Manitoba Hansard — 25 April 2017 (Sitting 44B, 41st Legislature, 2nd Session)

41-2-44b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session – Forty-First Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Myrna Driedger Speaker Vol. LXX No. 44B - 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, April 25, 2017 ISSN 0542-5492

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

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

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

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

1519 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, April 25, 2017 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Madam Speaker: Please be seated. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 212–The Conflict of Interest Act Hon. Steven Fletcher (Assiniboia): Madam Speaker, I'd like to move, seconded by the member from River Heights, that Bill 212, The Conflict of Interest Act, be read for a first time. Motion presented. Mr. Fletcher: Madam Speaker, this is a non-partisan issue. The current legislation for conflict of interest is woefully inadequate and must be changed to relate to the realities of the 21st century.

This bill is based on legislation brought forward by Premier Brad Wall in our sister province of Saskatchewan. The bill includes any assets owned by a member or immediate family, including stocks, bonds and real estate in Canada. In the last 15 years, the world has changed dramatically from tax -free savings accounts to public policy. This bill will ensure that no MLA or immediate family can benefit financially. For example, issuing a licence for environment or a mining claim or new pot –or the marijuana regime. You can –we need to fill that pot hole. Manitobans expect the be st.

Brad Wall has introduced the highest standard that I'm aware of, and I hope this will be a framework for the future. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed] Committee reports? Tabling of reports? MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister for Crown Services. The required 90 minutes notice prior to routine proceedings was provided in accordance with rule 26(2). Would the honourable minister please proceed with his statement? MPI Accepts Military Identification Hon.

Ron Schuler (Minister of Crown Services): Madam Speaker, as Minister for Crown Services, I was proud to announce earlier this morning a new way our government is making life a little easier for the am azing members of our Canadian Forces stationed in Manitoba. From training and missions to the sacrifices they and their families make, military personnel's daily lives can constantly be in flux. And that includes relocations, resettling from all corners of Canada, often quickly and without much notice, can be stressful and difficult.

That is why today, along with my colleague, Manitoba's special envoy for military affairs, the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Reyes), our government was proud to announce a new change that makes transition to our province easier for all m ilitary personnel. To truly live up to our friendly Manitoba reputation, I am pleased to announce that Manitoba Public Insurance is now accepting military ID and Canadian Forces driver licences as proof of identity when applying for a Manitoba driver licence or identification card.

Manitoba already recognizes commercial -class driver licences issued by the military for equivalent class exchange to a provincial licence. Manitoba was, in fact, one of the first provinces to recognize military driving permits for this purpose. These are just two small ways that, as a government, we can show our support for the military by making it as easy as possible to transition to friendly Manitoba when stationed here. I have the utmost admiration, respect and gratitude fo r the men and women of Canada' s military. They have ded icated their lives to protect all of us.

I know I speak on behalf of our government and all Manitobans when I say to all past and present members of the Canadian Forces and their families , thank you for dedicating your lives to protecting ours. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): We owe our service members and their families, who sacrifice so much for us, an enormous debt of gratitude. We strongly

1520 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 support our reservists, active service members and veterans. For those members who may have slept in this morning, the member for Kildonan and I had a very positive discussion about that today as we passed on Bill 215 to committee. Our former NDP government undertook many initiatives to make life easier for military personnel and their families. We made it easier for military personnel and their families to find a family doctor . We extended the right to vote in provincial elections to Armed Forces personnel serving outside of Manitoba.

We brought in legislation to allow military personnel to end their renta l agreements before they expire if they were deployed in military service. We changed The Employment Standards Act to protect the jobs of reservists on tours of duty. We introduced legislation allowing military members to retain their Manitoba driv er's licences while serving in other countries and continue to earn merits, and we also made it easier for personnel posted here to obtain their Manitoba driver's licences. Military personnel and their families often need to relocate quickly and suddenly to serve our country.

In rec ognition of the sacrifices they ha ve made and continue to make, the least we can do is to ease their transition when they move from or to another province and make sure they have access to the front-line services they need. Madam Speaker, on behalf of our NDP caucus, I thank all military personnel for their service and their courage and dedication. We will continue to support actions to make their lives in Manitoba easier. Thank you. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Yes, Madam Speaker, I ask leave to speak to the minister's statement.

Madam Speaker: Does the member have leave to speak to the minister's statement? [Agreed] Mr. Gerrard: Madam Speaker, I first want to thank the Clerk and all the legislative staff for so diligently staying in the Chamber until after 1 o'clock this morning. Madam Speaker, i n 2015, Manitoba was one of two provinces in Canada to start recognizing commercial-class military driver's licences for upgrade to equivalent-class civilian driver's licences. Recognizing these licences, and now identification cards, to satisfy applicable identity requirements is a logical extension.

As my colleague, the member for Burr ows (Ms. Lamoureux), has said this morning, the Liberal caucus is happy to support any enhancements for our military personnel and to thank them for all the wonderful work that they do. This measure will help military personnel to meet the requirements for photo ID so that they can vote and fully participate in other ways in Manitoba.

However, I note, mister –Madam Speaker, that there are still many others that have –some in our northern communities, for example, who are not with driver's licence and photo I D, and they also need attention in terms of how we make sure that they have the photo ID that's needed so that they can fully participate as well. Thank you. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada Mr. Nic Curry (Kildonan): I rise today with respect to the recent centennial anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge.

I take this moment to recognize the Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada, who joined thousands of Canadians who captured Vimy Ridge 100 years ago. Especially of note ar e the Cameron Pipes and Drums, today led by Pipe Major John Dawson. * (13:40) At Vimy Ridge on 9 April 2017, John Dawson was the Pipe Major for the Pipes and Drums of 3rd Canadian Division honour guard. I' ve known John Dawson for years as one of the veteran sergeants who is mentoring young infanteers and pipers who joined the Cameron Highlanders of Canada.

In 2008, he was deployed to Afghanistan and is one of the many veterans who continue to serve with the Canadian Armed Forces reserve. For w ell over 100 years, the Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada Pipes and Drums have been sounding in battle and at home. In the trenches of the Somme, they led the men over the top. From the landing craft, the Cameron men deployed to the shores of Dieppe to the sound and the tune of their pipers, many of whom were captured that day. From the 1950 floods, when thousands of Manitobans went out to their

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1521 communities, Camerons were piped to the dikes and piped to the sandbag lines. And at the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge, the Cameron Pipes were there. The Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada Pipes and Drums' most recent accomplishment came in 2016 when they, as part of a composite with the Camerons of Ottawa, won the Grade 4 North Am erican Pipe Band Championship. Of course, they were led by John Dawson. Over 100 years ago, the Cameron highland men looked up at Vimy Ridge with their rifles and pipers at the ready.

Today pipers like John Dawson remain at the ready to lead our men at home and abroad. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Reproductive Health-Care Services Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns ): Reproductive health is a fundamental right of women and girls . Our NDP team believes in tangible, substantive reproductive equality for women and girls, including accessible reproductive health-care services. Manitoba has a high youth- pregnancy rate which highlights the very real barriers in accessing birth control and public education.

Doctors are increasingly prescribing IUDs as a primary method of birth control for women and girls. IUDs are the easiest, most effective and cost-efficient form of birth control, lasting upwards of five years per device. The increased use of IUDs has not only led to a reduction in the number of unplanned pre gnancies, but has also reduced the number of abortions sought out by women and girls. IUDs carry a high up- front cost many women, and certainly young girls, are simply unable to pay.

Women and girl clinics here in Manitoba and across Canada have called for IUDs to be fully covered and paid for by governments in order to eliminate this barrier. Certainly, IUDs may not be the right choice for every woman or girl, so, consequently, we believe all birth control options should be covered by Manitoba, ensuring women and girls are able to practise real reproductive choices for themselves. Our NDP team will continue to support a broad range of reproductive health services, including the call to fully fund the abortion pill.

We recognize the importance of accessibility and control over one's reproductive health as a fundamental expression of women and girls' equality. Certainly, we encourage the Pallister government to stand with us not just with words, but with actors – actions by fully covering the range of bir th control and abortion services for Manitoba women and girls. Miigwech. Keystone Cup Mr. Derek Johnson (Interlake): Earlier this month I had the pleasure to bring greetings at the Keystone Cup in Arborg arena. The Keystone Cup is a tournament that brings together Junior B hockey teams from across w estern Canada.

I am very pleased that it was hosted in my home constituency of the Interlake and the town of Arborg. Two local teams, the Arborg Ice Dawgs and the Peguis Juniors, qualified for the tournament, so the Interlake was well represented. In the regular season, the Ice Dawgs play in a league with teams from all across Manitoba as far south as St. Malo to northern Manitoba in communities like 'opaskaway' Cree nation. It takes a lot of dedication to play hockey at this level. All of the teams spent a lot of time on the road and away from t heir homes and their families.

I admire the commitments and accomplishments of the players, who worked very hard to get to this level. Once they've made it through the regular season, the highest ranked and hosting teams get to face off the best of western Canada in the Keystone Cup. The tournament brought great many visitors from across the Interlake, western Canada and as far away as Iceland. The boost for the local hotels and restaurants was quite evident. Unfortunately, neither of the local teams made it through to the final, but , nonetheless, they can be proud of their achi evements this season for all their hard work.

Please join me in congratulating the Arborg Ice Dawgs and the Peguis Juniors in their success in the very challenging league. National Volunteer Week Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): Madam Speaker, happy National Volunteer Week. Today I want to recognize, thank and celebrate the countless volunteers who give their time and talent to help make life better for others. I would

1522 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 like to express how grateful we all are for these exceptional Manitobans. People from all walks of life dedicate their volunteerism to eve nts such as Folklorama, to spending an afternoon with our furry friends at the Winnipeg Humane Society , to helping local not-for-profit organizations fundraise. Whatever the case, Manitobans always show up motivated in full force to volunteer.

In fact, Winnipeg is set to hos t the 2017 Canada Summer Games this July and August, and no doubt Manitobans are already lining up to be part of this special event taking place in our province. With that said, it's important that we don't forget even the smallest act s of kindness or the amount of given time is an y act of volunteerism.

From those who volunteer at local churches or community centres, to parents here in Manitoba who dedicate their time to support their local parent councils, to our friendly neighbours who shovel our walkways or carry up our garbage bins from the curb, to the hard-working, dedicated and driven campaign volunteers who helped each and every one of us get elected, the gracious act of volunteering impacts all of us in one way or another. Madam Speaker, allow me to end with a quote written by Kimberly Rinehart: Volunteers are just ordinary people with extraordinary hearts.

They offer the gift of their time to teach, to listen, to help, to inspire, to build, to grow and to learn. They expe ct no pay, yet the value of their work knows no limit. They've known the unexpected joy and have planted seeds of love. Volunteers are just ordinary people who have reached out and taken a hand to make the others' lives–that last a lifetime. So, happy volunteer week. Thank you. National Organ and Tissue Donors Awareness Week Mr.

Reg Helwer (Brandon West): Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand in the Legislature today to celebrate the 20th anniversary of National Organ and Tissue Donors Awareness Week and the fifth anniversary of Transplant Manitoba's online Sign Up for Life registry. Yesterday, I had the opportunity to join with Dr.

Faisal Siddiqui, who grew up in Brandon, by the way, and Transplant Manitoba at The Forks on behalf of the Minister of Health to proclaim National Organ a nd Tissue Donors Awareness Week and to bring awareness about those who have donated human tissues or organs to someone in need as well as those who are in need. Kathy Urban, a kidney recipient, had a great story to tell and she is very encouraging to donors and potential donors.

Over the next week, green landmarks and ribbons will be seen across Canada, honouring donors and donor families who have given the gift of life, the gift of h ope, and to recognize the thousands of patients in need of a transplant and those who have died waiting. This year alone , 4,600 Canadians are in need of an organ transplant , and m ore than 250 Canadians will die on waiting lists. As you know, Madam Speaker, our daughter Jessica fell ill with a kidney disease in 2010 that progressed to the point where she was placed on dialysis.

Thanks to my incredible wife Aynsley and our son Andrew, their gifts as living donors helped save Jessica's life. Five years ago , I stood in this H ouse to raise awareness for signupforlife.ca which was introduced by then-Health minister Theresa Oswald, and to date, over 19,000 Manitobans have registered. The gift of life is the ultimate act of generosity, and I encourage all Manitobans to discuss organ and ti ssue decisions with your family and then register their intent to donate at signupforlife.ca to make your wishes known.

I have registered; I know many of our family, friends and colleagues have stopped me to let me know that they have registered. Please visit the website and sign up for life as a donor and tell your friends and loved ones. Give someone the gift of a second chance. Thank you, Madam Speaker. * (13:50) Introduction of Guests Madam Speaker: Prior to oral questions , we have some guests to introduce to you.

Seated in the public gallery from École Christine-Lespérance we have 41 grade 6 students under the direction of Philippe Champagne, and this group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Seine River (Ms. Morley-Lecomte). And also in the public gallery we have the grandmother of our member for the Interlake, Elsie Gislason, and I understand Elsie is 95 years old. And

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1523 also with the member's grandmother are his aunt and uncle, Donna and Mark Johnson-Russell. On behalf of all honourable members, we welcome you here, today. And to the –in the loge to my left, we have Ron Kostyshyn, the former member for Swan River. And on behalf of all members here, we welcome you back to the Manitoba Legislature. ORAL QUESTIONS Emergency Room Closures Impact on Patient Care Ms. Flor Marcelino (Leader of the Official Opposition): The Premier concealed his motivation for closing emergency rooms.

Now, the truth has finally come out: the Premier is putting the bottom line ahead of concern for patient care. Nurses have t old the Premier this is a front -line cut. Doctors Manitoba and the Manitoba College of Family Physicians are calling on the government to rethink this plan. Madam Speaker, if the Premier won't listen to us, will he at least listen to the doctors and nurses who are our front-line service providers? Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, again, Madam Speaker, we're very excited to be on a road to recovery in terms of improving our health- care system, which was broken under the previous government. In terms of listening, we've had input from over 20,000 Manitobans, including a significant number of front -line workers in the health- care system, including physicians and nurses.

And we will continue to have a willingness to listen going forward, Madam Speaker, because we believe that improving the system is a goal that is shared by all who work in the system and a goal that is shared by all who need the services which they had to wait record lengths for under the previous administration. Madam Speaker: The honourable interim Leader of the Official Opposition, on a suppl ementary question. Ms.

Marcelino: Recent letters from both Doctors Manitoba and the Manitoba College of Family Physicians are both concerned that the changes the government is proposing will lead to less timely access to emergency care and the loss of access to family physicians. The government's response in a media statement is to tell doctors that they had their chance to provide comments. Madam Speaker, patients, workers, nurses and doctors are calling on this government to rethink their plans, focused only on the bottom line. Will the Premier today cancel his plans, go back to the drawing board and actually listen to Manitobans?

Mr. Pallister: Well, it's a puzzling question, Madam Speaker. The member refers to less timely care being a fear of some who work within the system, and yet it seems that the members opposite are trying to defend a system which resulted in the least timely care of any Canadian system. Across the country, from coast to coast, no Canadians had to endure longer waits in many categories–emergency health care, diagnostic testing, necessary surgeries, the worst wait lines in the country.

The members opposite had said for years–in fact, they borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars from the rainy day fund of our province, Madam Speaker, and said they were using it for wait times reduction when wait times were getting longer with every passing year. So, Madam Speaker –[interjection]–they commissioned the study– Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Pallister: –they refused to listen to the recommended advice. And, Madam Speaker, the difference between us is clearly this: they didn't have the courage to implement the recommendations and we do.

Madam Speaker: The honourable interim Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary. Ms. Marcelino: Madam Speaker, those statements need fact checking. Madam Speaker, the closure of three emergency rooms is of concern to us and many people who provide and receive services at those facilities, and, for those facilities that remain, we're concerned that they may not be provided with the necessary resources to keep up with greater need and more and more acute demand. Those weren't our words, Madam Speaker. They are the words of Dr. Barbara Kelleher, president of Doctors Manitoba.

1524 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 The Premier needs to cancel his plans, focus only on the bottom line and actually draw up a plan focused on patient care. Will the Premier do that today? Mr. Pallister: Madam Speaker, again, now as opposition, the NDP is forced to defend the system which they created, a system which was the worst in Canada, the most broken in Canada. The member asked about fact checking.

She challenges the facts presented to us and to the previous government by the Canadian Institute for Health Information, which noted that Manitoba's wait times for emergency services are double the national average and, in many cases, exceed six hours. They also noted, Madam Speaker, that our wait times for many areas of diagnosis and treatment were the longest in Canada, and yet they failed to act. They failed to act because they lacked the courage to act. We do not lack that courage. We will act.

We understand that change is difficult, it's difficult for all of us, but the status quo is not good enough and we will make the system work better for Manitobans. Emergency Room Closures Impact on Patient Care Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): It's now becoming clear that this government decided to take an axe to the health -care system without checking first who would be hurt. It's also clear that this government failed to adequately consult with front -line workers before chopping emergency rooms and QuickCare –sorry, urgent-care centres in our communities.

They say that this is a cut –this is the nurses – they say this is a cut and that they are disappointed because, quote, they were promised by this Premier (Mr. Pallister) that they –that he wouldn't cut front-line services. So, they have no real plans for immediate investment in the remaining ERs and the nurses say that this will cause chaos and confusion. Madam Speaker, will the minister admit his mistake, listen to our front-line workers– Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired. Hon.

Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living): Madam Speaker, many inaccuracies in the statements by the member, continuing a pattern of inaccuracy. We've indicated, of course, there are more resour ces going into the expanded emergency room at the Grace Hospital, so he was wrong on that account. There certainly was consultations with Doctors Manitoba in the lead up to the Peachey report. They were part of the steering committee, so he was wrong on that account. And, of course, the member opposite, along with the interim leader, says that we need to go back to the drawing board.

Well, the drawing board was their drawing board, is the Peachey report which they commissioned, Madam Speaker. Madam Spea ker: The honourable member for Concordia, on a supplementary question. Mr. Wiebe: Madam Speaker, the fact is that this government clearly failed to meaningfully consult with doctors before deciding to wield the axe to the health-care system. Doctors Manit oba says this plan could have, quote, serious consequences for patients and it will increase the burden on doctors. They say–see that cuts will negatively affect patient care.

Why didn't the minister work with the people who know our health- care system best before he eliminated emergency care for half the city? Mr. Goertzen : Madam Speaker, the member opposite again ignores the fact Doctors Manitoba was part of the steering committee when it came to the Peachey report. They certainly were consulted under the NDP when the NDP consulted or commissioned the Peachey report. He fails to add up the cost for those who are waiting in the system for hours at a time in emergency rooms.

He doesn't seem to care about the fact that many Manitobans have been waitin g for five, six, seven, eight hours over the last 17 years of the NDP government for care. * (14:00) He fails to acknowledge, as Dr. Brock Wright did today in responding to Doctors Manitoba, that they don't anticipate any reduction in the physician positions in emergency or critical care. He should get his facts straight, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Concordia, on a final supplementary.

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1525 Mr. Wiebe: Madam Speaker, it's clear that this Health Minister wasn't interested in listening to front-line workers and he's only listening to those health-care experts and ignoring others, only choosing those that fit his particular narrative. Dr. Alan Katz, for instance, of the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy says, quote, he just doesn't see the government being able to meet targets without cutting front-line jobs. Why isn't the minister being clear with front-line workers about their future and about the future of our health-care system? Mr.

Goertzen: Madam Speaker, I assume–although, perhaps, the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger) could confirm it–that one of the reasons the Selinge r government commissioned the Peachey report is because their previous strategies hadn't worked. In fact, in 2013 the NDP released five wait -time targets that they were going to try to meet in terms of reducing the amount of time that individuals waited in hospitals. After that, after two years, in 2015 they came forward and they acknowledged that they wouldn't be able to meet any of their targets. That was after putting more than $100 million into the ER system.

They failed. We'll deliver, Madam Speaker. Emergency Room Closures Impact on Patient Care Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns ): This Pallister government is focused on the bottom line and not on Manitoba patient care. The Premier and Health Minister are not listening to Manitoba front -line health-care providers who have real concerns about this government's plans. Dr. Deirdre O'Flaherty from the Manitoba College of Family Physicians affirms these ill-thought-out changes, and I quote: undermine family doctors, jeopardizing their ability to provide continuous care to all patients in all communities.

Clearly, this Pallister government is unwilling and unable to listen to us. Will they at least listen to Manitoba doctors and nurses who have real concerns about this government's plan for patient care? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Madam Speaker, I have had dozens of communications sent to me from patients, from physicians, from workers, nurses in the health-care system over the last year. And I can tell you that there is a shared concern about t he inability of the system, as it was constructed and as it was maintained by the previous administration, to make available to people, in a timely manner, care.

Madam Speaker, I have had a lady write to me with 40 years of nursing under her belt and tell me about an 11- and-a-half-hour wait with her mother at an ER without a blanket to be put on that lady while she w as waiting. And I can tell you that no one is more motivated than the members of this government to stop the system from shortchanging Manitobans who need care and who are vulnerable. When people in our province need our help, Madam Speaker, we will not run away, as the previous government did, and hide. We will step up and we will do our part. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St.

Johns, on a supplementary question. Ms. Fontaine: Day in and day out the Premier and the Health Minister provide us with a distorted narrative on hearing from and consulting with front-line workers, when, in fact, it is the absolute antithesis to this when the Pallister government simply charges ahead like a bull in a china shop regardless of what Manitoba front -line doctors and nurses say.

Doctors Manitoba and the Manitoba College of Family Physicians –let us be clear, the experts in health care–have expressed real concerns about the effects of this government's plan for patient care, noting, for instance, patients who will be most hurt are our most vulnerable citizens. Will the Health Minister just start over and begin by talking with front-line doctors and nurses? Mr. Pallister: Sadly, Madam Speaker, the member's question continues on the theme of fear mongering among Manitobans, encouraging fear, and fears are a natural emotion when change is in the offing.

I accept that and I understand that, but I don't see it as a strength of character to multiply and amplify the fears of the people around me. I think that Manitobans deserve to feel confident that their health-care system can provide the care they deserve, and it has not done so, and it will in the future. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, on a final supplementary. Ms.

Fontaine: When the Pallister government announced its misguided plan to cut emergency rooms, it tried to justify it by saying that most patients don't have real emergencies and Manitobans will just have to self-diagnose to figure out what's an

1526 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 emergency and what's not. The reality is that tens of thousands of patients have urgent health concerns requiring real care that can't wait to make it for a doctor's appointment. In a recent letter, Dr. Barbara Kelleher from Doctors Manitoba explains her deep concern the remaining hospitals will simply not be able–provided with the investments and resources needed to meet the exponential increase in demand for health -care services. Will the minister cancel this ill -thought-out, hurried plan– Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired. Mr.

Pallister: The mem ber references a plan which was misguided. The plan was designed in consultation with Manitoba professionals, caregivers, who listen to Manitobans in every respect. The plan was designed and presented to the previous government. What was misguided at that point –it was only in the fact it had no guide. Madam Speaker, we will guide this health -care system forward, because the member referred to real care that can't wait.

Manitobans can't wait for a system that stops making them wait so long; 600,000 hours plus last year alone Manitobans sat in waiting rooms in fear, in pain, waiting for care that might never arrive. Madam Speaker, that's not good enough for this government, and it shouldn't be good enough for the members opposite, either. Emergency Room Closures Request to Withdraw Plan Mr. James Allum (Fort Garry -Riverview): Patients, workers, nurses and now doctors have all expressed their concerns about the government's health-care plans. Government is throwing our health-care system into chaos.

The minister's own words are that this health-care plan is going to cause considerable disruption all across the system. The government has rushed its plans, and it's only interested in the – [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Allum: –bottom line. So will the Premier do the right thing today: Will he withdraw this botched plan, right here, right now, today? [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living): Well, Madam Speaker, that's true.

We have said, and health professionals have said, there will be disruption to the system, as there is with change. That is accurate. But the member fails to talk about what a disruption it is for a mother who brings a child to an ER and has to wait for 10 hours for that young child to be seen. He fails to talk about the disruption on the life of a daughter who brings their mother to an ER to be seen and it takes seven hours before they get into an ER. That is the disruption we're most worried about, Madam Speaker.

And if he doesn't want us to disrupt that, well, that's something he can defend, but we certainly are going to try to disrupt that and bring real care to Manitobans. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Garry-Riverview, on a supplementary question. Mr. Allum: Madam Speaker, more than a year ago, the government members were on the doorsteps of Manitobans saying that they would protect front -line services and protect front-line workers. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Allum: And instead– Madam Speaker: Order. Mr.

Allum: And instead, what we have is a government who is disrespecting the constitutional rights of workers to collectively negotiate their contracts. He's putting in–their government is putting into question the programs and health -care– [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Allum: –services that they rely on. So I'm going to ask the Premier, again–he's –the minister's already said that this plan will cause considerable disruption all across the system: Why doesn't it–just simply admit this is a botched plan and it needs to be withdrawn right now? Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, there you have it, Madam Speaker. It's no longer a defence of Manitobans who need care. They can't offer up any kind of criticism in respect of anything that is of substance i n regard to our willingness to move forward and shorten wait times, so now it's all about

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1527 protecting the system itself as it existed under the previous government. * (14:10) That defines the status quo, Madam Speaker. The status quo is not good enough. But what would you expect from a party who's just solidified its position as the only party in Canada, the only political party, that actually gives control over its leadership process to three or four public sector union bosses? Madam Speaker, that's what the member is doing.

He's defending the status quo of a desire not to protect patients, not to give care to people, not to provide shorter wait times for diagnosis or treatment or emergency services, but rather to protect his own petty, vested interests. And, Madam Speaker, that's not what this government's about. We're about providing better care sooner to Manitobans who need it. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Garry-Riverview, on a final supplementary. Mr. Allum: Well, Madam Speaker, the Premier's interested in defending one status quo and that's the status quo from the 1990s, and we don't want that anymore.

But, you know, this Premier talks a lot about – the Premier talks a lot about having courage – [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Allum: He talks a lot about having courage. We know that nurses are having an AGM today, and we know also–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Allum: –that they're going to gather on the steps of the Legislature tomorrow. So, will he have the courage to step outside tomorrow and defend his actions to cause considerable disruption in this health-care system, or will he do what he always does: put his hands in his pockets, shrug his shoulders and say there's nothing he can do?

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Order. The Speaker has been standing for some time now and there are still conversations that are happening. I would remind everybody that when the Speaker stands, there is to be silence. Mr. Goertze n: Madam Speaker, the good news is the member won't need to bring a bullhorn to the rally tomorrow; he can just simply speak to them in the way that he spoke in the House today. Madam Speaker, but we respect the right of nurses and others, of course, to gather here at the Legislature and to bring forward their views.

But what he forget, of course, is we're not just thinking about them; we're thinking about those who are waiting in an ER, waiting for service–[interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Mr. Goertzen: Madam Speaker, we continue to think about those who are waiting in the emergency rooms, waiting for hours at a time. And I know the member doesn't want to defend them. He doesn't want to defend those patients who need care. He doesn't want to help those who've waited for hours. We're going to defend them and we will always defend them, Madam Speaker. Emergency Room Closures Impact on Patient Care Mr.

Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): How on earth does it make sense, in this government's bizarre version of logic, for communities in the suburbs of Winnipeg to lose their emergency rooms, to have those replaced with urgent-care centres, but for the inner city to lose its urgent-care centre? Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living ): I recognize that, Madam Speaker, the member opposite wasn't a Cabinet member in the Selinger government when they commissioned the Peachey report, but he certainly has access to it now; it's online.

The access to the Peachey report would give him the information that Winnipeg is an outlier when it comes to the number of emergency rooms it has compared to cities that are much larger like Vancouver or like Calgary or like Ottawa. It's about making the system more efficient and ensuring that people get patient care, real care when they need it. I would hope he'd be onboard with that, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Wolseley, on a supplementary question. Mr. Altemeyer: Madam Speaker, my constituents would be very happy to be able to access care under

1528 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 this government's plan, but I don't see, and they don't see, and the workers and the doctors and the nurses do not see, how that could possibly happen. This minister closed the closest QuickCare clinic to my community. This governm ent is now closing the urgent-care centre, which is a model supposed to help people stay out of the ERs and get care at the appropriate level. Where does he think 40,000 people from the inner city are going to go when their urgent -care system disappears?

They're going to go down the street to the Health Sciences Centre ER, the very place he's trying to help the wait times. Mr. Goertzen: If the member opposite would listen to the doctors, the very doctors that he purports aren't being listened to, he would've heard the doctors say that the majority of individuals who are going to the urgent-care centre at Misericordia are coming from different parts of the city, Madam Speaker. They're coming in from the south, and they're coming in from the north.

They will certainly be able to access the additional urgent-care centres in the south and in the north, but overall, they'll have a system that works better, a system that didn't work for the past 17 years, that left people waiting for five, six, seven, eight hours. Maybe he's getting letters into his constituency office, people saying nothing should change. But that's not the letters I'm getting, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Wolseley, on a final supplementary. Mr. Altemeyer: I think in that answer, Madam Speaker, it is very clear that this minister and this government have a bias.

They simply do not see the illogical steps that they are taking with this flawed, flawed plan. I would invite the minister to imagine, if he can, that not only did he not get a 20 per cent salary increase, but that he is actually a low -income person living anywhere in the core area and he feels he needs urgent medical assistance. If the closest facility is now an emergency room, where would he take himself? Where would he take his loved ones to get urgent care? Mr. Goertzen: Well, Madam Speaker, the plan that the member refers to as ill ogical is actually a plan that was created by the Selinger government.

Now, I know he created a solidarity pledge. He wanted everybody to be onside in the NDP. Perhaps he would like to speak to the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger) and determine wh y it is that he doesn't like the plan that the member for St. Boniface and the Selinger government came up with, Madam Speaker. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Legislative Session Voting on Bills Hon. Jon Gerrard (River H eights): Madam Speaker, my questions today are about waste and eliminating waste.

Last night, Liberals supported the principle of Bill 22, to reduce waste, extra paperwork and red tape, by voting for it at second reading. In contrast, the NDP voted against it. We also note that the NDP last night rang the bells for nine hours. Sadly, it was essentially a waste of nine hours which could have been used more productively. Will the government help us send a message – [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Gerrard: –to the NDP to stop wasting people's time ringing bells when there's little to be gained from it? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Madam Speaker: Order. Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, perhaps the member would stop wasting Manitobans' time by defending every move that Ottawa makes and the federal government makes and start using his time more effectively in standing up for Manitobans on issues that matter to Manitobans. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for River Heights, on a supplementary question. Tuition Fee Tax Rebate Effectiveness of Rebate Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, my colleagues and I work hard every day on behalf of Manitobans. In my second question, I expand on the issue of waste with respect to the recent budget. The

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1529 recent budget eliminated the tuition rebate for post-secondary education students, calling it ineffective and wasteful. The government claimed that it was waste and not effective, but I will, in my next supplementary question, table evidence which says it was effective. Would the Premier admit that if the tuition rebate was shown to be an effective measure, it would be a waste to get rid of it? Hon.

Brian Pallister (Premier): Madam Speaker, when we had the opportunity, as Manitoba's new government, to stand up for Manitoba's best interests, the interests of seniors, in respect of the CPP discussion and the negotiations with the federal government, we took that opportunity a nd led the charge on a better CPP for our seniors while the members opposite sat on their hands and did nothing.

When we had the opportunity to stand up for Manitobans who deserved to not lose half a billion dollars in health transfers over the next decad e, the members opposite sat on their hands and did nothing, including the member opposite, who was part of a government that made the largest cut to health -care supports in Manitoba history when he was in Ottawa with the Liberal government then. * (14:20) And, finally, Madam Speaker, when we had the opportunity to stand up for refugees seeking a home of hope in our beautiful province, in our beautiful country, we took the lead in working with other provinces to have unanimous support, calling on the federal government to do its part while the members opposite, again, sat on their hands.

I see a pattern 'emergening' –emerging here, Madam Speaker: the member opposite represents Ottawa to Manitoba. We here on this side of the House will represent the views of Manitobans in all discussions with other governments. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for River Heights, on a final supplementary. Mr. Gerrard: Madam Speaker, if it is effective the tuition rebate is not waste to be eliminated, but a treasure to be continued. In the seven years leading up to 2007, Manitoba's population increased by an average of 6,000 people per year.

After the tuition rebate was implemented, in the nine years from 2008 to the present, Manitoba's population increased an average of 14,300 people per year. I table the evidence. It may have been one of the most successful measures to tell young people that Manitoba is a great place to be. I ask the Premier: Why did he break his promise not to increase taxes by ending the successful tuition fee rebate? [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Mr. Pallister: The member speaks of evidence.

He would be aware, if he chose to do the research, Madam Speaker, that high school graduation rates among indigenous young people in our province have declined in the last number of years. He would be aware also that university graduation success rates have declined among our most vulnerable population. He would also be aware, if he was choosing to do objective, empirical data – consult empirical data, that out -migration rates in this province have increased under the previous administration and are now the largest in Canada.

Madam Speaker, each of these statistics supports the contention that there's a better way. We're pursuing the better way. Recycling Initiatives Expansion of Services Mr. Nic Curry (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, o n Saturday, April 22nd, it was international Earth Day. My family and I spent the afternoon in Kildonan Park in the heart of my riding. I was pleased to see that the government made an exciting announcement this morning regarding recycling in Manitoba, near and dear to my heart. My home recycling is a family effort and our blue bin is almost always full.

We believe it is an easy way to ensure that we keep our environment b eautiful and healthy not just for today, but for tomorrow, especially for my new child that is three –almost three weeks old. I know–[interjection] Can the Minister of Sustainable Development provide more information on today's wonderful recycling announcement? Hon. Cathy Cox (Minister of Sustainable Development): I'd like to thank our member on this side of the House for that excellent question today. Our government has decided to empower our recycling organizations in Manitoba to become more efficient regulators of recycling services.

The status quo is not good enough for this government, and I am pleased to announce that we will be one of the

1530 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 first provinces in Canada to expand recycling services to industrial, commercial and institutional buildings, and, also, expand throughout our parks to campgrounds and campground owners. By expanding recycling services to these facilities and parks, we will dive rt significantly more recyclables from landfills and contribute to a cleaner environment. Manitobans want to do their part and they are proud–and we are proud to expand recycling initiatives so Manitobans can recycle everywhere. We are– Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired.

Changes to Health-Care Services Impact on Front-Line Workers Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): If there was a prize for breaking promises this government would win it. They promised to protect front -line services; they broke that promise. They promised to protect jobs of front-line workers; they broke that promise. The health-care system has been thrown into chaos by this government. This government's scheme focusses on one thing and one thing only, and that's the bottom line. Madam Speaker, will the Health Minister admit his scheme is a total failure and should be halted immediately? Hon.

Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living ): Madam Speaker, I'm surprised at the member opposite. Although I know he's a new member and I–he's been an addition to the House–I won't qualify what kind of an addition, but he's been an addition to the House. I'm shocked that he would suggest that the plan by the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger) under the Selinger government is a scheme. I think that's dangerously close to unparliamentary. He shouldn't reflect on the plan by the member for St. Boniface in such a negative way.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Flin Flon, on a supplementary question. Mr. Lind sey: The Health Minister has shown total disdain for front -line health -care workers. He's ignored them in launching a misguided scheme to cut health-care services. Front-line workers are doing the best they can do. But how can they continue while this government shows it doesn't have their back? Doctors, nurses, health- care aides, technicians don't know what their future will be under this government's scheme. That's because this government is only concerned with the bottom line.

Madam Speaker, will t he Health Minister stand up today, do the right thing, apologize for the chaos and confusion he's bringing to our health- care system? Mr. Goertzen: Madam Speaker, the question by the member, my friend from Flin Flon, was revealing because he listed a num ber of different groups, but he didn't list patients. He never mentioned patients in his question. That's very revealing that the members opposite–they've done a lot of things today, but they haven't actually represented patients. They don't seem to be c oncerned about those long wait times in the ERs.

They don't seem to be concerned about the mother who brings in a child and has to wait her eight to 10 years. I thank him for that question because he's revealed what this opposition, the NDP, care about, and it isn't patients, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Flin Flon, on a final supplementary. Mr. Lindsey: Unfortunately, this government doesn't grasp t he concept that protecting front -line workers and front-line services does protect patients. Madam Speaker, with the chaos that this government has introduced, they need to stop.

Will the Premier apologize for breaking his promise to workers that he would protect their jobs and protect and respect their workplaces? Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I appreciate the question the member has asked. He mentions if there was a prize for that we would get it. Well, Madam Speaker, if there was a prize for rhetoric he'd be in contention for that. If there was a prize for raising taxes his government would certainly get the first -place ribbon. And if there was a prize for failing Manitoba patients on health care they would get the last-place orange ribbon.

Seven Oaks Hospital Emergency Room Closure Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): My question is not to the Minister for Crown Services. Relax. If this government had the best interest of families in mind, why was Seven Oaks' emergency room cut?

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1531 Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living ): Madam Speaker, I'm going to do something that I would admit is rare for me. I will take the word of the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Selinger) and the former Selinger government. I assume that t he reason they commissioned the Peachey report was because they thought it would better care, including for the residents of the member who asked the question. I assume that the Selinger government thought that the Peachey report was something that would be valuable for the system.

I assume that the Selinger government thought it would improve patient care. Now, maybe I shouldn't be making the assumptions and defending the Selinger government. Maybe I'll never do it again. But, in this case, I think it's appropriate, Madam Speaker. * (14:30) Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Tyndall Park, on a supplementary question. Mr. Marcelino: Madam Speaker, I think the cut of the ER at Seven Oaks is a done deal. So, my next question is this: How can an extr a 16 minutes travel time to Health Sciences Centre– [interjection] Madam Speaker: Order. Order. Mr.

Marcelino: How can 16 minutes travel time to the Health Sciences Centre from The Maples be something that's helpful to my community? Mr. Goertzen : Madam Speaker, I do respect the member opposite, and I respect his question. I know that he is asking it on behalf of his constituents, and I appreciate that. I know what it's like to be in opposition, and he has a role and responsibility to ask questions on behalf of his constituents, and I applaud him for that.

And I would say to his constituents, the ones that are asking him this question, that the extra 16 minutes will be particularly helpful when you don't have to wait seven hours to get service, Madam Speaker. There is no point –there is no point –in having an emergency room five minutes from you when it takes eight hours to get service. I would tell him he should bring that back to his constituents. But I appreciate he's asking this in the best–in–with all good faith on behalf of his constituents, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired. PETITIONS Taxi Industry Regulation Mr.

Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background of the petition is as follows:

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

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

(3) Regulations have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting the safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras. The regulated taxi industry also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, including a stringent complaint system.

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

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

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

(8) The proposed legislation also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as been –what has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pricing, not providing ser vice to some areas of the city and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety. We petition , Madam Speaker, the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provinc ial government to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. And this petition's signed by many Manitobans.

1532 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 Madam Speaker: In accordance with our rule 133(6), when petitions are read, they are deemed to be received by the House. Concordia Hospital Emergency Room Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And t he background to this petition is as follows:

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

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

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

(4) These cuts will place a heavy burden on the many seniors who live in northeast Winnipeg and visit the eme rgency room frequently, especially for those who are unable to drive or are low income.

(5) The provincial government failed to consult with families and seniors in northeast Winnipeg regarding the closure of their emergency room or to consult with house –health official –sorry, health officials and health -care workers at Concordia to discuss how this closure would impact patient care in advance of the announcement.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to reverse the decision to close Concordia Hospital's emergency room so that families and seniors in northeast Winnipeg and the surrounding areas have timely access to quality health-care services. And this petition is signed by many Manitobans. Taxi Industry Regulation Mr. Greg Selinger (St. Boniface): I wish to present the following position–petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: The taxi industry in Winnipeg provides an important service to all Manitobans.

The taxi industry is regulated to ensure that there are both the provision of taxi service and a fair and affordable fare structure. Regulations have been put in place that has made Winnipeg a leader in protecting the safety of taxi drivers through the installation of shields and cameras. The regulated taxi system also has significant measures in place to protect passengers, including a stringent complaint system. The provincial government has moved to bring in legislation through Bill 30 that will transfer jurisdiction to the City of Winnipeg in order to bring in so-called ride-sharing services like Uber.

There were no consultations with the taxi industry prior to the introduction of this bill. The introduction of this bill jeopardizes safety, taxi service and also puts consumers at risk, as well as the livelihood of hundreds of Manitobans, many of whom have invested their life savings in the industry. The proposed l egislation also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as what has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pricing, not providing service to some areas of the city and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and patient safety.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. Signed by many, many Manitobans. Thank you. Kelvin High School Gymnasium and Wellness Centre Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

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

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1533

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

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

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

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

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

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

(8) It is wasteful and disrespectful to the dedicated efforts of students, staff and the community in general to simply lay their goals aside without consultation. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to recognize the need for excellent recreation facilities in all Manitoba schools, to reverse this regressive cut and to provide Kelvin High School with the funding necessary to complete a new gymnasium and wellness centre. This petition, Madam Speaker, is signed by many Manitobans. Thank you. Neighbourhoods Alive! Funding Mr.

Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) Since 2001, the Neighbourhoods Alive! program has supported stronger neighbourhoods and communities in Manitoba.

(2) Neighbourhoods Alive! uses a commu - nity-led development model that partners with neighbourhood renewal corporations on projects that aim to revitalize communities.

(3) Neighbourhoods Alive! and the neighbour - hood renewal corporations it supports have played a vital and important role in revitalizing many neighbourhoods in Manitoba through commu - nity-driven solutions, including: employ ment and training; education and recreation ; safety and crime prevention; and housing and physical improvements.

(4) Neighbourhoods Alive! now serves 13 neighbourhood renewal corporations across Manitoba which have developed expertise in engaging with their local residents and determining the priorities of their communities. * (14:40)

(5) The provincial government's previous investments into Neighbourhoods Alive! have been bolstered by community and corporate donations as well as essential support from community volunteers, small businesses and local agencies.

(6) Late in 2016, the minister responsible for the Neighbourhoods Alive! program said new funding for initiatives was, quote, paused, end quote, and that the future of the Neighbourhoods Alive! program was being , quote, reviewed, end quote, bringing hundreds of community projects to a standstill.

(7) Neighbourhood renewal corporations and their communities are concerned this funding freeze is the first step in a slow phase -out of the Neighbourhoods Alive! grant program, which would have severe negative impacts on families and communities.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: That the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba be urged to support the Neighbourhoods Alive! program and the communities served by neighbourhood renewal corporations by continuing to pr ovide consistent core funding for existing neighbourhood renewal corporations and enhancing the public funding available for specific initiatives. Thank you, Madam Speaker. High School Recreation Facilities Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

1534 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 Manitobans recognize how important it is to provide young people with quality learning spaces to succeed in school. Sport, recreation and the spaces to engage in them are critical to the physical, mental and social welfare of students. Kelvin High School and Dakota college have both spent several years raising money toward the construction of a new gymnasium and wellness centre and a new sports field, respectively. Kelvin High School is one of the largest high schools in the province, with over 1,200 students.

Some Kelvin students currently have to pay to use outside facilities to obtain their mandatory physical education credit. Likewise, Dakota's varsity teams have been forced to play elsewhere because of the negative condition of its playing field. Football and soccer teams at Dakota college must put the project out to tender and break ground in a matter of months for the field to be completed for this coming school year. The provincial government is a regressive and short-sighted move, cancelled funding for both projects for political reasons despite the extensive community support, fundraising and engagement.

We petition th e Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to recognize the tireless efforts of Kelvin High School and Dakota Collegiate, to recognize the need for excellent recreation facilities in all Manitoba schools, to reverse this regressive cut to Manitoba schools, and to provide both schools with the funding necessary to complete the new Kelvin High School gymnasium and the Dakota college field of dreams. And this petition, Madam Speaker, has been signed by many, many Manitobans. Taxi Industry Regulation Ms.

Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wab Kinew (Fort Rouge): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

(1) Since 2001, the Neighbourhoods Alive! program has supported stronger neighbourhoods and communities in Manitoba.

(2) Neighbourhoods Alive! uses a commu - nity-led development model that partners with neighbourhood renewal corporations on projects that aim to revitalize communities.

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1535

(3) Neighbourhoods Alive! and the neighbour - hood renewal corporations it supports have played a vital and important role in revitalizing many neighbourhoods in Manitoba through commu - nity-driven solutions, including employment a nd training, education and recreation, safety and crime prevention, and housing and physical improvements.

(4) Neighb ourhoods Alive! now serves 13 neighbourhood renewal corporations across Manitoba which have developed expertise in engaging with their loc al residents and determining the priorities of their communities.

(5) The provincial government's previous investments into Neighbourhoods Alive! have been bolstered by community and corporate donations as well as essential support from community volunteers, small business and local agencies.

(6) Late in 2016, the minister responsible for the Neighbourhoods Alive! program said new funding for initiatives was paused and that the future of the Neighbourhoods Alive! program was being reviewed, bringing hundreds of community projects to a standstill.

(7) Neighbourhood renewal corporations and their communities are concerned this funding freeze is the first step in a slow phase -out of the Neighbourhoods Alive! grant program, which would have severe negative impacts on families and communities.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: That the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba be urged to support the Neighbourhoods Alive! program and the communities served by neighbourhood renewal corporations by continuing to provide consistent core funding for existing neighbourhood renewal corporations and enhancing the public funding available for specific initiatives. And t his petition was signed by Joan Wilson-DeLorme, Sandy Dzedzora and Edward Cloud, as well as many other Manitobans. Provincial Nominee Program Ms.

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

(1) The provincial government has proposed regressive changes to the Provincial Nominee Program that create financial and social barriers for newcomers.

(2) Starting this year, successful provincial nominees must pay a $500 fee as part of their application, adding to the financial burden of applicants.

(3) While the provincial government's stated justification for the fee is that it will be reinvested into language -support programs, the PNP already requires nominees to have proven English- or French-language skills.

(4) The provincial government is also changing its criteria from selecting nominees with family and community connections in Manitoba to an employer-driven focus that will only select nominees with approved job offers from established employers.

(5) The shift in focus jeopardizes the PNP's successful 86 per cent retention rate as, without family or community ties, nominees will move to other provinces with larger job markets.

(6) This change provides employers with an incentive to select newcomers based on reduced cost, leaving nominees vulnerable to exploitation.

(7) The business community and the Manitoba Chambers of Commerce have made it clear that the PNP is a successful program, driving the economy with skilled workers.

(8) According to a report in 2014, 94 to 98 per cent of nominees reported employment earnings within the first year of arriving in Manitoba and had the second lowest unemployment rate among immigrants in Canada. * (14:50)

(9) Despite the wealth of economic and social benefits that newcomers bring to the province, the Premier cruelly portrayed them as a burden to society by inaccurately linking provincial nominees to high unemployment rates and social assistance. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to maintain the PNP's nomination criteria, to remove the $500 fee and to continue to invest in newcomers who build the province, drive the economy and promote diversity and inclusion in Manitoba. Signed by many, many Manitobans. Thank you.

1536 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 Taxi Industry Regulation Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(8) The proposed legi slation also puts the regulated framework at risk and could lead to issues such as what has been seen in other jurisdictions, including differential pricing, not providing service to some areas of the city, and significant risks in terms of taxi driver and passenger safety. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to withdraw its plans to deregulate the taxi industry, including withdrawing Bill 30. Signed by many Manitobans. Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jim Maloway (Official Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Logan (Ms. Marcelino) that in accordance with rule 38(1)–I better start that over. In accordance with rule 38(1), I move, seconded by the member for Logan, that the regularly scheduled business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely, that the United States of America has

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1537 imposed new tariffs of up to 24 per cent on Canadian softwood lumber exports. Manitoba's forest industry is facing an uncertain future and the se punitive duties will negatively impact an industry that directly and indirectly employs hundreds of Manitobans and generates millions of dollars of export business with the United States each year. We urge the provincial government to work with the federal government to protect Manitoba's forest sector by preventing job losses, investing in natural resource development and strengthening Manitoba's economy.

Madam Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), I should remind all members that under rule 38(2), the mover of a motion on a matter of urgent public importance and one member from the other recognized parties in the House are allowed not more than 10 minutes to explain the urgency of debating the matter immediately. As stated in Beauchesne's citation 390, urgency in this context means the urgency of immediate debate, not of the subject matter of the motion.

In their remarks, members should focus exclusively on whether or not there is urgency of debate and whether or not the ordinary opportunities for debate will enable the House to consider the matter early enough to ensure that the public interest will not suffer. Mr. Maloway: And, of course, this is certainly the first opportunity we've had to bring this matter before the House because I believe that it was only late last night that members of our caucus did hear that the President of the United States was instituting this tariff on the softwood lumber and, in fact, I believe that it is taking effect immediately.

Manitoba's forests play a crucial role in developing our economy and society and, in fact, it's very important in a number of constituencies in northern Manitoba. The forest –Manitoba's forest industry is the fifth largest manufacturing sector in the province. Approximately 9,000 people are employed directly by the forest industry. More than 2.6 million cubic metres of softwoods and 1.3 million cubic metres of hardwoods are currently allocated by agreements with forest product companies or through quotas to small forestry companies and individuals.

In addition, there's approximately 3 million cubic metres of unallocated softwood and hardwood of pro ductive quality, but much of that wood is in remote northern areas which do not have road access. Under the previous government, the government's three primary goals for the success of the forests were to protect the ecosystems throughout the province, increase the opportunities for Aboriginal communities and making Manitoba a leader in the promotion of a sustainable forest economy. * (15:00) In order to meet these goals, Madam Speaker, our strategy included five priorities for sustaining Manitoba's forests.

One was increasing the scientific and traditional knowledge of Manitoba's forests, enhancing forest stewardship, increasing employment, economic development and co-management opportunities for Aboriginal communities, and also promoting a sustainable forest economy and updating and improving legislation and guidelines. Now, Madam Speaker, in terms of the softwood lumber, Manitobans want to know if the Premier (Mr. Pallister) is going to stand up with the forest industry or if he's just simply going to hold up his hands.

The other provinces, for example, I believe Quebec–[interjection]–and I'll get to that in a minute, but the Quebec government is offering guaranteed loans as of today. This is, like, this happened last night, and already, today, t he Quebec government has acted. Quebec government is offering guaranteed loans to 178 companies to offset the actions of the Trump administration actions here and the Quebec government is also taking further steps to protect the forest industry employees a nd their families. Also, Madam Speaker, British Columbia has already decided to put pressure on the federal government.

British Columbia's political parties are vowing to fight the–for the forestry workers after the Trump administration announced they would impose a tariff of 20 per cent on Canadian softwood lumber. So the question really boils down to, we have two provinces who have acted within less than 24 hours, and we want to know what this government is doing. We've gone through a question period here. We've gone through most of the day. This government appears to be asleep at the switch.

1538 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 Madam Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader? [interjection] Oh, the honourable Minister of Health, Seniors and Active Living. Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Health , Seniors and Active Living ): I know we're speaking to the urgency of the issue, Madam Speaker, and when it comes to a MUPI there are a number of different requirements you, as the Speaker, need to consider, not the least of which being whether or not there are other opportunities to have the debate in the House. And I don't dispute with the member for Elmwood (Mr.

Maloway) that this is an important issue and I wouldn't take that away from him. Obviously, trade as it relates to many different issues in Canada and Manitoba is very important; that has been seen. And actions by our government, when it comes to signing the New West Partnership, which was not signed under the previous government, it's been seen in negotiations on trade between provinces in Canada.

But we also know that –and the member mentioned in his discussion–that the issue around the new President and trade policies from the new President do have an impact on Canada, and we all watch that closely, Madam Speaker. It is impor tant. It is an important issue. We've heard different discussions not just around softwood lumber, although that's the one the member mentions, but possible renegotiation of NAFTA, for example, has been talked about with the Trump administration. And we all have a concern in terms of our relationship, our trading relationship with the United States.

Clearly, we are friends and allies in every true sense of the word with our American friends, but there is more to consider than just being friends and allies. We are also partners. We are trade partners. One of the reasons I wanted to speak to whether or not this should be considered a MUPI is I have the opportunity to co- chair the international Canada -US relations committee as part of the midwest legislators conference. And the member will know –he's attended those meetings and others –that a great deal of the discussion that we have, time that we have within those committees is dedicated to trade.

In fact, we'll have an opportunity this summer in Des Moines, Iowa. We have the opportunity to–in Iowa–to discuss the issue of trade. We'll have the opportunity with our congressmen and with senators in the United States to discuss the issue of trade and tariffs, Madam Speaker. I think that that is an important issue. I think that I would not want to dismiss at all the concerns that the member raises. The issue, of course, is timing, and where is the best timing? So we'll have opportunity obviously at that conference, but I recognize that's a long time away. There are other opportunities.

Question period is often a time to pose these questions to the government. I know they have other questions. I received a few myself today, but there are questions that they could ask in terms of trade policies with the government. We are always more than willing to talk about not only the New West Partnership, which was signed, but also the great work that our minister of growth, economy and trade and our Premier (Mr. Pallister) have been doing in terms of the relationships between the provinces and getting a good, solid trading–internal trading agreement.

But I recognize that the international overlay of that and the different things that we are hearing from the Trump administration give many Canadians great concern about where that trading relationship is going. And we need to respond to that in a respectful but in a real way. It shouldn't be ignored. I acknowledge that, and I don't think it is being ignored by any member of this House, Madam Speaker. So, we do agree that it is an important issue; there's no question about that.

The question that does arise in terms of the parliamentary procedure that we have in the House is whether or not this fits the definition of a matter of urgent public importance, whet her or not this is not only the earliest opportunity which applies to different matters of procedure in the House, but whether or not it is the best opportunity, and whether or not the issue is so urgent that it should set aside other matters of the House. And I know there are other matters that are to be debated and discussed this afternoon.

Members opposite, I think, wanted to have a robust discussion on health policy in Health Estimates this afternoon. There are other departments that were lined up to speak as well, Madam Speaker. But I do want to acknowledge that the importance of the issue and the concerns that we hear out of the United States and from the Trump administration do concern all Canadians.

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1539 And I would think that our Prime Minister, along with other political parties in Ottawa, the official leader of the opposition, Rona Ambrose, along with the leader of the New Democratic Party in Parliament are all fully engaged in the issue to try to ensure that we maintain that strong trading partnership. All of us know that Canada truly is built on the issue of trade going back many years, and though that trade has changed in some ways in terms of value added and what is –what crosses the border, the relationship is as strong as ever.

I also know, Madam Speaker, that how the relationship has changed is important as well. We no longer just send one issue from this side of the border to the other side, but now there's often you'll have the same product which goes back and forth across the border as th ey get manufactured. I think it was described to me that it is more about working together as business partners as much as it is trading partners because we build things together between the United States and Canada. So, I appreciate the fact the member o f–from Elmwood has brought forward this important issue.

I think he's done it with all the right reasons, Madam Speaker, and I would say to him as well –and I hope in some ways this is a new member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) that we're seeing here today, because I know over the past 17 years when they were in government and in the 30 or so years that he's been in this Legislature, that trade has never been really the key issue for him. He'd never really pushed the issue of the Free Trade Agreement with wester n provinces strongly. He never pushed strongly in government internal trade agreements with other provinces. He spent a little bit of time in Ottawa.

I don't remember him speaking about many trade issues there. I know he spoke a bit about airline passenger bill of rights. And that airline passenger bill of rights would have been pretty high on the radar had he stayed in Ottawa over the last few weeks. * (15:10) But I don't remember that he really engaged in the issues of trade, Madam Speaker.

But I hope that this is the conversion on the road to something greater that the member opposite will now look to trade and look to the issues of trade as far more important Having said that, Madam Speaker, I would offer the advice to your good office that while t his is clearly an important issue and one that impacts all Manitobans and that would engage all Canadians, there are many different forms by which this particular issue could be debated that would be outside of a matter of privilege. There are opportunities such as question period, which we've just concluded.

There are opportunities of Estimates for the minister of growth, economy and trade by which this issue could be debated. Of course, there are public forums in which the issue can be discussed and debated. And my guess is the member opposite might be surprised. We would probably have great agreement on a number of the different issues around it, maybe not on every specific, but there would be vast agreement, I would hope, if he truly is now a free trader which he hasn't been for the vast majority of his career, Madam Speaker.

But if he is truly a free trader as he now purports to be, I think we would find many areas of agreement. But in terms of the definition of what a matter of urgent public importance truly is, Madam Speaker, I think that the member opposite, while well intended, has missed the mark here today. But I would encourage him. Tomorrow in question period–he can spend all of question period tomorrow asking issues of free trade.

I suspect m y colleague from –minister of growth, economy and trade might not be –appreciate me giving that suggestion, but he can spend all of question period tomorrow asking questions about trade, and he'll get all sorts of answers– [interjection]–all answers and responses. But if he chooses not to do that, then, I guess, we'll truly know whether or not the member has had a conversion when it comes to his views on trade.

So while I do very much appreciate the fact the member has raised this–and it is an important issue , none of us will dispute that–I don't believe that it fits the technical definition of a matter of urgent public importance, Madam Speaker. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Yes, Madam Speaker, I rise to speak briefly on this– Madam Speaker: The–I wou ld remind the honourable member that he would have to seek leave to speak to the MUPI. Mr. Gerrard: I ask leave to be able to speak on the MUPI.

1540 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 Madam Speaker: Could the member please restate it that he is speaking to the urgency of the issue. Mr. Gerrard: I rise to speak to the urgency of this issue. Madam Speaker: Is there leave for the member to speak to the urgency of the issue? [Agreed] Mr. Gerrard: Yes. Okay. Thank you. This is an issue of vital importance to us in Manitoba, and it is clearly urgent and it has come up very quickly and it needs to be addressed.

We can't stand by and just, you know, let this go unanswered without a major effort with the federal government and the provinces all working together. It is very timely. It needs to be addressed quickly, and I believe that we should have this debate on this matter of urgent public importance. Thank you. Madam Speaker: I thank honourable members for their advice to the Chair on whether the motion proposed by the honourable member for El mwood (Mr. Maloway) should be debated today.

I would note that notice of this matter required by rule 38(1) was provided, however, I must note that there were problems with the form of that notice. First, the document was not addressed to the Speaker. Second, it was not in the form of a letter explaining the member's intention, but rather was in the form of a motion. Third, the form of the motion itself was incorrect as motions should not contain extra information beyond the specific purpose of the motion. For future reference, I would encourage members to consult our table officers in advance on the proper form of a notice letter.

Under our rules and practices, the subject matter requiring urgent consideration must be so pressing that the public interest will suffer if the matter is not given immediate attention. There must also be no other reasonable opportunities to raise the matter. I do not doubt that this matter is one that is a serious concern to all members of the House, as trade matters with the United States of America are a key concern of Manitobans and of this Legislature.

However, I have listened very carefully to the arguments put forward and I was not persuaded that the ordinary business of the House should be set aside to deal with this issue today. I would note that there are other avenues for members to raise this issue, including questions in question period, raising the item under members' statements and grievances, as well as during the consideration of departmental Estimates in the Committee of Supply. Therefore, with the greatest of respect, I rule the motion out of order as a matter of urgent public importance. Grievances?

ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Hon. Andrew Micklefield (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, this afternoon I'd like to call Committee of Supply. Madam Speaker: The House will now resolve itself into Committee of Supply. Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) AGRICULTURE * (15:20) Mr. Chairperson (Dennis Smook): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply will now consider the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture. Does the honourable Minister of Agriculture have an opening statement? Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture): I do, Mr. Chair. Agriculture is one of the province's leading industries. Farm cash receipts are $6 billion and the agricultural sector employs almost 25,000 hard-working Manitobans.

With a focus on fixing our finances, repairing our services, rebuilding our economy by growing our livestock sector and driving value added, capitalizing on the world's demand for sustainable protein, reducing red tape and protecting our environment, we're well on our way to being the most improved province in all of Canada.

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1541 2017 Budget: Our goals are, with this budget, are simple: to accelerate growth in agriculture, agri-food and agriproducts sector; to increase competitiveness, sust ainability and adaptability of agricultural commodities. This includes growing the agri-food and agriproduct processing industries in Manitoba. The Livestock Growth Strategy: The livestock industry plays a significant role in the agricultural sector, Man itoba's economy and the potential for growth.

We have made it a priority in this budget to support livestock producers and growth in the livestock industry. As we focus on rebuilding our economy required a regulatory framework that protects our environment and reduces red tape. First, we want to assure Manitobans that livestock producers are responsible stewards of our land, and we are supportive of the Province's climate-change mandate. Growing our livestock sector will not change that. Our Livestock Growth Strategy focuses on three primary components growing segments of the industry.

A livestock engineer will work with producers to evaluate environmental risk and prepare for conditional -use applications improving productivity on agricultural Crow n lands. The department will sharpen its focus on furthering uptake and productivity. MASC will administer a proactive monitoring and complaint -driven investigation program. The Manitoba Beef and Forage Initiative is already making strides with collaborations between beef producers, researchers, the public sector and government to advance the beef and forage sector.

This Livestock Growth Strategy aligns with our government's commitment to be a world supplier of choice, sustainable protein, advance the agricultural sector and make Manitoba the most improved province. Under the Business Risk Management: Business Risk Management Program continues to be a primary focus in this budget, with over $90 million dedicated to a cost -sharing program with the fede ral government. This program helps producers mitigate risk at the farm level. Farmland School Tax Rebate: The full –the Farmland School Tax Rebate has seen an increase of $5 billion this year, for a total of $41 million.

This is reflective of the fact that in 2016 Manitoba farmland assessed values increased by 47 per cent, which has resulted in higher farmland property taxes and larger tax burden on farmers. School taxes on farmland alone increased by $17.8 million, or 28 per cent, in 2016. Innovation: Manitoba has a global focal point for the gains industry, and this budget includes continued funding for support from going forward 2 for research activities through the Grain Innovation Hub.

This funding will support research and development activities s uch as applied research projects undertaken at our crop- diversification centres. Research and innovation enhances the profitability and sustainability of Manitoba grain farms. Building Public Trust: Manitoba Agriculture is committing resources in this budget that assist agriculture and industry groups to work alongside government to increase trust in the food sector, including increasing transparency of industry practices and creating value- based dialogue with the public.

Capitalizing on existing activitie s will ensure complementary efforts, maximize resources and results. Consultations: We continue to demonstrate our commitment to transparency. I've held many industry consultations the past year, which has played a predominant role in informing federal-provincial-territorial discussions, a new policy framework and, most recently, agricultural producers' funding act. We have consulted with Manitobans, all farmers, on the changes to this legislation. We held an online survey in which we asked for their feedback and will see, based on our decisions, those results.

In closing, I am confident this budget provides the tools our sector needs to continue rebuilding our economy. This budget allows us to continue to rebuild our sector and achieve my mandate to grow the agricultural sector. It's an honour to present the 2017-18 budgetary Estimates for Manitoba Agriculture. This concludes my opening remarks, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister for those comments. Does the official opposition cri tic have any opening comments? Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): Yes. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Lindsey–or the honourable – the member for Flin Flon.

1542 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 Mr. Lindsey: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My opening comments will be relatively brief. First off, we need to be really clear that we on this side support our farmers and support their ability to feed the world. We need to make sure that in the process of supporting farmers and agriculture that we support the long-term sustainability of agriculture to make sure that the farmlands remain fertile for generations to come so that it's not growth now at any cost, but it's long- term sustainable growth that we need to make sure we're looking at.

We, of course, have concerns with how some things like carbon pricing may affect agriculture. We want to talk somewhat about food security. We want to focus some on food availability, particularly for people in the northern part of the province, that agriculture for them means a small garden plot or greenhouse at best. So we want to be able to make sure that the department has not forgotten them in the mix of things. With that, I think I'll conclude my opening remarks and will go on to questioning the minister. Mr. Chairperson: We thank the critic from the official opposition for those remarks.

Under Manitoba practice, debate on the minister's s alary is the last item considered for a department in Committee of Supply. Accordingly, we shall now defer consideration of line item 3.1.(

a) contained in resolution 3.1. At this time we invite the minister's staff to join us at the table and we ask that the minister introduce the staff in attendance. Mr. Eichler : I would like to introduce my deputy minister, Dori Gingera -Beauchemin; Leloni Scott is the assistant deputy m inister of Stewar dship and Assurance; Maurice Bouvier, assistant d eputy minister, Production and Economic Development; David Hunt, who's assistant deputy m inister of Policy and Transformation; and Ann Leibfried, executive financial officer; and Kim Beilby, acting executive director for Strategy Management.

And from the MASC Corporation we have Neil Hamilton, and Fern Comte, CFO. Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister for that, and we welcome the staff here. Does the committee wish to proceed through the Estimates of this department chronologically or have a global discussion? Mr. Lindsey: A global discussion. Mr. Chairperson: Global, is that agreed? [Agreed] Then it shall be in a global manner. The floor is now open for questions. Mr. Lindsey: Where to begin? Well, we can't talk about the minister's salary, so I guess we won't begin there. Let's talk about vacancy management within your department for a minute.

How many positions have you kept vacant for the 2017-18 year? * (15:30) Mr. Eichler : Staff is a key part of our administration, of course, delivering our programs, providing the services that every day farm families need. We are very proactive in making sure that any vacancies that become vacant, be it through retirement or moving on to other opport unities, we want to make sure we get those positions filled as quickly as possible. I don't know of a department in government or in business that doesn't have some form of vacancy.

But I would love to ensure the–my critic and the member opposite that we take any vacancy very seriously in order to make sure we get it filled as quickly as possible in order to help us be the most improved province in all of Canada. Mr. Lindsey: So how many positions are presently vacant within your department? Mr. Eichler: I thank the member for the question. We have 30 positions that are –at the current point, attempting to be filled. There's applications that are being submitted on those 30.

And there's 58 that have lapsed that have not yet to have action put on them to be filled at this point, but certainly working towards getting them filled. Mr. Lindsey: So just to clarify the numbers that you've just given me, there's 30 positions currently shown as being vacant and 58 more that have dropped off the radar that will remain vacant? Is that–? Mr. Eichler: The member is correct. There's 30 that's in the process of being filled, with 58.4 that's–that there's no action being taken on at this point in time, for a total of 88.4.

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1543 Mr. Lindsey: So is that number greater than it was last year? Less than? Equal to? Mr. Eichler: It's less than last year. Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that answer. So your plan is to fill, presently –or attempt to fill, 30 of those positions and leave the other 58.4 vacant for the coming year. Is that just for the coming year, or do you see that number going up in the years goi ng forward, or staying the same, or going down? Mr.

Eichler: May 3rd of last year I got sworn into this position and I had the opportunity of attending the graduation at the University of Manitoba, and I'd love to share with the member that every one of those graduates got jobs in agriculture. And agriculture is up and coming and always has been one of the most sustainable departments in the government, and it's not easy to fill a lot of these positions. But of the 30 that I mentioned, those applications are out and we're receiving applications on them as we go forward.

The process can be somewhat cumbersome: time you advertise, time you get the application in, and then get them filled takes some time. The other 58.4 are also very important. We're in the process of taking the next steps in order to fill them as well. So in total, our goal is to have all those positions filled going forward. But, having said that, as we know, we'll have other vacancies come through retirement. I know my critic knows this very well, as well, is that we're in the baby-boom times.

And there's a lot of people that will be retiring that want to do other things than just work for government, that want to seek other retirement plans and have that opportunity to be able to travel and enjoy their life. So we anticipate we'll continue to have staff turnover, but I also can tell you that I had five retirements been sent in to my department asking to extend their retirement date, so I'm elated that a number of colleagues decided the y want to hold off on some of their retirement. So we're certainly happy about that, but we work very hard to achieve the vacant positions to be filled quite soon.

But it does take time. Mr. Lindsey: So, as a budgetary item, there's a certain number that is included in your calculations that will be vacant year over year. What is that number that's in your budget? Mr. Eichler: On page 13 of your Estimates books –I think you have it there –if you look at second- last line, allowance for staff turnover is $2.318 million, which represents 17–seven per cent vacancy rate, is which we were allowing for for Budget '17-18. Mr. Lindsey: So is that number consistent with what it would have been for last year's budget, or greater, less than, again? Mr.

Eichler: While we're getting at that answer for my critic, I would –in trying to be as efficient as we possibly can, and we know we are going global –but we did bring our staff in from MASC from Portage. So I'm not sure how long you had planned to do Estimates, but if you have MASC questions, if we could maybe try to do those today, that would be helpful. * (15:40) But if not, I'm certainly fine with that as well. We're just trying to make sure we save some money, if you have an opportunity to do that, but if you want to hold them over for tomorrow too, we're fine with that as well. Mr.

Lindsey: I believe those questions may get held over until tomorrow. Sorry that it may cause people to have to travel a little more, but–[interjection] Okay. Just while we're getting that answer, can the minister or his department characterize what those vacant positions are? Mr. Eichler: In response to the overall variance between the previous year and this year, at this point in time, as the member well knows, there's fluctuations from month to month. But, at this point in this month, at this time, is $140,000 more in vacant positions than last–the year before. Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that.

So the next question that I'd asked was kind of what those positions that are vacant are. Mr. Eichler: All the departments are very important to us in the Department of Agriculture, and we couldn't pick one that would be standing out over the other, because they're all very important. But food safety, animal safety is very important to us, whether it be plant protein, animal protein; those are our priorities, if we have to narrow one down more than the other. Certainly, all of them are a priority for us, as we try and fill them as quickly as possible. Mr.

Lindsey: I understand that food safety and animal safety are important, but could you be more

1544 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 specific as to which positions are presently sitting empty? Mr. Eichler: We have six positions in food safety. In food processing and meat inspection, we have one. We ha ve food safety officer, another one. Actually, there's three in food safety. And in the manager of the vet and diagnostic services–is also open, for a total of six. Mr. Lindsey: Okay, so that talks about six positions that are vacant, but you talked about 88 positions that are vacant. Where are all the rest of those positions? Mr.

Eichler: We'd be happy to read that list off for you, if you want to go down each one. Is that what you like to do? Mr. Lindsey: Well, I think it'd be interesting to see where the vacancies are, for sure. Mr. Eichler: Sure, would be happy to read those out and onto the record. Mr. Lindsey: Perhaps the minister could table that list as well. * (15:50) Mr. Eichler: In Administration and Finance, there's 14 in total. In policy and agri -innovation, there's 17. In Agri -Industry Development and Advancement, there's 26.8, and agri-food is 31.6. Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that. Are you going to table that list? Mr.

Eichler: Yes, we don't have a copy machine handy, but we'll photocopy it and get it to you. Sure. Mr. Chairperson: The honourable –or, sorry, the member for Flin Flon. Mr. Lindsey: That's okay. I don't mind being honourable every now and again. We're talking about food safety and food inspectors. You're already short -handed with food inspectors, is that correct? Mr. Eichler: Well, every position is important, but we're short six in food safety. Mr. Lindsey: That's six positions you're short that are budgeted positions.

How many positions in food safety for food inspectors, for example, have been cut from the budget? Mr. Eichler: Will you repeat the question? Mr. Lindsey: You talked about there being six positions presently vacant for food inspection, but, in the budget documents, it appears that there's –some positions have been cut. So how many positions have been cut from the budget, and is that on top of the ones that are presently vacant? Mr. Eichler: There was one managerial position.

If you look at page 67–I don't know if that's where you were looking–and it wa s administration position that we transferred to the small -animal mandate in order to advance that program. So we went from one management position to one small-animal position. Mr. Lindsey: Well, I was actually looking at page 12 where it talks about t he food safety inspection–goes down by one full -time equivalent. The animal health, welfare goes up by one and the Agri-Resource goes down by two, and Industry Advancement goes down by three. Primary Agriculture, it goes down by one; food and agri-processing goes down by one.

So, you–just to go back to the original question, you've cut one manager out of the food inspection department, but there's also a bunch of other cuts within the budget. Is that correct? Mr. Eichler: On page 12, my critic would see that food safety, that was a managerial position that I talked about, so that was a decrease in one, but we moved it to Animal Health and Welfare on that particular one, unless there's other questions. But it's–that one's actually a wash. It–from administration to small animal care and welfare. Mr.

Lindsey: Could the minister explain what the rationale for moving even one manager from the food inspection to the Animal Health and Welfare? * (16:00) Mr. Eichler: I hope this'll help. The food inspection administration position was vacant and we wanted to streamline to a new process which'll allow us to provide front -line service for small animal welfare. So that was a new position in order to allow us to have a person in the small animal welfare department to provide that front-line service. Mr.

Lindsey: So you cut one from the front -line service of food inspection and replaced it with one for animal welfare? Is that what you're saying or did I mishear you? Mr. Ei chler: Yes, this was a managerial vacant position that –it's not an inspector position–and we 'provile'–re-profile that position, that vacant position,

April 25, 2017 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1545 to support growing the demand for small animal welfare which is a large part of our ongoing support, you know, for smaller animals. Mr. Lindsey: So, without belabouring the point about possible vacant positions and stuff, would the minister agree that food inspection is a relatively important aspect of his department? Mr.

Eichler: The–we certainly agree a h undred per cent with my colleague that food safety is of utmost importance whether it be animal health, plant health, in order to ensure that all those positions do what they're detailed to do and getting the best service in order to make sure that food sa fety is paramount. It doesn't matter what group I meet with. It's ongoing in order to ensure that we do have the safest, most affordable food in the country, never mind Manitoba.

But our producers are very active in ensuring that we do have that policy in place and, you know, the front-line services are the ones that help us make that happen. Mr. Lindsey: I thank the minister for that. Seems to me, and maybe I read too much into the headlines, but it seems to me that every couple of days I open the newspa per or hear a news report of some other food product being recalled after the fact because salmonella has been found or some other contaminant.

Would it not better serve the public to do more inspections up front to prevent those products from getting to the consumer shelves, rather than finding out after the fact? Mr. Eichler: First off, you know, Canada has some of the strictest in safety inspections in food of any country. And, of course, we all want to make sure that responsibility is taken very seriously.

Manitoba Agriculture shares the food safety inspection responsibility for provincially permitted food processing facilities, and Manitoba Health, Seniors and Active Living is responsible for providing inspection to facilities whose primary business is direct interaction with consumers, such as restaurants, grocery stores, farmer markets, and food service. Manitoba Agriculture is responsible for inspecting facilities that distribute the majority of their product to other permitted 'fercilities'. In 2016, Manitoba Agriculture conducted food safety inspections in 442 food processing and distribution facilities.

All product types including meat, bakery, beverage, and prepared foods are subject to inspection. Risk-based inspection models are used to determine inspection 'frequswencies.' High- risk facilities like meat processors, they receive a number of 'spections'. The total number of inspections for 2016 was 751; 2015–I know the critic will want to know this –was 739; in 2014 was 675. Routine inspections was 472; re -inspections was 229; requests for inspections was six; complaint -driven was eight; building assessment was 44. And that was the total number of inspections. Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that.

Could you explain the mythology for developing the risk-based inspection model? * (16:10) Mr. Eichler : Manitoba agriculture works with, of course, the Department of Health and CFI, which is a federal component, use a number of science factors to determine risk and, of course, it's a very technical process that requires significant education and training. Our scientists are updating us on a regular basis.

Of course, this is critical, as the lives of Manitobans are to be protected and ensure that we have, you know, the safest food and–that we can provide to all our consumers, and, of course, working in partnerships not only with Health but also with the businesses to ensure they have the best business practices in place, as well, in order to ensure that they get a good- quality product that's safe for consumption. And we do, as I said earlier, have some of the strictest requirements in regards to food safety in all of Canada, in fact, of all the world. Mr. Lindsey: I thank the minister for that.

The reason I ask about the risk -based criteria is I come out of a different world where risk-based health and safety programs–from a worker perspective–left me somewhat wanting, because the scientific formula downgraded the actual potential for harm to workers, and I'm just curious as to how the mythology works in this case and does it potentially through a scientific process downplay some of the risk, and is that why we start to see more recalls of products after the fact. Mr. Eichler: I thank the member for the question. Food safety is paramount not only for the producers.

I mean, there–we have farm verifications. We have checks and balances. We track the–our livestock from birth to the plate, if you will, in order

1546 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2017 to ensure that we do have the safest food for all our consumers. And once it hits the processor s–and I don't know if the member's had an opportunity to tour any of the processing plants, but it's very, very detailed. In fact, I can assure the member that those processes are actually filmed now in order to ensure that the animal is processed in a way that's humane, and also just to make sure that all those checks and balances are being followed.

And, when the member talks about recalls, that means the system's working in order to ensure that those checks and balances are in place, to make sure that they are caught. Prime example–I'm not sure the member's aware of it –but, when Maple Leaf had the listeriosis outbreak a few years ago, Michael McCain stood up in front of all the world and said, look, I take full responsibility in order to ensure that all food is safe for consumption. It not only impacts their livelihood, but the livelihood of the producers, the livelihood of all the people that are working there.

So, when we talk about food safety, it's paramount that each and every day, not only from the processing side of it –for the consumption side, but also on the processing side, you know, for the safety of the workers as well. So safety is utmost important–no matter how we slice, dice it, process it–in order to make sure that we provide the safest food for consumers is a bottom line that we're all focused on. Mr.

Lindsey: Again, I don't want to belabour the point too much, but it just seems to me that –Robin Hood flour, for example –that the list of recall products just keeps growing and growing and growing that somewhere, if there'd have been a different kind of inspection regime up front, that problem would've either been picked up sooner or potentially picked up before it ever got in the bag and in the consumer's hands. I'm just not sure how running short of food inspectors, even though potentially may have done more inspections, the amount of food processed has also gone up.

So how does that shortage of inspectors tie in with your desire to have the safest food process possible? Thank you. * (16:20) Mr. Eichler: We know that food safety is paramount. We're not short any positions far as inspections are concerned, and in any food that's processed within the province of Manitoba. You know–as we all know –we have a changing world, so we have pro ducts coming in from all over the world. Those are managed through CFIA. There are standards that are being –that are established and inspected by CFIA when they come in.

One of the things that my critic will know, that when stuff comes in everything's dat ed, everything's bar-coded, everything has an expiration date on it. And I think the system is working quite well, and for those checks and balances that are in place in order to ensure that the food is safe, they check these on a regular basis, and if we see an increase in that number, actually makes me feel more comfortable that the system, in fact, is working in order to ensure that wherever that product would be coming from.

Working with our federal government to ensure that we do have the safest food, gives us an opportunity to make sure that whether it's provincially or federally inspected, that those checks and balances are in place to ensure that consumers are safe, and of course, drive up demand for that product as well because consumers want to know that they're eating the safest food that's possible out there. Mr.

Lindsey: So just on Manitoba having some of the best food safety regulations, and presently – according to the minister's line –some of the safest food in Canada, what impact do you see things like the New West Partnership or maybe other jurisdictions have less stringent requirements, how will that play off with the requirements for food safety in this province? Will we go down to the lowest common denominat

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	41-2-44b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	41st 2nd hansardpdf 44b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a2689bc87a9139ccebd6cbd6c3b4fdd84067052f

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