotional production, with a series of 12 stirring movements reflecting the events surrou nding the Holocaust. The movements focus on the events and experiences of individuals during this dark period of history, beginning with the Kristallnacht pogrom and as an exhibition of hatred erupting into violence to the evocative finale reminding us that we must continuously build the moral fabric of our society in the hope for peace.

I Believe is a five-year labour of love by Zane Zalis, local composer, lyricist and music teacher at Miles MacDonell Collegiate. It brings together the talents of the full 65-member symphony, Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra under Alexander Mickelthwate, soprano Kelsey Cowie, tenors Marc Devigne and Marko Zeiler, narrator Shelley Faintuch, a 140-voice chorus made up of high school, community and university singers and a 50-voice children's chorus. I attended the premiere last Thursday and was moved by the stirring performance that illustrated the horrors that humankind can bring on upon others.

The chorus and soloists were absolutely incredible. They brought to life the emotions of fear, anger, shame, desolation and hope carried in each of the movements while the narration eloquently complemented the musical progression of events. In its five years of development, I Believe has brought together a wide community of support. Friends of I Believe have been monumental in raising support for this production and champying– championing it as a major production in the Winnipeg arts scene, propelling Manitoba once again into the international stage of artistic development.

I ask the House to join me in thanking Mr. Zalis for creating this amazing and thought-provoking work. I Believe is the testament to the power of the human spirit and the fortitude of our collective

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2279 memory. I wish all the musicians and singers the very best as they share this musical message in future performances here at home and everywhere the I Believe production travels. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Grievances. GRIEVANCES Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Springfield, on a grievance? Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a grievance in regards to the Minister of Education (Mr. Bjornson) and his clear inaction and inattention to the issue of asbestos in our schools.

Back on April 28, I raised with the Minister of Education the issue of asbestos in our schools, and he indicated at that time that he would provide a list of schools in Manitoba that have asbestos in them, and Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out for this House that we have a increasingly growing stock of schools that are aging an d are crumbling and are need of repairs and remediation, and this has been an issue that's been facing ou r province for a long time, and, certainly, over the last 10 years, we've seen no action on part of this minister or of this government.

The schools, of which a lot of them were built, or the bulk of them were built, in the 1950s and 1960s, may potentially have asbestos in them in some form or another. Now, some of the schools may not actually have asbestos in them that would be a health concern, for instance, if it's wrapped around pipes, in crawl spaces, and in areas where there would be no action, no activity of children around, those would not be of as much concern as those schools that would have asbestos ceiling tiles, floor tiles, or pipes, or any other application of asbestos where children might have access to them.

I had a story related to me. There was a school in our city where there wa s an approximately an eight-or nine-foot ceiling that had asbestos tiles. Now the minister has spoken about encapsulated asbestos, and he's correct. As long as it's encapsulated, it is not the same health concern as if it is not. In this case, students were jumping up and down and were trying to touch the ceiling and were slowly moving the tiles around and the encapsulation obviously wasn't working.

When it was discovered that the tiles were being moved about, the wing of the school or the school was shut down and the tiles had to be remediated. The other day I got up in question period, and I rose and raised the issue of an event that happened in 2005 in British Columbia. There a school was put up for remediation, for some renovation, I should say, and unfortunately, nobody pointed out to the construction crew or to the staff or to the students that there was asbestos present.

Happened to be that teachers started to complain about the dust in the school because dust does build on top of the tiles and so forth and when you construct, as any of us would know, there's a lot of dust involved. Anyway, the teachers complained and sure enough, they came out and they tested the air to make sure that it was safe and found out that there was in fact asbestos in the school. And what happened was that eight construction workers were exposed to excessive amounts of asbestos, and also so were the teachers. Now it doesn't say if there were students affected.

I suspect the students would have been affected as well, and that is the kind of concern we have when it comes to asbestos in schools. Number 1, there should be a provincial list. Number 2, it should be listed where the asbestos is, and that would protect all of us. For instance, if someone comes in and does some plumbing, we have seen in this very building, the Manitoba Legislature, we've had a problem where a pipe burst and there was damage. In fact, in my office, a lot of the pictures that were up in my office were damaged. Obviously, that evening, somebody had to be called in.

The pipe has to be fixed, and I would hope that if there was asbestos invo lved, that they would immediately be notified that they are in a asbestos-surrounded site. In this case, I understand it wasn't here at the Legislature, but it was the case in British Columbia, and I would point out that in this instance, the school division was charged $75,000 by WorkSafe British Columbia. It was the responsibility of those who manage the buildings to let those know who come in and do work on them that there is asbestos present, and we know that we have potentially many schools that will have asbestos in them.

We asked the minister. We've asked him twice now in question period, and each time we get a fairly weak, if not a very poor, response. * (14:50) And I understand that the minister's been to over 350 schools. Mr. Speaker, we have no problem with the minister travelling to schools and visiting schools. What we have a problem with is the fact that

2280 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 the minister isn't in his office doing his job. He should first be doing the job of minister, and the kind of negligence that he's showing by not producing these kinds of lists, by not asking for the kinds of reports that should have been a given, that he should have had at his fingertips, that kind of thing is not on, and he should, in fact, be providing that list immediately. That list should be available. That list should have been available right from day one. The minister indicated, the Member for Gimli, the Minister of Education (Mr.

Bjornson) indicated that the school board should have that list. Well, in that case it would have been as simple as an e-mail going out asking for all the schools with the list and that list should have been provided. And we want to be careful, Mr. Speaker. This isn't about fearmongering or putting people at ease. It should be a list that shows exactly where the asbestos is located and the safety of that asbestos. And so we feel that there is a real case to be made, a real grievance in front of this Legislature, the fact that the minister is not providing the list.

And I wonder why the minister won't provide the list. What is it about it that he doesn't understand is a serious issue? I would point out to this House that there was a press release put out June 5, 2008. The headline is Asbestos eradication planned for Montréal schools, and it doesn't basically say that these are harmful. It doesn't say that these are capsulated or not encapsulated, but says that there is an immediate need for it. In fact, it goes on to say there is no immediate danger to students.

However, they believe in Montréal that the asbestos should be cleaned out and because I'd like to point to the House that anybody who has their own residence knows that after 15, 16 years, you know, your house starts to show some age. Carpet has to be replaced, the linoleum has to be replaced, shingles have to be replaced and so and so forth and so too is it with our schools that are 30, 40, 50, 60, in some cases 70 years old. We know that the buildings shift.

We know that things change in the building and that it is very important, very important to be on top of this issue because although those ceiling tiles or floor tiles or wherever this asbestos might be, although it might be encapsulated, it might have been in, in, in a very safe place some time ago that may not be the case today because we know that our buildings do age and do shift and do change with age. We want to be very clear–we want to be very clear with Manitobans, with parents who entrust their children to the care of, of, of the schools.

We want to be very careful with those who work in our schools on a daily basis and are in volved with teaching or education. And, again, as example from British Columbia, we want to be very careful with those individuals who come in and work in our schools, who do minor construction pr ojects or in some cases major construction projects. So we call upon the minister to, to do his, his, his best to make this a priority, to get a list and present it to all Manitobans, to present it in this House.

We would ask the minister that maybe, maybe he would set this up as one of his main, his main focuses, that he would be, that he, he would view this as being important, not as secondary, not as another one of those projects that, that may or may not get done, that in fact should be done. We grieve this in front of the House and would, would ask that the minister do the right thing, get that list and make it public, which schools might have asbestos and what kind, and what form. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The Member for Ste. Rose, on a grievance? Mr. Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): On a grievance, Mr.

Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to rise in the House today and put a few comments on the record on the fiscal responsibility and the rural health care of this government.

The government's been an absolute failure of doing anything that even faintly resembles fiscal responsibility, not only of the enjoyed significant increases and their own source revenues, but they have also received huge increases of federal transfers, equalization payments and more recently in–the Brinks truck has arrived in Manitoba with unprecedented amounts of infrastructure funding and we're seeing announcement on top of announcement with federal money– An Honourable Member: Re-announcements. Mr.

Briese: – and re-announcemen ts recently and the–we're still not seeing the improvements in the infrastructure that we're, we're hoping at some point are going to be arrived at. Our highways still continue to crumble and deteriorate. Our–our sewer and water systems and our–our urban centres continue to degrade, and, in spite of all the extra money that's coming into this province from various

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2281 sources, Manitobans still don't believe their health care is any better than it was 10 years ago. They know that they're–are not as safe on our streets as they were 10 years ago, and most of them are no better off financially than they were 10 years ago. We have a government that is very, very good at making announcements, but equally weak at making something happen that actually has a meaningful impact on people's lives. Ten years ago, the NDP promised to fix hallway medicine in six months with $15 million.

Well, here we are 10 years later still with hallway medicine. Here we are spending $2 billion more per year on health care than we were in '99, and here we are with accumulative extra spending in health care of over $10 billion over the–the 10 years, and what have we got to show for it? Well, we have highway medicine, both in Winnipeg and outside Winnipeg. I recently talked to a man in Dauphin who has to travel to Brandon for dialysis, even though dialysis is available in Dauphin. There are not enough trained staff to provide the service. So this gentleman must commute to Brandon for dialysis.

That really makes a lot of sense. You've got an elderly person that's sick, having to travel down the highway for a couple of hours one way for dialysis and back home, and do it a couple of times a week. We have many rural emergency rooms closed. After 10 years of supposedly fixing health care and, yet, we have chronic shortages of nurses and doctors, support staff and technicians; 1,500 doctors have left Manitoba since this NDP government was formed. That's a shameful number. We have a government that has no imagination, no ability to get results even when millions and millions more dollars are spent.

Money is certainly not the issue. Priorities and results are the issue. The government can make all– all the announcements they want, but if they don't carry them through to fruition, we just spin our wheels in the sand. My area of the pr ovince, we are now experiencing another shortage, that being trained EMT and EMS staff. Not only must we travel great distances for our health care, if we can get it at all, but now we were experiencing difficulties in finding trained first responders.

That's bec–become even a bigger issue if you're already some distance from a hospital and then you find out that your closest hospital has a closed ER. There simply cannot be any good outcomes to the crisis that this NDP government has perpetrated in rural health care. I listened closely to the answers the Minister of Health (Ms. Oswald) gave to my questions about availability of family doctors, and what I heard was a litany of we did this, we made announcements, we spent the X number of dollars. Nowhere did she say what the time lines were, when we could expect to see some resolution to the growing problems.

In Neepawa, Gladstone, Dauphin and Ste. Rose du Lac, doctors are not accepting new patients. In McCreary, there are no doctors, so that looks after whether they're gonna accept new patients or not. In Dauphin, just recently, the doctors there have quit accepting new patients, too. The only time you can get on to a doctor's list as a new patient, onto a family doctor's list, is if somebody has moved off it, somebody leaves the area or dies, or whatever happens to take them off–off that doctor's list.

I don't think the people in that area of the province really believe the NDP are doing anything to improve health care. The fact, if you actually listen to the people, I think you'd quickly realize that in spite of the rhetoric, empty promises and many announcements, health-care provision in this province has deteriorated since 1999. * (15:00) Mr. Speaker, you know, saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it right. We've heard the Premier (Mr. Doer) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) say over and over again that we have a balanced budget.

Those must be wonderful rose-coloured glasses that they are looking through, because there's no way anyone else in Manitoba can understand how this budget is balanced, and that's in spite of the high-priced media, media blitz that the NDP ha ve authorized. The tired, old spin is just not working as well as it used to. The magic is gone. We have a budget that actually has an $88-million deficit, even using the numbers that the Finance Minister twists and manipulates.

Far beyond the $88 million, though, is the fact that the NDP are using $200 million of Manitoba Hydro profit and another $110 million out of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund to try and balance their books. In addition to that, the NDP are raising our debt by another 1.7 billion. Now, Mr. Speaker, even with all the spin, all the smoke, all the mirrors, they have introduced a Bill 30. It relieves them of paying down any debt for the next three years. If the forementioned wasn't true,

2282 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 why would they not have money around to pay down the debt? The balanced budget legislation introduced with bill–introduced by the Filmon government called for yearly debt repayment with the goal of retiring Manitoba's debt over a number of decades. Now, unfortunately, the NDP have more to get rid of–moved to get rid of all semblance of balanced budgets.

They are deep–they are dragging every citizen in Manitoba deeper into debt, and it is a debt that until we–that will be carried by our children and grandchildren, and we're in the millions and millions on accumulated debt, the billions of accumulated debt. Every total debt in the province is somewhere around 21 billion, which is something like 20,000 for every man, woman and child in this province. I think, maybe, you have to watch that people don't start leaving and taking–leaving their debt behind and moving to the provinces that have little or no debt.

Accumulated debt in this province is higher than Saskatchewan, Alberta and B.C. put together. I think–I can't believe that they can't see what they're doing to the province by increasing our debt over and over and over again, and not paying any of it down. With those few words, I'll thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Grievances? House Business Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, on House business? Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Offi cial Opposition House Leader): Yes, on House business, Mr. Speaker.

For Thursday, May 28th, I'd ask leave of the House, first of all, for Thursday, May 28th, during private members' business, to switch the order to have 10 o'clock in the morning debate on a–on our private member's resolution, and for 11 o'clock in the morning to have debate on our private member's bill. Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement of the House for Thursday, May 28th, to reverse the order, to do the resolution at 10 a.m. instead of 11 a.m. and, then, at 11 a.m. to do the bill instead of the resolution? Is there agreement? [interjection] Okay, there's agreement.

The honourable Government House Leader, on House business. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you might call the following bills for debate on second reading, commencing with Bill 30, to be followed by Bill 8, Bill 12, Bill 13, Bill 17, Bill 21 and Bill 11. That's 30, 8, 12, 13, 17, 21 and 11. Mr. Speaker: The order of business will be second– resume debate on second reading of Bill No. 30, followed by Bill No. 8, followed by Bill No. 12, then followed by 13, 17, 21 and 11.

ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill 30–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2009 Mr. Speaker: So I will now call, resume debate on Bill No. 30, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statues Amendment Act, 2009, standing in the name of the honourable member for the Lakeside. What is the will of the House? Is the will of the House for the bill to remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Lakeside (Mr. Eichler)? Some Honourable Members: Yes. Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Okay. It will remain standing in the name of the honourable Member for Lakeside.

Is there any speakers? Mr. Gerald Hawranik (Offi cial Opposition House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker, we'd like to have the bill remain standing in the name for the honourable Member for Lakeside. We won't be putting up any speakers at this point, but we reserve the right to have. Mr. Speaker: That's fine. I just have to–when I have a bill remain standing, I just double-check to see if there's speakers, and if no one rises then we'll move on to the next bill. Okay. Bill 8–The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act (Enhanced Manitoba Hydro Employee Benefits and Other Amendments) Mr.

Speaker: So now I'll call resume debate on second reading of Bill No. 8, The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act (Enhanced Manitoba Hydro Employee Benefits and Other Amendments), standing in the name of the honourable Member for Brandon West. Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon West): I'm pleased to rise to speak to Bill No. 8, which is The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act, and it's a very

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2283 topical point that is being discussed currently with respect to pensions, not only in this House, Mr. Speaker, but pensions throughout the country, both on the public service as well as the private sector, as most members of this House recognize that pensions are in jeopardy, particularly those in the corporate sector. We recognize names like General Motors and we recognize names like Chrysler and we recognize names like Air Canada, who have what's known, Mr.

Speaker, as a defined benefit plan or defined benefit pension, and the actuarial surveys and studies now done on those corporate pensions are indicating that, in fact, the pension fund itself cannot support or substantiate the defined benefit payments that go to the retirees of those corporate pensions. As a matter of fact, it's at the federal level right now where the federal government used to have legislation in place that said that, if a corporate, or corporation did not have a fully funded pension plan, that they had to make contributions to that pension plan over a period of five years.

Meaning that if the actuarial accounting came forward and said that the amount of money in that pension plan wasn't sufficient to pay that defined benefit, based on the longevity of its members as well as the numbers of new retirees coming into the plan, then that corporation had to put in, within five years, sufficient capital to make that plan fully funded. There is now proposed legislation federally that that five years will be extended to 10 years, and the reason that was done, Mr.

Speaker, as most people in this House recognize, that the investment improvements in those plans over this last 18 months has been, not only, not only not sufficient to keep the plan going, but also has lost substantial capital in their pension accounts. Mr. Bidhu Jha, Acting Speaker, in the Chair As a matter of fact, the case in Québec, which runs their own pension plan, like the, the CPP and OAS for Canada, has lost approximately 25 percent of its capital over the last 18 months, and that, Mr. Speaker, is a substantial amount of money to try to recover over a very short period of time.

Now, we hope over the next five to 10 years investment opportunities are going to improve, markets will come back. But, if you read, as I do every morning, different economists and what they feel is going to happen with the economy, you can have a range from some economists saying that the, there will be improvement as early as the last quarter of this fiscal year, and some economists that I read say that it'll be 10 years before we get back to the levels that the plans had been a short 18 months to two years ago. So pensions are very, very, in vital, very important. We know.

Read the newspapers articles and watch television and you're going to find that there are a number of reti rees right now who have depended on their defined pension plans going forward, and a lot of those retirees seeing the erosion, not only of their RRSPs, but also their pension funds, are very concerned as to their ability to retire within the time lines that they had set for themselves. You heard of freedom 55?

Well, freedom 55 is basically not available to a substantial number of Canadians and a number of Manitobans at the present time, because they looked and they planned their retirement based on defined pensions. They planned their retirement based on having other monies offset some of those costs through their RSP accounts, which have lost a lot of capital over the last while. * (15:10) They have savings accounts which were put into investment certificates, whether they be mutual funds, Mr. Speaker, or whether they be in the market themselves in equities, and they've lost a substantial amount of that capital.

Therefore, they cannot see within the next numbers of years being able to achieve the goals that they set out for themselves only a short two years ago. Well, Mr. Speaker, pensions are very important to the civil servants that we have here in Manitoba as well, and that's what this bill speaks to. It's called The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act, and there are a number of organizations that belong to that fund.

Now, not to lecture the House, but, simply put, there are a number of corporations, if you will, or there are a number of entities, government entities, that belong to this master plan, the Civil Service Superannuation Fund. It includes Manitoba Hydro. It includes MGEU. It includes other entities that are controlled by the provincial government. And these individuals honestly and logically, every month, contribute to a pension fund.

They have it deducted from their salaries on a monthly basis, and those dollars go into the fund, and it's matched by the employer, and we hear about that constantly how there's an unfunded liability in the pension funds currently by the Province of Manitoba, but the employer is required to match the contributions of the employee going

2284 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 forward into those pension funds, and that's what this bill speaks to. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Deputy Speaker, my light is not on, but my neighbour's light is on. Is that a problem? Can you still hear? There we go. There we go. We thank the– An Honourable Member: Your light's never been on. Mr. Borotsik: Oh, no, my light's on. Now my light's on. My light has always been on. It's the dim bulbs across the House, Mr. Speaker, that I have some concern with.

I know they didn't want to listen to this lecture, but they should because they're going to find out that in fact it's their responsibility to make sure that these pension funds are there when their employees and our employees go out and take retirement up. Anyway, now that I have my light on, Mr. Speaker, this piece of legislation, for the most part, is very good and that's going to come as a surprise, I'm su re, from members opposite. For the most part, this legislation is proactive which I find really strange 'cause most of the legislation coming forward to this House is quite the opposite.

It's reactive and not proactive. But, in this particular case, this piece of legislation coming forward is in fact proactive. I just talked about the absolute importance of pensions to individuals who are looking forward to their retirement, and it's absolutely vital that they have the opportunity to make sure that they've got something stable that they can look forward to. That's why I say it's really interesting to see a proactive piece of legislation, but, in saying that, there are still a couple of issues that I think we should be very, very careful about.

Before we get to that, I would like to say that what this legislation does is two things. Well, it does a number of things, but two very important things. Number one is it enables–there's an enhanced benefits built into this legislation for Hydro employees. The enhanced benefits are good benefits. There's not unnecessary cost to it because some of the benefits are just simply options that Hydro employees have when they are dedicating their pension to their spouses, and for anybody who's actually looked at pensions in the past, Mr.

Speaker, you'll know that there's an opportunity to get more of a pension for the individual employee if they wish to only take a two-thirds pension for the spousal pension. What this does is this allows a 100 percent spousal pension for Hydro employees, but what it does is it reduces the amount of pension that the employee will get upon retirement. So that's just smart business.

It's an option for the individual if the spouse has a pension that's fairly large, then the employee, under the superannuation plan, if they retire, or when they retire, they may wish to take more into their pension and give less to the spouse, should that employee pass on. So that's very positive, Mr. Speaker. The other thing that's–it's also fairly positive, but also carries a negative at–attached to it, that's an opportunity within this legislation that will transfer $145 million from the main plan into the COLA account or what they refer to as, I believe, the a–a– [interjection] That's indexing; you're right.

Thank you very much to the member from– An Honourable Member: Pembina. Mr. Borotsik: Pembina. I knew that as well. There is an indexing account. So there's a main plan of what there's about–about $3 billion in the superannuation plan currently. And what they want to do is to have a full COLA and remember that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because this is a very important part of this piece of legislation. They're suggesting that if they transferred $145 million from the main plan and put it into the indexing fund, that superannuants going forward could have a full COLA, cost of living allowance.

Now, the cost of living allowance is a special calculation based on Canadian cost of living. But, should that cost of living be one-and-a-half percent or 1.6 percent, then under this legislation they're suggesting that with the transfer of $145 million there's a 30-year window th at full COLA would be applied to the superannuants. That, in itself, is a reasonable thing to expect. We really would like to see full indexation, full COLA, because as we know, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, that as costs increase on an annual basis, if you don't have that COLA component, then your real disposable income is eroded, and you're not able to maintain the same kind of a lifestyle with less disposable income coming in than you would have if you were able to offset that increase in inflation or that cost of living by an increase in your pension.

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2285 Now, that's–that's sound fiscal management, and I believe very strongly in it that individuals today should not be impacted by inflation of the future. But what has to happen, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is that there has to be an indexed fund that's sufficient to be able to pay out that cost of living, whether it be one-and-a-half or 2 percent or two-and-a-half percent, whichever it may be on annual basis, and right now, the superannuants don't have sufficient funds in that indexation account to be able to go forward. Ms.

Bonnie Korzeniowski, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Now, there is supposedly an actuarial study that is out there that says with an additional 145 million that, in fact, the indexation portion will be–will be able to be achieved. I question that. And I think that members opposite have to question that, as well, because I think there are expectations that are being set currently that cannot be achieved. So we're setting expectations for the superannuants, but I don't believe those expectations can be achieved, and let my tell you why that is, Madam Deputy Speaker, for two reasons.

We have the financials for the last four years and, in fact, when there was an actuarial study done in 2005, there was an actuarial surplus. Now, don't confuse that with an actual surplus in the account, but there was an actuarial surplus. So what the actuary did is he or she went in and said, this is the amount of the fund. These are the numbers of people that are being paid out of that fund currently. These are the retir ees that are going to be coming in at these certain time lines throughout the next 20 years. Here is the longevity.

Here is how long people are expected to live on average, and here is the actuarial surpluses that we see. * (15:20) As of 2005, the actuarial surplus in the superannuation fund was $136 million. Sounds like a not a bad thing; $136 million was the actuarial surplus in the main account for the civil servants. In 2006, that improved, and there was an actuarial surplus of $149 million in the main plan. In 2007, that actuarial surplus was reduced to $49 million. Now, we don't have the fiscal year-end December 31st, 2008. We don't have it for the civil servants' pension.

We have it for TRAF, and we'll talk about that a little later because there's an inequality here, but for the civil service, in 2008, I'm told that we're going to have a minus 17 percent return on that main pension plan. Now that's not out of the realm of possibility. I just mentioned earlier that the case in Québec had a minus 25 percent return on their plan.

Most plans are running somewhere in the neighbourhood of 14 to 18 percent in reduction of their plan, and I'm told by some rather informed sources that the superannuation plan year ending December 31st, 2008, which we don't have the real numbers for yet, is going to have a minus 17 percent return on the plan. Well, the plan's approximately $3 billion and that's a lot of money. That's a lot of money, but there's also a lot of reti rees, and there's a lot of people who work in the civil service. So a $3-billion plan that has a minus 17 percent return will lose, this past year, $510 million.

Now, are you listening to the number? It will lose $510 million this past fiscal year, but this legislation says that they're going to transfer $145 million of what's supposedly actuarial surplus into their indexation account. So we now have a loss of $510 million, which, if you look at the actuarials, they're going to say the existing plan doesn't have sufficient funds in it to fund this defined benefit pension that civil servants have paid into over the last 20, 25, 30, 35 years.

So not only is there some difficulty in maintaining the defined payments, there's going to be severe difficulty in transferring, if you will, $145 million from the main plan to the indexation account that's now going to allow for a full COLA. But this legislation says that can happen. I'm saying it should happen, but if you do the math, it can't happen. We don't have the $145-million surplus, actuarial surplus, to put it in the indexation account. So the legislation says that they're going to fund 100 percent COLA for the civil servants, for the civil service superannuations.

They say it's going to fund a full COLA, but here's the kicker. The legislation–the amendment says that it will do that, but the legislation itself says that, should the indexation account not have sufficient money in it to fund the indexation, then they can reduce it to two-thirds COLA. Says so right in the legislation.

In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, it says and I quote, on 33, 7, 1 of the act: Whenever in the opinion of the actuary the superannuation adjustment account is not in a state of pre-funding sufficient to ensure its ability to make all required adjustment payments on a continuing basis for the immediately ensuing period of 20 years, the percentage increased used in one of the formula set out in subsection 7 is to be reduced by one-third.

2286 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 Now what that legal gobbledygook says, that if the indexation account doesn't have sufficient funds in it, the actuarial says, to fund it for 20 years, then that's going to be ratcheted back to a two-thirds COLA, and I think it's important that members opposite listen to this, because in this amendment, there's the suggestion that with the 145 moved over, there's going to be a 30-year ability to pay for a full COLA.

COLA's very important in this whole discussion, and I'll tell you in a minute why that is, but they're saying in one place that they can move 145 million–I've just shown you that there's a $510-million loss in the account. There is no surplus of 145 million, whether it be cash or actuarial, to move across. It's not there. The math doesn't work. So then it goes back to the main legislation that says, well, if you don't have the amount in the indexation account or adjustment account, then we're going to ratchet back to two-thirds COLA and that's basically where the civil servants are at the present time.

They're at two-thirds COLA, so what's going to happen is you've got these expectations built up in this piece of legislation, this amendment that, unfortunately, Madam Deputy Speaker, are just not achievable. Now, you're going to wonder why I spent a fair amount of time on the COLA clause. Well, there're two main pensions that are held by the provincial government; one is the Civil Service Superannuation Plan and the other one is called TRAF, the teachers' retirement account.

Now, I'm sure members opposite remember, not that long ago, committee hearings and legislation that came forward that capped the TRAF account COLA at two-thirds. That was a cap. There was never the allowance to have a full COLA of 100 percent, and in this legislation there is an allowance for full COLA at some point in time. So, in this pension account, the government is saying a full COLA is the way it should be. They're saying it's achievable and they're saying that civil servants should have a full COLA–and I don't disagree.

I said that very much earlier in my convers–in my discussion that pensioners, in fact, should have the ability to have a full COLA because you can't erode your pensions that much over years and still have necessary disposable income to maintain your lifestyle. So nobody's arguing with the full COLA. What the argument would be, Madam Deputy Speaker, would be, why is it in this legislation the government sees it's fine to have a full COLA for the civil servants, but on parallel legislation with TRAF, there's going to be a cap of two-thirds COLA. But it gets worse than that.

In this legislation, it says it will be reduced to two-thirds, so civil servants can always expect–and I think it's probably more realistic to expect–two-thirds of COLA than in the TRAF legislation where it is a ceiling, a cap of two-thirds COLA, while we all recognize that the TRAF, or the retired teachers, have in fact been receiving substantially less than two-thirds COLA, substantially less. As a matter of fact, in this particular year, I believe it was .37 percent of the total COLA that was calculated, so they got a third of COLA as opposed to the two-thirds which is guaranteed in this legislation.

So my question is, why the inequity? Why would you treat one group differently than another group? Now, there's another very serious inequity that went forward. We talked about the adjustment accounts or the indexation account. Well, civil servants actually contribute a portion of their–a portion of their contribution is put into the adjustment account. The same is true with TRAF. Teachers today are making contribution to their pensions. We know that.

Employees make contributions on a monthly basis–all employees, with the exception of GM and Chrysler, who don't make any contributions, but that's a whole different issue, a whole different ball game and, unfortunately, we have no control over that. However, teachers, when they make their contributi on into the TRAF account, a portion of what they contribute goes into the adjustment account. That's a higher contribution to the adjustment account than civil servants make.

So, very simply, civil servants now make a contribution to not only the main benefit account, a portion of that goes into the indexation account or the adjustment account. Teachers pay more into the adjustment account for COLA, but they get less. They pay more, but, unfortunately, they receive only a cap of two-thirds COLA. * (15:30) Now, there's an inequity here and I'm sure anybody on either side of the House can see how retired teachers feel put on.

This is why retired teachers spoke very passionately to the–their pension bill, when it came forward last year and indicated to all members of the committee that they should be treated equally. And I think everybody in this House believes that; that teachers should be treated as well as civil servants, particularly when they're making a larger contribution to their adjustment account. But, no, the Minister of Education (Mr. Bjornson) decided at that point in time that he wasn't going to listen to

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2287 retired teachers and he had the backing of the teachers, Manitoba Teachers' Society. Why they backed that particular piece of legislation is still beyond me because not only is it affecting the retired teachers currently, but it's going to affect them when they decide to turn in their erasers and chalk. Because they are not going to have a protection, an inflation protection to their pensions. So now we have a piece of legislation that is exacerbating the issue and the problem.

Teachers aren't going to complain with this legislation 'cause right off the bat I said this is good legislation to protect pensioners in our province. People who work hard on our behalf on a daily basis, people who work and put away their money into a pension account should have some stability in that pension account. The same thing should be said for not only teachers, but retired teachers. So, when this legislation comes to committee, be prepared. Be prepared to an swer questions as to why one sector of our employment society is going to be treated differently than another sector.

Be prepared to give answers and I don't think there are any answers available. I really can't come up with a really good justification for this government to poke a stick in the eye of teachers and retired teachers. But they are, in fact, going to assist civil servants under the superannuation plan, which is good and I'm not unhappy with that. The other thing that's in this legislation, Madam Deputy Speaker, is enhancements to the Hydro employees. Now, this gets a little bit complicated. But the Hydro pension fund is pooled with the other organizations and it's managed as a pension fund.

But the Hydro pension fund is fully funded. The employer, Hydro, has paid its contribution on an annual basis. The employees, Hydro, have paid their contribution on an annual basis and the fund itself, within the fund, has been operating extremely well. If you do just the actuarials on the Manitoba Hydro component of this fund, you'll find that Manitoba Hydro is doing a very admirable job in making sure that the defined benefits are going to be there when the employees would like them. That's laudable and I give Manitoba Hydro full credit for it.

There was a danger that Manitoba Hydro, because of their, their liquid plan, was going to remove that from the main superannuation fund. So the government, this government of the day, decided that they're going to give Manitoba Hydro employees enhanced benefits, and we talked very briefly on those enhanced benefits and they say that those enhanced benefits aren't necessarily cost benefit, but, regardless, when one group within the plan receives options and abilities to make changes to their benefits, then, then, the others, I believe, are going to want the same options and the same benefits.

Doesn't that make sense, that when you have a number of organizations within this one group of plan–this group, this plan, that in fact the other groups are going to say, well, if Manitoba Hydro has the ability to have these options available to them then I think we should have those options available to us and I think that's gonna happen. Now, never have pensions been a part of negotiations.

Never have pensions been a part of negotiations, however, it seems that this may well be the strategy that this government has, Madam Deputy Speaker, is to open it up to the negotiating table to try to look and try to fix the pensions. Remember, in closing, I said we have a $500-million deficit in the fund. We don't have $145 million to move over to the adjustment account. We're setting expectations too high in this piece of legislation that can't be maintained– Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The member's time has expired. The honourable Member for Emerson– An Honourable Member: Carman.

Madam Deputy Speaker: Carman–damn. Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Carman): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Briese), that Bill 8, The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act, be now adjourned. Madam Deputy Speaker: It has been moved by the Member for Carman, seconded by the Member for Ste. Rose (Mr. Briese), that the debate be now adjourned. Agreed? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Madam Deputy Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Bill 12–The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act Madam Deputy Speaker: We move on now to No. 12, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, standing in the name of the Member for Emerson (Mr. Graydon). Is it the will of the committee–

2288 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 25, 2009 An Honourable Member: House. Madam Deputy Speaker: House, sorry, to let the member's name for Emerson stand? An Honourable Member: Yes. Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Madam Deputy Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity this afternoon to rise and participate in second reading debate of Bill No. 12, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act. This act was introduced into the Legislative Assembly by Finance Minister Selinger, pardon me, the Finance Minister, on April the 6th.

My apologies, I withdraw the name of the honourable minister, on April the 6th, 2009. Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm pleased to say that we're looking forward to the–to this bill, as comprehensive as it is to move through to committee, and after second reading debate to offer the opportunity for Manitobans to bring forward their thoughts in regards to this legislation. To date, there are six persons that have registered with the Clerk's office to make presentation on Bill No. 12, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act.

Now this bill has a–has number of different components to it and I will attempt to debate all of the various components today, although I know I only have a limited amount of time, and in order to do so. As my position as official opposition Consumer and Corporate Affairs critic it is my responsibility to have a briefing by the minister as it pertains to Bill No. 12 which we have–have been graciously provided for by the minister, and it did give us a great deal of material in which to–in which to study.

In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, the briefing notes as–as maybe noteworthy are–are consuming of 112 legal-length pieces of paper, and it is quite extensive of a modification to the existing residential tenancy act, but, primarily, we here in the province of Manitoba have been listening to Manitobans and do want to support the government in its efforts to modernize legislation and to make the necessary changes that accommodate the current Manitobans' needs. * (15:40) One of the modifications that, in this act, is to provide for tenancy agreements that include tenant services.

As we're all aware that persons moving from their own home ownership into apartments when one is a little more seasoned and perhaps does no longer wants to be tasked with the upkeep challenges of owning their own home, and when one moves into the–into apartment complexes and becomes a tenant would, though, like to be served with various amenities within that complex, and to date there is no ability to have detailed break-out of the charges that are required for various services provided within an apartment complex.

This bill does then now allow for an ability to break out these charges so that tenants can take on and make use of the services with the full knowledge of what that service is going to cost them, either by monthly rate or by usage rate or for an annual rate. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think this is definitely the way to accommodate more persons and also, too, to add a greater array of services to tenants in various complexes. I know that in the complex to which I reside here in Winnipeg, when in session, does provide for swimming and hot tub, but not much more in addition to the apartment.

But there are amenities that are close by the apartment complex that we can go out and purchase: the health spa, inclusive of weight room and running track and massage therapy and other services. But we want to make–and because it is another business, the charges are well known prior to sign-up. But in some complexes now, those services are part of the complex, and so there is not much opportunity for tenants to know exactly what those services are costing.

Also, too, there is a move to have a greater number of apartments with supportive and assisted living throughout the province so that persons are not having to enter into long-term care facilities until that level of support is truly needed. So, with the advent of supportive and assisted living, there are services that provide for–provide to a tenant. As an example, congregate meal programs and house- keeping services and as well as light chores might be done for the tenant insofar as shopping and for groceries, and et cetera.

So this particular bill does make provision for modification to the tenancy agreement to include these types of services, which Manitobans, indeed, are wanting. Also, too, this particular amendment act does provide for a separate pet damage deposit to be part of the tenancy agreement, because here in the province of Manitoba, when one, as I said, is moving from their own home that they've lived in for many years into an apartment, that home ownership, in

May 25, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2289 most cases does, does involve also having a, having a pet. And Winnipeg Humane Society, in 2007, received 5,640 cats and 1,97 6 dogs, the majority of which came to the Winnipeg Humane Society because of persons moving into apartments from their homes, and the particular apartments had no-pet policies. And, understandably, the landlords here in Manitoba are reluctant to accept pets because we all know that there is significant am

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-3-46
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 3rd hansardpdf 46.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	9ca7a29eb462aa76d6871849714fa1128efa4516

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