Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 1B (42nd Legislature, 1st Session)

42-1-1b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session – Forty-Second Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Myrna Driedger Speaker Vol. LXXIII No. 1B - 1:30 p.m., Monday, September 30, 2019 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Forty-Second Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ADAMS, Danielle Thompson NDP ALTOMARE, Nello Transcona NDP ASAGWARA, Uzoma Union Station NDP BRAR, Diljeet Burrows NDP BUSHIE, Ian Keewatinook NDP CLARKE, Eileen, Hon. Agassiz PC COX, Cathy, Hon. Kildonan-River East PC CULLEN, Cliff, Hon. Spruce Woods PC DRIEDGER, Myrna, Hon. Roblin PC EICHLER, Ralph, Hon. Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FIELDING, Scott, Hon. Kirkfield Park PC FONTAINE, Nahanni St. Johns NDP FRIESEN, Cameron, Hon. Morden-Winkler PC GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib.

GOERTZEN, Kelvin, Hon. Steinbach PC GORDON, Audrey Southdale PC GUENTER, Josh Borderland PC GUILLEMARD, Sarah Fort Richmond PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC ISLEIFSON, Len Brandon East PC JOHNSON, Derek Interlake-Gimli PC JOHNSTON, Scott Assiniboia PC KINEW, Wab Fort Rouge NDP LAGASSÉ, Bob Dawson Trail PC LAGIMODIERE, Alan Selkirk PC LAMONT, Dougald St. Boniface Lib. LAMOUREUX, Cindy Tyndall Park Lib. LATHLIN, Amanda The Pas-Kameesak NDP LINDSEY, Tom Flin Flon NDP MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Malaya Notre Dame NDP MARTIN, Shannon McPhillips PC MOSES, Jamie St.

Vital NDP MICHALESKI, Brad Dauphin PC MICKLEFIELD, Andrew Rossmere PC MORLEY-LECOMTE, Janice Seine River PC NAYLOR, Lisa Wolseley NDP NESBITT, Greg Riding Mountain PC PALLISTER, Brian, Hon. Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine, Hon. Midland PC PIWNIUK, Doyle Turtle Mountain PC REYES, Jon Waverley PC SALA, Adrien St. James NDP SANDHU, Mintu The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron, Hon. Springfield-Ritchot PC SMITH, Andrew Lagimodière PC SMITH, Bernadette Point Douglas NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Vérendrye PC SQUIRES, Rochelle, Hon. Riel PC STEFANSON, Heather, Hon.

Tuxedo PC TEITSMA, James Radisson PC WASYLIW, Mark Fort Garry NDP WHARTON, Jeff, Hon. Red River North PC WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC WOWCHUK, Rick Swan River PC

5 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, September 30, 2019 The House met at 1:30 p.m. At 1:30 p.m. the Sergeant-at-Arms, carrying the mace and followed by the Speaker, the Clerk, the Deputy Clerk and the Clerk assistants of the Legislative Assembly, entered the Chamber. The Sergeant-at-Arms returned to the north doors and met His Honour the Administrator with the mace. Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms (Mr. Ray Gislason): His Honour the Administrator.

His Honour the Administrator, accompanied by the honorary aides -de-camp, the officer escort, the Premier and the Provincial Court judges, entered the Chamber and took his seat on the throne. The Sergeant-at-Arms made obeisance with the mace and retired to the side of the Chamber. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE Hon. Chief Justice Richard Chartier (Administrator of the Province of Manitoba): Please be seated. Madam Speaker and members of the Manitoba Legislature, I welcome you to the First Session of the 42nd Legislative Assembly of the province of Manitoba.

Je vous souha ite la bienvenue à la première session de la quarante -deuxième Législature de la Province du Manitoba. Translation I welcome you to the First Session of the 42nd Legislative Assembly of the Province of Manitoba. English I offer my congratulations to all n ew and returning members of this Assembly. I also offer the congratulations and appreciation of all Manitobans to all candidates who sought election to this Assembly in the recent election. Your commitment and contribution to the validity of our democracy is deserving of our respect.

To all Manitobans, your government is grateful for the honour to continue serving the people of our province. You have renewed your government's mandate to continue its mission of fixing Manitoba's finances, repairing it s services and rebuilding its economy. While significant progress was made in all three areas during the previous term, much work remains to be done in order to complete the task of moving Manitoba forward towards greater prosperity for all.

As a government that keeps its promises, your government will continue to work to make Manitoba more economically competitive by reducing regu - latory red tape and encouraging innovation. Passage of The Business Registration, Supervision and Ownership Transparency Act (Various Acts Amended) will help Manitoba complete implementa tion of the New West Partnership Trade Agreement and will provide Manitobans with more access to customers and opportunities across western Canada.

Your government will address the issues of addictions and honour its obligation to keep our streets safe from crime, and your government will continue to work to strengthen our education system, support families in need and deliver better health care sooner for all Manitobans.

In the coming days, this Assembly will be asked to complete all necessary legislative requirements in order to fully implement the measures outlined in Budget 2019, measures that increase funding for health care, education and families, measures that increase support for tour ism and our creative industries while also investing more than $1 billion in strategic infrastructure, and, most importantly, measures that lower the provincial sales tax to 7 per cent.

In 2011, the previous government was elected based on its promise to not raise the provincial sales tax and a commitment to let Manitobans vote on major tax hikes. Just 18 months later , both of those promises were broken. After making goods –after making more goods and services subject to the PST, the PST rate was i ncreased to 8 per cent without the consent of Manitobans. That increase took more than $300 million annually off the kitchen tables of Manitobans. The previous government took more from Manitobans and gave less. Your government is committed to taking less from Manitobans and giving them more.

6 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 * (13:40) Reducing the PST back to 7 per cent is part of your government's plan to guarantee $2,020 in tax savings for Manitobans over the next years. Manitobans have given your government the mandate to move for ward towards a stronger economy, better services and better jobs. The work to achieve those goals resumes today. They will continue to guide the decisions of this government throughout its mandate. It is the path Manitobans have chosen, it is the bright fu ture they deserve and it is what your government will work hard to deliver.

I now leave you to the business of the session knowing you will faithfully discharge your duties and responsibilities. May Divine Providence continue to bless our province and gui de this Assembly in all of its deliberations; God bless Manitoba; God bless Canada; God save the Queen. His Honour the Administrator rose from the throne and retired from the Chamber escorted by the Sergeant-at-Arms carrying the mace and followed by the h onorary aides -de-camp, the officer escort, the Premier and the Provincial Court judges. Prior to their exiting the Chamber, the lyrics of God Save the Queen and O Canada were sung.

The Speaker proceeded to the throne. The Sergeant-at-Arms approached the Speaker, made obeisance with the mace, then placed the mace on the table. 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 p rovince. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom, know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.

Please be seated. At this time I would just like to take a moment to welcome everybody back, and especially to all the new members who are joining us here, a very special occasion it is for you, I'm sure, and all the best to everybody as you are taking on your new tasks before you. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 1–An Act Respecting the Administration of Oaths of Office Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I move, seconded by the member for Borderland (Mr. Guenter), that Bill 1,

An Act Re specting the Administration of Oaths of Office;

Loi sur la prestation des serments d'entrée en fonction, be now read a first time. Motion agreed to. * * * Mr. Pallister: I move, seconded by the member for Southdale (Ms. Gordon), that –my motion has the name of the member, Madam Speaker. I need your guidance–[interjection]–it's appropriate to say the name–Doyle Piwniuk, member for the electoral division of Turtle Mountain, be Chairperson of the Committees of the Whole House, and Deputy Speaker. Motion agreed to. Mr. Pallister: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Morden -Winkler (Mr.

Friesen), that Dennis Smook, member for the electoral division of La Vérendrye, be Deputy Chairperson of the Committees of the Whole House. Motion agreed to. Mr. Pallister: I move, seconded by the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson), that Andrew Micklefield, the member for the electoral division of Rossmere, be Deputy Chairperson of the Committees of the Whole House. Motion agreed to. Mr. Pallister: I move, secon ded by the member for Spruce Woods (Mr. Cullen), that the speech of His Honour the Administrator be taken into consideration today. Thank you. Motion agreed to. * (13:50) House Business Hon.

Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): On House business, Madam Speaker. Could you please canvass the House for leave to limit the debate on the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne to three members in the following order: the Leader of the

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 7 Official Opposition (Mr. Kinew); the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Lamont); and the Premier (Mr. Pallister). Each member's speech would be limited to five minutes and following the third speech the Speaker would be obligated to put the question on the motion. Madam Speaker: Is there leave to limit the de bate on the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne to three members in the following order: the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Kinew); the member for St. Boniface; and the Premier?

Each member's speech would be limited to five minutes and following the third speech the Speaker would be obligated to put the question on the motion. Is there leave? [Agreed] THRONE SPEECH (First Day of Debate) Mr. Bob Lagassé (Dawson Trail): I move, seconded by the member for Seine River (Ms. Morley - Lecomte), that the following address be presented to His Honour the Administrator: We, the m embers of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, thank Your Honour for the gracious speech addressed to us at the First Session of the 42nd Legislature of Manitoba. Motion presented. Mr.

Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): I want to say a big thank you, kitchi miigwech, to the people of Fort Rouge for sending me back to this Chamber to serve in another Legislature, and also a congratulation to all my colleag ues returning and new MLAs. I am very proud to stand with a strengthened opposition team that will work very hard to keep this government to account. I want to take a minute to acknowledge that everyone on our team did something very difficult to be her e.

Some of them made history in their election to this Chamber; others defeated Cabinet ministers or incumbent MLAs; and still others conducted themselves with great integrity, honesty and perspicacity in finding their way to the hallowed Chamber of the Ma nitoba Legislative Assembly. And we will certainly need all of those skills and attributes to be able to hold this government to account. We know that their focus in the last Legislature was to cut health care, to close emergency rooms and to raise the c ost of people's Manitoba Hydro bill.

And our increased size of our caucus on this side is a clear repudiation of this government's agenda, and we will hold them to account each and every day, Madam Speaker. Gives me great pleasure to stand here as the voice of progressive Manitoba. And we heard in that short Throne Speech that this government saw fit to bring forward an extended soliloquy made up of partisan attacks, and yet they didn't even mention climate change once, Madam Speaker.

And this just a few days after my colleagues and I joined 12,000 people out front of this building as the young people of our province and our world demanded that we take immediate and substantial action to address the issue of our time which is climate change. On a perhaps m ore cross-partisan note, Madam Speaker, today is Orange Shirt Day, and I want to thank all of my returning colleagues who did support The Orange Shirt Day Act in the last Legislature which recognizes this day officially in our province as one that we observe in honour and commemoration of the survivors of Indian residential schools.

Our country has learned the lessons of the past to a certain extent. We saw the apology on behalf of the Crown by Prime Minister Harper in 2008, and now it is up to each of us to carry the lessons of that past dark era forward and to ensure that no child in this country is separated by force from their family simply because of who they are and, perhaps more importantly, that we never see fit to allow a government policy to judge an entire group of people based on racist and outmoded thinking.

And so the true import and significance of this Orange Shirt Day in 2019 is that it's another opportunity for us to stand together and reaffirm that slogan that we now see imprinted on T -shirts, that every child matters. In our language–and I'll table the Anishinabe transition for the benefit of Hansard–we say gakina abinoonjiiyag apiitendaagoziwag [every child matters]. Every child matters.

The significance of this, Madam Speaker, is that the residential school survivors themselves stood up, demanded justice of this country, and when they were met by leaders of the federal and provincial government, they displayed a great amount of wisdom, a great amount of compassion and a great amount of courage, which I think is a true lesson on what it means to be a human being, that when you are done wrong, the proper response of a fully formed human being is not to strike back, but rather to rise above with love, with compassion and with generosity.

8 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 And so while we honour the residential school survivors themselves on Orange Shirt Day, we alt 'aso'–we ought also to take a moment to recognize the true lessons of humanity that have been shown by these generations in many of our communities. In the pa st year, I wrote to the Prime Minister asking him to make Orange Shirt Day a federal statutory holiday. And it is my hope that this will be accomplished by the next prime minister of our country. I will write to the next Prime Minister to do so.

It would be a fitting tribute to these residential school survivors. It would mark the progress that our nation has made while still giving us an opportunity to commemorate their courage, their grace and their compassion. And so perhaps that's something that the Premier and I can work together on during this Legislature. With that I say thank you again to everybody who played a role in sending us here, and congrats once again to all the elected members. Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): I'd like to start by acknowledging Orange Shirt Day.

It's a reminder of the causal daily cruelty and denial of dignity that was a legacy of residential schools, as well as the ongoing decades -long legacy of governments undermining and tearing apart First Nations families. We must remind ourselves this day, and every day, that every child matters. We must reflect, too, that the residential schools mark the worst of what government can do: institutional cruelty, neglect and death, even as warnings were raised over a century ago that what was taking place was a national crime.

Set against this, we are also today marking the outcome of an election, which in many ways represents the very best of our values. Democracy offers us the peaceful transition of power. And while we live in a so ciety that is unequal, and is growing more unequal, the democratic right to vote means that at the ballot box, at least, every person is equal. We can and should lament that more Manitobans did not vote and that so many people feel disengaged from the political process. I am grateful to everyone who put their name forward to make democracy better in Manitoba.

I say that especially for candidates who ran under the Manitoba Liberal banner, but it is true of all parties. There are good people in every party, and no one has a monopoly on good ideas, though sometimes it certainly seems this government has a monopoly on bad ones. Our job is not just to criticize but to demand the government prove its case. Much of politics is treated as theatre, which is to say it is assumed by the people watching it that it is not serious, that people pretend to be someone they're not and recite lines over and over that someone else wrote for them.

One consequence of this is that the theatre of lip service is seen as a substitute of action. The decisions made in this Chamber every day have an impact on the lives of over 1 million people in Manitoba and more besides when we include our role in Canada and the world.

This is not just a question of decisions to act, but decisions not to act, that Manitobans may be harmed by neglect and cuts, and there are many areas where we are deeply, deeply concerned about this government's policies–on health care, education, climate change, on the economy and, indeed, on democracy–that these systems are already more fragile than the government realizes and the measures this government is proposing is putting them at greater risk when we need to be strengthening them. * (14:00) In the often hyper -partisan atmosphere in this Chamber it is easy to dismiss complaints as theatre or posturing.

I hope we can consider the serious nature of the decisions we make, that we approach our task as legislators with humility and, when necessary, set aside our partisan blinders to listen in earnest to the voices of people who cry out for help or in warning that we are headed in the wrong direction. We have the opportunity in this Chamber to set our province on a path that will affect people's lives for the better or for the worse for years and decades to come. O ur obligation is to the future, not just ourselves. We look forward to working with you all. Thank you. Merci. Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): Congratulations on your re-election as Speaker, Madam Speaker. Also, congratulations to my colleague, the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Kinew), and to his team, including those–all those who sought office under the banner of New Democratic Party. As well, to my colleague from St. Boniface, congratulations also to him and to all the–of his candidates who sought office on behalf of the Liberal Party. And congratulations, of course, as well, to all my colleagues here and all who sought office on behalf of the Progressive Conservative Party, and to all who put

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 9 their names on the ballot. Thank you for making democracy work and for giving Manitobans a choice. It is my hope that this Assembly will continue to be the foundation for ongoing dialogue, for co-operation, for debate on important issues. I look forward to working with all my colleagues here to move our beloved Manitoba forward as we continue in our efforts to fix the finances, to repair the services, to rebuild the economy of our province.

Back in 2016 our PC team asked Manitobans for their trust, and in return we said that we would keep our word and we establ ished a plan that included better jobs, better care, better education, better value for money and better together; and promises were made, promises were kept. And, Madam Speaker, three weeks ago, on September 10th, Manitobans renewed their confidence in this party and in its leadership and they made their choice, and their choice was forward, not backward. They elected the largest back -to-back majority governments in the history of Manitoba.

And we will move forward, Madam Speaker, forward to better care s ooner; forward to better education, better outcomes for our children and 20 new schools; forward to a made -in-Manitoba climate and green plan; forward to a stronger economy and 40,000 new jobs; and forward to affordability, which means, Madam Speaker, low er taxes and more money on the kitchen tables of Manitoba families, Manitoba small businesses and Manitoba seniors.

Over the course of the next couple of months our government will be putting forth an ambitious 100-day agenda that will see record tax relief, better health care sooner, more schools for students, more jobs for Manitobans and made -in-Manitoba climate change solutions. And we will bring forward legislation to begin implementation of the 2020 $2,020- tax-rollback guarantee.

We will work towards implementing recommendations from the 2019 review of planning, permitting and zoning to help do a better job of attracting capital and creating jobs in this province, and we will host the inaugural Manitoba jobs summit later this week. Working with the W innipeg Regional Health Authority we will create 200 new nursing positions. We will continue with the planning and then the construction of the St. Boniface emergency department and we will initiate the Frontline Ideas Fund for healthcare workers to strea mline operations and improve patient care.

In addition, we will initiate the teachers idea fund to support innovative solutions brought forth by teachers to streamline operations and improve educational outcomes for students. Moving forward on the construction of 20 new schools has been previously identified in our new schools guarantee. We will continue to advance and lead in the elimination of barriers to interprovincial trade within our country. We will announce initial funding recipients for the growing opportunities in watersheds trust, and will consult with the private sector and develop a plan to eliminate the use of plastic bags in Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, our team is ready to continue the hard work of making Manitoba Canada's most - improved province. Manitobans should expect nothing less. Manitobans deserve nothing less. Coming together is a beginning; keeping together is progress; working together is success. I encourage all members of this House to work together to achieve the betterment of our province for the good of its citizens now and in the future. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question.

Madam Speaker: The question before the House is the motion of the honourable member for Dawson Trail (Mr. Lagassé), that is, the motion for an address in reply to the Speech from the Throne. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed] House Business Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, on House business. Could you please canvass the House for leave to consider a sessional order motion today without notice. Madam Speaker: Is there leave to consider a sessional order motion today without notice? Leave? [Agreed]

10 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 GOVERNMENT MOTION Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine), THAT the following sessional order applies for the First Session of the 42nd Legislature, despite any other rule or practice of this House. Sitting

schedule for September and October 2019 1. Subject to the following, the House shall sit Monday to Thursday from 1:30 p.m. until 6 p.m., from September 30th, 2019, until October 10th, 2019: (

a) On Friday, October 4th, 2019, as a separate sitting day, the House shall sit at 10 a.m. until 12:30 p.m. to consider Departmental Estimates in the Committee of Supply. The Speaker shall not call Routine Proceedings on this day, only Orders of the Day; (

b) On Friday, October 11th, 2019, the House shall sit a t 10 a.m. until 12:30 p.m. to consider Routine Proceedings and Orders of the Day subject to item 10; (

c) The House shall not sit on the mornings of Tuesday, October 1st, 2019, and Thursday, October 3rd, 2019; (

d) If there are more than 40 hours of Estima tes time remaining when the House rises on Friday, October 4th, 2019, the House shall then sit on the mornings of Tuesday, October 8th, 2019, and Thursday, October 10th, 2019, from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. to consider departmental Estimates. If there are fewer than 40 hours of Estimates time remaining when the House rises on Friday, October 4th, 2019, the House shall not sit on the mornings of Tuesday, October 8th, 2019, and Thursday, October 10th, 2019, from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. Budget process Reinstatement of financial process from the Fourth Session, 41st Legislature 2.

The steps or segments of the financial process introduced and concluded during the Fourth Session of the 41st Legislature shall be reinstated in this First Session of the 42nd Legislature as follows: (

a) The introduction, debate and adoption of the budget motion and M essages of Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor tabled on March 7th, 2019, shall be deemed to have been introduced, considered and concluded during the F irst Session of the 42nd Legislature and that the ensuing steps of the financial process be continued in this current session; (

b) The sequence for consideration of the departmental Estimates by the Committee of Supply, tabled in this House on March 21st, 2019, shall be reinstated and remain in effect for the duration of this session, subject to any subsequent amendment agreed to by the House leaders of the recognized parties; (

c) The departmental Estimates shall be reinstated during the F irst Session of the 42nd Legislature at the same s tage as they were when the Fourth Session of the 41st Legislature was dissolved with 92 hours and 26 minutes left for consideration of the same; (

d) The consideration of departmental Estimates must be concluded by Thursday, October 10th, and reported to t he House by Friday, October 11th, 2019. On Thursday, October 10th, subject to item 15, if all departmental Estimates resolutions have not passed, the chairpersons of the Committee of Supply shall immediately put all questions necessary to dispose of the re maining matters. These questions are not subject to debate, amendment or adjournment. * (14:10) (

e) The consideration of all remaining steps in the main and Capital Supply procedure set out in appendix D of the Rules, Order and Forms of proceedings of t he Legislative Assembly of Manitoba (The Rules) must be concluded by Friday, October 11, 2019. Reinstatement of Bill 22 Reinstatement of Bill 22 – The Business Registration, Supervision and Ownership Transparency Act (Various Acts Amended) from the Fourth Session of the 41st Legislature. 3. Bill 22 – The Business Registration, Supervision and Ownership Transparency Act (Various Acts Amended) is to be reinstated during the F irst

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 11 Session of the 42nd Legislature at the same Second Reading stage it was at when th e Fourth Session of 41st Legislature was dissolved. Conclusion of the Second Reading, Committee Stage, Report Stage Amendment and Concur - rence and Third Reading on Bill 22. 4. Second Reading stage on Bill 22 is to be completed on or before Wednesday, October 2nd, 2019.

If necessary, 30 minutes prior to the adjournment hour on Wednesday, October 2nd, 2019, the Speaker must interrupt the proceedings and, without seeing the clock, put all questions necessary to conclude, without further debate or amendment, the Second Reading stage of Bill 22. 5. Rule 92(7) of the Rules, regarding the requirement for two days notice of a standing committee meeting, is to be waived for Bill 22. 6. Committee stage on Bill 22 is to be completed no later than Monday, October 7t h, 2019, and reported to the House on Tuesday, October 8th, 2019. 7.

If the committee stage is not completed by the noted date, the following provisions are to apply if a committee is sitting: (

a) The committee shall not rise until clause by clause is completed and the question to report the bill has been decided by the committee. (

b) If the committee has not completed public presentations, it must close public presen- tations at 9 p.m. By unanimous consent, the deadline can be extended to 10 p.m. The public has the ability to provide written submissions for an additional 24 hours. (

c) At 11 p.m. any member of the committee who wishes to move an amendment to Bill 22 must file 20 copies of the amendment with the Clerk of the committee, and the C lerk must distribute the amendment to members of the committee. After that time, an amendment may be moved only if copies of it were filed with the Clerk and distributed as required by this provision. (

d) At midnight, the C hair of the committee must interrupt the proceedings and, without further debate or amendment ( other than an amendment distributed as acquired by paragraph (c)), put every question necessary to complete clause- by-clause consideration of the bill under consideration. 8. Report stage amendmen ts and the Concurrence and Third Reading stages of Bill 22 are to be completed on or before Thursday, October 10th, 2019.

If necessary, subject to item 15, the Speaker must interrupt the proceedings and, without seeing the clock, put all questions necessar y to conclude without further debate or amendment the report stage amendment and the concurrence and third reading stages of Bill 22. 9. At any time this session when the House is considering any stage of Bill 22, the two sections of Supply in the committ ee rooms may meet concurrently with the House to consider departmental Estimates. The Chamber

section of Supply will not meet at these times, and the House will be in session in the Chamber to debate Bill 22. During such sittings: (

a) If there is a recor ded vote requested in the House, the two sections of Supply must recess for the duration of the vote. (

b) If there is a recorded vote requested in a

section of Supply, the House must temporarily interrupt proceedings to resolve into Supply so that the Chamber

section may convene, receive the request for a recorded vote, and then conduct the vote in accordance with rule 77(10), 77(11) and 77(12). Following the vote, the Chamber

section may rise to allow the House to resume consideration Bill 22 while the two sections of Supply continue meeting. (

c) If on any day the House concludes its consideration of Bill 22 prior to the adjournment hour, the House may resolve into Supply so that the Chamber

section may consider departmental Estimates. Adjournment on Friday, October 11, 2019 Matters to be completed before adjournment on Friday, October 11, 2019 10. The House is to not see the clock or adjourn on Friday, October 11, 2019, until the items set out in this Sessional Order are completed and Royal Assent has been granted to the following bills: (

a) Bill 22 – The Business Registration, Supervision and Ownership Transparency Act (Various Acts Amended); (

b) The Loan Act, 2019 and The Appropriation Act, 2019.

12 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 11. At the conclusion of the actions required by this Sessional Order, the Speaker must adjourn the House without a motion for adjournment. The House then stands adjourned until the call of the Speaker. General Provisions Recorded Divisions 12. A recorded division on any item referred to in this sessional order cannot be deferred. Interruption of proceedings 13. Where this sessional order requires the Speaker or a Chairperson to interrupt proceedings to take any action: (

a) the House will not adjourn on that day until the Speaker or Chairperson has put all applicable questions on all items; and (

b) at 30 minutes prior to the adjournment hour, the Speaker or Chairperson will interrupt debate and put all questions with no further debate or amendment. Priority of actions to be taken 14. On Monday, September 30, 2019, the Speaker shall call: (

a) The category Tabling of Reports from Routine Proceedings to allow for all remaining volumes of supplementary information for legislative review 2019- 2020–departmental expenditure Estimates to be tabled, followed by: (

b) Orde rs of the Day –to allow the House to resolve into the Committee of Supply to consider departmental Estimates. 15. On Thursday, October 10, 2019, if these actions have not already been concluded, at 30 minutes prior to adjournment they will be considered and resolved in the following order: (

a) The chairpersons of the Committee of Supply shall put all questions necessary to dispose of the remaining departmental Estimates resolutions. (

b) The Speaker shall put all questions necessary to conclude the report sta ge amendment and the concurrence and third reading stages of Bill 22. 16. Where: (

a) this sessional order requires the Speaker or a Chairperson to take any action at a specified time; and (

b) at the specified time, a point of order or matter of privilege has been raised and is under consideration by the House or Committee; the Point of Order or Matter of Privilege is to be set aside, and no other Point of Order or Matter of Privilege may be raised, until the required action has been taken and all matters r elating to the required action have been resolved. Amendments 17. After adoption by the House, this Sessional Order may be amended by unanimous consent of the House. Madam Speaker: It has been moved by the honourable Government House Leader (Mr.

Goertzen), seconded by the honourable member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine), that the following sessional order applies– An Honourable Member: Dispense. Madam Speaker: Oh, thank you. Dispense. It has been moved by the honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Goert zen), seconded by the honourable member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine), and the motion was in order. Are there any members wishing to speak to the motion? Is the House ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Madam Speaker: The question before the House is the sessional order proposed by the honourable Government House Leader.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed] * (14:20) ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS TABLING OF REPORTS Madam Speaker: As per the sessional order , I am now calling tabling of reports under routine proceedings to allow the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review 2019 -2020 Departmental Expenditure Estimates books to be tabled. Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Education and Training): I am pleased to table Manitoba Education

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 and Training Supplemental Information For Legislative Review 2019 -2020 Departmental Estimates. Thank you. Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I am pleased to table the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review Departmental Expenditure Estimates report for the fiscal year of 2019-20. Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Families. [interjection] The honourable Minister of Justice? Mr. Cullen: For the Department of Justice. Hon.

Heather Stefanson (Minister of Families): I am pleased to table the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review 2019 -2020 departmental estimate–or–expenditure Estimates for the Department of Families. Hon. Cameron Friesen (Minister of Healt h, Seniors and Active Living): I am pleased to table the 2019-2020 Supplementary Information for Legislative Review Estimates supplement for Manitoba Health, Seniors and Active Living. Hon.

Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, it's my pleasure to rise today in–Assembly to table the Manitoba Civil Service Commission's Supplementary Information for Legislative Review 2019-20 Department Expenditure Estimates. Madam Speaker, it's my pleasure to rise today in– Assembly to table the Manitoba Employee Pensions and Other Costs Supplementary Information for Legislative Review 2019 -20 Department Expenditures Estimates.

Madam Speaker, it's my pleasure to rise today in– Assembly to table the Manitoba Enabling Appropriations and Other Appropriations Supple - mentary Information for Legislative Review 2019-20 Departmental Expenditure Estimates. Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Sustainable Development): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table Supplementary Information for Legislative Review '19-20 De partmental Expenditure Estimates for Manitoba Sustainable Development. Hon.

Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, it's my pleasure to rise in–Assembly today to table the Manitoba departmental of agriculture expenditure Estimates for 2019-2020. Hon. Cathy Cox (Minister of Sport, Culture and Heritage): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the annual report for the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review for the Department of Sport, Culture and Heritage for the fiscal year 2019-2020. Hon.

Blaine Pedersen (Minister of Growth, Enterprise and Trade): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the Manitoba Growth, Enterprise and Trade Supplementary Information for Legislative Review 2019- 2020 Departmental Expenditure Estimates. Hon. Eileen Clarke (Minister of Indigenous and Northern Relations): I am pleased to table the Indigenous and Northern Relations Supplementary Information for Legislative Review for the 2019-2020 Departmental Expenditure Estimates. Hon.

Jeff Wharton (Minister of Municipal Relations): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the Municipal Relations supplementing information for legislative review for the '19 -20 Departmental Expenditure Estimates to the Department of Municipal Relations. Hon. Ron Schuler (Minister of Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table the Department of Manitoba Infrastructure's Supplementary Information for Legislative Review of the 2019-2020 Departmental Expenditure Estimates. Thank you.

ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Madam Speaker: As per the sessional order, I am now calling orders of the day to allow the House to resolve into the Committee of Supply to consider departmental Estimates. 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 resume consideration of the Estimates for Executive Council, pursuant to the sessional order recently passed in the House.

14 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 For the committee's information, these Estimates are being reinstated at the same stage from the previous Legislature, where we last met on April 23rd, 2019, for a total one hour and 48 minutes. Given that these Estimates only contain one resolution, by practice, the discussion will be –will proceed in a global manner. For the information of the speakers, when you have one minute left in your speaking time, I will just flash the little yellow reminder to let you know that you have a minute left.

Would the honourable First Minister like to introduce his staff that's here–present today? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I have with me Fred Meier, Clerk of the Executive Council, Cabinet secretary. Charlotte Price is here, assistant deputy minister, Cabinet strategic priorities. Aurel Tess is over here, Provincial Comptroller with Manitoba Finance, and my assistant's Ryan Werbicki over there, who is special assistant. Mr. Chairperson: The floor is now open for questions. Mr.

Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Since this is our first time back since the election, I'll kind of use the first question maybe as a bit of an opening statement. Just want to take a moment to congratulate the First Minister and the other MLAs in the room on your elections. It's not an easy thing, and the way I always talk about it is: Not too many people in the history of our province get a chance to sit in that Chamber. Not too many people in the history of Manitoba get to be an MLA or t o wear one of the pins that a few of our colleagues are wearing here today.

And I do take that seriously, regardless of partisan stripe or affiliation, that we're all doing an important service here and all of us did do something special in getting elected here. So I just want to take a second to acknowledge that. Also, specifically want to tell the First Minister, you know, well done, in terms of receiving a second mandate and getting re -elected to the government side.

I know that we have different outlooks on the future of our province, though I think we share a common vision for making Manitoba a great place to live, and I look forward to serve in a role as opposition leader so that that difference of outlook not only creates many memorable comebacks and , you know, points in question period, but hopefully does actually advance the project of making this province one that we're all proud of. You know, our team, we ran an election campaign that we're very proud of. We ran on a message of building a province that works for all of us, not just those at the top.

And so our focus over the next few years will be to stand up for health care, will be to stand up for education, will be to stand up against climate change and to ensure that what happens in this building, the Manitoba Legislature, can help forge progress towards achieving those goals. I know that the First Minister will articulate –he has started to articulate today with the mini -Throne Speech–but with the more fulsome Throne Speech later this fall, will set out his agenda. And I'll tell him that I will listen with an open mind and an open heart.

I'll take seriously the proposals that his government is bringing forward, and I will do my best to give voice to the reasonable concerns, the practical questions and the hopes and dreams that people in our province have for having a province that works for all of us. So I just want to take a minute to just put those words on the record and once again to offer congratulations to the First Minister, to all my colleagues from the different constituencies around the province who are here at the committee table. Mr.

Pallister: I thank my colleague for his words and also want to offer my congratulations to him and his team and also to the newly elected members who are with us on the committee today, from–the member for Wolseley (Ms. Naylor), the member for Fort Garry (Mr. Wasyliw), the member for St. Vital (Mr. Moses), and also to offer, if I could, my congratulations to the Leader of the Liberal Party for his effor ts in the campaign. He, as the Leader of the New Democratic Party, worked very, very hard and their preparation was obvious in their articulation of the positions they wanted to advocate for.

And I thought for the most part the campaign itself was focused on issues, and I think that's always preferable. And I also, of course, would offer my congratulations to my colleagues who returned to the Legislative Assembly and also, if I could, also to the families of our members, because it is not possible, really, for many of us to make this commitment to public life without the support of our friends and family, and for us, say, personally, in our household, first year that the place has been empty of children for over a quarter of a century, so it was a different experience for my wife this time.

Esther was able to be involved in the campaign more than she had, and that was great to be able, as a couple, to share that experience with something that over the years we

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 15 haven't been able to do as much just because of the nature of our lives and the other tasks outside of politics that are also very important in life. So I say thank you to her and thank you to all of the partners, spouses, family members because it is a commitment we make, but it also has a resultant effect on those around us and on the relationships we have with those we love.

So, for each of us, I know this is a pursuit of love, love for our province, love for the ideals that we share and sometimes don't, but ideals nonetheless that we speak for her e that, as the member for Fort Rouge quite rightly said, are a privilege. And the honour of being given the stewardship of public office is something that many have aspired to over the years; many others have not, but for us, we have the opportunity to act ually serve. When it's in that serving, that we demonstrate our caring in a real way and demonstrate our abilities in a real way as well.

So it would be my hope that where it is possible, and I believe it is possible on many occasions, to work together, to articulate positions that express Manitoba's best interests that we can also look for those occasions to do that as well as the normal course of events seems to be, in particular –a lot of western democracies lately that seek out points of disagreement, I think there is also a real opportunity to seek out points of agreement.

I remember today as a special day in respect of residential school recognition, recognition of the horrible public policies that resulted in so much hurt and harm and continue to.

But I remember being part of a government that deserves some credit, but also being part of a, more importantly, the House of Commons, that came together regardless of political party stripe, to make this apology initially happen and to make the recognition of the wrongdoing of the past something that we –institutionalize isn't the right word–but that we have come to understand more fully, and to demonstrate we understand more fully, so we can move forward together. * (15:00) I think it's one example, and t here are many others, where we have the opportunity to overcome the barriers of the things that divide us, I guess, and just work together for the united best interests of all.

And I look forward to working with all my colleagues to see if we can make those types of things happen as well as we conduct the normal –all too normal – political debates on issues where there certainly is ample room for disagreement, both within our caucuses and among us as party members, because that happens too. But I look forward to the opportunity to serve and to serve with colleagues in the Legislative Assembly in the upcoming session. And I think that there's every reason for optimism as Manitoba continues to move in a–on many fronts in a positive direction. Mr.

Kinew: Well, and that concludes the most non- partisan exchange that you'll see over the next four years between the Premier (Mr. Pallister) and myself– or maybe three years, I don't know, we'll see–no, just kidding. The Premier did mention Orange Shirt Day and the residential school, I guess, history in the response there. Earlier today in the response to the Throne Speech, I did mention the idea of making this a day that's nationally recognized. The case for doing so, I guess, has a few propositions to it.

Maybe the mos t solid foundation on which the idea rests is that it is one of the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to have a stat holiday nationally recognized that would observe –be observed by Canadians and that would be a day to remember what happened in residential schools, but also more importantly, perhaps, to educate future generations so that we could learn from the mistakes of the past and use those lessons to forge a better tomorrow in our country.

And I think there's maybe just, like , a broader point that TRC may not have articulated exactly, but just that as we move forward on reconciliation, that having a public holiday to mark the occasion and to gather in communities like ours, which is happening today–many schools –I saw people posting about Steinbach, Winnipeg, you know, northern communities all reviewing Orange Shirt Day celebrations. And, you know, that's a good learning opportunity for kids, good learning opportunity even for adults.

Because I know, like, many of us, my age included, we didn't learn about residential schools when we were in elementary or high school. And so some of us are learning that later in life about all that. So I just wanted to see, you know, if the Premier's interested at all in joining me in advocating the next Prime Minister to pursue that as a national stat holiday. I'd previously written, you know, the current Prime Minister on that topic and, you know, his government expressed some interest. You know, I think there's a general consensus that I think all the parties support doing something in this space, and I

16 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 think part of the debate is which day to honour: June 21st, September 30th, what have you. So I just wanted to, you know, I guess, share a bit of the background on that issue with the First Minister because it is, you know, something that a lot of people have worked on up to now: different MPs and the commissioners, Truth and Reconciliation Commission. And so, yes, I just wanted to ask the Premier (Mr.

Pallister) whether he'd consider perhaps w riting a letter to the next premier or advocating of behalf of this idea of implementing that call to action, which I would propose could be fulfilled by making Orange Shirt Day a stat holiday. Mr. Pallister: I appreciate the member's interventions. I wouldn't dismiss the recommendation out of hand and I'm interested to speak to him on that note, and we can pursue that if he'd like. I would also say in terms of the TRC recommendations that we have acted very enthusiastically on a number of the recommendations already–and I'm just looking for a

summary sheet but I don't see it, but when we get it I'll refer to it–this is just an overview document. But there is a progress report, I think, getting prepared, annual progress report that should be released in a c ouple of weeks' time on The Path to Reconciliation Act. So there'll be –this would be for new members.

Our returning members would be aware of this, but we file an annual report on the path to reconciliation each year and there'll be a report coming out in the next few days that I encourage members–all members–to have a look at, that outlines in every respect each of the TRC recommendations and what we're doing or not doing on each one. So there's–that's out there for you to have a look at.

And there are many of them that we are acting on, about –approximately 90 per cent already of Justice uses recommendations on the Phoenix Sinclair issue have already been acted on, the bulk of those since we came to government in '16. Our family reunification numbers w ould be an example of some progress, about a 8 and a half per cent increase in family reunification numbers so far. More to be done, but it's a start. Apprehension's down by 9 per cent so far. These are positive directional stats. They're not suggesting we 're, you know, satisfied at this point, but they're progress. They represent progress.

The taking care of our children act, the CFS amendment act, was brought in to improve outcomes, in particular, obviously, for indigenous children which are impacted by the policies of that department most directly, most frequently.

And these are focused more on community -based prevention, establishing and strengthening lifelong connections and enhancing a child's connection to family, to community, to culture at the same time as opposed to the sort of approach some have referred to in–less than charitably as the old approach, as a kind of a bounty hunter approach where the agencies were actually, you know, funded based on how many kids they could get out of the community. And this has got to change and we are changing it.

The social impact bond project that's under way is an interesting one and it's –involves increasing through the greater involvement of doulas or mothers, elders, strengthening the relationships and preparatory work that can be done directly with expectant mothers and then with new mothers to help them, to give them the supports that they need and deserve to have so that they do not lose their children to an agency that then takes them away from the mother. And so these are on the –in the category of preventative and focusing largely on the child and family services' side of the TRC.

Of course, it's much broader than that. There are many other categories that have been–where recommendations have been made. But I just–I wanted to express that as a quick overview, I guess, just in respect of some of the actions that we've been taking as a consequence of the TRC. Mr. Kinew: So perhaps I'll follow up with the Premier in another venue about the idea of the stat holiday, and we'll just maybe table that one for the time being and return to a topic that we discussed on election night, actually, when we had the congratulatory phone call after the election results were announced.

I raised the issue of, I guess, the needs of agri–ag producers across the province and I specifically mentioned the AgriRecovery program to the Premier, raised the issue with him and also, you know, shared a few thoughts on, you know, that night as well, publicly, in addition to that private conversation. So I do want to raise the issue because I recognize that, you know, the First Minister's government made an announcement today, or at least, I think, had a conference call, if I’m not mistaken, shedding some light on what the plan is.

What I heard, and I'm sure the Premier's heard a ton of this as well, many times during the campaign and, really, over the summer, had to do, I think, with, you know, livestock producers and, you know, them

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 being in a very tough position. I guess more recently there's issues with crops coming off the field. * (15:10) So I wanted to check in with the Premier (Mr. Pallister) if he could share with us an update, because my understanding that it's not actually going to be the AgriRecovery program that's going to be invoked here, but there's going to be another federal - provincial kind of co- operation to help ag producers across Manitoba. But it is an issue that I take serious.

It is an issue that I raised with the Premier previously, and so I'd like to check in and see what's planned, and if the Premier can explain the steps that his government is going to take to help producers. Mr. Pallister: Well, this is another in a series of challenges that ag producers face and have gotten in the habit of facing. It's not isolated to hay shortages in northern Interlake either, as the member has alluded to.

I've just spent a good part of the weekend touring some of the crop areas in southern Manitoba and there is a ton of crop down, to put it mildly, not just in the Red River Valley, but in Agassiz, Portage La Prairie, Spruce Woods, Dauphin, Swan River, Arthur-Virden and throughout the Riding Mountain and the Turtle Mountain ridings and up into the Interlake. A lot of crop down and the rainfall in much of the province in the la st six weeks, I would say, is what you might expect in a year.

So it's pushed some pretty good crops down into the stubble where yield and [inaudible] are going to both suffer, and there's some real hardship out there, not the least to a lot of my friends and family I grew up with, you know. So, it's all over the province, I would say, widespread in terms of the water problem. Ironically, in the same year, probably, as well as a water problem, we have a drought problem in parts of the Interlake, so this is the challenge, in terms of a response.

Also, compounded by the reality of the federal cost -sharing program which we –is probably not for this table, but we can talk about more because there's a good example where a unanimous approach to a different strategy for disaster financial assistance would be, I think, a positive step for us to take as a group, together. The Harper government departed, for example, on–from past practice on the deductible formula, basically tripling the deductibles for provinces, and this has impacted provincial treasuries, in particular, disproportionately on agricultural provinces like ours, Saskatchewan.

And I've long advocated at the premiers' meetings, not just the western Canadian national budget, we should revert back to a mor e reasonable and fair deductible strategy on that issue because that puts a big burden on Manitoba and other ag-based provinces. So there's one mark down for the member's consideration, also for the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Lamont) to consider. But it goes beyond just deductibles into the actual administration of the FAA plan itself.

I had the honour and challenge of being the minister in charge of that program some 25 years ago, and it was a mess then and it's almost as bad now, I have to say. The challenges are many and I don't wish to get into the weeds too much on the details, but just for example, there are impediments to declaring a disaster in certain areas because of what limits severely your ability to have a claim in a subsequent year. And so, this is a–this becomes a very, very difficult challenge for all provinces, that they have to weigh the benefits of calling for a disaster.

In this instance, I think, we've got, probably, oh, what would there be? Five RMs that are severely impacted? Approximately, how many are there? About five? [interjection] There's a limited number of RMs that are impacted right now more severely than others. And if you invoke the program, in essence, you're punished if next year there are 10 because your claims proces s is inhibited by the fact you called a disaster the year before, because they don't cover ongoing situations. They say they're not disasters; it's an ongoing situation, and then they wash their hands of it, you get me? So we have a real problem.

I'd be happy to arrange for a briefing, if other members are interested, in more, you know, interested in more detail and more background on this particular program. But we should be changing it, especially with climate change. You know you're getting increased incidences of drought, flood, forest fire. This is very, very relevant to us moving forward, and I think it's a good example where some type of all -party approach could help us lever more effectively. Mr. Kinew: So our team would take the Premier up on that briefing offer and he can follow up, I guess, on how best to do that.

Just a clarification question more than anything before proceeding: You know I was asking about the AgriRecovery program, which I believe there's 16 RMs that have declared, you know, st ates of agricultural disasters. Their hope was to trigger the ag recovery–have the AgriRecovery protocol triggered

18 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 by the provincial government so that they'd be able to claim under that. If I'm hearing the Premier correctly– and this is the point I want clarified–he's talking about DFA, the disaster financial assistance program, and he's saying that there are now five RMs that have declared states of emergencies and are asking the Province for a declaration under the DFA. I just want to make sure that we're kind of talking about the same thing.

So I guess what I'm asking to be clarified is, in addition to the 16 RMs that are seeking relief under AgriRecovery, is the Premier also saying that there's five other RMs that are looking for DFA? Mr. Pallister: Yes, just to clarify, we're talking about ag recovery program, but I wouldn't say–my remarks were intended to discuss–when I was referencing the difficulty of filing a claim in a second year, I was referring to ag recovery, but I'm not saying that the DFAA guidelines are at all anything but in need of update; I'll put it that way.

And when I referred to the deductible, I was referring to the DFAA, so I'm sorry; I was building a bridge between two support programs. My briefing note tells me there are 12 RMs t hat have declared a state of ag emergency. And so I don't mean to, in referencing five, I'm talking about five that I think are most profoundly affected. But everyone that's affected by a disaster is affected. So the degrees are somewhat different by area. But, no, my information has 12 declaring that they have a disaster.

But, again, if the member would like, we can arrange as I offered previously –or for any of my colleagues that would like it too –a briefing on when– on the challenges of calling for a disas ter under the ag recovery program; that's the issue that I'm trying to communicate on right now, that once it is called, it creates difficulties in a subsequent year to call it again. And so we have to weigh the pros and cons of calling.

You can't just wil ly-nilly call everything a disaster each year, each subsequent year, call it a disaster again and again and expect to get support from the federal government under this program for ongoing events; that's our responsibility. Once in a while, events of a negative nature, that might be our responsibility too–depends. So the depends is why I'm offering the briefing. The department has a number of risk- management tools that farm families can use, not limited to MASC providing forage insurance, which is availa ble and can be purchased in advance of a challenging hay year.

So, in '18, for example, there were over $10 million paid out in claims to farm families that had purchased forage insurance. It's important to understand that that is an option that is available to all farm families who wish to plan to protect themselves in the event of forage loss or, you know, reduced yield as a consequence of drought. Those products are readily available. Ag stability program provides producers with margin -based programs to protect against large, short -term profitability impacts of a negative nature.

So that's what the ag stability program does, but Manitoba Ag provides information to producers on managing feed shortages, alternative feed strategies. The department works closely with the beef producers, works closely with KAP, the Keystone ag producers, and they have established, I think, very, very effective collaborative approaches to assist farm families that are looking to access feed, for example, crop producers that need to find alternative food sources.

So that work is ongoing with the department and with major ag groups. * (15:20) You know, we've been blessed with some –never totally, but largely over the last three to–in some areas five years–with some really, really good farm years, very, very good yields, good quality, lots of grain in the bin and good–reasonably good prices, too. That situation, every farm family knows, doesn't always exist. The way one farmer described it to me this weekend, he's got two sons coming up to work with him in the farm, and they're both in their early days of faming. I said, how'd your year go?

He says, a good year for my boys to experience so they know what farming is really like. And that's the practical nature of farming. It's not always there. Sometimes it's really challenging and it's been really challenging for a lot of farm families this year. Mr. Kinew: So I just want to pick up on a comment that the Premier made there. He referred to it as an ongoing event and hinted at pote ntially difficulty in having claims, if ag recovery was triggered, being made in a subsequent year.

Just wondering if the Premier can share with the committee what information he has to suggest that this is an ongoing event or that this will be repeated next year. Mr. Pallister: I have no information of that nature, nor did I state that it was. I was referring to the consequences of filing a claim if, in fact, a similar event occurred next year would invalidate our ability

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 19 to make claims under the program i n a subsequent year. So there's a danger. Whether it will or not –or ill or will not occur. I didn't a bring a crystal ball, so I'm not going to pretend I can predict. But I know the consequences are very real for producers if you use the program, because in a subsequent year you would be disallowed from doing so for that area and potentially for other areas more broadly.

So if it affects 10 or 12 RMs this year and we file a claim under the ag program–the ag stability program–and it affects 20 next year, we're disallowed from filing for 20 next year. That's the challenge with this particular situation and that's–that is a real challenge. I should also mention a couple other resources, though, that producers would have available to share these with the mem ber. Because the feed shortage issue is a big issue. No–I grew up on a farm which had some pride, at least, in its ownership. I was a labourer, not the owner.

My grandfather and dad had a lot of pride in the Hereford herd that we built up. But an adverse year for feed that causes a disposition of that– of a herd of cattle before their time is a significant loss to a family. So the feed shortage issue is very real and very, very important to address. And producers have mechanisms at their disposal and they ha ve an insurance program on the forage side that they can avail themselves of, but it doesn't change the challenges to a family of dealing with that issue.

The department–the Province has a Manitoba hay listing program that is responsible for assisting the management of pastures during dry conditions. I referenced the alternate feed programs that the department is assisting. There's also assisting producer families with – there's also feed and balancing rations. There's early weaning of calf opportunities. There's a program called creep feeding with beef calves on pasture ammoniating roughages of lower quality.

There – through Manitoba Agriculture there's a lot of excellent information and supports available to producers and to operators of cattle operations and others, of course, as well. In July we announced that livestock producers will be temporarily allowed a permit to cut hay and to graze on Crown land. That isn't normally the case, but this year's conditions made that a necessary course of action, and so with the Crown lands leasing programs, you are administering the use of available land.

I don't have in front of me the acreages involved, but I know there's been significant efforts in this area made by the departments, and perhaps we could have that for the member for–to share with him at a future discussion. I think it'd be interesting to have that information available, but, anyway, that permitting process has been used to assist in–for producers to activate additional hay. I know that close to 200 pa rcels had been approved for that use, but in terms of the total value of the hay or the measure of the amount of hay, I don't have that with me right here.

So this is, I should emphasize it's–this program is to allow hay to be produced in areas that are not normally used to produce hay. So this is Crown land that has available grass that has not been in the past allotted for hay cutting permits. Mr. Kinew: To follow up , I'd like to ask the Premier (Mr. Pallister) why, you know, his government decided to invoke the ag stability program instead of the ag recovery program.

The reason why I ask the question is when the municipal leaders and, you know, producers of it speaking about this issue over the past few months, they've typically asked for the ag recovery program to be invoked, for that protocol to be triggered by the Province. However, if I'm understanding the First Minister's comments today and if I'm, you know, correct in what I've been briefed on in terms of what the Ag minister announced, it actually went to the ag stability program, which is a separate program, but I'm just curious as to why the decision was made.

You know, I'm sure producers are interested to know that there are these additional resources being brought forward, but I'm sure they'd also like to know some of the rationale and the explanation for that. So, again, just more of an explanation rather than, you know, anything too specific, just as to why ag stability is being brought in here as opposed to ag recovery. Mr.

Pallister: I just asked the clerk to get him a more detailed explanation and provide it in the briefing, if you're interested–or if the member is interested in that, and if not, then just to get something in writing to him on the detail of the difference between ag stability and ag recovery, but I'll generalize and at the risk of what every generalization of not being entirely right and just say ag stability is a margin -based program. It's basically an average formula so that you can claim if you have a year that's below the average but not have a year that's above the average. The ag recovery

20 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 program is more designed to provide immediate like feed assistance, like I've been alluding to with the Crown lands program that we've been trying to assist, and this is in that issue or transportation assistance. So, under the ag recovery program that the member has talked about and that KAP has asked for, you're talking about additional supports, additional cost assists.

Under the ag stability program, you're talking about basic ally an insurance program, if I could generalize to that degree, so where you pay into it when you have a year that is below a certain margin, you're able to draw on the program. If you have a really good year, you don't draw on the program. Mr. Kinew: So is it fair to say then that the decision to go with the ag stability route was based on financial considerations from the government's side? Was it like a –just to reduce expenditure? Was that the motivation? Mr. Pallister: No. That's not an accurate observation at all. * (15:30) Mr.

Kinew: Can the First Minister explain what went into the decision making, then? Mr. Pallister: I've already offered to give the member a briefing–and any of his colleagues who would like one–and I think that that would go fa r to him understanding what went into the decision making. I can tell him, because I now have it in front of me in more detail, what the ag stability program is. The ag stability program is a business risk management program under the Canadian agricultural partnership we've entered into as a province.

And what it does is it helps farmers manage income risks by providing financial assistance when their businesses experience a large margin decline. And some farmers will be eligible for coverage under the ag stability program this year. The federal government pays 60 per cent of the cost, the provincial government pays 40 per cent of the cost. Producers do not pay into that plan. All farmers are eligible including farming on reserve lands as well. If they c onduct at least six months of farming activity and they complete a production cycle within a fiscal year, they're eligible.

Farmers have to report farming income for income tax purposes or submit the equivalent information if they're tax exempt, and farmers have to meet all program requirements including deadlines for sending information, paying program fees. All ag commodities are eligible except for aquaculture, forestry products, peat moss, game, cannabis and the processing or resale of items that are not produced by the farmer. You can't just have another business on the side while on your farm and say that you're going to claim under the ag invest program. So it's for ag commodities.

The support is based on margins, and this is basically just the difference between your allowable expenses and your allowable income, so your net. Income and expenses directly related to the production of farm commodities are considered allowable. Examples would include the sales of your commodities, obviously, purchases , fuel, inputs and your ag insurance proceeds or premiums. Those are also factored in. Margins are adjusted for changes in inventory, accounts payable, receivable and purchased inputs. Other income, like custom work– which many farmers do –rental income, program payments are not allowable.

That's separate income from these calculations –nor are expenses such as overhead, repairs, rent, interest, depreciation not considered allowable. So by using margins what that does is allows the program to respond to changes in input costs or commodity prices. So in other words, if expenses go up dramatically or commodity prices drop dramatically, this can trigger your ability to put a claim in under this program. And it treats all farmers similarly regardless of what thei r holdings are, what their business structure is, what their debt load is.

Commodity sales, fuel, fertilizer, pesticide, feed can be variable. They're all included in the calculation. So one year fuel may be higher, pesticide may be lower; varies from year to year. But they're all factored in to the calculation, so it's based on the net proceeds on a margin calc.

Supports based on the reference margin on the historical average, a margin based on a farmer's actual results except for beginning farmers whose reference margin is calculated using industry averages because they haven't got a, you know, history of–they haven't got a calc–they haven't got a record yet of how they've been doing on their farm so you have to use something to establish a starting point for a new farmer, and that– there the industry average is what is used. Farms that have expanded have their margins adjusted accordingly.

Farms that have downsized have their margins adjusted accordingly as it would hardly be fair for someone who has dow nsized their farm to be made ineligible as a consequence of

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 21 reducing the size of the farm for any claim that they might make. So it allows for those calculations to be weighed based on the relative size of the farm, and if it expands margins carries forward the track record on margins, but they're adjusted according to the expansion or the reverse, as the case, if they get smaller. The average reference margin is calculated using the average of the margins over the past five years. Then they exclude the years with the highest margin and lowest margin. That's the starting point.

If the participant hasn't farmed for five years yet, then the average of the past three years is used instead. I hope members found that interesting. That's–but that's the mechani sm for being able to recover costs under this program. It's a program that farmers have benefited from on too many occasions, but by necessity in the high risk–in a high -risk industry this is the kind of program we need to have to stabilize, hence the name ag stability. Mr.

Kinew: These various programs that we've been discussing over the last little bit, most of them do involve some interplay between the federal and provincial government, and so I'm curious to know what communications have been taking place between the federal and provincial government. If–I'm asking if the Premier (Mr. Pallister) can update us, at least generally speaking, on what sort of communications have been taking place over the past month on this topic with the federal government. Mr. Pallister: We'll make sure that any detail the member desires is made available to him at the Ag Estimates. Mr.

Kinew: Has the Premier raised the issue himself with the federal government? Mr. Pallister: We'll make sure that any detail the member desires is made available to him at the Ag Estimates. Mr. Kinew: I'm reminded of Marshawn Lynch when he used to do his post-game interviews there and just say, I'm only here so I don't get fined, kind of thing. Have we hit that sort of point in this ag recov ery, ag stability questioning? Is that fair to say? Mr. Pallister: I believe the member can get an answer to that question at the Ag Estimates. Mr. Kinew: Yes, just observe, for your benefit, Mr.

Chair, I'm sure once we get to Ag Estimates we'll be told, you should have asked that at Executive Council–you had your chance there with the chair of Executive Council, with the Premier, and you didn't take it. So we'll have a little bit of, you know, the snake biting his own tail, perhaps, when we get to that point of Estimates. An Honourable Member: Can I have the opportunity to respond to that? Mr. Kinew: For sure. Yes, please. Mr. Pallister: I would suggest that the member ask the question at Ag Estimates and then he can evaluate better. Mr.

Kinew: Alright, well, we'll wait with bated breath for the Ag Estimates process then, won't we? I'm wondering, apart from the joint programs, what additional supports are being offered by the Province to producers, whether they're dealing with trouble getting the crop of f or whether it's the livestock producers we were talking about earlier there. Which additional programs are being offered or additional sources of support are being offered? Mr. Pallister: Well, I had referenced previously a number of initiatives the Ag Department's engaged in.

I would mention that we’ve also offered a number of other programs to assist in the ag industry, such as water source development funding, which, of course, is of no one's concern in the high water areas currently, but is a concern in drought-stricken areas. And the new intake for that program was just announced in September, and this is well-digging and dugout renovation to assist in providing better water storage on farm sites. So that's a preventative program that's had some interest.

I don't have detail, but we can get more detail if the members are interested in that, in terms of the number of farm families that have availed themselves of that support. It's a worthwhile program. As well, Western Livestock Price Insurance Program is there to assist cattle farmers against unexpected price declines, and cattle producers are encouraged to use this as a tool in their risk management approach. We talked about AgriInvest; it's a self -managed producer-government savings account.

Essentially, it allows producers to set money aside so that they can, similar to, like, our fiscal stabilization account, I guess, conceptually or an emergency fund in your own personal financial plan, it's designed to set money

22 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 aside to be available at some future point, should it be needed. And so there is a mechanism there to incent that to happen. That's there, obviously as a way to assist if incomes go down in subsequent years, because you've got that reserve set aside. * (15:40) The livestock cash advance–Manitoba Livestock Cash Advance is a non- profit administrator of the federal advance payments program that provides producers with a cash advance on the value of their product during a specified period.

And the program helps producers to meet their financial obligations that benefit from the–from better market conditions. And there's a livestock tax deferral, provisional also under Agri-Food Canada that allows farmers who sell –I would say who are forced to sell because of bad conditions are forced to se ll their breeding stock, or part of their breeding herd, during a drought or flooding for that matter, in prescribed drought or flood regions to defer a portion of their sale proceeds in that year, so they can defer them to the following year, which is a r eal assist in terms of the tax planning on farm.

So there –most of what I've just referred to are either shared programs or partnership programs which don't involve producer contribution. The forage plan does, though, and that–we get more information; that was–that could be part of also–of a briefing if members were interested. So there's a forage insurance program available that we'd be able, I think, in that briefing, to tell–share with members the uptake on that, how many farm families have availed the mselves of that program.

And it is a program that's available to assist when circumstances such as ones that've existed in several municipalities this past year come up. Finally, we also recognize, certainly do, that when one's business is threatened, one's way of life is threatened, that there are stress levels that can be dramatically high.

And so Manitoba Agriculture provides telephone and online counselling to farmers through their northern–Manitoba Farm, Rural & Northern Support Services operations, and that as someone who, like a number of my colleagues, has lived through things like the BSE crisis in the cattle industry, I can tell you that counselling is tremendously important and tremendously valuable and a service that has been utilized by a number of our ag producers over the years, and this year will be no exception.

There –farming is a demanding business, and it is one without the guarantees that some businesses provide or give a sense of, at least, and so this is where the stress can add up, and it's important to have that counselling service available to ag producers. Mr. Kinew: The–I think one of the things announced today was there would be a deferral of loans from the Manitoba ag services corporation, and then, I guess, maybe, leaving the door open a bit to perhaps further deferral of loans beyond that.

So I'm just curious because, you know, this is not the first time we heard about Manitoba ag services corporation the past week. It was also the basis –one of the bases, I guess, for a qualified opinion from the Auditor General. So I was wondering if the Premier (Mr. Pallister) could explain why Manitoba ag services corporation was not included in the

summary financial statements for the Province. Mr. Pallister: Not the Province's money. Belongs to farm families and farm producers and it's being treated under our books the same way it's treated in every other jurisdiction. Mr. Kinew: So the Auditor General writes: In my opinion–that's a quote; his opinion–my opinion, the trusts are assets under the control of Province and the final–financial position and results of operations should be recorded in the

summary financial statements for the years ended March 31st, 2019 and March 31st, 2018. In this respect, the

summary financial statements are not in accordance with PSAS, which require that the Province account for all assets under its control. So this is the second year, I believe, that there was a qualified opinion provided on this basis. So I'm wondering why the Premier did this again for a second year. Mr. Pallister: It was the right thing to do last year, and it remains the right thing to do. Mr. Kinew: What sort of work will the Premier undertake to try and address this difference of opinion between the Auditor General and his government?

Again, the Auditor General is the independent office tasked with looking at these things. They've returned a qualified opinion two years consecutively. So I'm curious to know what sort of work there may be to reconcile those two positions. Mr. Pallister: We've been working diligently with the Auditor General to build a better understanding of the Auditor General and the Auditor General's office of the logic and rationale for not including a trust fund–

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 23 which is beyond the control of the provincial government, but is rather managed on behalf of ag producers in a trust for their benefit; and the money, not belonging to the Province, belonging to the producers instead, as is the nature of the way that such programs are treated, from British Columbia to the Maritimes, and only Manitoba treats them differently. We've been trying to communicate that to the Auditor General for a long time, over –well over a year and a half.

That being said, we'll continue to believe that the correct approach is not to treat workers compensation money or ag insurance money as if it was an asset of the provincial government. What that does, it creates the false impression, when that money goes up in value through no work of the provincial government at all, that somehow the provin cial government's doing a good job of managing money that's not in its– that's not its responsibility to manage, not in its purview, that doesn't belong to the taxpayers of the province writ large. Rather, it's a trust.

So we've taken the trust out for clar ity, greater transparency, and, therefore, it's reported separately, as it should be and as it is in virtually every jurisdiction in the country. Mr. Kinew: Can the Premier (Mr. Pallister) explain to the committee what sort of communications he's had to convey this to the Auditor General? Mr. Pallister: Well, I wouldn't say pleading, but an on-going exchange of views has happened over quite a long period of time.

I would mention that eight other provinces agree with us on our handling of Workers Compensation Board funds, that they should not be treated as if they are under the purview of a

summary government document, but rather treated separately, as they are, in trust for the workers of the province to avail themselves of, if they have an injury, or there's a liability issue that they should be compensated for. So the Auditor General will, I'm sure, at the next opportunity, be availing himself of –making himself available to answer the member's questions on why he views the approach that is taken by eight other provinces is wrong. But I'm sure he’ll welcome that question.

I'm sure the member will be excited to ask the Auditor General why he's virtually alone on his understanding of the way–or misunderstanding, some might say less charitably –of the way tha t money is being managed and handled and reported to the people of Manitoba, on behalf of the citizens of Manitoba. Mr. Kinew: The Auditor General is an independent officer and provided his qualified opinion based on public sector accounting standards. And I take the Auditor General at their word when they say that this was a sound basis to provide a qualified opinion onto this government's books.

As an aside, when the Premier talks about asking the–a–Auditor General questions, I did have the pleasure, in a previous life when I was a journalist, of asking a previous Auditor General some questions about the books of the Province. And, though they did kind of provide tons and tons of insight about what the public sector accounting standards are and what goes into providing the Auditor's opinion on the Province's books, I have to admit that the biggest take-away that I drew from that conversation is that if you look at volume 2 you can see how much public sector officials are paid in the province.

So me being a reporter, just cracked open that volume and looked up the last names of different people I knew, and it's one of the bits of trivia that a lot people get into once the new Public Accounts come out each year is, they look up people they know and see how much they were paid by government. * (15:50) But just getting back to the more serious issue of the Premier, you know, implying that the Auditor General is wrong in their assessment of the books. I'm just curious, like, on what basis did the Premier make this decision and then stick to this in a second year? Is there some sort of opinion?

Was it just an internal decision? Was there some other reference point that justifies why the Premier has earned this qualified opinion from the Auditor General for tw o years in a row? Mr. Pallister: Well, I would just encourage the member in his research. We have proactively disclosed every aspect of these trust funds on our website. It's all out there for anybody who wants to see it to see. I'm sorry that he disagrees with the esteemed opinions of eight other auditors general across the country.

This is the correct way to administer, under public accounting principles, the funds in a discreet trust fund not under the management of the government. That that is what the vast majority of our Canadian provinces have decided is the correct way to do things. We have consulted on an ongoing basis with nationally renowned accounting experts Ernst & Young to make sure that we are complying with the highest standards of public accounting and we continue to do so.

24 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 Mr. Kinew: What was the basis of the communication with Ernst & Young, and what sort of advice did they provide on this topic to the government? Mr. Pallister: Not only is –are the funds all proactively disclosed, but the advice is also proactively disclosed. The member's welcome to read it on the website. Mr. Kinew: So is it fair to say that the Premier (Mr.

Pallister) is going to continue this and that there will be a, likely, another qualified opinion next year that they'll account for the same–they'll account for the books using the same approach as was provided this year? Mr. Pallister: Well, I'd point out that it's more transparent. I'd point out to the member that it's – allows for

summary accounting that is more reflective of the government's responsibilities in areas of management, that it's not made fuzzy by the performance of multi -million-dollar trust funds someplace else which can then throw in a

summary – throw the

summary

interpretation off and cause people to believe that the government's actually managing better than they are or worse than they are, for that matter. If the investment portfolio in the MASC's trust fund has a wonderful year, it makes it appear that the government has had a wonderful year ma naging people's money, when it hasn't because the money that is managed by MASC is not part of the

summary performance of a government and creates the false impression–we'd be overstating our assets by over a billion dollars if we were to add these trust funds into our

summary reporting, and it's not our money. It's not our money. Trust assets can't be withdrawn by the government. They can't be used for any other purposes than–other than the purposes for which they were designated. There is –that's the essence of trust funds. They are administered but they are not available to us, and they should not be accounted for in any other way than the way we're doing them, because to do so would be to imply that the money that belongs to ag producers, for example, was an asset of the Province's. It is not.

That the money that's in the Workers Compensation Board's trust fund was an asset of the Province's. It is not. And so, we're accounting for them separately because that's the accurate, honest way to account for them, and that's the way that eight other provinces agree we should be accounting for them. I would also argue that the Province cannot deny, for example, under the ag program, under MASC, access to trust funds that could be used to pay insurance indem nities to producers. It's not our business. It's the business of the Manitoba crop insurance organization.

And so we do not have control over those funds, nor should we. Therefore, reporting the funds in–whether it's workers comp or MASC as if they were as sets of the government is wrong. And in my estimation, and in the estimation of experts that we have consulted with, we have to report it the way we're reporting it. I also point out that under the conditions of the trust agreements that govern the handling of these funds, these funds can absolutely never ever be returned to the Province of Manitoba.

They cannot ever be withdrawn by the Province of Manitoba, and they cannot be used for any other purpose than the purpose for which they are designated, whi ch is to support workers and farm families in our province. So what we're doing is reporting the way we should be reporting, and I'll encourage the member to convey his support. I'm sure the Auditor General would be pleased to hear his support for the Auditor General's position, but it is not a position that is shared by the vast, vast majority of experts in respect of this– the handling of this issue across our country. Mr.

Kinew: I note the Premier's reply, but I note that, you know, in black and white in the Public Accounts, it says the trusts are assets under the control of the Province. So it appears that the Premier is incorrect.

So, having noted that, and then also that –I guess the difference in accounting here moves what the government has stated as being a deficit actually to a surplus position–I think the concern that I've heard articulated by many people who watch this government's record when it comes to cutting health care in-year, reducing the amount of expenditures in areas like health care, is that this is perhaps a technique being used by the government to justify further cuts, further reductions in expenditure, and the loss of more services and emergency rooms as we've seen over the government's past term in office.

So that will be one o f the things, I think, that we watch for when it comes to this difference of opinion on accounting standards. You know, the Premier 's talking about some rationale that he received from a consultant, Ernst & Young, about the reasons why

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 25 they should change t he accounting this way, but I think the concern that many people have is that this government continues to approach things with an eye towards cutting health care, cutting education, and that this is another step being laid to accomplish that goal. And I hear the member for Riding Mountain (Mr. Nesbitt) nodding his head vigorously in agreement, and I notice that this has– An Honourable Member: You can hear nodding? Mr.

Kinew: Well, when the 'noddering' –nodding is so–as vigorous as the member just exercised, yes, it is audible around the table, though perhaps not recorded in Hansard. Anyway, so that's, I think, the concern there is that, you know, the government –in disagreeing with the Auditor General –may, in fact, be laying the groundwork for further cuts in subsequent years. But, again, my question was, you know, is this going to be the practice of the First Minister going forward?

Like, assuming the Auditor General doesn't change the accounting standards that they use to judge the Province's books, are we to expect further qualified opinions? Or –well, maybe that's too hypothetical for the Premier (Mr. Pallister) to ask. But is the Premier going to continue using this approach to accounting for these trusts and tabling the Public Accounts? Mr. Pallister: Let me take steps to help the member take the black helicopter out of the sky and stop being so cynical and paranoid.

We're trying to make sure that the money that belongs to Manitoba farm families is booked as belonging to them and not booked as a

summary asset of the Province of Manitoba. If we were to try to do anything that the member has suggested, to access those funds in some manner, we'd be sued–and rightfully so. The money is in an irrevocable trust. It is for the farm families of Manitoba. All of the other provinces of our country have similar legislation. Eight of them account for their respective workers compensation board or ag support programs in the same manner as us. These assets do not belong–our assertion is they do not belong to the Province of Manitoba, and eight other provinces agree with us.

So I would encourage the member to be comforted in that knowledge, to understand that to reflect the assets of agricultural producers' trusts or the Workers Compensation Board reserves on the balance sheets of the Province of Manitoba would have the effect, which it had under the previous administration for years, of artificially increasing the asset position of Manitoba by over a billion dollars.

And that was not an accurate reflection of the actual assets available to support things like health care. * (16:00) What we are doing is making sure that there isn't a false assessment made by those who might not understand that, that there is not a–an assumption that somehow this million dollars -plus is available for other things. It is not. It's available to support workers. It's available to support farm families and it is not appropriate that we overstate the assets of the Province of Manitoba. We have to properly account for the ag producers trust funds and we do.

I've invited the member to view the website to view, in fact, the advice that we've received in respect of this issue. The Workers Compensation Board reserves, under public sector accounting standards, supported by eight other provinces, are accounted for in this way. And so the member is attempting to ride a horse which has died, and it is time he dismount. Mr. Kinew: And I'll continue to refer to the Auditor General as a human being and one worthy of our respect. Perhaps we coul d turn to some consideration of Manitoba Public Insurance.

You know, I guess one of the issues that's arisen over the past number of months is the role of insurance brokers, the provision of online services for MPI in the province of Manitoba and the actions that the government has taken to insert itself, in some cases, in between MPI and the brokers. But I think where I come at it is maybe just from a more everyday person's perspective, which is, like, if you are in another jurisdiction, many services ca n be provided online. You know, in the States, you're able to file claims from your smartphone.

In other provinces you can book–including some provinces with public insurance –you can book some services online. So it does seem to me that Manitobans ought t o be able to access more insurance services online, that Manitobans ought to be able to, you know, book appointments and, you know, carry out a number of functions that MPI delivers or that brokers deliver– that they be able to do that online.

26 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 So I'm curious to know what the Premier's views are just at that level, you know, before we talk about the specifics of MPI and Autopac. Like, does the Premier (Mr. Pallister) share the view that Manitobans should be able to access more insurance services online from our public insurer? Does the Premier agree that Manitobans would be better served if we have more access to online bookings and that Manitoba Public Insurance should move towards more provision of online services? Mr.

Pallister: Yes, well, the computer i sn't a new invention and the previous NDP government made no progress on this particular offering of services electronically for close to two decades. We have now begun the initiated processes in government of making that progress happen. So, yes, of course, I think that the availability of electronic services is something that should have happened for Manitoba ratepayers–including Autopac customers – many, many years ago but didn't for some reason.

So now we have a negotiation moving forward between MPI through a conciliator's appointment and the insurance brokers, with the goal being to make that which never happened in 17 years of NDP government actually happen now. Mr. Kinew: I think a more accurate statement of the facts is that the work was undertaken and the Premier, within the past year, handed over control of those online assets to insurance brokers through a series of directives that he made to the public insurer, executed by the Crown minister, who lost her seat in the most recent election.

However, those are all issues that we can unpack in, you know, the coming questions. The question that I asked more generally was just about the provision of online services, and does the Premier share the view that Manitobans would be better served if they could access more online services on, you know, smartphones, Internet -equipped devices?

Would Manitobans be better served if they could book more services online, and does the Premier share the view that it would be great if you could file a claim from yo ur smartphone, and that our public insurer should be moving in that direction to provide greater access and more convenience towards motorists in the province? Mr. Pallister: Well, if the member's aware of some directive that was given by a minister, he'd best produce evidence of it. And other than that, he would then be simply engaging in innuendo and false speculation.

The fact of the matter is that the negotiations which should have been afforded with insurance brokers by MPI did not take place for 17 years under the NDP government and are now taking place. Mr. Kinew: You know, when I was asking the previous question, I overheard a colleague on the government's side asking, what about jobs? And I think it's a legit question, but I think the outcome of a free and fair negotiation should be to find a balance recognizing the important role of brokers but also in finding a way to bring more online services to motorists in the province of Manitoba.

And I would note that the current arrangement that the government is overseeing is not really a free and fair negotiation, the reason being that, you know, this government has effectively given the insurance brokers a veto, because they can walk away and they will know that services won't be provided online in absence of them signing off. So there is a legitimate question about jobs, but there's also a legitimate question in the question I've asked already about when Manitobans are going to be able to access services online. So, again, do we have, you know, kind of, a shared view, the First Minister and myself?

Does the Premier believe that Manitobans should be able to access more online services? And if he shares that view, when will Manitobans be able to get those online services for their car insurance, for booking appointments, for some of the other things like claims that they might like to be able to access through a smartphone or computer? Mr. Pallister: Well, again, the member puts a false assertion on the record in respect of his comments about a veto. As a matter of fact, the previous NDP government basically vetoed any progress that could have been made on this file over their entire 17 years in office.

And there was no agreement reached, nor was one pursued with the insurance brokers to make sure that the important services of being able to–that Manitobans deserve to be able to avail themselves of were available to them or expanded under their watch. And the reasons for that, I'm sure, many and varied, but the fact remains that there was no progress made. And so the member makes an assertion about vetoes. He should be referring to the 17 years where there was no progress made on this file.

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 27 Now there is progress being made: a conciliator has been appointed, people are at the table discussing this and we expect to see progress made in –as a consequence of that initiative in the not -too-distant future so Manitoba rate-payers get the availability of products they deserve. Mr. Kinew: But does the Premier (Mr. Pallister) agree that Manitobans should be able to access more online services that MPI delivers? Mr.

Pallister: That was the result of dialogue in both Saskatchewan and British Columbia between their insurance industries and their auto- insurance monopolies, and that would be what the NDP never pursued for 17 years here in Manitoba, and what we're pursuing now. Mr. Kinew: So is it the First Minister's personal view that Manitobans should be able to access insurance services online? * (16:10) Mr. Pallister: I've answered the question previously. Mr. Kinew: I know the Premier often thinks that, you know, partisan attacks, et cetera, qualifies an answer, but–a simple question and it remains unanswered.

Is it the Premier's personal view that Manitobans should be able to access more car insurance services online? Mr. Pallister: The member's here in Estimates to ask for my personal view, but I'll give him the view of the Premier of Manitoba, because that is the role I am here appearing at Estimates in.

My goal would be to see an agreement reach ed as has happened in other jurisdictions between the insurance distributors and the insurance product designers and producers, so that there can be better access to electronic–through electronic means and all others on a consistent basis, at as low a price as is possible, by Manitobans, of all insurance products that are distributed through MPI. Mr. Kinew: So what is MPI negotiating with the insurance brokers exactly? Mr.

Pallister: Here's–I'll help the member understand the background to this because it is important that he understand that the NDP had 17 years to improve the availability through electronic means of insurance products and failed to do so. They had, through MPI, discussions with the Insurance Brokers Association and arrived at an agreement on June the 7th, 2011. In that agreement, on page 3, they agreed that Manitoba Public Insurance would provide $250,000 in funding to IBAM as in clause 4.0. In clause 5.0, they agreed that IBAM wouldn't communicate anything unless the government said it was okay. It says in

section 5.1, both parties acknowledge that communications to members of IBAM, consumers and other stakeholders are integral to ensuring the objectives herein are achieved. To that end, the parties agree to consult and collaborate with one another when creating and issuing such communications. In other words, MPI and the Insurance Brokers Association agreed that MPI would pay a quarter of a million dollars a year to IBAM and that they'd both handle, confidentially, the communications th at they issued in respect of the discussions around electronic availability of product.

From this point on, in 2011, no progress was achieved. No progress was arrived at. So when the member makes an assertion about a veto, he's barking up the wrong tree. The previous government's record demonstrates that they were willing to forward a quarter of a million a year to IBAM in exchange, in this contract, for confidentiality in the communications that occurred around this issue between IBAM and the Insurance B rokers Association of Manitoba.

That is pretty clear evidence that there was an agreement not to make progress rather than an agreement to make progress, and this agreement resulted in over a million -and-a-quarter going to IBAM, ostensibly, according to re ports in one of the local media outlets, to be used to bring in high-priced entertainment to the IBAM annual banquet. My concern isn't so much that as it is the fact that there was no improvement made in the availability of electronic insurance product s ervices during this entire time and in the years preceding it, a decade. So this was the agreement made in the NDP term in office.

This was the agreement that was made which resulted in no progress whatsoever being made on what we are now attempting to mak e progress on, which is to reach an agreement with IBAM and MPI on the distribution–better distribution, we would hope, as this happened in Saskatchewan and British Columbia–of insurance products; better availability of those insurance products through electronic means. Mr. Kinew: What prompted the government to pass a Cabinet order directing MPI to engage in conciliation with the Insurance Brokers Association of Manitoba? [interjection] Mr. Chairperson: Could you repeat your question?

28 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 An Honourable Member: Sure, would you like me to? Mr. Chairperson: Please. The Leader of the Official Opposition, would he repeat his last question, please? Mr. Kinew: Yes. I'm just curious to know what prompted the government to pass a Cabinet order directing MPI to e ngage in conciliation with the Insurance Brokers Association? Mr.

Pallister: I'd also just share with the member that during the time the NDP was in government, the commission rates paid to brokers effectively tripled versus the consumer price index while no progress was being made on product availability through electronic means at the same time the rate of commission payment, I repeat, tripled beyond the consumer price index. So the assertion the member makes about –and, you know, the implication is very clear, he's implying that somehow the government is taking actions which are unfair to ratepayers and favourable to the insurance industry.

Yet the evidence contradicts that totally. The evidence would support the argument that the previous NDP government colluded not to see electronic distribution of product, paid IBAM to be quiet about it, and then tripled their commissions during the last 10 years that they were in power. Those are the actual numbers. As far as the rationale for trying to get electronic product availability enhanced, I think they're pretty self-explanatory. We know that customers in other provinces benefit from agreements having been reached between their auto monopolies and the insurance broker arm.

That's exactly what we're in pursuit of here. The directive that we gave under The Crown Corporations Governance and Accountability Act was to encourage–which empowers us to issue directives to Crown corporations where leadership is required, as it clearly is here. The directive provides i nstruction to MPI to engage in a process of conciliation with the insurance brokers association to reach an agreement regarding the future service delivery strategy for customer transactions under both The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act and The Drivers and Vehicles Act.

This directive applies to the development and introduction of online services related to motor vehicle licensing and insurance in Manitoba and the participation of insurance brokers in providing those services. The minister is a cknowledging that IBAM is an independent organization not subject to this directive, but it strongly encourages it to participate in the conciliation process to achieve a resolution on the matters of contention. So we're moving MPI and the insurance broker s together so that we can get an agreement to enhance electronic distribution and availability of Autopac products for Manitoba. Mr.

Kinew: I didn't know the Premier (Mr. Pallister) had such strong views against insurance brokers, as he outlined in the

preamble to his answer there. And kind of surprising too. I would note that the Premier used the term monopolies several times in his preceding answers, perhaps attempting to discredit, but I would remind him that it's public insurance. That's the way that MPI should be framed, to be thought of as a public insurer. You know, shouldn't be thought of as a monopoly with some of the negative connotation that that term has in an economic discussion, but rather that it should be thought of as the provision of a public good– specifically, the provision of affordable car insurance.

That's what Manitobans want, is affordable rates. * (16:20) And now that insurance seems to be moving online and services become more convenient when they do, I think Manitobans are quite right to ask that they have the ability to access those services online. You know, it should be totally doable to have a public insurer deliver services online. You know, it should be totally doable to have a public insurer deliver services online. I'd point out that the document that the Premier was reading from, previously, is also the source of the de facto veto language I was using earlier.

Because in that document, it specifies that if the insurance brokers don't agree to the proposals under conciliation, then they have the ability to walk away, effectively handing them a de facto veto, but also removing the ability for MPI to negotiate because, eventually, they know that they'll just have to deliver what IBAM wants; otherwise, IBAM will be able to walk away. And in the absence of their agreement, that there won't be online services added for Manitobans. So that's where that language came from.

I'd also point out that under the Premier's watch the public insurer cancelled a project worth about 4 and a half million dollars, 4 and a half million dollars invested by MPI to enhance the provision of online services, and so, that certainly seems like a missed

September 30, 2019 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 29 opportunity and one that could have led to greater service delivery. So I just wanted to make those notes because the Premier (Mr. Pallister) was making some commentary and I wanted to answer a few of the comments that he did make. And just to ensure that the record shows that, perhaps, you know, greater balance is required.

But, again, I return to what the Premier 's comments were when he was talking about making this order for MPI to enter into conciliation, and then asking that the insurance brokers participate into that process as well, recognizing that they are independent and can't be directed to participate if they don't want to. So I'm curious to know the Premier 's intentions with that process, the conciliation process. Like, the outcome that the Premier read into the record that is being sought through this conciliation, and I think it does leave some room as to what the end point will be.

Like, is the end point just going to be, like, maybe like a very narrow sort of agreement that specifies just newly added online services, online bookings, stuff like that? Or is the outcome, like, maybe a more global agreement that would govern online services in the context of maybe, like, a new master agreement with MPI and IBAM. So I'm curious about the Premier's intent in having this conciliation process started. Is it the Premier's intent to do something very narrow, or is this a more global revisiting of the relationship between MPI and brokers? Mr. Pallister: Well, a few erroneous assertions there.

Too many for me to respond to all of them. I'll just respond to a couple of them. And nothing disparaging about referring to the Manitoba Public Insurance monopoly as a Manitoba Public Insurance monopoly. That's what it is. As far as the assertion that there's somehow some bias inherent in my comments against the general insurance industry, none is intended. The idea here is to arrive at solutions that benefit the customers of –that need MPI products and need access to them. This has happened in Saskatchewan, it's happened in British Columbia. Agreements have been reached.

We believe they can be reached here, too. And so, unlike the NDP who actually paid a million and a quarter to the insurance brokers association on an agreement that they be quiet about issues, and that's right in the contract, we don't agree with that approach. That didn't lead to any kind of additional availability of–through electronic means of insurance products through the entire time the NDP was in power. That agreement was signed in 2011. Nothing happened to enhance electronic availability of services in that last six years that the NDP had the opportunity to make progress. No progress was made.

We're endeavouring to have a conciliator assist MPI and the insurance brokers in arriving at a progressive outcome, but we're not in any way, shape or form, accepting the thesis somehow that the member's advancing that we're favouring one side, disparaging another. Not the case. So the member's now asking me to predict the outcome of conciliation process. I would prefer not to do that. I would prefer to see progress made. And, clearly, that's the goal with appointing a conciliator in the first place. The agreement, the application, the scope, the directive is all public information. The member can read it.

There is no such directive within any of this document that should imply or, in any way, speaks to a preconceived outcome. Nor is there anything in this directive that favours one side or the other. We're simply appointing a conciliator to come in so that the sides can get together and have a discussion around the issues, and hopefully we can move towards a solution. That's the process. That's the goal, and I believe there will be outcomes achieved that were never achieved in 17 years the NDP were in power. Mr.

Kinew: Well, what the Premier has achieved already is to essentially just light f our and a half million dollars on fire that was spent to develop these online services and, you know, that project was cancelled. So that's an inauspicious start towards providing more online services for Manitobans. But, again, the question, you know–and I do think it's–I take at face value the First Minister's assertion that he doesn't want to predetermine the outcome here.

However, I do think it is still reasonable for the Premier to answer what sort of agreement would be the outcome of this conciliation process, still leaving room for both sides to arrive at some sort of agreement as to the details. So, again, you know, I repeat my question perhaps more clearly this time: what is the Premier 's goal in having ordered this conciliation? Does the Premier want a narrow agreement that would just govern online services and then would perhaps sit beside, if you will, broker compensation–the broker compensation agreement?

Or is the Premier looking for a more global agreement that would also include broker compensation and these other matters, along with

30 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 30, 2019 online services, to be part of this new agreement that comes out of the conciliation? Mr. Pallister: Well, again, I tried to explain the member the purpose of the conciliation. I think, perhaps, the best way to clarify it to his satisfaction may be to simply read from the directive itself, which is available to him. He can go online and read it, but it is–outlines that MPI will engage in a conciliation process with IBAM to reach agreement regarding future serv ice delivery strategies and the modernization of service delivery options.

Again, I emphasize this is something that did not happen for 17 years under the NDP, despite the fact that computers were invented a long time before the NDP came to power. The fact is also that we have directed that they will negotiate with the objective of reaching one or more agreements or written letters of understanding to address the development and introduction of online services relating to motor vehicle licensing and insurance in Manitoba, and the participation of insurance brokers in providing those services.

So, again, not prejudging the outcome, but rather, setting up the formula or the format for the discussion to happen is the goal of this directive. The principles to be applied in the negotiation service follows. There are a number of them and I can share them with the member if he would desire to have a better understanding of the nature of what it is that we are wanting for an outcome here. Mr. Kinew: Again, I've reviewed the document that the Premier's (Mr. Pallister) reading from, though I do thank him for reading it into the record.

The question, though, has more to do with the intent of his government behind ordering this conciliation. Do they want a new nar row agreement that just covers off certain online services, or is there a more broad agreement, like a master agreement, that would also see compensation and other issues addressed, with broker compensation addressed under that? Mr. Pallister: Again, the member is asking me to speculate on the outcome of a conciliation process which our governments initiated between MPI and the Insurance Brokers Association which is up to them through this conciliation process to determine.

So my bias is –which is what he's asking me to share –are irrelevant in the case. I'm not going to be at the table with the conciliator. I'm not going to be venturing into the discussions with IBAM and between IBAM and MPI. But I think it would be helpful for the member to understand

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	42-1-1b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	42nd 1st hansardpdf 1b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a185614cb3984e871d30acd53aa231faf55c8173

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