Manitoba Hansard — 18 November 2010 (Sitting 3, 39th Legislature, 5th Session)

39-5-3

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. LXIII No. 3 - 1:30 p.m., Thursday, November 18, 2010 ISSN 0542-5492

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

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

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

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

45 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, November 18, 2010 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee t o f r a m e s u c h l a w s a s may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom, know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 2–The City of Winnipeg Charter Amendment Act (Winnipeg Police Service Auxiliary Cadets) Hon. Andrew Swan (Min ister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Local Government (Mr. Lemieux), that Bill 2, The City of Winnipeg Charter Amendment Act (Winnipeg Police Service Auxiliary Cadets); Loi modifiant la Charte de la ville de Winnipeg (cadets auxiliaires du Service de police de Winnipeg), be now read a first time. Motion presented. Mr.

Swan: This bill is specifically designed to support the Winnipeg Police Service's new auxiliary force cadet program. They will provide that cadets will perform duties and exercise powers as set out by regulation. The bill also provides that cadets will be subject to The Law Enforcement Review Act. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] PETITIONS PTH 15–Traffic Signals Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

These are the reasons for this petition: In August 2008, the Minister of Transportation stated that traffic volumes at the intersection of PTH 15 and Highway 206 in Dugald exceeded those needed to warrant the installation of traffic signals. Every school day, up to a thousand students travel through this intersection in Dugald where the lack of traffic signals puts their safety at risk. Thousands of vehicles travel daily through this intersection in Dugald where the lack of traffic signals puts at risk the safety of these citizens. In 2008, there was a 300 per cent increase in accidents at this intersection.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Transportation consider the immediate installation of traffic signals at the intersection of PTH 15 and Highway 206 in Dugald. To request that the Minister of Transportation recognize the value of the lives and well-being of the students and citizens of Manitoba. T h i s i s s i g n e d b y D . B o n d , R . S i g u r d s o n , L. McLeod and many, many other Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House. RCMP Rural Service Mr.

Stuart Briese (Ste. Rose): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition: Manitobans deserve to live in a safe environment and feel secure in their homes and their communities. Some regions of rural Manitoba have been hard hit by crime, including residential break and enters, property theft, vandalism and other offences that threaten people's security. In some areas, RCMP detachments are not staffed on a 24-hour basis.

Criminal elements capitalize on this, engaging in crimes at times when officers may not be readily available to respond to calls for service. Some believe the current RCMP detachment boundaries need to be redrawn so that service delivery could be faster and more efficient.

46 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request the Minister of Justice to consider working with the RCMP, the federal government and communities to develop strategies to address service challenges in rural Manitoba, such as the possibility of having response units that could be dispatched to regions affected by crime waves. And to request the Minister of Justice to consider working with the stakeholders to determine if the current RCMP detachment boundaries are designed to ensure the swiftest and most effective service delivery.

This petition is signed by R. Anderson, T. Ducharme, R. Ducharme and many, many other fine Manitobans. Auto Theft–Court Order Breaches Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows: On December 11th, 2009, in Winnipeg, Zdzislaw Andrzejczak was killed when the car he was driving collided with a stolen vehicle. The death of Mr. Andrzejczak, a husband and a father, along with too many other deaths and injuries involving stolen vehicles, was a preventable tragedy.

Many of those involved in fatalities involving stolen vehicles were previously known to police and identified as chronic and high-risk car thieves who had court orders against them. Chronic car thieves pose a risk to the safety of all Manitobans. We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows: To request the Minister of Justice to consider ensuring that all court orders for car thieves are vigorously monitored and enforced. And to request the Minister of Justice to consider ensuring that all breaches of court orders on car thieves are reported to police and vigorously prosecuted. And, Mr.

Speaker, this petition is signed by K. Power, R. Panufnik, R. Smith and many, many other Manitobans. Bipole III Project Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Carman): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows: In September of 2007, the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro directed the utility to abandon an east-side route for its Bi pole III project. Five days later, Manitoba Hydro announced that the utility would be proceeding with a west-side route.

Manitoba Hydro staff, technical experts, regular Manitobans have communicated to the provincial government that they would prefer an east-side route. A west-side route will be almost 500 kilometres longer than an east-side route, less reliable and cost taxpayers at least an additional $1.75 billion. The extra cost being forced on Manitoba Hydro and Manitobans by the provincial government will mean that every Manitoba family will end up paying $7,000 for this decision. Since the current provincial government has come into power, hydro rates have already increased by almost 20 per cent.

If this decision is not reversed, it will result in further rate increases for Manitobans. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to allow Manitoba Hydro to proceed with a shorter, cheaper and greener east-side route, subject to the necessary regulatory approvals, enabling the utility to keep our hydro bills lower and ensure a more reliable electricity system. And this petition is signed by J. Brownell, L. Tarko and N. MacDonald and many, many more Manitobans. * (13:40) Multiple Sclerosis Treatment Mrs.

Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition: More than 3,000 Manitobans and their families are impacted by multiple sclerosis, and Manitoba has one of the highest rates of MS in the world. New research indicates that there may be a link between a condition known as chronic cerebrospinal

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 47 venous insufficiency and multiple sclerosis. Preliminary studies indicate that many MS symptoms can be relieved with angioplasty, a common procedure. In order to test this procedure for safety and effectiveness, additional res earch and clinical trials are needed. Manitoba is not testing for CCSVI, conducting research or conducting clinical trials. The Province of Newfoundland and Labrador will be monitoring MS patients who have undergone the liberation treatment and studying its impact.

Saskatchewan has announced that it will move forward with a clinical tr ial when their research community presents a proposal, and has invited other provinces to join them. Meanwhile, Manitoba's provincial government has not taken up this initiative nor shown leadership on this issue. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the Minister of Health to consider making the province of Manitoba a leader in CCSVI research and to move forwar d with clinical trials as soon as possible. And this is signed by T. Kostyra, R. Kostyra, T. McLachlan and many, many others. Bipole III Project Mrs.

Mavis Taillieu (Morris): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly and these are the reasons for this petition: In September of 2007, the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro directed the utility to abandon an east-side route for its Bi pole III project. Five days later, Manitoba Hydro announced that the utility would be proceeding with a west-side route. Manitoba Hydro staff, technical experts, and regular Manitobans have communicated to the provincial government that they would prefer an east-side route.

A west-side route will be almost 500 kilometres longer than an east-side route, less reliable and cost ratepayers at least an additional $1.7 billion. The extra cost being forced on Manitoba Hydro and Manitobans by the provincial government will mean that every Manitoba family will end up paying $7,000 for this decision. Since the current provincial government has come into power, hydro rates have already increased by almost 20 per cent. If this decision is not reversed, it will result in further rate increases for Manitobans.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to allow Manitoba Hydro to proceed with a shorter, cheaper, and greener east-side route, subject to necessary regulatory approvals, enabling the utility to keep our hydro bills lower and to ensure a more reliable electricity system. And this is signed by W. Reimer, A. Teghtmeyer and K. Friesen and many others. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon.

Diane McGifford (Minister of Advanced Education and Literacy): It's nice to be so welcomed and I'm pleased to table the following reports: Red River College Annual Financial Report 2009-2010, Assiniboine Community College Annual Report 2009-2010. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today, we have Jared Kuehl, manager of Enbridge Incorporated in British Columbia. He is the guest of the honourable Minister of Innovation, Energy and Mines (Mr. Chomiak).

And also in the public gallery we have with us from the Junior Parliament Group from East Selkirk Middle School and Walter Whyte School. We have 41 grade 7 and 9 students under the direction of Ms. Deanna Cameron and Ms. Jen Cyr. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you all here today. ORAL QUESTIONS Football Stadium Cost and Funding Options Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, 232 days have now passed since the Premier desperately announced that he wanted to play banker with respect to the stadium deal. He then went and dug a great big hole at the University of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, taxpayers and Bomber fans are now waiting to see a stadium deal that's good for the Blue Bombers and fair to taxpayers.

48 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 Can the member for St. Boniface indicate today when he will be climbing out of that hole to let Manitobans know what's going on? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I can confirm we will be proceeding with the stadium. Much work has been done. All the partners, the Bombers, the University of Manitoba, the City of Winnipeg, the Province, the private partner, are all working together to advance this project. This project will provide a first-class quality facility available to Manitobans. It'll be used all year round.

It'll be available for amateur sport, University of Manitoba athletic teams, as a training facility, and it will also, obviously, be used by the Winnipeg Blue Bombers, and it will allow us to avoid tens of millions of dollars of costs on repairing the existing stadium, which everybody acknowledges is in its last days. Mr. McFadyen: Well, Mr. Speaker, both Bomber fans and taxpayers have now waited 232 days to–for some degree of certainty from the member for St. Boniface. They've waited 232 days, which is more than half of the time that he's been in the Premier's office, consumed by fumbling the ball on this deal.

I want to ask the Premier if he can be specific today, with 232 days and counting, on this fumbled deal, when can we expect him to clear up basic questions about what the stadium's going to look like, what it's going to cost and who's expected to pay for it. Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the stadium project is moving forward. It's going to provide a first-class facility. It's going to provide a first-class facility that Manitobans can have the benefit of. People need to remember that it was the member from Fort Whyte's opposition that opposed the MTS Centre.

The MTS Centre is now a highly valued facility, highly used faci lity. They did everything they could to block it. We know they're trying to block this project as well. We know that they're trying to block having clean water in Manitoba. We know they're trying to block hydro development. They're the party of doing nothing. We understand it. We're the party of moving the province forward. We will on this project. We will on better health-care access, more access to physicians for all Manitobans. We'll move forward in making sure young people get an education up to the age of 18. We'll move the province forward.

They'll stop it in their tracks, Mr. Speaker. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, the member for St. Boniface has said many, many things about many topics over the years, incl uding recent assurances, as of August of this year, to taxpayers about how any cost overruns would be handled in connection with the stadium deal. We now know that he reneged on those promises to taxpayers that were made as recently as August with respect to overruns.

I want to ask the Premier: In his current state of desperation, what new assurances will he be providing to taxpayers that he's actually done due diligence before he goes out and makes a new round of promises to Manitoba taxpayers? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, this publicly owned facility, owned half by the University of Manitoba, half by the City of Winnipeg, will be available for the benefit of all Manitobans. Students come from all over Manitoba to go to the University of Manitoba.

They will now have a first-class facility to replace the decrepit stadium that they've had there for many years that was in a very bad state of repair. The stadium will also be available for the Blue Bombers. It'll also be available for community use. It will provide 2,400 jobs, years of employment for Manitobans at a time when we're wanting to continue to move forward with strategic infrastructure projects in this province. It will be done in partnership with the City, the Bombers, the university.

Of course, the Province will be involved, and we've had good involvement up to now from the private partner. * (13:50) The reality is, Mr. Speaker, the members opposite want to stop the project. They want to block it. They want to do nothing, just like they did on the MTS Centre, just like they don't want to protect the UNESCO World Heritage Site, just like they don't want to do anything– Mr. Speaker: Order. Role of Winnipeg Blue Bombers Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new–order.

We have some youth parliamentarians here, and I'm sure some of them have dreams of following in some of the members' footsteps. So let's set a good example here. We have that good opportunity today to set good examples, so let's take it and let's have some decorum.

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 49 The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. Mr.

Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): In today's–this morning's paper, the Premier is quoted as saying, and I quote: "The Blue Bombers want to play a role in providing a business case for continuing to have the stadium built as we're moving forward on it right now." I'll just read that again: "The Blue Bombers want to play a role in providing a business case for continuing to have the stadium built as we're moving forward on it right now." I just want to ask the Premier if he could translate that quote from NDP-speak to plain English. Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, the translation of everything we've said is: We're moving Manitoba forward to have first-class facilities. We're having better schools. We're having better hospitals. We're having better housing for people. We're having better recreation facilities so that people can make productive use of their leisure time. We're doing it in a forward-looking fashion to avoid tens of millions of dollars on–of expenditure on a nearly time-expired existing facility. The members opposite want to back into the future by doing nothing. Their plan is to take things apart. They want to gut The Water Protection Act.

They want to gut the opportunity to have a UNESCO World Heritage Site. They want to cancel converters and decrease the reliability for Manitoba Hydro. They want to abolish the minimum wage. They want to stop the stadium just like they stopped the MTS Centre. We'll move the province forward; they'll drag us backwards. Cost and Funding Options Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): I–he's gone from 30-second attack ads to 60-second attack ads. They're no more convincing here than they are anywhere else, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to ask the Premier if he can move beyond the 60-second attack ads here in question period and try to focus on responding to questions that are important to taxpayers and important to Blue Bomber fans. He said in the paper today–and the suggestion in the paper this morning is that there's been no business case yet developed with respect to the stadium plan. I want to ask the Premier that, as of today, we're now 232 days since the original announcement. He's suggesting in this morning's paper that no business case has yet been developed.

Can he please assure the House today that he was misquoted in this morning's paper? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): I can confirm to the House today that we're moving forward on the stadium project. I can confirm to the House today, just like we moved forward on the MTS Centre, we will provide a good quality facility that will be publicly owned and publicly accessible for amateur sport, the University of Manitoba, the Manitoba Blue Bombers and for community use. That's where we're going. And we have done that on many other projects.

I can confirm today we're moving forward on hydro development in this project to supply energy to our customers both within and outside of Manitoba. We won't put it at risk. I can confirm today we're moving forward on the UNESCO World Heritage Site. I can confirm today that we're moving forward on greater protection for Lake Winnipeg in terms of the amount of phosphates [inaudible] And I can also confirm that the members opposite will drag their feet, block, stall and obstruct every single one of those projects like they've done for the last several years under the leadership of the member opposite. Mr.

McFadyen: Well, Mr. Speaker, we all remember all too well when he confirmed that Crocus was strong and a good investment. We all remember all too well when he confirmed that the west-side bipole would only cost $2.2 billion. We all remember today when he confirmed that they would end hallway medicine. And now he's confirming a whole bunch of other things. But here we are 232 days after the announcement, more than half of his time as Premier consumed by this failure of a deal, we have no idea what the stadium's going to look like, no clue as to what it's going to cost and no answers on who's going to pay.

How can he justify this complete and total failure of leadership? Mr. Selinger: And, again, we know that the existing facility is going to cost tens of million dollars in

50 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 repair bills; that's well documented. And the reality is there needed to be a plan to move the project forward, and I'm pleased that all levels of–the City government, the provincial government, the Bombers, the university, and with input from citizens of the community, including the private partner, took the leadership to move this project forward.

No question that it's a project that will provide great value to the community, great value in terms of recreational use, great value in terms of a facility that will serve the students of the University of Manitoba and, of course, it'll provide a new home for the Winnipeg Blue Bombers. Members opposite don't want to do that. We know that. They've made that clear from the get-go. They didn't want to put one nickel into that project.

They opposed it every step of the way just like they opposed the MTS Centre, just like they opposed having clean water in Manitoba, just like what they tried to do in the spring when they wanted to cut a half a billion dollars out of the budget and lay off teachers, lay off nurses, la y off police officers. We know what their agenda is, and we know what Manitobans need for the future. Vale Inco Mine Premier's Knowledge of Plant Closure Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, on a new question to the leader of the party formerly known as the Gary Doer party. I want to just ask the leader: Yesterday–I'm not sure what they go by these days–but yesterday he said when the news came out about the terrible situation in Thompson, when the terrible situation– [interjection] they don't want to talk about the 500 job losses in Thompson. The fact is, Mr.

Speaker, when the announcement came out yesterday that more than 500 workers would lose their jobs in Thompson with an impact on the–all of the families in that entire community, the Premier said that he was caught off guard–he said he was caught off guard by the announcement. I just want to ask the Premier– yesterday he said he was caught off guard by the announcement and he was angry about the lack of notice. I just want to ask the Premier: Can he indicate when he and his government were first warned that the smelter closure was a possibility? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, yesterday the member opposite got up and defended the company. He thought the solution to the challenges with Vale Inco were to give them another massive tax cut. That's what he was arguing in this House yesterday. When they have the second most competitive tax regime in Canada right now, his solution was to give them another tax cut. We stand with the people of Thompson.

We stand with the working people of Thompson, the City Council of Thompson, the school board of Thompson, all of whom we met with this morning and had a discussion with them about a–bring unity to the community to sit down with Vale Inco and look at constructive solutions to their role in mining in Thompson and in Manitoba. And there will be tremendous co-operation as we work towards finding a go-forward strategy with Vale Inco, which will add as much value to Manitoba's economy as possible.

And I can tell you right now that the comments made by the member opposite were not well received in the community of Thompson. Mr. McFadyen: I appreciated the opportunity yesterday to speak with Mayor Tim Johnston, who's doing a terrific job in showing leadership on the issue in Thompson. I think if we can be positive about the work being done by Tim Johnston, the mayor of Thompson, and other community leaders on this, then this helps us move forward. Mr.

Speaker, what doesn't help us move forward is when we have the sort of statements made yesterday by the leader of the NDP when he said that he was caught off guard. He then makes a desperate trip north after the announcement when it's too late to do anything about it and offers this weak response to dealing with the issue. * (14:00) He didn't respond, Mr. Speaker, to the question the first time I asked it, so I want to ask him again: Can he indicate when he and his government were first warned that the smelter closure was a possibility? Mr. Selinger: Mr.

Speaker, as I've indicated in public, the confirmation that they wanted to close the smelter and the refinery came very recently, and in a

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 51 matter–as a matter of fact, we do not believe there was due notice or consultation with the community on their decision to proceed in this fashion, and that is exactly why we have said it is a decision that we find not acceptable to the people of Manitoba, the people of Thompson, the people of the north and the government of Manitoba. I know the member opposite wants to defend the company. I know the member opposite wants to solve–address the problem by giving them another massive tax break.

That's what he was indicating yesterday, when we know that the tax regime for mining in Manitoba is considered the second best in the country. We want to work with the people of the community, the mayor and council whom we met with this morning; the school board, some of whom we met with this morning; the working people of Thompson, represented by their union; and other members of the community to ensure that Thompson has a prosperous future. We know they have good quality assets; we know they have a strong workforce.

We know they have a strong community, and we have committed to work with them to find a solution to this to make sure Thompson thrives and as a result– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, the trouble is that the people of Thompson would have been better served if some work had been done earlier in order to deal with the big challenges that they're now facing. And if the Premier hadn't been so consumed over the last 232 days with the failed stadium deal, he may have been able to provide–put more time and energy into working to head off the announcement that was made yesterday.

In fact, the comments I made yesterday were identical to the comments made this morning on CJOB by the Minister of Energy (Mr. Chomiak) with respect to the company. The Minister of Energy and I said exactly the same th ing almost word for word yesterday [inaudible] said this morning on CJOB. In fact, the only person in the House who is on a different message saying that he was surprised, that he was panicking and desperate, was the Premier yesterday after the announcement was made. And that's why I want to ask him one more time if he can indicate when he was first warned that the closure was a possibility. Mr.

Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the member has just alleged that I'm the only person that was surprised by this announcement. Does that suggest that he knew about it earlier? And if he did know about it earlier, why wasn't he doing something about it? Why wasn't he standing up and defending the interests of the working people of Manitoba? Why wasn't he standing up and defending the north? Why wasn't he talking to us about how we could work together on a solution? You know, these glib one-liners searching for headlines really don't serve the interests of Manitoba.

Working with the people of the north to find a solution to the problem is the way forward, and I was pleased to go up there and meet with the people of Thompson last night while the member opposite was missing in action. Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. Mr. McFadyen: The reason I'm asking when he was first warned about the possible closure of the smelter is that there was a story about it in the Winnipeg Free Press in–on Wednesday, October the 24th, 2005, Mr. Speaker.

Now, the current Premier was sitting at the Cabinet table when this story appeared, and the story says in the Winnipeg Free Press that the Thompson smelter will be processing concentrate for the next five or six years until a smelter can be built in Newfoundland. That smelter is now nearing completion in Newfoundland and the smelter in Thompson, as predicted five years ago in the Free Press, is now being closed.

I just want to ask the Premier: Why is it that he missed the warning five years ago that this was coming and why, after 24 hours of theatrics, why didn't he do something sooner to prepare and deal with what was–what has been known by him and his government now for more than five years? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the obvious question is if the member was–had such a heightened awareness since 2005 himself, why is it just now that he's raising this matter? He's had five years as Leader of the Opposition to show a scintilla of interest in northern Manitoba. We haven't seen any of it.

The reality is this– Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Let's have a little decorum, please. Order. Hard to hear the questions and the answers.

52 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 The honourable First Minister has the floor. Mr. Selinger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since 2005 there's been a very substantial change in ownership at Inco. It's now owned and controlled by Vale, and their announcement recently has shut down the refinery. This is complete ly new direction for the people of Thompson. They never expected that the refinery was on the chopping block. They thought a solution was being worked on to find a way to continue to have value-added processing in Thompson, not just mining, not just milling, but value-added processing.

They understood when the '56 agreement was signed that it was going to be an integrated operation providing a range of job opportunities for the development of that community, and they ha ve an expectation that that would continue. They were completely caught off guard by this most recent announcement and the lack of consultation and the lack of notice on it. And that's why we have said it's an unacceptable decision. Mr. McFadyen: And he was the Minister of Finance sitting at the Cabinet table also privy to information about the taxes paid by the company at the time in 2005 when the story appeared.

The story first appeared, as I said, in August of 2005, and I want to assure the Premier that I would have been quite prepared to ask a question about it at that time except for the fact that I wasn't elected until December of 2005, four months after the story appeared. But apart from the fact, Mr.

Speaker, that he has no grasp of any of the facts or details of anything that he talks about in the Hous e, apart from that reality that everything he puts on the record in this House is phony, is made up and is false, which belies his incompetence, this would not be of particular concern except for the fact that there are 500 families in Thompson now worried about their future. How could he have so utterly failed the people of Thompson on this important file? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the lame excuse from the member opposite is that he never entered the House till December, four months after the story.

Well you know that still gave him five years to do something about it if he was really concerned about it. That's pretty pathetic. It's pretty pathetic. During that period of time, Mr. Speaker, we have a strong record, and during that period of time, our government has worked very closely with companies like Inco to ensure that they move forward, including the new Birchtree Mine. We've always taken a collaborative approach to working with the major industries in northern Manitoba and, indeed, around Manitoba, to find solutions.

And that's why we were surprised and disappointed and angered by their decision to shut the refinery without any recent notice about that, without any opportunity for consultation, and leaving people in the north in a state of shock about this. And that's why it's unacceptable. The member opposite defends the company. Everything they did was absolutely fine. As a matter of fact, he defends the company so much he wants to give them another tax break. We want them to invest in Manitoba. Mr. McFadyen: Mr.

Speaker, the–there's no need to respond to the–anything that is contained in his responses because we've got a really serious issue the 500 families in Thompson are being affected by. And now, Mr. Speaker, he's got a plan to raise taxes after the next election on Manitoba families, but this is of concern as well to Manitobans. The reality is that there are major new investments and jobs being created in Saskatchewan, in Newfoundland and in Ontario by the very company that he is today attacking. Rather than attacking people who create jobs, Mr.

Speaker, will he take responsibility for his complete and utter failure to show leadership on this file? * (14:10) Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, we are working responsibly with the local level of government, with the community, with the union, with the school board to come up with a united front to deal with Vale, to make the case why they should continue to invest in Thompson. It's got an excellent workforce. It has a strong infrastructure. We've just committed to an $82-million University College of the North facility that the members opposite voted against. That's how much they care about Thompson.

We're building new housing in Thompson that they voted against. We have said today we will continue those projects. We've given assurance to the community that we will proceed on these projects to help them diversify their economy, to help them to add skills to their

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 53 workforce and ensure they can participate in the future. And we expect Vale to work with the community and to work with us to ensure that mining remains strong and value added in northern Manitoba for the benefit of all Manitobans. Child and Family Services Agencies Child Abuse Investigations Mr. Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question. Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, Mr.

Speaker, he attacks major employers, he attacks anybody who criticizes him in his state of desperation, and I think Manitobans deserve better. And one area that is of great importance to everybody in this province is what we see happening within his Child and Family Services system. Mr. Speaker, in September we were all saddened and distraught to learn of the six-year-old boy who allegedly suffered incredible and awful abuse over several months. He sought help no fewer than four times, reportedly being returned to his abusers before finally receiving assistance from Child and Family Services.

Police have said it's one of the most severe cases of abuse they have seen. I want to ask the Premier to explain how it can be, that under the watch of his government, that this little boy was returned to his abusers three times before his government finally took appropriate action. Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Consumer Affairs): Yes, Mr. Speaker, the incident as reported is certainly–it's heartbreaking, and one can only put yourself in the position of a little boy that was looking for help from neighbours and, thankfully, the neighbours did respond by phoning.

And it reminds us all of the importance of the public in reporting concerns about child welfare. But the case and the role of both the law enforcement and child welfare has been the subject of some conversation in the media and, certainly, raised serious concerns on our part, which is why we took the unprecedented decisi on that we should have an outside external review of what took place.

We do that, as we know, automatically for child deaths, but in this circumstance we also thought that that independent review was so necessary to guard against this in the event that there were shortcomings in the delivery of child welfare services. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, now, the member opposite, who is arguably better at anybody in this Chamber at pretending that he cares about these situations. If he actually cared, he would have done something about it by now. He wouldn't continue to come into the House, time and again, and feign concern. Well, Mr.

Speaker, members opposite have said so many times since 2007. For three years this minister and his government have made promise after promise after these sorts of situations that they would take action to fix the province's CFS system. In fact, this minister made a promise that, and I quote, every child will be seen every time. I want to ask this minister how he can justify this broken promise and his complete failure to take action, as opposed to his words when it comes to this very important issue for Manitobans. Mr.

Mackintosh: It's one thing, and I think it's entirely legitimate that members of this House question whether standards are properly followed by public servants, social worker s, or foster parents, for that matter. It's quite another to make suggestions that people in this House don't care about what happens to our youngest and most vulnerable. That is really repugnant and I think it reflects very poorly on the Leader of the Opposition. Having said that, we are very concerned that we do identify what took place.

It's important that there be an outside review to determine whether a child welfare worker–or workers–took the appropriate and reasonable steps according to the standards. It's not appropriate, in our view, that the member opposite wants to politically pre-empt an outside, independent review of a most serious matter. Mr. McFadyen: Mr. Speaker, his words were convincing for three years and I, and other members of the House, gave him the benefit of the doubt for three years. We never doubt ed the sincerity of the words in terms of his caring for three years.

But we're now at the point wh ere after three years of making such statements, we continue to see these things happen time and again under his watch. And it's not about his feelings or his ego; what it is is about his actions and his failure to lead. I want to ask, Mr. Speaker, since the minister is upset that I may have hurt his feelings, if the Premier

54 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 (Mr. Selinger) will show leadership on the issue today and stand up and respond to this question: Will the Premier show leadership today because of the failure of his minister? Will the Premier stand up today and say that he is concerned enough that he's prepared to set aside other things he may be working on, put this on the top of his priority list and get real action to prevent future tragedies in the system? Mr.

Mackintosh: Well, the very fundamental shortcoming in the presentation of the member opposite is he would expect Manitobans to believe that if he took half a billion dollars out of the budget, that he would still make improvements and, indeed, increase the child welfare budget of 60 per cent like we have, Mr. Speaker. I also remind the member opposite that when they were in office, kids were warehoused in hotels, headline after headline. It was a result of the actions of this government that we are now down to an average of about two kids, down from 166 just a few years ago.

We've increased by thousands the number of foster beds available. We've enhanced the standards. We've enhanced the training. We've enhanced the investments and we're moving toward a new prevention stream of child welfare. Mr. Speaker, if those members ever got their hands on child welfare, we know they would take the well-being of children. It's not a good place. Foster Care Written Decisions on Child Removal Mrs. Bonnie Mitche lson (River East): Mr.

Speaker, the issue of a young six-year-old having to plead four times for help and not be heard by this minister's policies and Child and Family Services system, is much more important than the kind of answer we just received from the minister. Mr. Speaker, Gage Guimond was removed from a loving foster family and died at the hands of an abusive family. This young boy could have been in the same situation as Gage Guimond had he not had the ability to cry out for help. He had been in foster care and was moved back into an abusive situation. What checks and balances were put in place to ensure his safety? Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Family Services and Consumer Affairs): Well, again, Mr. Speaker, the–as Manitobans have heard, the inspector that reported on this one said that the child had been interviewed. There were interviews that had taken place. The question is whether those were thorough enough. Clearly, something went wrong here and that's why it's important that we have an independent review of what happened, and we will also send that external review to the Ch ildren's Advocate. There may be further questions that she will have, further inquiries that she will want to follow up on.

So that is the appropriate course. And as the members know from the hearing and the standing committee in June, Manitoba does have the strongest system anywhere when it comes to outside reviews. And, in fact, the Children's Advocate said we're the only province doing it, and I think that's a huge commitment compared to other provinces. We've got to make sure we get to the bottom of this. Mrs.

Mitchelson: Under this government we've had review after review and recommendation after recommendation and children are still falling through the cracks and being placed in unsafe circumstances by this minister and his policies. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister today whether he would implement recommendation No. 47 of Gage Guimond's report and recommendations, which I've asked him many, many times, and that is to ensure that no child is moved from a long-term foster placement until there's a written reason documented why it's in the best interests to move that child.

Will he implement that recommendation today? * (14:20) Mr. Mackintosh: Well, the member knows full well from a number of questions on this in the House that the southern authority has reported back on action on that. We're interested not just in one recommendation from that report but all of them. And I also think that members in this House would find it very unfortunate that the member would want Manitobans to think that there were no cracks in child welfare, that there were no deaths in child welfare under her watch. She knows that is not the case. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, I have never indicated that.

What I am indicating today is that children are dying in the system as a result of some of the policies that he has put in place and because he hasn't put the proper checks and balances in place. And he isn't listening to the recommendations and

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 55 the reviews that have been provided to him over years and years, and again, we're doing another review. Mr. Speaker, safety legislation for children isn't worth the paper it's written on if it isn't followed through on. Will he show leadership and will he ensure today that children are not put in abusive situations, in abusive families under his watch? Will he today send the directive to the agencies? Mr.

Mackintosh: Well, under Gage's law, which was passed by this Legislature, the strongest message possible was sent–backed up by stronger standards that the safety of children comes first. But it is also backed up by the new overhaul of child welfare that was launched with Changes for Children in late 2006. But the member wants to get up and talk about her ideas about not moving foster children. What we did hear in the committee in June was the Children's Advocate saying the opposition is asking to stop taking kids from foster parents. That is a very simplistic approach. Mr.

Speaker, we've got to continue on the path of overhaul, making sure that the new positions, in fact, 230 of them, go to work on the front lines and to help the front lines, that we keep kids out of hotels, that we enhance standards and we also enhance accountability for expenditures in child welfare. Education System High School Graduation Rates Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, in typical NDP fashion the government has looked over their classmate's shoulder when drafting policy and this time they've come up with the wrong answers.

They fashion their punitive policy on–to address high school dropout rates, high ones in this province after New Brunswick and Ontario. And if the government had done their homework, they would've known that dropout rates in Nova Scotia and PEI have decreased more than in New Brunswick. They would know that in Ontario one in five children doesn't complete high school. They'd also note, Mr. Speaker, that this government, which doesn't have any vision and they like to look at their neighbours' test papers, but maybe in the future they should start looking for answers that work for Manitoba.

I ask the Premier: Why is he not addressing the basic reasons that young people are dropping out of school instead of fining parents? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, we are using a multi-pronged approach to ensure that young people complete high school. Just a couple of we eks ago I attended the Pathways to Education announcement on Selkirk Avenue with the Community Education Development agency, who are partnering with local schools, local community organizations, and getting some funding from the Royal Bank and some funding under our Brighter Futures program.

They've enrolled over a hundred children in a program that gives them mentoring, homework assistance, access to part-time employment, scholarship and bursary money, and creates a culture of success for inner-city kids to complete high school. Those are the kinds of initiatives we support. We've set up a Premier's Advisory Council on Education, Poverty and Citizenship with 27 members. Two-thirds of these members are people that work with Aboriginal communities all across this province of Manitoba, regardless of jurisdiction, on ideas and practical approaches to help young people complete high school.

We recently had Izzy Idonije in Winnipeg to do a First Down program at Sister MacNamara School, which is an attendance program to help kids go to school and feel good about being at school– Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and after 11 years of poor visionless education policy, we have the second highest high school dropout rate in all of Canada. In 11 years this government has tried, but everything they've turned to almost has been made worse instead of better. We have alarmingly increasing rates of people using food banks because this government has not addressed poverty.

This government has got fetal alcohol spectrum disorder rates which are as high as they've ever been. They have done worse for Child and Family Services than we have ha d–we've had more kids in Child and Family Services than anytime in the history of our province.

56 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 How can this–people of Manitoba possibly trust this government when so many things have backfired on them? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, our high school graduation rate has gone from 72 per cent to just under 80 per cent; that's a very significant improvement. Our dropout rate had decreased by 29 per cent. But we're not satisfied with those results.

We think we can take it to a higher level, and we think we can take it to a higher level by working with parents and educators and community organizations that have an interest in seeing young people succeed, and we know that those people exist all across this province. There's private businesses that want to help with this. The Premier's Economic Advisory Council has come up with an excellent mentorship program to allow young people to have mentoring opportunities with employers and employees to show them what kinds of job opportunities exist in Manitoba.

We have co-op education programs with our post-secondary institutions. I visited Sisler High School just this week, one of the 10 best high schools in Canada, one of the largest enrolment in Manitoba of 1,800 people, and I saw a high technology program there in the new media that didn't exist two years ago, and young people are getting great success in that program and getting jobs as early as grade 10 in fixing computers and developing new technologies. Those opportunities–we want more of those in our high schools. We want more opportunities for success, and we will have them under our program. Mr.

Gerrard: And after 11 years this government has the second highest high school dropout rate in all of Canada. At that rate it would take a century to be the best in Canada. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that this government has not done their job. They have a visionless policy. Instead of taking accountability, this government hasn't realized that the people who are not graduating are often the poorest, and what this government wants to do is to fine the parents of the poorest people in this province in order to try and keep kids in school. There are much better wa ys to do this.

There are much better ways to address things like poverty. There are much better ways to engage kids in schools than to fine the parents. Why didn't this government come up with a much better approach? Mr. Selinger: We're willing to take any approach that has proven results. That's why we have a Healthy Child Committee of Cabinet. That's why we invest in young children and young families. That's why we're expanding our daycare program with an early learning curriculum so that people aren't just being child minded, but they have opportunities to learn while they're in child care.

That's why we have the lowest unemployment rate in the country, because it gives families the opportunity to earn incomes to support their children, and that's why we're taking these several initiatives, including what I think is a very worthwhile announcement today to ensure that young people stay engaged in education till at least 18 years old. If the program that they're in isn't working for them, we will work with the school divisions to develop alternative programs that they can be successful at. That can include apprenticeship. That can include co-op educatio n.

That can include all kinds of experiences that allow them to have confidence about entering the labour market. But we want them to learn. We want them to earn. We want them to succeed. And we will do that with these new initiatives, and the member opposite will vote against it and try to cut a half a million dollars out of the budget and say we should balance the budget yesterday on the backs of children and families. We won't do that. Mr. Speaker: Order. Time for oral questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Springfield Heights School 50th Anniversary Ms. Erna Braun (Rossmere): Mr.

Speaker, it is with particular pride that I acknowledge the 50th anniversary of Springfield Heights School, as I, among–along with many others, was among the first students who walked through the doors when it opened in September 1960. I especially want to congratulate the administration, Mr. Mario Beauchamp, principal; Ms. Joelle Guillou, vice-principal; the staff, students and parents for organizing and hosting such a wonderful event. * (14:30) The anniversary celebration on September 30th brought together staff and students from the past and present.

The occasion provided everyone with an opportunity to go back in time and get a better

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 57 appreciation of just how much the school and the surrounding community has grown in the past 50 years. The students who first attended Springfield Heights School were in grades 1 through 8, but it didn't take long before Springfield Heights was designated as an elementary school to accommodate all the new families with young children who had moved into the neighbourhood. As the community grew, so did its cultural diversity.

This was soon reflected in the programming offered at Springfield Heights School, which began offering both a Ukrainian bilingual program and a French immersion program. These language programs continue to thrive at the school and are a reflection of the rich cultural makeup of the community. The last 20 years have seen the introduction of a variety of new programming, through projects and initiatives that have had a positive impact in the school and for its students. Some of the projects put in place include a recycling program, a literacy lab, and a student conflict mediator/peer support initiative.

Springfield Heights School, through its students, has also extended its horizons beyond the walls by reaching out to the broa der community through organized fundraisers as a way of coming to the assistance of others. These include supporting students in Africa and collaborating with the Kiwanis Club of Winnipeg to assist charitable organizations in the city. Mr. Speaker, it was an honour and a pleasure for me to share in the celebration of Springfield Heights School's 50th anniversary.

Springfield Heights has proudly served its students and the broader community since 1960, and may it continue to do so for many more years to come. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Marjorie Anne Heinrichs Mrs. Mavis Taillieu (Morris): It is with great sadness I rise today to remember Marjorie Anne Heinrichs who passed away November 9th in a tragic car accident. Marj was the second eldest of six children born to Sydney and Helen Reimer of Rosenort.

Marj graduated from Rosenort Collegiate, married her high school sweetheart Jim and they had five children: Tom, Jennife r, Katie, Sara and Billy; and two foster children: Cody and Callie. She will also be remembered by her grandchildren Alex, Sativa and Isabella. Sadly, her eldest son Tom was also killed in a car accident in 1994. Marj was a gifted storyteller and began her career writing a column in the Morris paper, the Scratching River Post . She was a photographer, author and recorder of Aboriginal history and, as such, nurtured a deep connection to Roseau River First Nation and others in northern Manitoba.

She also worked for Golden West radio station in Altona and sat on several boards, including a women's shelter and regional health authorities. Marj discovered and nurtured what was sacred in this world through a tender heart. Her soul was nurtured by that which was holy in children, in those who suffered, through the wonder and beauty of creation, inside the Christian stories she inherited and the Aboriginal journey which invited her in. Indeed, when Charles Nelson spoke at her funeral, he told the congregation that he'd offered a burial place for Marj beside his mother–a very high honour.

Marj was described as an uber-mom to all of her kids and to others as well. She loved to travel, garden, bake, cook, host, go for walks, drink red wine, listen to CBC and shop till she dropped. I knew Marj as a friendly face who was putting her microphone in my face and asking me questions. The last time we spoke was in Rosenort and we talked about care of seniors within the community, something that she was committed to. Marj was the dear–the daughter of dear friends Syd and Helen Reimer, who I have known over the last seven years since I was elected.

Marj was a wonderful person, taken too soon from her family and friends. So many people will miss you, Marj. Thank you. Evelyn Shapiro Ms. Sharon Blady (Kirkfield Park): Mr. Speaker, rarely in life do we meet people who not only influence the system but re-envision the entire structure of something like geriatric care. I deeply regret having to relate the recent passing of Evelyn Shapiro–the creator of the first provincial home care program–at the age of 84.

Born in Lithuania, Professor Shapiro received her B.A. and M.A. from Mc Gill University before joining the University of Manitoba as an assistant professor in 1972. She worked in the department

58 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 now known as Community Health Services in the Faculty of Medicine. Professor Shapiro kept busy. She was a research associate with the Manitoba Longitudinal Study on Aging, a member of the Gerontological Advisory Council of the Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Council on Ethics in Human Research. She became a full professor in 1990 and a senior professor in 1998. However, she didn't lock herself into the ivory tower of academia.

She worked as a senior health policy advisor from 1988 to 1990 and gave generously of her time, serving on different health advisory committees and organizations. She also participated in the founding of Manitoba Centre for Health Policy. Evelyn Shapiro's achievements cannot be recounted in only two minutes, but we will remember her most as the key architect of the universal Manitoba Home Care Program. Started in 1974, it became a blueprint for similar programs across the country and arou nd the world. Tens of thousands of Manitobans benefit from Shapiro's vision.

Nearly 39,000 Manitobans receive home-care services a year. Mr. Speaker, these services are more crucial than ever as our province ages. Professor Shapiro was one of seniors' most passionate advocates, and she was accordingly recognized in October 2006, when she was appointed to the Order of Canada and in 2008 with an appointment to the Order of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to extend my deepest condolences to Professor Shapiro's family. She was an exemplary woman who fought for some of the most vulnerable among us and left us a legacy that none of us will soon forget. Thank you. Dan Giesbrecht Mr.

Peter Dyck (Pembina): This fall, the Winkler and District Chamber of Commerce held their annual gala celebrating the Winkler Citizen of the Year. This year's award went to Dan Giesbrecht, a well-known retired educator and principal from Garden Valley Collegiate, who served his community for nearly 40 years. Dan Giesbrecht has made significant contributions to education and sport in Winkler, which has benefited students in the community. He has led students on field trips outside of Manitoba, allowing them to gain a better understanding of the world beyond the borders of our province.

The work that he has done has left a lasting impression on the lives of students that he has taught. Throughout his tenure, Mr. Giesbrecht has inspired his students to be the change you want to see in the world. He is truly dedicated to enriching the lives of students through education, as he has proven over his extensive career. In the spring of 2009, the Province of Manitoba awarded Dan Giesbrecht in the inaugural Outstanding School Leader Award for his ability to encourage his students to change the world for the better.

Through his actions, he has encouraged young people to make the most of their futures and think critically about the world they would like to live in. Throughout his life, Dan Giesbrecht has followed the advice of his father passed on to him, and I quote: "You don't get anything for nothing, and never ask anybody to do something that you aren't prepared to do yourself." Although he has now retired, Mr. Giesbrecht plans to continue his role in advocating for youth in the community and would like to see youth play a strong

part in the community's future. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to congratulate Dan Giesbrecht on becoming the 2010 Winkler Citizen of the Year. Mr. Giesbrecht ha s an extraordinary career on–has had an extraordinary career. On behalf of the Pembina constituency, I thank him for the time he has dedicated towards providing a higher education to students. Thank you. Brandon Infrastructure Investments Mr. Drew Caldwell (Brandon East): Mr.

Speaker, the summer of 2010 saw our provincial government continue its record level of investment in the city of Brandon, a level of investment unprecedented in Manitoba history, a level of investment which is helping build a strong foundation for future growth in my home community. Recently, many exciting new projects have been announced that will improve the lives of residents in and around Brandon, especially in the areas of health, education, infrastructure and neighbourhood renewal.

In the past year, we've announced major funding improvements to downtown Brandon: funding announcements for a new fitness centre and physical plant at Brandon University; funding for the restoration of the historic agricultural display

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 59 building No. 2 on the Keystone Centre grounds; funding for low-income family housing; and the development of over 50 units in the historic Massey warehouse building in downtown Brandon; and funding for green initiatives to capture methane gas; renew Brandon's transit fleet; and provide energy-efficient re trofits to hundreds of family homes. * (14:40) In addition to these investments, I would like to highlight three projects in particular, which will have a tremendous impact on the lives of western Manitoba residents.

The first is the Western Manitoba Cancer Centre. When fully operational, the Westman cancer treatment centre will provide radiation therapy, chemotherapy and outpatient care to patients throughout the–throughout western Manitoba. The facility will be a major component of the regional–Brandon Regional Health Centre campus which we've been building over the last decade. The second project is the new $48-million Len Evans Centre for Trades and Technology at Assiniboine Community College. The Len Evans Centre will be able to accommodate upwards of 1,400 students and including more than 700 new apprentices.

This high-tech, world-class training facility, which complements the Manitoba Institute of Culinary Arts and pre-stages the future redevelopment of the monumental Parklands building, will help Manitoba meet a growing demand for skilled workers. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, the historic development of Assiniboine Community College in Brandon's N rth Hill is an initiative which will ultimately position Brandon as a national centre for post-secondary education in Canada. o Mr.

Speaker, our concerns about the speech relate not to the government staff who would have been prepared in its preparation, but to the content of that speech, which was disappointing to us in several ways. The last project is the $40-million reconstruction of 1st Street, 18th Street and the David Thomp n Bridge in Brandon. These–this new–these new roadways replace narrower 'throughfares', Mr. Speaker, making it safer for drivers and pedestrians, offering better flood prediction–protection–and providing Brandon with a suitably high-profile entranceway. so Mr.

Speaker, 11 years into this NDP government, what we got on Tuesday was a rehash of old broken promises. There were some ideas that had been proposed by members of the opposition within that speech, and I wa nt to acknowledge many of my colleagues in opposition for having put forward some good ideas over the past number of years. Many of those ideas made their way into the speech, and those ideas are good ideas. Together, Mr.

Speaker, these improvements are enabling Brandon, the Westman region, and all Manitobans to move forward towards a stro ger future. n The issue and the problem and concern we have is that the ideas are being promoted by a government ORDERS OF THE DAY GOVERNMENT BUSINESS THRONE SPEECH (Second Day of Debate) Mr. Speaker: Resume adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable member for Flin Flon (Mr.

Jennissen) THAT the following address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: We the members of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba thank Your Honour for the gracious speech addressed to us at this Fifth Session of the Thirty-Ninth Legislature of Manitoba, in the name– standing in the name of the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition. Mr. Hugh McFadyen (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, and I am pleased to rise today to provide some comments in response to the Speech from the Throne that was presented on Tuesday by His Honour Philip Lee.

And I want to first thank His Honour, the staff of the Legislature, including our pages, and our many great people who support us here each and every day for ensuring a very smooth opening to the Legislature on Tuesday. And I know that many of the guests that were here appreciated having the opportunity to be part of the experience, and so we offer our compliments to His Honour, to our staff here of the Legislature, to yourself, Mr. Speaker, to our pages and the others–and staff of government who were involved as well in a very significant way in the preparation of the speech.

60 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 that has no ability, no strength, no commitment to actually follow through in implementing those good ideas. It's a government that, after 11 years, is tired. It's a government that is weak and unfocused. It's a government that is increasingly desperate in terms of the comments that it makes both in the House and publicly, Mr. Speaker, and for all of those reasons, we're unable to support its Throne Speech. If we believed for a second that anything in that speech was actually going to be done, Mr. Speaker, we might have a different view of the speech.

And in earlier speeches we, along with all Manitobans, really hoped that a lot of the ideas that were contained in the speech would actually be carried out. But after 11 years, we are certainly more aware than ever that when this government says something, it certainly doesn't mean that it has any intention or ability or energy whatsoever to follow through on it. That is really at the hear t of our concern about the speech. Mr. Speaker, words alone are–can be powerful things, they can be meaningful things.

But when they're delivered by a tired and weak government after 11 years that's broken its promises and failed on every major challenge they said they would address, when they have failed to tackle violent crime in the way that they promised they would back in 1999 and in every year since, when they fail to be fiscally responsible, which they were elected on in 1999.

Who can forget the words of then-NDP leader Gary Doer when he said, we're going to keep the things the Tories got right and we're going to do one thing differently from the Tories and that's we're going to end hallway medicine in six months with $50 million. That was the basis for the Gary Doer party's election in 1999. And, Mr. Speaker, to our disappointment–and we have given them ample opportunity to actually follow through on these things. [interjection] In fact, the member for Steinbach (Mr.

Goertzen) says 10 and a half years; I think it might be slightly over 11, but we're not going to quibble. [interjection] He's giving the government the benefit of the doubt. And we are, of course, justifiably, I think, and reasonably, sceptical about the commitments contained in the Speech from the Throne, and again, the facts are what the facts are. Manitoba is known as the violent crime capital of Canada. That is something that none of us are proud of as Manitobans. And I certainly recall, growing up in St.

James with my friends, getting on the bus, going downtown, watching a movie at the Met, maybe stopping over at the Paddlewheel for fries and gravy, and doing all those things without any concern at all. Too much–too many fries and too much gravy on some cases, but the–all of us on the rubber chicken circuit have some amount of awareness of how that can happen. But that was a time, Mr. Speaker, when our parents wouldn't have had any concern about us doing that as kids.

And I think today it would be fair to say that most parents here in the city of Winnipeg, myself included, would be greatly concerned about our kids wandering around downtown. We wouldn't allow it without us being there. And I think members opposite as well are all peop le who are involved in the community in different ways. I know I have the great pleasure of running into the member for Gimli (Mr. Bjornson) from time to time down at The Forks and on Saturdays at MTYP and we–I have the opportunity with many other members of the House here to bump into them in different places.

And I think we all have that same kind of anxiety about whether we would just allow our kids to hop on the bus, head downtown for a Saturday afternoon and be absolutely certain that they were going to be safe. That doesn't exist anymore today in Winnipeg, Mr. Speaker, and that is a very sad comment and a very significant failure on the part of this government. And so we were disappointed, to put it mildly, Mr.

Speaker, when all we got in the Speech from the Throne was more of the same kind of tired promises and a complete lack of energy or commitment or explanation as to how they would actually follow through in the implementation of any of those promises. And so on that count, Mr.

Speaker, the Speech from the Throne was a disappointment in that it just absolutely failed to provide any degree of comfort to any member of this House, whether you live in Winnipeg or whether you live in Brandon, whether you live in the Interlake or Dauphin or any other community in this province, that this government is at all serious about reducing violent crime. * (14:50) So, on that front, Mr. Speaker, and on that point alone, we have reason to vote down the speech. Without looking at any other aspect of the speech, that's a good enough reason by itself.

Providing for the safety of our citizens is the most fundamental

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 61 responsibility of government. Our senior citizens look to us to ensure that they can leave their apartment blocks or their homes and walk to the store without fear of being mugged. Our families look to the government to ensure that our kids can go to a movie downtown or go shopping downtown without fear of something happening, and families all over the province have that sense now that something has changed in this province, Mr. Speaker, and it hasn't been a good change, particularly here in Winnipeg but also in other communities around the province.

So, on those grounds alone, the speech isn't worthy of the support of this House. Second, Mr. Speaker, the government promised that they would be fiscally responsible when they were first elected. I think I remember the line from the Gary Doer party at the time when they said that we would keep the things that the Tories got right: We'll balance the budget. We’ll be fiscally responsible. We won't do what past NDP governments did, which was run up debt and then leave a huge mess for futu re governments and for future generations.

A lot of that debt that we still have on our balance sheet, a lot of that debt was run up by earlier NDP governments and still hasn't been paid off even as of today, and this government has gone on a 11-year spending spree that has run up that debt to even higher levels. When you combine all of the debt, of Crown corporations, of core government and of the other entities that this government has responsibility for, because I know they like to consolidate their numbers, when you consolidate all of them, that produces a total debt of $24 billion already, and rising, Mr.

Speaker, at a rate of 10 per cent a year–$24 billion and rising at a rate of 10 per cent a year, at the same time as the government's revenues are rising in the range of between 1 and, at the absolute upper end, 3 per cent a year. So, when you increase debt by that amount, Mr. Speaker, you, in effect, put in place a ticking time bomb, a tax bomb for future taxpayers. And what they have done over 11 y ears is they've assembled this mess that–of debt which will become a major source of financial pressure for Manitoba families. We fear that that pressure is coming sooner rather than later.

These are families who have already endured the devaluation of their pension funds because of the Crocus mess. These are families that are dealing with other struggles in terms of their finances and their job security as a result of factors both within the control of the government and outside of its control. But what they look to the government for is to know that regardless of what happens and what the pressures are, that they've got a provincial government that's on their side, that wants to keep their costs down and that is genuinely concerned.

What we have instead is a government that during the good times that were–that really started in 1998. If you look at the way the numbers started to realign after years of hard work and years of focus on building an economic base in Manitoba through a very forward-looking economic strategy, the economy of Manitoba, if you look back, really started to take off in the early part of 1998.

Now, not being a revisionist historian, I'm reasonably certain that there was a Progressive Conservative government in power when the economy started to take off in 1998, and that was as a result of the efforts of many, many people. Now, Mr. Speaker, the members opposite I know, because they lost three elections in the 1990s, have a hard time with that era, that they're out of step with the rest of Manitobans. And I know that in the Speech from the Throne there were three references to the 1990s.

There was also, of interest, a reference to the year 1215, all of which were fascinating academic historical references. But they do nothing to bring down violent crime, which is really the issue that Manitobans are concerned about today. They do nothing to address the massive deficits now being run by the NDP after promising that they wouldn't be fiscally reckless. They do nothing to address the fact that the debt is growing.

They do nothing to plan for the possibility–some economists would even say the likelihood–that interest rates are going to go up in the months and the years ahead, and we know that a single point rise in interest rates–and I know they're not very good at anticipating things. They can't– they're 232 days into the stadium fiasco and they haven't sorted that out, so I wouldn't expect them to understand the possible impact of an interest rate hike. But a one-point rise in interest rates will eventually add about $200 million to the annual expenses of government, and those $200 million, Mr.

Speaker, and members opposite know this, those $200 million in debt payments are not optional. The banks who have lended the government this money don't say, sure take a year off when it comes to your debt repayments. Those are mandatory payments;

62 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 otherwise, we end up in a Greek situation where defaults start to lead to dramatic action. So that's not optional, those repayments, and so what this NDP government has done in running up the debt is they have, in effect, put our children's future in the hands of bankers who live outside of the province of Manitoba, and that is the ultimate in irresponsibility.

And they had–what's most disappointing as we look back is the missed opportunity over those 10 years as other provinces around us recognize that the growth through that period, starting in 1998 and carrying on until the bust of 2008–so it started under a Progressive Conservative government, went bust under an NDP government–that that period of growth was a great opportunity to tackle the debt of the Province and to prepare ourselves for what would inevitably happen, which was the–would be that the economy would turn down. And sure enough, that's what happened, Crocus first and then a variety of other failures.

And, Mr. Speaker, what we find ourselves in a position today is seeing that debt now accelerating at a rate much more quickly than our ability to pay it off. There is an Irish saying that you make hay while the sun is shining, and this NDP government, instead of following that good common sense advice, chose instead to squander the opportunity to pay down debt and leave us in this position. I think some people also say that you fix the roof when the sun is shining. Instead of fixing the roof while the sun was shining, they made that hole in the roof even bigger, so that when it rains, Manitobans get soaked.

And, Mr. Speaker, that is part of the worry that we have today about the terrible financial position that we find as this NDP government's legacy to the next generation: a legacy of debt, a legacy of financial pressure, a legacy of rising crime. And all of these things, you know, undermining both the personal security and the financial security of Manitoba families is what they have done, and that's why they don't deserve to carry on in their position of government. Mr. Speaker, there are other issues in the Throne Speech that we have great concerns about: broken promises in health care.

Hallway medicine is still with us now 11 years after the promise and, to be fair, 10 and a half years after hallway medicine was supposed to have been ended. And I'm glad that the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) has made that point that it's 10 and a half years now since it was supposed to have been done, and now we're waiting.

In a lot of ways–I don't want to count the number of days that would be but, in a lot of ways, that is something that as we–every day passes, and that promise fails to be kept, can just be stacked on top of all the other broken promises that continue to fester away under this tired and weak NDP government. Now, Mr. Speaker, we have failures in violent crime, failures in financial management, failures in health care.

We know that the news came out recently about a directive th at hospitals in Winnipeg were to discharge patients as rapidly as they could and they were to block seniors from entering personal care homes, block families from providing access to our seniors to personal care homes because they had so badly failed to plan for what's happening.

They were so obsessed with playing politics in so many different areas, so obsessed with their little political games here and there, abusing their departments, abusing the government to play games with advertising and a variety of other things, that they just took their eye off the ball and they failed to plan for what we now have happening in this province, which is growing pressure because of our aging population and an inability on the part of the government to meet that pressure.

And I want to commend members of this House for raising issues: the memb er from Morden who, on behalf of his constituents, has been asking for– An Honourable Member: Pembina. * (15:00) Mr. McFadyen: –the member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), who has been as king for years for the government to take action on the Tabor Home because of the needs in his community facing seniors. He's been asking for real results. Other members in this House who have asked for results, the member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik), who, for years, needed more space than what the government has provided in his communities.

Because of their mismanagement of the project, we now have an ongoing shortage of spaces in Neepawa and in other communities around the province. And so we see this complete failure to plan, this obsession with news releases and spin, and announcements, and getting into the Free Press and all the other things that they spend their time trying to do while they failed to actually deliver results for the people of Manitoba. And so we've had failure on crime, failure on financial management, failure in health care. We've had–we've got grave concern about their misguided plan to raise taxes after the next election,

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 63 Mr. Speaker, which is absolutely clear when you look at the campaign they just ran in Winnipeg. And let me just say for a moment, pause, that while we and I and our party disagreed with the plan put out by Judy Wasylycia-Leis to raise taxes, one thing that I think needs to be acknowledged is that she was honest enough to put it out in front of the public. They voted it down, but that plan was put out there.

And I think, unfortunately, that this provincial NDP which was running that campaign, running that failed campaign and running attack campaigns against Councillor Smith and other people through the course of the civic campaign, as they were out threatening people and bullying people in the Minto constituency, and doing other things to attack Councillor Smith and others who were running, as they were spending all their time doing that, these problems continued to mount, the shortage of care homes for seniors and others. And we are concerned, Mr.

Speaker, that they have learned the wrong lesson from the civic campaign, that the lesson they've learned now is that, rather than telling everybody we're going to raises taxes, let's tell them that we're not going to raise taxes, because when we told them we were going to raise taxes in the civic campaign, they voted us down. So let's–the lesson the NDP take from that is let's just be sneaky and slippery and let's not tell anybody about our plan to raise taxes after the election.

And we'll just do it after and we'll hope that after that election we'll have enough time, and enough spin, and enough advertising dollars to try to recover from that. And that is really what the approach is. And it's not grounded on anything other than their own budget numbers or anything other than their own civic campaign. And what it's grounded in is the fact that they know that transfer payments, which now make up 40 per cent of the budget, remain flat. They know, Mr.

Speaker, that own-source revenues are projected to grow at a rate that's certainly below 4 per cent over the next period of time, more likely in the range of 1 or 2 per cent, and yet they're increasing spending in this budget, budget to budget, by over 5 per cent.

And then they're saying that four years from now the budget is going to be magically balanced without any plan to grow the economy to increase own-source revenues, with the full realization that transfer payments have reached a high-water mark and are either going to be fl at or are going to start to taper down over time and, with a commitment, just magically balance the budget. So how do you fill that gap between rising expenditures and relatively flat revenues? What's the answer to that question? [interjection] That's exactly right. Members on this side of the House have put their finger on it.

The only option they've got is to raise taxes and rates and fees on Manitoba families. And we're going to fight them, Mr. Speaker. We're going to fight them from today and to the election because Manitoba families deserve better than a sneaking tax increase from a tired NDP government. And, Mr. Speaker, the de speration that they're displaying all over the place today will translate into a bunch of phony promises, just like Crocus is strong, ending hallway medicine. They're going to go into the campaign, no, don't worry we're going to keep taxes frozen; we won't change any taxes.

You know we're the ones–we brought in–remember the minor corporate tax cuts we brought in when we were in government. You know we're good with minor corporate tax cuts. Nobody needs to worry. And that, I'm afraid, is going to be an issue that is going to be a problem for them. And so, Mr. Speaker, su pporting small business in Manitoba is about tax relief. It's about an economic plan.

It's about a common-sense approach to supporting small business entrepreneurs and others who want to take risk by ensuring their taxes are competitive with other province, and that we are pursuing a broader agenda of keeping taxes and rates down for all Manitobans, including small business, including others who contribute to our economy. Mr.

Speaker, so the absence of an economic strategy, the excessive reliance on transfer payments and this out-of-control wa ste and mismanagement in government are heading exactly where they always do and that's the higher hydro rates, higher bills to Manitoba seniors for their hydro. It's leading to higher rates in terms of taxes and fees across the board, and I know the Premier (Mr. Selinger) said on CJOB: Don't worry. There won't be any major tax increases after the election–and the key word being major within that.

You've got to watch very carefully and pay close attention to the words, because the slippery words contain a lot more hidden meaning and hidden agendas and those are agendas that Manitobans deserve to understand before they vote next October. In the same way that he hasn't emerged from the hole at the University of Manitoba to explain what's

64 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 going on, we highly doubt that he's going to emerge from the hole to explain his plans for rising taxes on Manitobans after the next election. Yet another reason, Mr. Speaker, to not support this Speech from the Throne. Mr. Speaker, we have called on the government to, as part of its economic strategy, to move forward in a variety of areas. With CentrePort, we've called on them to move forward in terms of joining the New West Partnership. We've called on them to embrace the strategy of free trade, and start with our next-door neighbour.

Saskatchewan is a good place to start with free trade and our other western neighbours, all of whom are projected to grow more than Manitoba this year. It's interesting when you look–the projections just released–the three provinces to the west of us are all projected to grow more quickly than Manitoba and that is clearly, at least in part, related to their forward-looking approach and their leadership that those provinces have shown in the New West Partnership, which Manitoba has been left out of. Now, Mr.

Speaker, we're very concerned about the announcement in Thompson and the impact on that community and families. We are worried about the signal and the message that comes from the fact that the company is announcing the creation of 15,000 new jobs in the province of Saskatchewan, billions of dollars in new investment in Ontario and Newfoundland. And, as Canadians, we are proud of our country, Canada. We're happy for the people of Newfoundland, Ontario and Saskatchewan, who are going to see this investment and these opportunities.

We worry about the people of Manitoba again being left behind because of the policies of our provincial government. Mr. Speaker, so the failure on economic policy, the failure in financial management, the failure in so many other areas means that we cannot support this government. We have–we're also concerned that the speech doesn't acknowledge 11 years of wasted money on bloated health-care bureaucracy at the expense of front-line care, and we're also concerned that the speech fails to acknowledge that the shortage of personal care home beds in Manitoba is a direct result of their failure to plan.

We're concerned that the speech fails to recognize that far too many of our First Nations and Métis people remain on the outside of the economic life of our province, or to offer any plan to address this failure.

And on that note, we were disappointed and concerned–and I had a chance this morning to speak to Chief George Kemp, from Berens River First Nation, on the east side of Lake Winnipeg this morning, after reading his letter to the editor today, where Chief George Kemp said that the Premier's decision to force the hydro line down the west side of the lake would be one of the most significantly damaging decisions for generations to come that this province has seen. That, Mr. Speaker, is not a partisan message. It's consistent with what the former CEO of Hydro, Len Bateman, has had to say.

It is consistent with what the landowners and producers have had to say who are concerned. It's consistent with what ratepayers are telling us. It's consistent with what engineers– there were 10 engineers with Mr. Bateman present at that shameful committee meeting that was conducted by the new Government House Leader (Ms. Howard) and many other Manitobans coming forward with concerns. And this coalition, Mr. Speaker, of Métis people, of First Nations people and others is a–is an important one and we hope that they'll be listened to by this government as we move forward. They haven't been listened to to date.

In fact, this Throne Speech is a slap in the face to the community of Berens River. It's a slap in the face to landowners in Manitoba. It is a slap in the face to seniors and ratepayers. * (15:10) It is an insult to serious environmentalists who see the damage of the west-side route. It is an insult to those people who know about the woodland caribou ranges that are going to be intersected. It's an insult to the people who care about the Aspen Parkland. It's an insult to people who care about the two significant staging areas for migratory birds that are going to be intersected.

It's a concern for anybody concerned about crossing five major highways, four major railway lines, the Red River which floods on a regular basis within a hundred metres of the homes of Manitoba families. It is an insult to people who are looking for hope and opportunity on the east side of the lake. Mr.

Speaker, the fact that they would use the speech to brag about the fact that they were going to do damage to our province in all of those ways, damage to our environment, damage to our reliability of our power system, damage to ratepayers, damage to First Nations, damage to our farmers and our producers–the fact that they would brag about it, that

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 65 they would brag about it in the Throne Speech, that they're proud of the fact that policy in their government is driven by getting invitations to award ceremonies when out-of-province lobbyists show up and host receptions, the fact that they're proud that they take their policy advice from American activists who are on the record as opposing everything that Manitoba Hydro does.

If you look at the record of what these activists have said about Manitoba Hydro over the years, they have said things like we oppose generating stations because we think they create greenhouse gases. We're opposed to transmission lines. We are opposed to everything that Manitoba Hydro does because, Mr. Speaker, we down here in the United States get no benefit from a successful Manitoba Hydro. We're much more interested in technologies that benefit the American economy like clean–so-called clean coal.

That's what the American activists have said on the record, and those are the people that they take their– that the Manitoba NDP take their advice from. They take their advice from people who despise Manitoba Hydro. They take their advice from groups who raise money from companies that have an economic interest in keeping Hydr o out of the American marketplace. The groups in the U.S., some of them, Mr.

Speaker, that protest against power sales into the United States, are funded by trusts that receive money from companies in the United States in the energy business who want to stop exports from Manitoba Hydro into the United States. And so these groups organize protests against Manitoba Hydro. Sometimes they turn into a cause célèbre when Manitoba Hydro wants to try and do something, and rather than having the strength to stand up for Manitobans, the strength to face down the activists who hate Manitoba Hydro, they were weak. They buckled.

They folded like a cheap suit in the face of opposition from American activists, and for that reason they shouldn't be in government in the province of Manitoba today. Mr. Speaker, their anti-Hydro agenda, which is backed up–which is–[interjection] Well, members opposite are laughing and I know that the members who are laughing are laughing because they don't understand the dynamics of what's going on in the American marketplace.

They don't understand that a lot of the groups that are highly influential with the U.S. administration right now are trying to build made-in-America approaches, and they can't be faulted for that. They are Americans who want to see their economy succeed, but these groups view Manitoba as a competitor in terms of energy supply. They don't view Manitoba Hydro as a friend in terms of energy supply, and that's why they're very well orchestrated, very well organized and very well funded in terms of pressuring the current administration. And so, Mr. Speaker, if the Premier (Mr.

Selinger) was worried about how he would be perceived by organizations in the U.S. who are very close to the current administration in the energy business, if he was worried about his perception with powerful American organizations in the United States, if he was trying to get a job in the United States where those connecti ons were important, then this decision actually would have some logic to it.

But, if that was what he was trying to do, if he was worried about his image with the NRDC and the other groups that are plugged in with the administration, then what he might do is make a decision that curried favour with those groups, and if he was applying for a job to go work in the United States, that would make some sense. But if he's–wants to be the Premier of Manitoba and stand up for Manitobans, then an individual who makes a decision like this can be considered nothing but grossly negligent.

And the people who take their orders from somebody who's driven by these motivations, whether it's out of naivety, whether it's out of a lack of due diligence, whether it is out of pure incompetence, whether–maybe it's based on being clueless when it comes to Manitoba Hydro, if it's those things, Mr. Speaker, I'm afraid that's not a good enough excuse for this failure, and that's what's driving the west-side line. Now, Mr. Speaker, so they brag about it in the speech.

They take tax dollars from hardworking Manitobans to put into an advertising campaign at taxpayers' expense, driven by politics, and that is something that they will have to answer for to Manitoba taxpayers in the months ahead. Mr. Speaker, the speech also fails in so many other ways. It fails to assure parents that their children are learning the skills that they need to succeed in today's workforce. It fails to do the right thing for Manitoba's farm families.

It carries on this many-year-long approach of the NDP government of enacting divisive policies between the city and our rural communities that result in the neglect or, in some cases, the penalization of farm families and rural communities in the province, their new tax on

66 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 producers in supply management issues being one example of a new NDP penalty brought in on farm families. And, unfortunately, like so many other things they do, even though the new tax was designed to punish those farmers, the effect of it is to actually put upward pressure on the price of milk, eggs and poultry, so it's everybody in Manitoba who pays the price. I know they are trying to take a direct shot at farmers with that new tax. In fact, though, Mr.

Speaker, because of their fa ilure to anticipate the effects of their actions, it's all Manitobans who pay for their new milk, poultry and livestock tax. So, Mr. Speaker, we can't support a speech or a government that neglects and penalizes farm families and rural communities. Mr. Speaker, the speech fails to acknowledge the chaos in Manitoba's child welfare system.

It fails to acknowledge that it was the policies of this government, caused by its policies, that has resulted in the tragic abuse and loss of life of children in this province as a direct result of the policies of this NDP government, the politically motivated interference in the world of Family Services driven by pure politics and a lack of care for the people who are impacted by those policies that has resulted in the chaos that we're seeing and the tragedies which happened, and no amount of indicating care and concern is of comfort to those people who are suffering as a result of their policies. Mr.

Speaker, there are agen cies out there that are doing a very good job, and I want to say that we have seen really good examples from the Métis agency of good work being done. We've seen really good examples of other First Nations agencies out there doing a good job out there on behalf of the children of Manitoba. But there ar e too many examples of things going off the tracks to allow the government to get away with continuing to play politics in Child and Family Services, and the speech fails to do anything about it.

The speech also fails–and we were all very saddened in this House, as I know all Manitobans were, to read about the tragic car accident which took place a number of weeks ago involving young people who had been drinking and driving and the terrible pain being felt by their families. And there are families throughout the province of Manitoba– and I've met many of them; the members, all members of this House have met many of them–who continue to grieve and suffer today as a result of the deaths of members of their family caused by reckless drunk drivers. And those families, Mr.

Speaker, were ignored in this Speech from the Throne. Those families have seen the pain of the loss they have suffered, and we see, not just in terms of the individual awful and heartbreaking stories, but we saw the numbers that came out before the House came back–since the last time we've sat, in fact–new numbers which came out which shows an increase in drunk driving in the province of Manitoba.

That increase goes against the trend that was in place as of the time this government took power and, obviously, as the amount of drinking and driving was decreasing, this government took their eye off the ball and it's now on the rise again, and we need to address that issue. We're disappointed that it didn't happen in this speech. * (15:20) Mr. Speaker, the speech fails to deal with addictions treatment.

We've seen chaos in that system as well–the resignation of one of the leading addictions experts last spring–and we need to do better for Manitobans who are dealing with addictions, and the fact that this is not acknowledged or addressed in an appropriate way within this speech, with actual action and follow-up is something that is of great concern to us. We know it is a matter that every family in this province deals with in one way or another, and we're disappointed that the government hasn't shown more leadership on that issue. Mr.

Speaker, the speech contains, as I said at the outset, some good ideas offered by members of the opposition. It fails, though, to convince us that any of them will actually be implemented after 11 years of broken promises. The speech fails to acknowledge that the government's 11-year track record of failure to keep its other promises, like ending hallway medicine, have caused the House to realize that the promises contained in this speech are very unlikely to be kept. And so, Mr.

Speaker, I think it has to be acknowledged that the current government is tired, it's out of steam, it is weak, it has failed on every major challenge it's taken on, and as it gets tired and weak, and as its failures continue to mount, the government's level of desperation increases. As we get closer to an election and the failures mount and they continue to sink, the level of desperation increases like somebody flailing around in a sense of

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 67 desperation. The attacks on employers, the attacks on city councillors, the attacks launched on anybody who has the fortitude and the honour to stand up and tell the truth about this government and to criticize this government in a constructive way are shameful. And so I would just say that their policy of, attack now, ask questions later, is something that is disappointing because the challenges are getting larger and larger.

And ever y bit of energy that this government has, the dissipating energy that remains needs to be marshalled and, at least to their best ability, focused on reducing violent crime, bringing fiscal responsibility, keeping taxes down, bringing stability to Child and Family Services, making our hospitals and our health-care system work better, providing for our seniors in our personal care homes, standing up for farm families, standing up for companies and people who want to invest and create jobs in Manitoba.

Whatever energy that's left, it's got to be focused on those things rather than dissipated through their flailing, desperate attacks on everybody who has anything to say about their shameful record. So, Mr. Speaker, it's very clear, at this mark in history, after 11 years, that this government is not up to the job. This government has failed to deliver positive results, and it is going to take a new and energetic government, one chosen by the people of Manitoba, who are the bo sses, though they're the ones who'll make the mistake–who'll make the decision.

They are the ones– An Honourable Member: It would be a mistake. Mr. McFadyen: Well, Mr. Speaker, the reference was to the 2003 election where Mr. Asselstine, the fraud examiner, indicated that had their financial fraud come to light prior to that election it would have had a material impact on that election. So I was just making reference to the fact that there was a mistake by Elections Manitoba in not setting the record straight, which happened before that election. But the reality is that here we are, Mr.

Speaker, desperate efforts to rig elections and to skirt the rules of democracy, desperate attacks on everybody who dares to criticize them, and the result of all of it, I think, is that it's becoming increasingly clear that this government has lost its way, that the office once occupied by people like Duff Roblin and Ed Schreyer, that that office is now occupied by somebody who, through a dodgy leadership process, has spent just over a year mismanaging his way along. And so, Mr. Speaker, the government doesn't enjoy the confidence of members.

The government has failed, and it is going to take a new government to follow through on bringing about reductions in crime, bringing about fiscal responsibility, keeping taxes down, supporting farm families, cleaning up Lake Winnipeg with actual results based on the scientific advice of Dr. Schindler. And, incidentally, the fact, Mr. Speaker, that they would use their attack ads to attack Dr. Schindler and other scientists in the way that they did by implication is one of the most shameful things I have ever seen. It just seems that they just know no limits in terms of their desperation, and to attack Dr.

Schindler and his recommended approach to cleaning up Lake Winnipeg is hitting absolutely rock bottom. And I know Dr. Schindler and the many other scientists are looking forward to a debate, a real debate, over the next 10 months in response to the NDP attacks about the best way to move forward to clean up Lake Winnipeg for our kids, for our grandkids, to ensure that the awful algae blooms all over Victoria Beach this summer and other beaches along the lake, which are worse–the summer of 2010–this isn't the 1990s I'm talking about. You only have to look back a couple of months.

The summer of 2010–the worst year on record for blue-green toxic algae, under the watch of this tired, political, desperate NDP government. And so, Mr. Speaker, we stand with Dr. Schindler and the other scientists, no matter how hard the desperate NDP wants to attack them and their recommended approach to cleaning up Lake Winnipeg, and we will do better. And so we know, Mr. Speaker, that our city and our province need better sports facilities and infrastructure. We know we need stability within Child and Family Services.

We know we need to bring an end to political interference in Child and Family Services and political games with political goals. We know it's time for a new government. It's time for real leadership. It's time for a commitment to tackle the provinces that we now face. And so I want to speak, Mr. Speaker, and I would move, seconded by the member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik), THAT the motion be amended by adding at the end, the following words: But this House regrets:

68 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA November 18, 2010 (

a) That the government's Throne Speech failed to acknowledge that after 11 years, violent crime is rising, waste is rampant and past health-care promises have been broken; and (

b) That the speech did not provide a credible plan to reduce violent crime, reduce waste and improve health-care; and (

c) That the speech endorses large ongoing deficits and rising debt which will result in higher taxes for Manitoba families; and (

d) That the speech failed to acknowledge the government's misguided plan to raise taxes on Manitoba families starting after October 2011; and (

e) That the speech failed to take immediate steps to improve Manitoba's competitive position by seeking entry into the New West Partnership; and (

f) That the speech failed to protect Manitoba seniors and families from hydro rate increases caused by the Premier's interference in Manitoba Hydro; and (

g) That the speech fails to acknowledge that for 11 years the government has wasted money on bloated health-care bureaucracy and boardrooms at the expense of front-line care; and (

h) That the speech fails to acknowledge that the shortage of personal care home beds in Manitoba is a direct result of the govern ment's failure to plan for the needs of our seniors; and (

i) That the speech fails to recognize that far too many of our First Nations and Métis people remain on the outside of the economic life of our province or to offer a plan to address this significant failure; and (

j) That the speech fails to assure parent s that their children are learning the skills they need to succeed in today's workforce; and (

k) That the speech continues the government's divisive policies of neglecting or penalizing Manitoba's farm families and rural communities; and (

l) That the speech fails to acknowledge the chaos in Manitoba's child welfare system caused by its policies or to apologize for the tragic abuse and lose of life caused by this government's political interference in the child welfare system; and (

m) That the speech fails to deal with the problem of increased drunk driving or to acknowledge that this reckless behaviour has caus ed heartache for far too many families; and (

n) That the speech fails to deal with addictions treatment or to acknowledge that drug abuse and addiction are contributing to much of the crime that plagues our province, now known as the violent crime capital of Canada; and (

o) That while the speech contains many good ideas offered by members of the opposition, it fails to convince this House that they will actually be implemented; and (

p) That the speech fails to acknowledge the government's 11-year track record of failure to keep other promises, like ending hallway medicine, causing this House to rea lize that the promises contained in the speech are unlikely to be kept; and (

q) That the current government has failed in its promises to Manitobans, and as a result, it is now clearer than ever that it will require a new government to deliver positive results on crime reduction, fiscal responsibility, job creation, tax relief, protection from rate hikes, access to family physicians, support for farm families, the cleanup of Lake Winnipeg, better sports facilities and infrastructure, stability within Child and Family Services and other goals that are supported by all Manitobans.

And as a consequence the government has thereby lost the trust and confidence of the people of Manitoba and this House. * (15:30) Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Leader of the Official Op position, seconded by the honourable member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Hawranik), THAT the motion be amended by adding at the end the following words: But this House regrets: (

a) The government's Throne Speech failed to acknowledge that after 11 years– An Honourable Member: Dispense. Mr. Speaker: –when moving a motion, you cannot dispense–

November 18, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 69 (

a) That the government's Throne Speech failed– [interjection] I have to read the motion back to the House. Order, order. For the clar ification for members, I have to read the motion back to the House. (

a) That the government's Throne Speech failed to acknowledge that after 11 years violent crime is rising, waste is rampant and past health-care promises have been broken; and (

b) That the speech did not provide a credible plan to reduce violent crime, reduce waste and improve health care; and (

c) That the speech endorses large ongoing deficits and rising debt, which will result in higher taxes for Manitoba families; and (