Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 45 (41st Legislature, 2nd Session)

41-2-45

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session – Forty-First Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Myrna Driedger Speaker Vol. LXX No. 45 - 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, April 26, 2017 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Forty-First Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLUM, James Fort Garry-Riverview NDP ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley NDP BINDLE, Kelly Thompson PC CLARKE, Eileen, Hon. Agassiz PC COX, Cathy, Hon. River East PC CULLEN, Cliff, Hon. Spruce Woods PC CURRY, Nic Kildonan PC DRIEDGER, Myrna, Hon. Charleswood PC EICHLER, Ralph, Hon. Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FIELDING, Scott, Hon. Kirkfield Park PC FLETCHER, Steven, Hon. Assiniboia PC FONTAINE, Nahanni St. Johns NDP FRIESEN, Cameron, Hon. Morden-Winkler PC GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib.

GOERTZEN, Kelvin, Hon. Steinbach PC GRAYDON, Clifford Emerson PC GUILLEMARD, Sarah Fort Richmond PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC ISLEIFSON, Len Brandon East PC JOHNSON, Derek Interlake PC JOHNSTON, Scott St. James PC KINEW, Wab Fort Rouge NDP KLASSEN, Judy Kewatinook Lib. LAGASSÉ, Bob Dawson Trail PC LAGIMODIERE, Alan Selkirk PC LAMOUREUX, Cindy Burrows Lib. LATHLIN, Amanda The Pas NDP LINDSEY, Tom Flin Flon NDP MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Flor Logan NDP MARCELINO, Ted Tyndall Park NDP MARTIN, Shannon Morris PC MAYER, Colleen St. Vital PC MICHALESKI, Brad Dauphin PC MICKLEFIELD, Andrew, Hon.

Rossmere PC MORLEY-LECOMTE, Janice Seine River PC NESBITT, Greg Riding Mountain PC PALLISTER, Brian, Hon. Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine, Hon. Midland PC PIWNIUK, Doyle Arthur-Virden PC REYES, Jon St. Norbert PC SARAN, Mohinder The Maples Ind. SCHULER, Ron, Hon. St. Paul PC SELINGER, Greg St. Boniface NDP SMITH, Andrew Southdale PC SMOOK, Dennis La Verendrye PC SQUIRES, Rochelle, Hon. Riel PC STEFANSON, Heather, Hon. Tuxedo PC SWAN, Andrew Minto NDP TEITSMA, James Radisson PC WHARTON, Jeff Gimli PC WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WISHART, Ian, Hon.

Portage la Prairie PC WOWCHUK, Rick Swan River PC YAKIMOSKI, Blair Transcona PC Vacant Point Douglas

1579 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, April 26, 2017 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Madam Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as 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 and know it with cer tainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen. Please be seated.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 220–The Environmental Rights Act Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): I move, seconded by the honourable member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 220, The Environmental Rights Act, be now read a first time. Madam Speaker: I would indicate that the member will have to redo that, as the seconder was not in their seat at the time, so. Mr. Altemeyer: I move, seconded by the honourable MLA for St. Boniface, that Bill 220, The Environmental Rights Act, be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr.

Altemeyer: It gives me great pleasure today to introduce Bill 220, The Environmental Rights Act, to the House. There are, very briefly, four main provisions to this legislation, all of which were inspired by Dr. David Suzuki and his national Blue Dot campaign, encouraging governments across the country to take this type of action.

The four main components of the bill are as follows: that government must consider the environ- mental impacts when it makes decisions, that information has to be provided to the public and that the public will have access to the courts in a couple of di fferent ways to enforce decisions that government should make and that any employee raising an issue will be protected with a whistle-blower-like provision. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Committee reports? TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Ian Wishart (Minister of Education and Training): I wish to table the 2015- 2016 adult – Manitoba Adult literally–Literacy Strategy and Adult Learning Centres, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: Ministerial statements? MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Rick Plaisier Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur-Virden): Madam Speaker, it is a great sadness and heavy hearts that we say farewell to a great Manitoban, Mr. Rick Plaisier. Rick leaves behind his wife, Marie, and his three sons, Kent, Shawn and Todd, and their families, including many grandchildren.

Rick spent most of his teaching career in the town of Virden and was principal of the Virden Junior High school. Rick was committed to public service. He was incredibly dedicated to the Lions service club, community of Oak Lake and many local boards. Over the years, Rick was past councillor of the Town of Virden. At the time of his passing he was the reeve of the RM of Sifton. As the reeve, he sat on many committees, including the Association of Manitoba Municipalities and Souris watershed committee. Rick had a 'pash' for politics; he knew politics inside and out. He was very connected provincially.

Rick was a role model not only to myself but to many others that crossed paths in different political circles. Rick served on my –as my campaign manager from the start of my political journey until his passing. I really enjoyed the days that we spent together travelling on the roads of Arthur -Virden's constituency. Even after I became the MLA for Arthur-Virden, Rick's wealth of knowledge and his ability to –the sounding board never failed to shed light or offer a different perspective on any issue. Rick's wisdom was always appreciated.

1580 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 Rick is not only going to be missed in the Virden and Oak Lake areas, he is going to be missed throughout the province of Manitoba. With his large network, he was well known in every part of this province. Success is not what is accomplished in your life; it's about what you inspire others to do. Rick's legacy will live on forever in his memories and experiences that he has left with many individuals, especially his family–his quest for improvement to his community.

Madam Speaker, Rick's widow Marie, family members and friends are here today in t he public gallery. Let us stand and applaud Rick for his contribution to public service in the province of Manitoba. Rick, my friend, you are going to be greatly missed. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Arthur-Virden. Mr. Piwniuk: Madam Speaker, I wish to leave –give leave to have the names of guests here today to be included in Hansard.

Madam Speaker: Does the member have leave to include the names of the guests in Hansard? [Agreed] Family and friends of Rick Pla isier: Kathy Batho, Keith McEwa n, Susan McEwan, Breanna Plaisier, Brendan Plaisier, Haylee Plaisier, Marie Plaisier, Mya Plaisier, Reed Plaisier, Shalen Plaisier, Todd Plaisier, Tristan Plaisier, Sandra Wallace Anti-Corruption and Integrity Forum Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East): Good afternoon.

During the March constituency week, I was honoured and privileged to attend the 2017 anti - corruption and integrity forum on behalf of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, known as the CPA. Fitting into the overall design of being in the public interest, this forum contained a number of presentations related to the public interest, and this forum contained a number of presentations that must be taken when looking at integrity into higher standards. It was of great interest to hear t he opening remarks from the Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic and the vice -president of Nigeria.

While both–corruption exists in these countries; both spoke of measures taking place to mitigate the opportunities while recognizing the need for further action. The seriousness of this issue of corruption and integrity in the world closed out the opening remarks with a delivery of a two -page report to the secretary- general of the organization of economic co-operation and development who hosted the forum. Madam Speaker, this forum raised some very real concerns with the huge cost of corruption by revealing the existence of inequality, exclusion and disillusionment.

With approximately 1,300 people in attendance, there was a strong indication that there was a great interest in those countries with past experiences of corruption and loss of integrity. Here in Canada, Madam Speaker, we are very fortunate to lead the world in legislation to mitigate corruption and increase integrity in both the public and priva te sectors. We must, however, always remain aware of the changes in our world and have the courage to stand up and make changes ourselves to ensure that integrity remains high among all of us.

In closing, Madam Speaker, the information gathered at the for um, whether through the sessional speakers or from best practices from my 'sellow' – fellow PCPA delegates, the Honourable Alando Terrelonge from Jamaica and the Honourable Sandra Nelson from Australia, it was all extremely valuable, and I want to thank the Clerk's office and the selection committee of the CPA for this great opportunity. Thank you. * (13:40) ArtsJunktion Ms.

Flor Marcelino (Leader of the Official Opposition): Last night, during National Volunteer Week, individual volunteers, groups and community organizations were recognized and honoured at the 34th Annual Volunteer Awards. Those who won the awards were nominated based on their exceptional contributions to improve our communities and our province. ArtsJunktion Manitoba, a community -based organization that collects used materials and redistributes them to artists, teachers and crafters, was one of the 30 deserving recipients this year.

Located in my constituency, ArtsJunktion is dedicated to serving artists in the city and promoting environmental sustainability. They've not only given

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1581 budding artists a place to grow, but they've also kept hundreds of pounds of material out of landfills. Every day, Manitobans of all ages are donating their time, skills and expertise, supporting amazing organizations and causes throughout the province. It's clear that Manitoba's reputation for generosity extends far beyond charitable donations. I'm proud to live in a province that consistently has one of the highest volunteerism rates in the country. Congratulations to ArtsJunktion and to all nominees and recipients of last night's awards.

Your dedication and hard work prove how easy it is to donate your time while doing something you love. Thank you for making Manitoba one of the best places in the world to live and raise a family. Thank you. French Legion of Honour Medal Recipients Mr. Greg Nesbitt (Riding Mountain): The Nazis were pushed out of Europe over 70 years ago, but the bravery of Canadians who fought on the continent during the Second World War hasn't been forgotten.

Three veterans from my constituency of Riding Mountain were recently awarded the French Legion of Honour medal, the highest national award that can be bestowed upon anyone by the government of France. Originally created by Napoleon Bonaparte as recognition of outstanding achievement made in service to the French Republic in either a civilian or military capacity, the five -armed cross and green wreath depicted on the medal has been bestowed to living Canadian veterans for the past five years in recognition of their efforts to help liberate France during the Second World War. The Honorary Consul for France, Mr.

Franc is [phonetic] Burnichon, presented the medals to Mr. Robert Henderson, age 95, of Shoal Lake; Mr. Alex Abel, age 93, of Minnedosa ; and Mr. Fred Oberg, age 100, also of Minnedosa, at events held in front of friends and family on Monday, March 13, 2017, in their respective communities. These three Canadian soldiers put their lives on the line in the fight to liberate France and brought honour back not only to Canada, but to their families and their Manitoba communities.

I am honoured today to stand before you and say how proud I am to have such constituents in my riding, and I would like to thank them for their contribution to ensure our freedom and congratulate them for being recognized with such a prestigious award. Manitoba's Agriculture Sector Mr. Brad Michaleski (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, one of the great things about my job is that I get to travel back and for th between Dauphin and Winnipeg quite often, and I'm constantly reminded about Manitoba's beauty and the cycles of rural life.

The trees are budding, things are drying up, the grass is greening, and farmers are getting equipment ready to tangle with Mothe r Nature for another year. A lot of cattle producers have just come off their calving season and its great to see the cows and calves out enjoying the warm spring days. Spring is a time of hope and optimism throughout the province, but especially so for our agricultural sector. Manitoba agriculture is a very diverse industry that contributes immeasurably to the quality of life enjoyed by most.

Safe, affordable food is a pillar of our economy, and our producers proudly play a vital role in responsibly producing food. Science and agriculture have made tremendous progress in meeting demands , and together , they have and will continue to improve on many sustain - ability challenges associated with the progresses and demands made by a changing and modern society. It's important, Madam Speaker, that we under - stand Manitoba's food production systems and to show support and appreciation for its diversity and adaptability in not only serving Manitoba's needs, but the needs around the world.

Whether its grains, oilsee ds, legumes, livestock, forages or vegetables, whether its intensive agriculture or not, no one system can meet the demand, and Manitoba's diverse producers and production systems coexist to do a great job of meeting the needs in a responsible way. I want thank our producers for doing what they do and wish them all a great and safe growing season. Thank you. ORAL QUESTIONS Health-Care Budget Government Plan Ms. Flor Marcelino (Leader of the Official Opposition): The Premier has caused chaos and confusion in our health system.

1582 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 After promising to protect the jobs of our health workers, the Premier now says he doesn't know who will lose their job. The Premier promised to protect our health workers; now he is using heavy-handed legislation to impose a wage freeze, rather than respecting the right of workers to negotiate their contracts. The Premier promised he would protect our front -line services, but now is only focused on the bottom line. The Premier won't listen to us, but will he listen to the thousands of patients, doctors and nurses who are telling the Premier to change course?

Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my colleague, and she is wrong, though, in one aspect of what she asserts. She says that we're not listening, and that's wrong, because we are listening and we're hearing from the members opposite that we should fight to preserve the status quo, and the status quo is not good enough. The status quo has us ranked last among all Canadian provinces in giving Manitobans access to services. It has our people waiting longer in emergency rooms than any other Canadians are forced to wait.

The status quo is not good enough, Madam Speaker, so although we lis tened to the members opposite, we are also listening to the front -line workers throughout out health -care system who are telling us that it can be made to work far, far better. Ms. Marcelino: If the Premier were at the steps today, he would hear the chant , care, not cuts, from the front-line workers. Madam Speaker, patients, workers, nurses and doctors have all stood up to tell this government that it needs to focus on patient care, not just on the bottom line.

Nurses and workers were just on the steps of the Legislature to tell this government that this Premier and this government are on the wrong track after causing chaos in their hospitals. The Premier would have us believe he can improve patient care by cutting $2 million from primary health care. I f his real focus was on patient care, he would listen to front -line staff and he wouldn't cut $2 million from primary health care. Will the Premier do the right thing and cancel his plans and reconsider his proposals? Or is he so stubborn that he will onl y focus on the bottom line, no matter what anyone says? Mr.

Pallister: Well, Madam Speaker, again, I would encourage the member not to be too strong in condemning efforts to make a system that is broken work better because she is putting herself and her party in a dangerous situation of advocating for the status quo. And, Madam Speaker, the system is not serving the people of Manitoba at all well. Certainly that is what front-line workers have told us, again and again and again. Nurses have told us stories about patients suffering and waiting excessively long times for services. They have told us about friends and family members who have done the same.

And they have told us that they want us to continue to trim at the top of the organization so we can fortify the front line. And that is exactly what we're focused on doi ng, in spite of the monumental inherited challenges that we face, which are undeniable. Madam Speaker, the fiscal challenges are enormous, but we will do our best to face this challenge, where the previous government walked away. Madam Speaker: The honourable interim Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary. Ms.

Marcelino: The Premier is rushing massive disruption to our health- care system because he is focused only on the bottom line. If this whole exercise were truly about p atient care, he would cancel his plans and actually talk to the people who are delivering front-line care. * (13:50) But he won't do that, Madam Speaker. He is rushing this hasty plan because he demands cuts right away. He is causing chaos in the health s ystem because he demands cuts today and he's not listening to patients, workers, nurses and doctors who are telling this government to change course.

Why is the Premier only focused on the bottom line? Mr. Pallister: What we are focused on is improving front-line services, Madam Speaker. We’re focused on the front line. What the members opposite were focused on, only they can answer, Madam Speaker. But what they did as a consequence of their lack of progress in reducing wait times was make wait times g row. And what they did as a consequence of their unwillingness or inability to make improvements to

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1583 the system of delivery of health care was create real hardship for real people. Here's a letter from a person who should know, a registered nurse, who says : I want to communicate my support for consolidation of health- care services in order to promote efficiencies. I'm a registered nurse. I see waste in our system. It frustrates me. Manitobans need strong efficient health care in order to promote prosperity and productivity. When we become complacent in existing structures, we turn a blind eye to waste and poor outcomes.

That's exactly what the previous government did, Madam Speaker, turned a blind eye and created a system that hurt Manitobans. We'll heal that system. Health-Care Budget Impact on Patient Care Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Madam Speaker, hundreds of people gathered on the steps of this Legislature today to protest this government's short - sighted cuts to our health- care system, including a reckless plan to shut down three emergency rooms. Manitoba nurses and the families and the workers who support them led the rally, calling on the minister to stand up for front -line workers and the services they deliver.

This government claims they are talking to Manitobans, and yet they didn't even have the decency to show up on the front steps and come talk directly to those workers who are providing services. Will the minister stop ignoring the families, the front-line workers who are hurt by his cuts and invest in our health-care system? Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living ): First of all, we certainly appreciate and respect the right of all Manitobans to bring their views either to the Legislature or other places when they want their views heard.

That is an important part of our democratic system. The plan that the member classifies as reckless was actually a plan that was commissioned by his former leader, the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger). It included a steering committee that involved many different people, including Sandi Mowat, the president of Manitoba nurses association. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable member for Concordia, on a supplementary question. Mr. Wiebe: Let us be clear here in this House today, Madam Speaker. It is this minister's and this Premier's (Mr.

Pallister) decision alone to make these reckless cuts and these closures which will affect patient care, and they're doing it only because they don't care about patient care, only about the bottom line. This was a cutthroat decision meant to meet only the Premier's impossible targets, and health -care experts are warning them that harm –the harm that this will impose on Manitoba's health care. The head of the Manitoba Nurses Union warns that these cuts, combined with wage freezes, will hurt patient care. The Manitoba doctors association warns the same. Why isn't the minister listening to doctors and nurses? Mr.

Goertzen : Madam Speaker, the member f or Concordia alleges that the former leader of the NDP, the member for St. Boniface, conspired to have a report, a commission, when they were in government to meet the targets of a future government that they wouldn't have known about. It seems a little ludicrous to allege such a thing. He indicates that there is concern. We certainly are willing–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order Mr. Goertzen : –to listen to individuals who have concerns, Madam Speaker.

I will recognize, though, that on that steering co mmittee for the Peachey report was Sandi Mowat, president of the Manitoba Nurses Union, and Robert Cram, chief executive officer of Doctors Manitoba. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Concordia, on a final supplementary. Mr. Wiebe: Madam Speaker, this minister continues to pick and choose pieces of the report that fit his narrative line only. As if these cuts across the board to WRHA and to wage –and the wage freezes aren't enough, the Health Minister is cutting a program to increase doctor retentio n in rural Manitoba.

He brought a budget which failed to build any new PCHs, ignored home care and cut prevention programs. He cut the WRHA budget by millions; he opened the door to private care.

1584 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 Families in Winnipeg and rural Manitoba are losing access to their front -line health care, yet the Health Minister calls it commitment to patient care. Well, now he's cutting millions from primary health care. The tens –sorry–the hundreds of people out on the steps would disagree. The only commitment this minister has is to the bottom line. Why won't he put families first? Mr. Goertzen: Madam Speaker, the Peachey report which was commissioned by the former NDP government specifically had a mandate to be focused on patient care.

The member asked that question in Estimates yesterday. I read him the mandate that was the focus of the Peachey report commissioned by the former leader, the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger). What I learned yesterday in Estimates, which I didn't know before until the member asked the question, is that was actually an untendered contract. The NDP specifically –specifically–selected Dr. Peachey because they thought he was the best person for the job. They hand- picked him for the report. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. Rural and Northern Health Care Cut to Doctor Retention Program Ms.

Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): The Health Minister closed three ERs in Winnipeg. Now he's dealt a blow to rural and northern health care. By cutting a program which encouraged doctors to work long term in isolated communities, this government has made it that much harder for families t o access health care. He's announced the cut with no–with a – no ready program to replace it. Why is the minister pulling doctors out of rural Manitoba without a plan to put them back in? Hon.

Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Livin g): Madam Speaker, under the former government, under the NDP 19 emergency rooms closed in rural Manitoba. They maybe think that the program was working to attract doctors to ERs in rural Manitoba, but 19 ERs closed in rural communities under the former government's watch. Now, maybe they consider that a record of success in terms of attracting doctors to work in rural Manitoba. Clearly, the program wasn't working when they closed 19 ERs. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for The Pas, on a supplementary question. Ms.

Lathlin: The minister says rural doctors with families aren't concerned about money. This govern- ment has increased tuition fees for students, cut their tax credits and now they've cut grants to medical students. These attacks mean graduates will have more debt and will need good jobs to pay that debt off. This government is attacking affordability for families. So who is the minister kidding? Mr. Goertzen: Madam Speaker, as indicated in my previous answer, under the former gover nment 19 emergency rooms closed over the last 16 years.

Some of them have been closed for more than 10 years under the Selinger government where members opposite, who sit today, also have sat in that government. They didn't say anything about doctor recruitment at that time. We know that we need to have a provincial plan to recruit doctors and to retain them. Money wasn't their chief concern in the majority of cases when it came to choosing a community to work in and the proof of that is that 19 emergency rooms closed under the Selinger government. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for The Pas, on a final supplementary. Ms.

Lathlin: The minister has pulled emergency doctors out of three Winnipeg hospitals without any investments to build capacity and now he's pulling doctors out of rural Manitoba without a plan to put more in. This minister's cut–the minister's cut -first-plan- later approach is hurting our families. Will he stop the cuts to rural doctors until he has a replacement program in place? Mr. Goertzen : Madam Speaker, as I indicated yesterday, there are, in fact, investments happening in emergency rooms in Winnipeg.

The Grace Hospital is currently under construction, will be completed, we hope, next year, and that is certainly part of the plan. * (14:00)

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1585 But we know that money isn't the answer. The former government poured $100 million into emer - gency rooms and wait lines –wait times in our emergencies just got worse. They got worse and worse every year. But I do want to inform the member, since she's asking the question particularly about the North, we know that the family medicine program for doctors was actually working, and that's why we've kept it, Madam Speaker.

Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to going on with oral questions, I just would like to indicate that the young students that were in the gallery today, there were about 80 of them, and they're grade 3- 4 students from Charleswood. Job Creation Government Plan Mr. Wab Kinew (Fort Rouge): Yesterday during the Estimates process, I asked the Education Minister what his government's plan is to keep talented graduates in this province after graduation. He replied: good jobs. Yes, good jobs are important. Yes, it's good; it's good; it's good, very good. Good jobs are important. Yet this Premier (Mr.

Pallister) has laid off 900 Hydro workers. He's cut programs to retain doctors in Manitoba. He's cut government jobs. Today, he's got hundreds of nurses on the steps of this Legislature worried about their careers. So, what is this Premier's plan for good jobs? Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Growth, Enterprise and Trade): It's certainly nice to finally have a job on the economy from the members of the opposition. Madam Speaker, we look at business optimism in Manitoba. It is the highest in Manitoba across any province in the country. We're going to harness that optimism and create more jobs in Manitoba.

I've met with the business sector this morning. They're very excited about the future of Manitoba. And, in partnership, we're going to grow the economy here in Manitoba. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Rouge, on a supplementary question. Mr. Kinew: I am optimistic, but not necessarily about this government. Yesterday, we just got news that Great -West Life is cutting 1,500 positions, including hundreds right here in Winnipeg. These are good jobs being lost because of automation.

It's happening at the same time that Bell MTS is carrying out reductions and the new tariff on the softwood industry threatens our producers, who export 99 per cent of their softwood products to the US. So, while all this downsizing is happening in the private sector, this Premier is still carrying through cuts in education that would help create jobs for the knowledge economy. So, again, what is this Premier's plan to create good jobs in Manitoba? [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Cullen: I do appreciate the question, especially on the technology side.

We have a thriving industry in technology and innovation here in Manitoba, and I was able to participate in their event just this last week. They're very excited about the future and they're going to create jobs that are going to allow Manitobans to stay in Manitoba. And I will say, Madam Speaker, since the beginning of this year, Manitobans have created 6,000 new jobs. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable member for Fort Rouge, on a final supplementary. Mr. Kinew: We hear the same lines, but no answer, no plan.

There is a bigger and bigger difference between what this Premier said he would do in the last election and what he is actually doing now that he's in government. No one would have voted for hospital closures. No one would have voted for 900 Hydro workers to be laid off. No one would have voted for the job losses that we've seen recently. Nowhere is the gap more evident between what the Premier said he would do and what he's actually doing when it comes to a lack of a concrete jobs plan.

Will the Premier tell the House today, specifically: What measures will he take to generate good, high-paying jobs here in Manitoba?

1586 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, I appreciate a question from the member on some thing his party has expertise on: knowing what people won't vote for, Madam Speaker. What people won't vote for is higher taxes. The members opposite ran on a promise in the previous election. The party the member now seeks the leadership of has a legacy of promising that they won't raise taxes and then following up by raising them to record levels, in fact, more so than any other government in Canada, right on the heels of promising they wouldn't raise them.

If the member wants a little lesson on how to uncreate jobs, he can take a look at economics 101 textbooks and they'll talk about the importance of leaving money in the hands of the people who work for it. Discretionary incomes go down when you raise taxes, Madam Speaker. We just tabled two con - secutive budgets with tax reductions. That's how you create real jobs: you let the people who work hard for the money have the chance to create those jobs for you. Funding for Arts Program Sturgeon Heights Music Program Mr.

Andrew Swan (Minto): Yesterday, students at Sturgeon Heights Collegiate and their parents were saddened and disappointed to hear their music program will be dramatically reduced this fall. Popular music teacher will be let go, and three performing groups, the wind ensemble, jazz combo and a jazz band, will cease to exist. The explanation given to parents and students is that this cut comes as a result of the provincial government's choice to underfund the school division. Will the Minister of Education step in to ensure that this popula r and successful program will not be slashed? Hon.

Ian Wishart (Minister of Education and Training): Our government is –provided a record amount of funding for the K -to-12 system in this province of Manitoba. We are great fans of good education in this province, and we will continue to supply and encourage school divisions to work together to provide the services required so that students in Manitoba can have the best educat ion possible. Under the previous government our educational results went from No. 5 in Canada to No. 11. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable member for Minto, on a supplementary question. Mr.

Swan: Madam Speaker, we believe the arts are an important part of quality education. The music program at Sturgeon Heights has a proud history going back decades to Silver Heights, which merged with Sturgeon. I took band at Silver Heights and so did the Premier's predecessor as PC leader. The music program at Sturgeon Heights is well known to the member for St. James (Mr. Johnston) as a former trustee; the member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Fielding), who is a graduate of Silver Heights; as well as the member for Assiniboia (Mr. Fl etcher), whose constituency includes the school.

Even the Finance Minister used to make his living teaching music in a public school. Is there anyone in the PC caucus prepared to speak up and defend the music program at Sturgeon Heights? Mr. Wishart: I can assure the member that members of our caucus speak up in favour of education all the time. And our government is focused on making sure that Manitoba students have access to a good -quality education province -wide in the –and we were certainly proud to be part of record funding for the – for K-to-12 system in Manitoba.

If the member opposite was so worried about our Manitoba education system, why did they underfund construction programs for the last 10 years? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable member for Minto, on a final supplementary. Mr. Swan: This government can control the spin in this building, but they can't control the concern in our communities. My time in the music program included many talented musicians who went on to pursue careers in music.

There's Alice, who teaches music at Westwood; there's Jim, who went to Brandon University and a career as a jazz musician and professor; and there's George, whose keyboards you would hear if you ever listened to Lenny Kravitz. And for everyone who went on to a career in music, there were many others who benefited from

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1587 the discipline, the teamwork and the development that comes from a successful music program. How many more arts programs will be reduced or closed down due to this government's funding choices? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Madam Speaker, many members of this House, including the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Kinew), who I know had an exciting musical career, and many others.

I have, as well, enjoyed my time with music in school and since, and I agree with the member in his assertions about building skills and about the opportunities for not only a music education, but a liberal arts education. As an arts graduate myself as well, I think these are important aspects of how we give our young people the opportunity to grow and to learn. And so–and I particularly appreciate his reference to teamwork and team building.

It's something that I know can be put on display by a good government such as this one, and will. * (14:10) As we support education and improving the quality of education, Madam Speaker, within the constraints of the real inherited deficit and debt situation that we've been given by the previous government, we'll do our utmost to make sure that the best quality education and the best possible results for our young people are achieved. Road-to-Recovery Plan Request to Release Ms.

Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): Madam Speaker, this government ran on a c ampaign of openness and transparency, but they have failed to demonstrate this in their actions. Manitobans deserve job security and assurance. They deserve to go home at the end of the day and have dinner with their families, not be consumed by the thought that this government could be pulling their job and their financial security out from under them. Madam Speaker, my question is: At what point will this government start sharing the so -called road-to-recovery plan with us? Hon.

Cliff Cullen (Minister of Growth, Enterprise and Trade ): It's great to respond to a question on the economy. Certainly, things are going nicely in our economy. We talk about 6,000 new jobs in Manitoba. I know the Liberal caucus, they –at least one of the Liberal cau cus agree with our Look North program and approach and, certainly, we've been out consulting with northern Manitobans in terms of an economic development strategy for Manitobans, and we're having very positive consultations with those northern communities and we look forward to bringing those results back to the Chamber.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Burrows, on a supplementary question. Emergency Room Closures Consultation with Front-Line Workers Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): Madam Speaker, history has shown that Conservatives like to change their minds and reverse their own decisions. We saw this during the Filmon era when ERs were slated to be closed down and the decision was reversed because people spoke out. Madam Speaker, ERs are now, once again, being slated to close down, and once again–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Ms. Lamoureux: –Manitobans are speaking out.

My question for the Premier is: Will he take the time to consult with our front -line workers before proceeding? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, that's too good an opportunity to pass up, Madam Speaker. Liberal flip -flops, where do I begin? Electoral reform–a– An Honourable Member: CHT Mr. Pallister: Yes, not raising the–what was that tax again? An Honourable Member: Halving CHT. Mr. Pallister: Right, and a lot of other things, Madam Speaker. We don't have enough time to get into all the Liberal flip -flops here. They even have three different position s on health -care reform in a three-person caucus.

Okay, Madam Speaker, we ran on a com - mitment, after a decade of debt, to focus on fixing the finances of the province and we are making progress in that direction. We made a commitment, after a decade of decay in our social services, to repair them and we are focusing on doing exactly that.

1588 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 And, Madam Speaker, after a decade of decline relative to other provinces, we made a commitment to work on repairing the rankings of this province in respect of our e conomic growth as well, and we're going to do each of these things with a focused plan that keeps our promises to Manitobans. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Burrows, on a final supplementary. Ms. Lamoureux: You know, Madam Speaker, I wish that this Premier would take these concerns seriously.

Our Liberal caucus took the time to speak with some of the hundreds of front -line workers who rallied here at the Leg. today because they are con - cerned with this government's health-care decisions. Will this government confirm today that our health-care workers do not need to worry about losing their jobs, about paying their bills and about putting food on their tables for their families due to the recent health-care announcements? Hon.

Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living): Well, Madam Speaker, I wonder, of the three Liberals who may have attended out front earlier on, which one spoke which position. Because the interim leader has said that she thinks the plan is great; the fo rmer leader said we should go, actually, half way; this member doesn't like it at all: three Liberals, three positions. But the biggest position that that member should have been talking about on the front of the Legislature was the position of the federal govern - ment to reduce the CHT escalator from 6 per cent to 3 per cent.

That is the greatest concern that health- care work should have. I hope she took a bullhorn and put that through it, Madam Speaker. Preliminary Hearing Reform Manitoba's Pilot Project Mrs. Sarah Guillemard (Fort Richmond): Madam Speaker, after the Supreme Court's judgment on R v. Jordan, the crisis of delay in the criminal justice system has become even more acute. If 'sustantial' change doesn't happen we run the very real risk that criminals will go free. Many people are calling for reforms to procedures such as preliminary inquiries that can add tens of months of delay to criminal cases.

Can the Minister of Justice please update the Legislature on the benefits of what she pr oposed to her federal counterpart for a pilot project? Hon. Heather Stefanson (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Manitoba's pilot–and I want to thank the member for that very, very good question– Manitoba's pilot project proposal to replace pre - liminary inquiries with an out- of-court discovery process has many benefits. It will mean shorter wait times for trial dates. It will reduce the number of inmates in jail waiting for their trials, numbers that skyrocketed under the member for Minto (Mr.

Swan) when he was the m inister of Justice. It will be less stressful for victims and their families. In fact, Karen Wiebe, executive director of Manitoba Organization for Victim Assistance, said, and I quote: By eliminating preliminary hearings, one of those experiences of revictimization and trauma would also be eliminated. Aboriginal justice commission said, and I quote: The initial purpose of the preliminary inquiry has virtually disappeared. And the former Ontario ombudsman, André Marin, said– Madam Speaker: The minister's time has expired. Health-Care Review Release of KPMG Report Mr.

James Allum (Fort Garry -Riverview): Yesterday I asked the Premier if he would have the courage to go out and talk with nurses that assembled on the steps of the Legislature, and he didn't show. So I want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Certainly, he was–I'm assuming that he was looking for the KPMG value-for-money report that he took to Costa Rica with him. So I want to ask him: Did he find that report? Did he bring it to the Legislature today? Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, as we were trimming at the top of the very, ver y, very overfat top of the system of health care in our province, Madam Speaker, and protecting the front-line, nurses are writing me quite a bit. Here's another nurse: We need to work together to promote efficiency. We need to eliminate hospital and health-care waste. We have a population with a great deal of health disparities, and if we fail to utilize all our health -care clinicians to maximum benefit, we risk having major health-care catastrophe in our future.

I'm not sure why, Madam Speaker, the members opposite choose to just foment fear in the nursing

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1589 profession and in others around the province, but they need to recognize that real nurses live to reduce fear. Real nurses have a career that is designed to give comfort and confidence to others. And r eal nurses aren't going to respond to the fomenting and the discontent and the amplification of fear tactics, because they see right through them and they see what they are: the desperate political acts of a desperate political rump.

Madam Speaker: I would ask the First Minister that if he's reading from a written document, is he able to provide copies of that document to the House. The rule is that if we are reading from private documents that they are to be tabled in the House. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. If the member's not reading from a particular letter, then nothing has to be tabled. The member is indicating he's reading from his notes. Would the member indicate and clarify for the House, then? Mr. Pallister: Yes, I jus t need clarification if I'm allowed to read from my notes or not.

Madam Speaker: The First Minister is indicating that he's reading from his actual notes. Mr. Allum: Well, that was one of the oddest moments I've witnessed in my five years in the House, Ma dam Speaker. I can only assume that it was written in invisible ink over there because he's not sharing it with the people of Manitoba. * (14:20) And, Madam Speaker, this is a Premier who looked Manitobans straight in the eye and he said, I'm going to re lease 97 per cent of the KPMG value-for-money audit. Now, we know he took it to Costa Rica with it. We're not sure whether he read it. It might have been disappearing ink too.

But I want to ask him today: Will he table it in this House, and if he won't table it, Madam Speaker, what's he afraid of? What's he hiding? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Mr. Pallister: Not the big bad wolf, Madam Speaker, nor the member for Fort Garry -Riverview intimidates me or anyone else on this side of the House. Let me read again, this time from a letter which I can table, if you like, Madam Speaker, since the members are curious.

P erhaps they'd like to listen to a registered nurse of 40 -years experience who shares with me that she travelled with her mother – [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Pallister: –who had fallen, who is 91 years old, Madam Speaker, who was in pain, who was bruised, and they waited and they waited and they waited. And nine hours later when it was time to do the required X-ray test to see if she'd broken her ribs she had to be restrained. She had to have a needle administered to sedate her. This was tremen dously upsetting. And this nurse goes on to say: I have been a nurse for almost 40 years.

It drives me crazy to see this kind of backward approach to our emergency rooms. I get frustrated about listening to talks about studies with no positive actions. T hank you for acting. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Garry-Riverview, on a final supplementary. Mr. Allum: Madam Speaker, I'm having a hard time following the Premier here today. I’m asking about the value -for-money fiscal performance review that he looked Manitobans in the eye and he said 97 per cent of that report was going to be released publicly. We can barely get him to release a letter here in the House.

The people of Manitoba paid for this report: $740,000 at a minimum, Madam Speaker. Why doesn't he do the right thing? Why doesn't he come clean? Why doesn't he stop evading, stop dancing, stop skating, come clean, put that report on the table of this Legislature today? Mr. Pallister: Madam Speaker, we've shared more information with Manitobans and with the members opposite than any government in the history of Manitoba. We have put more information out. We have put summations–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Pallister: We have put summations of meetings. We have put minutes of meetings.

We have put copies of presentations. We have given more information out, Madam Speaker, as a result of the

1590 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 largest, most ambitious consultation prebudget in the history of the province of Manitoba. And the member knows that or should know that. With a record of covering up that the members opposite had when they were in government it is pretty rich, Madam Speaker, to talk about openness and accountability. [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Health-Care Budget Impact on Front-Line Workers Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): We just heard from hundreds of nurses and other workers on the front steps of the Leg. who were telling this government that enough is enough.

The Premier promised their jobs would be protected, now the Premier can't or won't say how many jobs will be cut . The Premier promised, as an old labour guy, that he would respect the work they do, and yet he used this deeply disrespectful, possibly unconstitutional legislation to attack their negotiation. Will this Premier stop his campaign of disrespect? Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living): Well, Madam Speaker, the member talks about enough and I wonder for him, what is enough. When is enough enough? Would 30 hours of waiting be enough in an ER for him?

Would 40 hours of waiting be enough for him? We know that 10 hours wasn't enough for him because that was the average in some places in Manitoba and he decided that there should be no change. We should just continue on on the same path that we were going. So maybe the member co uld answer, when would enough be enough for him before he would actually take action? 50 hours? 60 hours? How long should people wait, sir? [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable member for Flin Flon, on a supplementary question. Mr.

Linds ey: The Premier says he's an old labour guy, but I don't know anyone who cares about workers who would attack workers while taking a 20 per cent pay raise for himself. He won't say how many jobs will be cut. He's caused massive chaos in our hospitals. He plans to use legislation to get a wage freeze, but he'll sleep fine on his plane to Costa Rica with his 20 per cent salary increase. Workers and nurses were on the steps to tell this Premier that enough is enough. When will this Premier stop his attac k on working Manitobans? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Madam Speaker, I don't mind the personal attacks.

In fact, I welcome them from members opposite because they demon - strate a fear that they have for themselves that wasn't able to motivate them enough to act on behalf of the people of Manitoba. When they were in government they had the chance to take action to address the lengthy wait times that Manitobans endure. They failed to do so. Why did they do that, Madam Speaker? Because they, I guess, wanted to be on that side of the House lobbing personal attacks like that one and now they're going to be there for a long, long time. Madam Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired.

PETITIONS Concordia Hospital Emergency Room Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And t he background to this petition is as follows:

(1) The provincial government has announced the closures of three emergency rooms and an urgent-care centre in the city of Winnipeg, 'inclusing'–including closing down the emergency room at Concordia Hospital.

(2) The closures come on the heels of closing of a quick–nearby QuickCare clinic, as well as cancelled plans for ACCESS centres and personal - care homes , such as Park Manor , that would have provided important services for families and seniors in the area.

(3) The closures have left families and seniors in northeast Winnipeg without any point of contact with front-line health-care services and will result in them having to travel 20 minutes or more to St. Boniface Hospital's emergency room for emergency care.

(4) These cuts will take place–sorry, these cuts will place a heavy burden on many seniors who live in northeast Winnipeg and visit the emergency room

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1591 frequently, especially those who are unable to drive or are low-income.

(5) The provincial government failed to consult with families and seniors in northeast Winnipeg regarding the clos ure of their emergency room or to consult with health officials and health -care workers at Concordia to discuss how this closure would impact patient care in advance of the announcement. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to reverse the decision to close Concordia Hospital's emergency room so that families and seniors in northeast Winnipeg and the surrounding areas have timely access to quality health-care services.

And this petition wa s sign ed by many Manitobans. Madam Speaker: In accordance with our rule 133(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. Taxi Industry Regulation Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to the petition is as follows:

(1) The taxi industry in Winnipeg provides an important service to all Manitobans.

(2) The taxi industry is regulated to ensure there are both the provision of taxi service and a fair and affordable fare structure.

(3) Regulations have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting the safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras.

(4) The re gulated taxi system has–also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, including a stringent complaint system.

(5) The provincial government has moved to bring in legislation through Bill 30 that will transfer jurisdiction to the City of W innipeg in order to bring in so-called ride-sharing services like Uber.

(6) There were no consultations with the taxi industry prior to the introduction of this bill.

(7) The introduction of this bill j eopardizes safety, taxi service and also puts cons umers at risk, as well as the livelihood of hundreds of Manitobans, many of whom have invested their life savings into the industry.

(8) The proposed legislation also puts the regulated framework at risk and co uld lead to issues such as has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pricing, not providing service to some areas of the city and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including the withdrawal of Bill 30. * (14:30) And this petition is signed by many Manitobans. Mr. Greg Selinger (St.

Boniface): I wish to present the fol lowing petition to the Legislature, the background of which is as follows: The taxi industry in Winnipeg provides an important service to all Manitobans. The taxi industry is regulated to ensure that there are both the provision of taxi service and a fair and affordable rate–fare structure. The taxi industry is –has regulations that have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting the safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras.

The regulated taxi system also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, including a stringent complaint system. The provincial government has moved to bring in legislation through Bill 30 that will transfer jurisdiction to the City of Winnipeg in order to bring in so-called ride-sharing services like Uber. There were no consultations with the taxi industry prior to the introduction of this bill.

The introduction of this bill jeopardizes safety, taxi service and also puts consumers at r isk, as well as the livelihood of hundreds of Manitobans, many of whom have invested their life savings into the industry. The proposed legislation also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as what has been seen in other jur isdictions, including differential pricing, not providing service to some

1592 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 areas of the city and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial governme nt to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. Signed by many, many Manitobans. Ms. Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background of this –the background to this petition is as follows: The taxi industry in Winnipeg provides an important service to all Manitobans.

The taxi industry is regulated to ensure there are both the provision of taxi service and a fair and affordable fare structure.

(3) Regulations have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting the safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras.

(4) The regulated taxi system also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, i ncluding a stringent complaint system.

(5) The provincial government has moved to bring in legislation through Bill 30 that will transfer jurisdiction to the City of Winnipeg in order to bring in so -called ride -sharing service like –services like Uber.

(6) There were no consultations with the taxi industry prior to the introduction of this bill.

(7) The introduction of this bill jeopardizes safety, taxi service and also puts consumers at risk, as well as the livelihood of hundreds of Manitobans, many of whom have invested their life savings into the industry.

(8) The proposed legislation also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as what has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pricing, not providing se rvice to some areas of the city and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety. We petition the Legislative of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. This petition has been signed by many, many Manitobans. Thank you. Mr.

Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows: The taxi industry in Winnipeg provides an important service to all Manitobans. The taxi industry is regulated to ensure that both the provision of taxi service and a fair and affordable fare structure. Regulations have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras.

The regulated taxi system also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, including a stringent complaint system. Provincial government has moved to bring in legislation through Bill 30 that will transfer jurisdiction of this –to the City of Winnipeg in order to bring in so-called ride-sharing services like Uber. There were no consultations with the taxi industry prior to the introduction of this bill.

The introduction of this bill jeopardizes safety, taxi service and also puts consumers at risk, as well as the livelihood of hundreds of Manitobans, many of whom have invested their life savings into the industry. The proposed legislati on also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as what has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pricing, not providing service to some areas of the city and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. And this petition has been signed by many Manitobans.

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1593 Kelvin High School Gymnasium and Wellness Centre Mr. Wab Kinew (Fort Rouge): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) Manitobans recognize how important it is to provide young people with quality learning spaces to succeed in school.

(2) Sport, recreation and the spaces to engage in them are critical to the health and welfare of all students.

(3) All forms of education al infrastructure, including gymnasiums and recreation centres in general, represent an incredible value- for-money investment, whereby the return is improved physical and psychological health and wellness.

(4) Kelvin High School is one of the largest high schools in the province, with over 1,200 students.

(5) Kelvin High School spent several years raising almost $1.2 million towards the construction of a new gymnasium and wellness centre.

(6) Some Kelvin students currently have to pay to use outside facilities to obtain their mandatory physical education credit.

(7) The provincial government, in a regressive and short -sighted move, cancelled funding for the Kelvin gym and wellness centre for political reasons, despite the extensive community support , fund- raising and engagement.

(8) It is wasteful and disrespectful to the dedicated efforts of students, staff and the community in general to simply lay their goals aside without consultation. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to recognize the lead–the need for excellent recreation facilities in all Manitoba schools, to reverse this regressive cut and to provide Kelvin High School with the funding necessary to complete a new gymnasium and wellness centre. Madam Speaker, this petition was signed by Tyler Ward, Aidan Cory -Nokinstry, Darrienh, and many other Manitobans.

Taxi Industry Regulation Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) The taxi industry in Winnipeg provides an important service to all Manitobans.

(2) The taxi industry is regulated to ensure there are both the provision of taxi service and a fa ir and affordable fare structure.

(3) Regulations have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting the safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras.

(4) The regulated taxi system also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, including a stringent complaint system.

(5) The provincial government has moved to bring in legislation through Bill 30 that will transfer jurisdiction to the City of Winnipeg in order to bring in so-called ride-sharing services like Uber.

(6) There were no consultations with the taxi industry prior to the introduction of this bill.

(7) The introduction of this bill jeopardizes safety, taxi service and also puts consumers at risk, as well as the livelihood of hundreds of Manitobans, many of whom have invested their life savings into the industry.

(8) The proposed legislation also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as what has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pr icing, not providing service to some areas of the city and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to withdraw its plans to deregulat e the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. This petition was signed by many Manitobans. Ms.

Flor Marcelino (Leader of the Official Opposition): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows:

1594 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017

(1) The taxi industry in Winnipeg provides an important service to all Manitobans.

(2) The taxi industry is regulated to ensure there are both the provision of taxi service and a fair and affordable fare structure. * (14:40)

(3) Regulations have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting the safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras.

(4) The regulated taxi system also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, including a stringent complaint system.

(5) The provincial government has moved to bring in legislation through Bill 30 that will transfer jurisdiction to the City of Winnipeg in order to bring in so-called ride-sharing services like Uber.

(6) There were no consultations with the taxi industry prior to the introduction of this bill.

(7) The introduction of this bill jeopardizes safety, taxi service, and also puts consumers at risk, as well as the livelihood of hundreds of Manitoba ns, many of whom have invested their life savings into the industry.

(8) The proposed legislation also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as what has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pricing, not pr oviding service to some areas of the city, and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. Signed by many, many Manitobans. Madam Speaker: Any further petitions? Grievances? ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Hon.

Andrew Micklefield (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, this afternoon we would like to continue with Estimates. Madam Speaker: The House will now resolve itself into Committee of Supply. Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) EXECUTIVE COUNCIL * (14:50) Mr. Chairperson (Dennis Smook): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply will now consider the Estimates of Executive Council. Does the honourable First Minister have an opening statement? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Just to welcome members of the committee to the committee and to say that we are excited to have advanced the budget that we have. We feel that we're addressing some of the major challenges that should be addressed, and we're excited to be on a road that we feel will lead us in the direction of recovery. There are some challenges, no doubt, in the –a number of areas.

Certainly, the previous admin - istration knew that, as well, and was addressing in the–to the best of their abilities some of those challenges. We are co gnizant of the dangers of continuing along the road to higher successive deficits. We're also very cognizant of the dangers of moving in the direction of higher taxes. These things will–both of them, whether in the short, mid or long term will endanger o ur economic growth, will imperil our social services and will make it more difficult for us to, of course, leave a legacy of fairness to those who come after us.

And so these are among the many aspects of the challenges that we must face and we are prepared to face as a new government. I wanted to also offer on record our thanks for the service of the former member for Point Douglas who, since we had last met as a committee, had made the decision to leave politics, and thank him for his service to the people of Manitoba and wish him well on his new endeavours as he assumes responsibilities with the Business Council of Manitoba. Mr. Chairperson: We thank the honourable First Minister for those comments.

Does the interim Leader of the Official Opposition have any opening comments?

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1595 An Honourable Member: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the Premier (Mr. Pallister) and everyone– Mr. Chairperson: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition. Ms. Flor Marcelino (Leader of the Official Opposition): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Maybe I will learn next time. And, also, the Premier, thank you, and to all my colleagues who are here. We will do away with an opening statement on our –on my part because we have many questions for the Premier. We'd like to proceed with the questions.

But one question before other questions: When will we receive, Premier, the Estimate books? Right now we're here without the Estimate books. Mr. Pallister: When we get the staff people here, I'll be able to get a firm answer and sh are that with you, so that–I expect we're going to do that shortly, and then I'll be able to give you that information. An Honourable Member: Okay. Mr. Chairperson: We thank the interim Leader of the Official Opposition for those remarks. Under Manitoba practice, debate on the minister's salary is traditionally the last item con - sidered for a department in Committee of Supply.

Accordingly, we shall defer consideration of line 2.1.(

a) and proceed with consideration of the remaining items referred in resolution 2.1. At this time, we invite the First Minister's staff, and staff from the official opposition, to join us at the table. Once they are seated, we will ask that the staff in attendance will be introduced. Will the honourable First Minister please introduce your staff? * (15:00) Mr. Pallister: First of all, this is Mr. Fred Meier, the acting Clerk of the Executive Council.

And now Aurel Tess, who's the Provincial Comptroller; Richard Groen here, who is the assistant deputy minister of Finance, res earch division; Don Delisle– Don, who's stepped out–who was in that empty chair over there, who is the director of Capital Markets; Scott Wiebe , director of Treasury Operations; and James White. And I –if I could, Mr. Chair,–just say I'm told that there is n't a separate, nor has there been, a separate Estimates book for Executive Council, that it's just contained in the general–[interjection] An Honourable Member: Yes. Mr. Pallister: –contained in the general Estimates document.

So this was not the past practice–it isn't a change in practice. It's, apparently, the way it's been done. Mr. Chairperson: I'd like to ask the interim Leader of the Official Opposition to introduce her staff if she has any here. An Honourable Member: We have one here– oh, sorry. Mr. Chairperson: The interim Leader of the Official Opposition. Ms. Marcelino: Okay, take two. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have a staff here, Mr. Mark Rosner, our caucus director and researcher. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: The floor is now open for questions. Ms.

Marcelino: We were unable to get out a response from the Premier during question period on this question. Maybe today we will obtain one. Will the Premier release the KPMG Fiscal Performance Review and the KPMG Health Sustainability and Innovation Review to the public in full in the House? Mr.

Pallister: No, that won't happen and it won't happen because there are a number of things that are not to be released because they are revealing of the company practices and methodologies that the KPMG used in the preparation of their report that are considered to be –I don't think I would be using the right word in saying copyrighted–but that are, if they were to get out, would be a very disadvantageous to the–their practice versus other competing companies. So, as far as the documents, I believe the members have received, and if they haven't we can –I can get them.

A great deal of information that has already gone out, summaries of the meetings that were held, copies of submissions that were received, I believe, also, even going so far as to getting emails with the, of course, the names, because we didn’t–and we'll do this next time, I think, better–didn't get permission in advance from people who participated on the – through electronic means to release their names.

1596 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 That's something I think we could do better next year or this fall, is to get– you know, I asked the member Flin Flon for feedback and he sent me an email. If I'm going to send it out with his name on it I should have asked him that at the start, and I think that's one thing we should of –we could do better in the fall so that it would give members of the opposition the opportunity to verify the person and they could actually talk to the people as well. I think the more openness in these discussions that we can have, the better. Ms. Marcelino: Fine.

If the P remier (Mr. Pallister) is unable to release the full report, is the Premier able to share–we're not after the research methodology or how they came up with their conclusions. But we would like and the people of Manitoba would like to see the recommendation s contained in that report. After all, the people of Manitoba paid for that report and the Premier promised 97 per cent of these reports would be made public.

So, on behalf of the people of Manitoba, we're asking the Premier if those recommendations and other pertinent information about the report's results of the questions asked or are the –what were in that report that would be of importance in making up policies or decisions by this government? We –the people of Manitoba, need to know that. Mr. Pallister: I appreciate that. I thank the member, because up 'til now, the members have been asking for the reports, and I've been trying to explain that there's information in there that wouldn't be fair to the providers of the service, in my estimation, to release it.

But now she's asking something different, which is the actual –to leave out –she's saying it's okay to leave out the 'proprietory' –proprietary, I should be saying–information or the formatting, right? You know that's an interesting thing. We've released quite a bit, I think, already in terms of the information. I can get a list put together of the information that's been released and make sure that that got to members of the opposition, because we did put out a lot of information that was taken from the reports–as much as we thought we could–already.

So, to know if there was additional information that could go, as well, we'd have to review all the information that was sent out. I –and I hope the members will accept–and last year we did this and I thought it went pretty well –where I can't give you an answer that day, I endeavoured to get it –the information–the next day. And I thought we had a pretty good working relationship with doing that. So, again, I hope you'll allow me to do that. I think it's –I find that's a more forthright way to deal with it than having you wait while I try to fish it out all the time.

And I expect you may want to have further discussion than today, so that'll give us the opportunity to get back to you with more information at the next meeting if it's possible to. Ms. Marcelino: We'd–those that are not –answers that are not available today, certainly we'd like to have it in the coming days. For the record, we'd like to ask the Premier: How much did the Fiscal Performance Review cost in full? Mr.

Pallister: There's a couple of different aspects to that, and I just want to get–before I ask the staff to get numbers–for some clarity because ther e was a–if she's asking about KPMG report on health care, I'll just–I'll give her the list and then if that's the information she wants, I'll endeavour to get it for her. The KPMG report on health care, the KPMG Fiscal Performance Review. There was also a–what did we call it, the team that looked at it with Janice MacKinnon, you know, the former NDP finance minister in Saskatchewan.

What was that called? [interjection] That was also a fiscal performance review as well. It was done with the former head of the Winnipeg chamber, executive director of the Winnipeg chamber, David Angus, and committee members, former civil servants and so on were on that committee as well.

I should be able to get –yes–the members of the Advisory Panel–sorry–on Fiscal Performance, which was Janice MacKinnon was the co -chair; David Angus was the other co- chair; Michael Sykes is a retired Department of Agriculture agricultural representative from, I think, from –resides in Selkirk now; Ardith Sigurdson, who is a nurse and a co-owner of a farm in the Gimli area; Joanne Sullivan is a community activist, community volunteer, does a lot of work with Alzheimer's patients, with Alzheimer Society fundraising, things like that, who makes her home in Portage la Prairie. We can get a

summary. Would she like a

summary cost breakdown of each of those? An Honourable Member: Please.

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1597 Mr. Pallister: Very good. I'll undertake to get that for the member. And I don't think we'll have it today, but we can get it for a subsequent meeting. Ms. Marcelino: Thank you, Mr. Premier and Mr. Chair. And, Mr. Premier, in addition to those mentioned reports and cost, kindly add the full cost of the Boston Consulting as well. Next–that was not a question; that was a request. Now the question. How much–or when did the Premier (Mr. Pallister) receive the final report of the Fiscal Performance Review? * (15:10) Mr.

Pallister: I'll undertake all of them, but not the Boston Consulting. That would be for the Minister of Crowns–I think you're best to direct that to that minister, if that would be all right? [interjection] Yes. That–I think that information's been published and is out there anyway. If I recall it was–I think that was a focus of questioning by the member for Minto (Mr. Swan), if I'm not mistaken, last year. So all that detail would be available to you. Date–I don't recall off the top of my head. [interjection] Honestly, I don't remember the exact date and I don't want to guess. I can check back to my

schedule and then I can give her that answer tomorrow as well. Mr. James Allum (Fort Garry-Riverview): I thank the Premier for being here today as well as members of his caucus and senior staff. I want to, of course, extend my congratulations to Mr. Meier on serving as the acting clerk. He– of course, standing on the shoulders of giants, as he well knows, but I know him to be a fabulous individual in his own right and will emerge as a giant in due course, and somebody else will stand on his shoulders some day, but I did want to extend my congratulations to him.

The Premier was gracious in talking about the former member for Point Douglas, and I appreciate his kind words with respect to him. However, we are still waiting on when he will call a by-election. Since we have some media here today and others, maybe he could tell us when that by-election might be. Mr. Pallister: Well, I could tell him when it might be.

Again, i t'll be a lot sooner than it was before we changed the rules that the previous government had, because those rules allowed for a year to pass before a by-election could be called and that time was used up before by-elections were called on more than one occasion. So we've introduced, as the member knows, new legislative changes which require a by -election to be called within 180 days. I believe the date of resignation of the member was December the 8th – [interjection]–was it Janu ary, not December? January 9th–[interjection]–was it.

So going 180 days from that point forward–I don't have a calendar on me, but I would say probably sooner than the middle of July there would be a by -election held. It would have to be held. Mr. Allum: Well, I thank the Premier f or that answer and for providing some context as well. Of course, we all remember that when the legislation – moving up the dates and how much time before you could call a legislation was passed –the government was in a big hurry to get by -elections called at that point, and now they seem to be a little bit slower in moving.

I'm wondering if he wouldn't agree that it would make sense to have it in June before Manitobans set off for holiday vacations [inaudible] Mr. Pallister: Thanks to the member for that question. I agree it would be –there are a lot of things that come into play with the timing of these things and what we don't want to do is –and, unfortunately, is what happened in the past –was we had a by -election called in Morris, the member will recall. It was January 30th, which was a tough time to have a by-election anywhere, and then there was also a by-election called for, I think that same day, in Arthur-Virden.

I suppose there is no perfect time to have these, but January 30th would be, I think we’ d all agree, a less than perfect time to have a by-election. I remember –having been chosen to lead the party I now lead in July –that at that time a by-election was called for September –early September. It was the day after the September long weekend. The re are a lot of disadvantages to a by-election the day after a long weekend as well. I don't know that there's a perfect time. It's interesting. I was just at an event where they were chronicling the history in one riding–that I teased the member for Lake side (Mr.

Eichler) as the worst represented riding in the province because it's only had three MLAs for the last 95 years, which is

1598 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 really incredible when you think about it –three MLAs in 95 years. But I was looking at the election dates –and I don't have the list in front of me –but the dates of election of D.L. Campbell who was the member from 1922 to early '60s, I think, when Harry Enns first came in about 1964 or '5. These men are too young to remember and obviously not political scientists–students–they don't know.

Anyway, I noticed that the elections there were frequently in July and August, which surprised me because I thought in a farm area, you know, with, you know, the busyness of that line of work, you wouldn't want to have an election in July or August.

But–so there's no perfect time, but I appreciate the member's, you know, concerns about making sure that the –I believe and I know he believes that this is an important career and that people in our province deserve to have an MLA represent them, and so this is part of the motivation behind making sure that by -elections were called within six months after resignation–or held–I shouldn't say called–held. The last date that the writ could be issued is June 2nd, and the last election day possible would be July 4th, assuming a 33-day election period.

And the writ has to be issued for at least 28 days but no more than 34 days, so that's the time frame that we're in. Sometime between now and then, there'll be a by-election and the people of Point Douglas will have a chance to replace the former member. Mr. Allum: I thank the Premier (Mr. Pallister) for that history lesson, and, you know, we can debate whether the end of January is a good time to have a by-election or not. Could be a little bit chilly her e in Manitoba, but most Manitobans, of course, are around at the –during January and at least available.

When it's the summer months, you can appreciate that–I think you would appreciate that there are vacation plans and families do need to get away and re-energize and enjoy some family time together. I want to change topics now and return to the topic that our interim leader had introduced. The Premier gave a bit of an explanation, but I wonder if he might just review it for us one more time, why he is una ble to release the KPMG Fiscal Performance Review. Mr. Pallister: Well, let's go back a little further and consider why a review would be a good idea to do, and let's talk about that.

We have inherited a situation where the deficit – actual Public Accounts deficit that we inherited was approximately $900 million. We inherited a situation where the projected deficit was less than half that. This was, of course, a bit of poisoned water to deal with–you know, a pretty challenging situation. When you see a deficit projection that is off by more than 100 per cent on the actual end number, you have to wonder at the veracity of the projections.

That alone in many business operations would be a compelling reason to review your fiscal practices, but there are many other realities that had to be addressed as well. * (15:20) Fiscal performance has clear ramifications for the ability of our Province to sustain its social programs to maintain and strengthen the capabilities that must be there for vulnerable people, whether – maybe seniors who need health care or maybe any of us at any given point in time, I suppose, as well as the social services we need to fund, the educational services, the child care opportunities.

These are all funded by tax dollars, and they all depend for their sustainability on prudent fiscal management. So when one looks at the situation in Manitoba, realizes that our services had been in many comparative rankings lagging in the country in various categories and are–and our fiscal situation in terms of deficit list deteriorating, and had deteriorated signifi cantly in combination with very significant tax hikes.

So you're seeing an ironic combination of two things: you're seeing revenues derived by the government going up markedly–significant increases in tax, significant increases in revenues to the government at the same time as you're seeing significant increases in deficit. That–this seems like a spending problem, and so merits attention. And this was the reason, obviously, in part, for taking a look at the fiscal situation of the province of Manitoba. And so that is, I think, by

preamble, I guess, to the member, the compelling reason for doing this work. Now, the member's question is in respect of getting copies of the report. My answer is referencing the need for the work to be done. I would also say t hat we need to remember that this was a multi-faceted exercise that he's referencing one part of. But I will repeat that the effort to reach out and include Manitobans was a genuine one, a very ambitious, tremendous amount of work was put into including M anitobans–giving Manitobans the opportunity to be included in their –the planning around their fiscal future.

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1599 And, in terms of the opportunity, also, for MLAs to be involved. I extended a genuine invitation to every MLA in the Legislative Assembly to be part of the process, and I was pleased that the members of the Ottawa -west caucus –or, I'm sorry, the Liberal caucus decided to participate in the process. But, at the same time, somewhat disappointed that most of the members of the opposition didn't avail t hem- selves of that opportunity.

But they could have been there and heard the presentations and chose not to, and now are asking questions about accessing the information they could have had if they'd been part of the process themselves. And that's too bad. I think it was a missed opportunity for them to demonstrate that they were actually interested in hearing from Manitobans, and they failed to demonstrate that they were interested in listening. Mr. Allum: I asked the Premier (Mr.

Pallister) why he was un able to release the KPMG Fiscal Performance Review, and then we got a history 'leshon.' And I think he knows I've read a lot of history in my life, and that was one of the more revisionist historical diatribes I've heard in a long time. So I want to ask him, then, since he's unable to provide a coherent answer as to why he won't release the report: Can he confirm that he stated in the Legislature on June 6th, 2016 that 97 per cent of the Fiscal Performance Review would be made public. Did he make that statement? Mr.

Pallister: Let's take a look at the revenue and expenditures of the government. In '16 -17, we had revenues of 15 billion, 230 million dollars; and expenditures of 16 billion, two hundred and ninety-one; with a lapse adjustment of $150 million, leaving a projected deficit of $911 million. Now, as a starting point, the actual deficit that we were promised we would be handed by the previous government was $422 million.

This, I should mention, was a figure which was arrived at by methods which only the previous government would be able to explain and has not yet explained, but they were promising the people of Manitoba throughout the election campaign 13 months ago that that was the actual deficit. In reality, the actual deficit was more than double that amount, $846 million was the Public Accounts finishing number, but it goes more than that. We have inherited as well from the previous administration great fiscal challenges, not only, unbelievably, the –these numbers, by the way, the member ref ers to revisionist history.

He needs to maybe look at his adjectives a little bit. These are actual numbers out of the Public Accounts and the actual Public Accounts of the government. If he wishes to decry the work of civil servants, he can continue along that line. But these are the actual numbers out of the Public Accounts documents. So I would say any revisionism was the –was actually done by the previous government when they went out to the people of Manitoba and promised them that they were running a $400- million deficit and it turned out it was over eight and a half. That's being fairly far off on your projections, I'd say.

But it gets worse than that. I mean, the deficits with the RHAs weren't something they mentioned or included, and we see signifi cant deficits in the –each of the RHAs almost without exception: $59 million worth of RHA deficits in 2015- 16. That wasn't referenced in the government's $400 million mythology when they projected their deficit would be at that level. In addition, on the east -side road project they made–they signed more agreements in the last few weeks before the election than they'd signed in the previous six or seven years.

The commitments under those community benefit agreements are in excess of $200 million–$200 million on top of the significant deficits they already had compiled. So, you know, the other sad reality is, of course, there's a thing called the rainy day fund or the Fiscal Stabilization Account that is designed to be there for self-described rainy days. T hat was depleted by the previous government systematically, year after year, from 2009-10 fiscal, when $57 million was taken out of that account, to the next year, 2010- 11, when $125 million was taken out of that account. I'll continue after–in my next response, Mr.

Chair. Mr. Allum: That wasn't the question I asked at all, and this is Estimates and so I'm asking the Premier a very direct question and a very simple one: Did he state in the Legislature on June 6th, 2016, that 90– per–7 per cent of the Fiscal Performance Review would be made public? Mr. Pallister: I've undertaken, in an answer to a previous question from the member's interim leader, to provide the additional information that she seeks, and so I will leave that on the record as it was on the record earlier despite the num ber of times the

1600 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 member asks the question. But I would continue to say that the fiscal situation we were handed by the previous administration goes far beyond the doubling of a projected deficit in a single year, which is, by the way, Mr.

Chair, the greate st missing -the-mark record of any government in Manitoba. * (15:30) It goes far deeper than that because in –you see, in addition to this, in the budget each year from 2009-10 until their final year in office, not only did they increase taxes by record am ounts, not only did they run deficits, but they ran deficits in spite of taking money out of the rainy day fund every year. To make their deficits look smaller, they took money out of a Fiscal Stabilization Account designed to protect Manitobans in times of dire need.

And so, in 2012 and '13 fiscal year, their deficit was made to look like it was $155 million less than it actually was, because the previous administration chose to take that amount out of the Fiscal Stabilization Account. In 2013- 14, transfe rs from that account were $100 million. This left the balance in the account at $275 million. By way of comparison, the balance in that account in 2008- 9 fiscal, when Gary Doer left, was $864 million.

And just a few short years later, it had been depleted consecutively, year after year after year, to the point where, in 2014- 15 fiscal year, the previous government took $55 million out of it, which was a record low in that six- year period; just $55 million was taken out of it and dropped the level in the Fiscal Stabilization Account down to $220 million. Then in the year before the election, while we now know that their deficit number that year wasn't as portrayed at $422, it was actually $846.

It would have been $105 million higher, except they raided the Fiscal Stabilization Account to make it look like it was lower. So now what we have is a Fiscal Stabilization Account that's at its lowest level in 15 years. And climate change and other factors are real and need to be considered, and they make the possibilities of disastrous events in our province greater, not lesser. Whether it be excessive rain event or a potential forest fire or drought, the undeniable reality is that we're more vulnerable to the fiscal uncertainty presented by those kinds of events than we've been for a good, long time. Mr.

Allum: Let the record show for all assembled that the Premier of Manitoba was asked a direct question and he simply refused to answer. He knows full well that on December 6 –June 6, 2016, that he told the people of Manitoba–he looked them straight in the eyes and he said to them, 97 per cent of that Fiscal Performance Review would be made public. And now here we are in the Estimates process asking him a direct question about whether he stated that; he refuses to ans wer. We know he did.

So I want to ask him now: Why did he say last June that 97 per cent of that report would be made public, and why is he saying today and the last several weeks, that the report can't be released at all? What changed in that period of time? Mr. Pallister: Our commitment to running a more open government than Manitobans have ever seen remains and will continue. And we will do every - thing we can to make sure that we improve the release of information practices of the government that I lead.

We know the record of the previous administration, which is one of secrecy and is one of not making information available, not even insofar as going out and scrumming with reporters at times, offering up spokespeople rather than ministers of the government. We recognize the previous administration also used the FIPPA legislation to protect itself as opposed to protect the best interests of Manitobans in terms of accessing information.

We know, for example, that when they paid generous severance payments to former friends to leave, they did not make that information public, covered it up–covered it up–for well over a year and a half. Seven hundred thousand-plus dollars was taken from Manitoba taxpayers and given to former friends of the previous government so they could work somewhere else. We know, also, the record of the previous administration on tendering. We know that they failed to disclose untendered contracts repeatedly – repeatedly covered them up.

We know that there was a requirement under The F inancial Administration Act to make this information available, requirement in law, was supposed to be made available in the Legislative Library down the hall on a computer terminal there. And so with great interest and anticipation, hard- working staff wen t through the untendered contracts to see what they could learn.

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1601 What they learned was that there were a number posted. What they didn't see were a number that weren't. Later, of course, it was –it came to light that the previous administration had actually entered into repeated contracts of an untendered nature that were not disclosed, that were covered up in some cases for over five years totalling well in excess of $10 million.

Just alone the contracts which Steve Ashton signed for Tiger Dam –not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, not seven, not eight, but nine contracts all untendered, all nondisclosed, all hidden from public view, none placed on the computer in the Legislative Library as per The Financial Administration Act. That's the record of the previous administration. So we'll do our very, very best to correct that. We're learning as we go.

I've already shared with members –some of the members of the opposition as well as with the media that there are practices that we need to adop t in future to make sure that more information goes out, not less. I'm committed to that. But one thing for sure, if there's a problem we'll admit it and address it, but the member opposite was quoted in the Hansard records as not even being able to admi t that a deficit was a problem. He called slaying the deficit not a challenge, but a myth. He said that it was a myth. He decried the work of credit rating agencies, as influential as they may be.

I guess the member doesn't see any value in their work. He said they are private firms. I guess he meant that to be an insult of some kind. He said that the people who run them are committed to ideologies, neoliberalism–this is what he said in the record of Hansard to the House on April 19th of this year. Those ar e strange comments, Mr.

Chair, because what they do is they reveal an absolute lack of understanding of basic financial management practices, and the reality of two credit rating downgrades–not one but two–under the previous government is tens of millions of dollars that goes not to health care but to happy moneylenders someplace else. So whether he likes moneylenders or not isn't the issue.

If he is questioning the influence they have on how much we pay to borrow money, he needs to enter into some additional research so he understands that the record of the previous administration was one which put our –not just our credit rating at risk, but put our fiscal stability and circumstances in a very vulnerable position. Mr. Allum: Well, that's really interesting, Mr. Chair, that the Premier (Mr. Pallister) can remember what I said, but he can't remember what he himself says in the House or in the Legislature: that 97 per cent of the public–of the Fiscal Performance Review would be made public.

And we're trying to get him to explain this dramatic change of heart he had from June 6th, 2016, when he told Manitobans, looked them straight in the eye, said without any hesitation and any doubt, that 97 per cent of the Fiscal Performance Review would be made public, and now here we are, seven, eight months later –actually, we've been asking for it since June –since January of this year.

And we asked in February and we asked in March and we asked again in April, and it looks like we're going to be asking again for –in May, if he would live up to the –his word that he gave to the people of Manitoba when he looked them in the eye and he told them he would release this report. * (15:40) So we're trying to get a straight answer from him, Mr. Chair, and you'll forgive me for repeat ing the same questions, but I have to know.

The people of Manitoba paid for this report, after all, so we're asking on their behalf: What changed between June 6th, 2016, when he declared that 97 per cent of that report would be made public, and today? What 's changed? Mr.

Pallister: I appreciate the new -found interest the member has in value for money and proper spending practices even though he calls doubling the projected deficit a non -existent crisis and two credit rating downgrades a non- existent crisis , even though he refuses to recognize the reality of the problem that he and his colleagues created with their dysfunctional and rebellious government. I really appreciate his interest in value for money. Let's talk about value for money for a second. Here's an

article with some information that I think the member would be interested in knowing about. The previous government increased the salaries just in the run-up to the last election of a number of their political staff by an average of 22 per cent. A nd they paid in salaries and payouts to 52 political staff members between the time of their rebellion –their family feud –until approximately a year later, they paid nearly $3 million out in salaries and payouts. Of those larger salaries that were paid ou t at that time–in the midst, remember, Mr. Chair, of a leadership crisis and a leadership contest.

Not to mention the use of offices populated by paid staff to work for leadership candidates here in this building– it doesn't demonstrate a respect for value for money in any way, shape, or form.

1602 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 There were severance payments paid out, covered up, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. The–these dollars could have been spent on health care. They could have been used to reduce taxes or reduce the act ual amount of the deficit as opposed to the amount it grew to and became. But those dollars weren't used for any of those purposes; they were used to pay political staff. They were used to pay severance to former political staff.

So just between this–December of 2014, October of 2015, there were 33 new political staff hired, there were 12 salary increases at an average of 22 per cent, there were seven staff who received severance payments. Total cost of those things to tax payers was $2,859,874. Salary ra nge of staff was between $37,000 low and $135,000 high. The average salary: sixty-seven–$67,000 total. Additional salaries was over $2 million. And I repeat, that was in approximately a 10-month period. As far as promotions, number of staff receiving raises was 12.

The range of percentage increases in the salaries was three per cent up to 60 per cent. Average salary increase was 22 per cent. Total additional salary: $182,000. In terms of severance, the number of staff receiving severance was seven. Glob al amount: $670,000. So I appreciate the member referencing getting value for money. I agree that's important and that's a really important consideration–one that was neglected by the previous administration. Mr. Allum: Well, Mr. Chair, I can appreciate that we can't force the Premier (Mr.

Pallister) of this province–top political figure in this province to answer a direct question, but I can tell you how disappointed I am, and Manitobans are, that he refuses to answer a direct question. The first time we asked for this report through Freedom of Information request, we were told by his Finance Department that this information was subject to Cabinet confidentiality–nothing in there about any proprietary interests of the contractor of KPMG.

The Cabinet confidentiality excuse or whatever it might have been is now out the window, and now, some time ago, he pivoted to some kind of proprietary interest that KPMG has in the Fiscal Performance Review, and then in the last few day s, it's about –it's been about protecting those Manitobans who may or may not have come to his budget consultations which, by the way, I attended, which, by the way, the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey) who's at the table attended, which, by the way, our interim leader attended.

But what we have are three different explanations for why he is going back on his word to the people of Manitoba to release 97 per cent of that report. So can he tell us which of those explanations are true so that the people o f Manitoba understand precisely why the Premier of Manitoba has said one thing to them but is clearly –quite clearly –doing another? Mr. Pallister: They're all perfectly true and they're all reasons, but what I'm committed to is having better results, so, as I've said, there are things that I want us to undertake in the future that we didn't do right this time.

For example, as I said before, we didn't get advance permission from people who participated–thousands of people, actually. Thousands of front-line civil servants participated in the health -care review and submitted ideas. There was a great amount of information submitted, and I think we've learned through the process that we need to do a better job of getting assurance in advance that we can release the information that they've given us. That was one example of what the member's asking.

She's asking for us to release information which we could, in future –and will–but we didn't choose the proper processes, I'm told, and get a proper assurance from people in advance, and it's not right to disrespect their confidentiality either.

But, again, I would say to the member who's chosen to adopt a rather accusatory tone here, that he needs to look a little bit more honestly at his own government's record, I think, just to be fair, in the interest of fairness, because there was never before, in 17 years of NDP government, this level of effort made to actually reach out to not hundreds of Manitobans, and not with preconstructed agendas and going out and try ing to elicit responses. We saw the way the previous government did consultations – predetermined outcomes and conclusions which weren't drawn from input genuinely provided by Manitobans.

I could, for example, say, well, you know, the prebudget consultation prior to the 2012 budget was done over a very short period and one could argue, well, it was following the election and so there wasn't a lot of time, and I accept that. That's a fair point. But there was no evidence of real consultation

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1603 at that time, an d then a budget came down which broadened the PST. Who was consulted about that? Who told–who in Manitoba told the administration right after they promised they wouldn't raise taxes, who told them to raise taxes? Where's the documents? Where's the evidence? * (15:50) Where is the openness, or was there a complete departure from the actual election campaign, from the actual mandate that was requested, within weeks? I would say there was.

And yet Manitobans with that budget, spring of '12, were yet again, for, I believe, the fourth or fifth time, with this previous admin - istration, were hit with a broadening of the PST so that it included their home insurance. So all of a sudden, boom, they got a 7 per cent increase in the cost of insuring their –farmer on t heir buildings, homeowner on their home, if they're renting an apartment, on their tenant's insurance or –so boom.

Same person who came to their door of their apartment a few months before promised they wouldn't raise their taxes, then went out, did a prebudget consultation, and then came out with a budget that jacked up the taxes on the apartment's insurance. Any evidence that anybody told them they should do that? Anybody come forward and say, yes, absolutely, want to pay some more taxes on my benefits at work? Looking to pay more for taxes on my beer and wine? Really like to get dinged on the taxes on my cottage? These–there's no evidence of any of that because there wasn't a real consultation done.

No consultation done, no reason for anybody to ask for any documents. Well, we did a real consultation. We heard from thousands and thousands of Manitobans, and the member's complaining because we didn't put out information, enough information for him. Put up more information than any previous government in the history of the province of Manitoba; it's not enough for him. I agree; not enough for me either. I'd like to have more information out too. And next year we'll put more information out. Mr. Allum: Well, it's hard to take the Premier (Mr.

Pallister) seriously on that particular com - mitment because in June 2016, he told us that 97 per cent of this report would be made public. Here we are several months later, he's refusing not only to table that report, he's refusing to give us a proper and appropriate ex planation, and now he's added yet another new explanation, which is, well, wait 'til next year. Well, this is rich. This is not the kind of opency–openness and transparency that this Premier was so big on prior to the last election but now has turned a com plete 180 and hides information. He's evasive in his answers.

He won't provide the documentation, and, in fact, he's confusing the matter. So let me ask him, then: Did KPMG do the budget consultations? Is that why they were hired? Mr. Pallister: I think the member's revealing his own new level of confusion here. Let me explain to him about –[interjection] Sorry, the member must want to speak. Member wants to speak, he should speak. Mr. Allum: Please do explain –please do explain –to the media that–here that reports to the public. Please do explain to the opposition.

Please do explain to the four new members of your own government that are sitting here, having to listen to the fact that you went out and talked about 'openciness' and transparency. You not onl y–he not only will not provide the information, Mr. Chair, he won't provide a proper explanation for it. We've had now three different answers, and today he's introduced a whole other confusing factor by suggesting that KPMG organized it, the budget consul tations, on behalf of the government. So I'm asking him: Is that what he's saying?

Did KPMG organize and–the budget consultations on behalf of the government, or didn't they? Mr. Pallister: I'd like to answer the member, but if he interrupts me again, I' ll give him a chance to launch into a further diatribe. Of course not. We consulted with Manitobans. We began that process on September 28th. We continued it 'til December 1st of 2016. This was the most expansive and innovative consultation process ever u ndertaken. We set up an interactive website.

And, by the way, I invited the member to participate, as I invited his colleagues to participate –and his new-found interest in these consultations is appreciated–but he refused to participate. In fact, he boycotted the process entirely. He boycotted the process, Madam Speaker–or Mr. Chair. We set up an interactive website. We had community consultations throughout the province. We asked for and received written submissions. The results of all the prebudget cons ultations were released online publicly. We also released thousands of anonymous –that were submitted anonymously –

1604 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 submissions from Manitobans. We were the first province in Canada to develop a citizen budget tool, which many used. Almost 1,000 Manitobans actually went and used that tool to try to work through and understand the process of preparing a provincial budget. This is an exercise that was a useful exercise for any member of the Legislature, any person, to see the kinds of trade -offs, the kinds of de cisions that have to be made. Members, apparently –according to the member for Fort Garry -Riverview (Mr.

Allum) –he doesn't think balancing the books matters and he doesn't think deficits are dangerous, so he wouldn't bother, I suppose, to do this exercise because to him it would be irrelevant, but to most common -sense people in our province balancing their books is something they have to do. They consider it very relevant and they understand that sending on growing deficits year after year to our future is not a smart thing to do. The member doesn't understand that, obviously.

But the fact remains that in less than 10 weeks we had –just on the prebudget consultation process itself, I'm not talking about the health -care consultations that we did. We had about 18,000 interactions with Manitobans. Now, that's an ambitious and genuine mechanism for letting Manitobans have a chance to have their voice heard, and that's what we did. And I would mention also that within our civil service we had many, many of our ci vil servants participate as well. This is important. This is –people who work in our public service deserve to be heard.

Many of them have told us this is the first time they were asked or that they were encouraged to really participate in a meaningful way, and I'm proud of the fact that we did. So, in

summary, I would say, you know, if the member's concerns extend to actual, genuine interaction with the people of Manitoba, then he would want to compliment our government for actually undertaking an exercise that did genuinely reach out and give people the chance to be part of a worthwhile process. Mr. Chairperson: Before I recognize the member for Fort Garry-Riverview, I'd like to remind him here that the rules here –if you wish to speak, you can put up your arm. When somebody else has the floor, I would appreciate it if you would withhold your comments until you do have the floor. Mr.

Allum: I think we're bordering on new information previously unheard by the public of Manitoba. So I want to ask the Premier (Mr. Pallister) directly–I'd like a yes or a no answer to this, if he wouldn't mind, just this one time: Did KPMG actually produce a report? Mr. Pallister: I'm not sure where the member thinks he's going with his facetious remarks, Mr. Chair. I really don't know, and frankly I don't care.

I want to put on the record, though, that the prebudget and post-budget campaigns of each of the governments, the previous government and our own, were exercises that were undertaken which used taxpayers' resources. And I would emphasize here that we were responsible in every respect in the way in which we went about this exercise. For example, the total cost of our exercise, which engaged significantly more Manitobans than any previous exercise that the previous government undertook–let's take a look at the differences in terms of the actual costs. First of all, let's go to the total cost.

The total cost of our exercise was $61,446. It was comprised of research costs and some media and the cost of production of document s that people could review and then add comment to. * (16:00) The supposed prebudget consultation of 2015 done by the previous government didn't cost $61,446; it cost $340,534. It engaged a tiny fraction of the number of Manitobans that we engaged and it resulted in a budget which jacked up taxes.

In 2013, the cost of the previous government's so -called prebudget consultation was $235,675, which included media investment of $160,000 and resulted in an increase in taxes to Manitobans and no evidence that an ybody asked for that in the prebudget consultation. In 2012–in 2013, by the way, when the government was spending the $235,000, they also jacked up the PST that year. In 2012 they spent over $200,000 again– promotional budget was $153,000. Again, that's t he year they raised the–broadened the PST to include benefits for working men and women at their place of business.

They increased the cost to own a car; they jacked up the costs for beer, wine; they jacked up the cost for a person to get their hair done, you know. So they invested three, four, five times as much in so -called prebudget consultation which resulted in Manitobans paying far more than these costs

April 26, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1605 because they ended up paying–for example, in 2012, Manitobans were hit for over $200 million of new taxes as a result of this so -called prebudget consultation. The prebudget consultation in '13 saw taxes rise on Manitobans over $300 million in that year alone. So this is what prebudget consultation was done by the previous government. We engaged in an ambitious, very, very, very cost-effective, highly engaged -in process which produced a budget –which the member has yet to ask about–that reflected what we heard from Manitobans. Mr. Allum: Well, I –Mr.

Chair, it's difficult to continue on when we can' t get a straight answer to a direct question and he –the Premier's (Mr. Pallister) been asked for the past hour by the –our interim Leader, the member for Logan (Ms. Marcelino) and by myself on behalf of our constituents and the people of Manitoba, several direct questions. And he's been unable to provide a direct answer on any of them. So I'm going to ask again: Did KPMG actually produce a report? Mr.

Pallister: I appreciate serious questions that are serious from serious members, but I think that when the member wants to come here and joke and fool around he does a disservice to his own constituents, his party, and everyone else. The reality of the situation, since we came to government–since the member refuses to talk about the budget, I'll talk about the budget. I understood that's what the Estimates process was at least in part to d o. The record of the previous administration in terms of actually hitting its budget targets is something that I think we need to talk about. It speaks to credibility.

We have–I believe, and I'll –I've asked my staff to come up with the actual dollar figur es, but I believe I am not wrong in making the observation that in each year between 1999 and 2016 year end, the previous administration managed to under - achieve. In other words, in every year but one, they ran deficits which were higher than they projected. This granddaddy of all missed targets, of course, was the 2016 Public Accounts, which, as I referenced earlier, showed that they missed by well over 100 per cent their projected deficit targets.

In each year, consistently, they said they would do things which they did not do. Now, there's a plus minus. We all get that. It's a budget. You're trying to make a guesstimate the best you can. We hope that it's an honourable, honest prediction. We hope that it would bear some reflection to the actual outcome, because if it's off every single year, people start to not pay attention anymore. And that's what was happening under the previous administration, people hear the budget and go, well, yawn, that doesn't really matter because it's not going to be anywhere near what they do at the end of the year anyway.

So why are we even paying attention to this thing. So we came out with our first budget. We inherited a fair bit of poison water. I talked about some of those things before. But there are a lot more than tha t. Let's talk about FleetNet–well, we'll talk about FleetNet later, all right? The government was told seven years ago they needed to replace the emergency communication system because it was outdated–to be kind. Did they? No. Year after year they didn't. This is the communication system for people who fight fires. They aren't out there fooling around like the member for Fort Garry -Riverview (Mr.

Allum), they're trying to fight fires –or they're ambulance attendants, or they're front -line health - care workers, and they're trying to communicate with each other and trying to protect themselves and trying to protect other people in the process of doing their work. And they need to be able to communicate in those circumstances and the way they communicate is a system called FleetNet. It's this FleetNet system the previous government was told was going the way of the dodo bird and they had to act, and did they act? No, they didn't act. Year after year after year they were told and they didn't act.

The president of the Manitoba government employee's union told me that she herself personally told the premier who told ministers of government the system needs to be replaced. No, didn't act. So what happened? Well, they started to have system breakdowns and they star ted to have times when they couldn't communicate with each other, and that's dangerous There were situations that were fires. There were fires in the southeast of Manitoba, for example –the Chair's district where people couldn't communicate with one another .

That's dangerous, and it would be wrong to suggest that there would be many higher priorities than having front-line emergency personnel be able to communicate with each other during an emergency. But the previous government didn't fix the system and th e people charged with keeping it

1606 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 26, 2017 repaired had to buy parts on eBay, and the cost to replace that system could well be half a billion dollars. And that got handed up to us. And now the member talks about not being open enough. Well, Madam Speaker –or Mr. Ch air, I'm sorry–we're interested in being open. So wha

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	41-2-45
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	41st 2nd hansardpdf 45.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	9fc2e3f2c6142c34fd52edcd7904f66b0d05cbbd

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