Manitoba Hansard — 28 June 2000 (Sitting 53, 37th Legislature, 1st Session)

37-1-53

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session -Thirty-Seventh Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable George Hickes Speaker Vol. L No. 53 - 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 28, 2000 ISSN 0542-5492

Member AGLUGUB, Cris ALLAN, Nancy ASHTON, Steve, lion. ASPER, Linda BARRETT, Becky, lion. CALDWELL, Drew, lion. CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. CUMMINGS, Glen DACQUA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary, Bon. DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry FAURSCIIOU, David FILMON, Gary FRIESEN, Jean, Hon. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. GILLESBAMMER, Harold IIELWER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie LA THLIN, Oscar, Bon. LAURENDEAU, Marcel LEMIEUX, Ron, Bon. LOEWEN, John MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. MAGUIRE, Larry MALOWA Y, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon.

MIHYCIIUK, MaryAnn, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom PENNER, Jack PENNER, Jim PITURA, Frank PRAZNIK, Darren REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack ROBINSON, Eric, lion. ROCAN, Denis RONDEAU, Jim SALE, Tim, lion. SANTOS, Conrad SCIIELLENBERG, !larry SCHULER, Ron SELINGER, Greg, Hon. SMITH, Joy SMITH, Scott STEFANSON, Eric STRUTHERS, Stan TWEED, Mervin WOWCHUK, Rosano, Hon. MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Seventh Legislature Constituency The Maples St. Vital Thompson Riel Inkster Brandon East Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Russell Selkirk Concordia Charles wood Pembina Lakeside Portage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Wolseley River Heights Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon St. James The Pas St. Norbert La Verendrye Fort Whyte St. Johns Arthur-Virden Elmwood Burrows Lord Roberts Minto River East Interlake Emerson Steinbach Morris Lac du Bonnet Transcona Southdale Rupertsland Carman Assiniboia Fort Rouge Wellington Rossmere Springfield St. Boniface Fort Garry Brandon West Kirkfield Park Dauphin-Roblin Turtle Mountain Swan River Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C.

N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.I'. P.C. N.D.P. I'.C. N.D.I'. N.D.I'. N.D.I'. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. I'.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P.

33II LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, June 28,2000 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Committee of Supply Mr. Conrad Santos (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has con sidered certain resolutions, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Mem ber for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), that the report of the committee be received. Motion agreed to. TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report of the Seizure and Impoundment Registry for I9 99-2000. I would also like to table the 29th Annual Report I9 99-2000 of the Manitoba Law Reform Commission. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 33-The Highway Traffic Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Fin ance (Mr.

Selin ger), that leave be given to introduce Bill 33, The Highway Traffic Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act; Loi modifiant le Code de Ia route et modifi cations correlatives, and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House. I would like to table the Lieutenant -Governor's message. Motion presented. Mr.

Mackintosh: The main focus of this bill is, first, to lengthen impoundment periods for motor vehicles driven by disqualified drivers and those involved in alcohol-related of fences when blowing over 0. 16 and for repeat offenders; second, to extend the time within which one is considered a repeat of fender; and third, to sus pend the licence of a person convicted of fleeing a police officer by vehicle. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where we have with us today His Excellency Dirk Jan Van Houten, Ambassador of the Netherlands. On behalf of all honourable members, welcome you here today. Seated in the public gallery from Netley School 25 Grades I to 9 students under the di rection of Ms. Kelly Eckford. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer). Also seated in the public gallery from Wingham School 20 kin dergarten to Grade 8 students under the direction of Mrs. Joan Wood.

This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan). Also in the gallery we have from Henry G. Izatt Middle School I 08 Grade 5 students under the direction of Mrs. Joann Eliuk, Miss Kristin Wyant, Miss Barbara Young and Miss Heather Wood. This school is located in the constituency

33 12 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 of the Honourable Member for Fort Whyte (Mr. Loewen). On behalf of all honourable members, I wel come you here today. * (13: 35) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Minister Responsible for The Gaming Control Act Conflict of Interest Mr. Jack Reimer (Southdale): Mr. Speaker, over the last few days there has been a fair amount of comment and questions from both sides of the House here in regard to the definition of conflict of interest in our pursuit of asking the Min ister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Lemieux) to step aside to get an outside legal opinion.

I just want to remind the First Min ister in regard to the conflict of interest and the per formance and the respons ibilities of the Minister, and I would like to just quote: "Where, during the exercise of any official power or the performance of any official duty or function by a minister ... there arises a matter involving the direct or indirect pecunia ry interest of any per son, corporation, subsidiary of a corporation, partnership, or organization to whom or which the Min ister or any of his dependants has a direct or indirect pecunia ry liability; the Minister shall . . . ref rain at all times from attempting to in fluence the matter;" I want to ask the First Min ister whether he has sought or whether the Minis ter of Consumer and Corporate Aff airs has sought an outside legal opinion as to their position in regard to the manner of the selection of the casinos.

Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, certainly the Min ister is aware of those pro visions of the Act and he has used them properly in the past. Mr. Reimer: I just want to ask the First Min ister then : I believe there was even a doubt or an innuendo in his mind because in yesterday's comments, and I want to ask him why he replied to one of the questions after the questions yesterday and the impressions that were left-I went back and inquired.

I want to ask the First Min ister then: Did he make a legal inquiry as to the position of his min ister or was this just an inquiry back to his communicators or his spin doctors? Mr. Doer: No, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Reimer: Mr. Speaker, the matter of conflict is a very, very serious matter. I want to ask the First Minister: Wiii he do the right thing? Wiii he clear the air in regard to the perception of a conflict of interest in regard to his Min ister of Consumer and Cor porate Affairs in the handling of the awarding of a proposed casino to Thomp son for the Nelson House First Nations where his wife acts as a lawyer?

Will he ask for an outside legal opinion to clear the air? That is all we are asking. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we believe the Min ister in all the actions and decisions he has been conducting himself with has disclosed properly, and when there was a matter that required with drawal, it was followed properly under the Act. Minister Responsible for The Gaming Control Act Conflict of Interest Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, the issue of a conflict of interest is a very serious matter, and indeed the mere perception of a conflict of interest is a serious situation.

Just last week the First Min ister him self said that democracy is improved by ensuring that a good perception is maintained in government. Again, Mr. Speaker, through you, I would ask the First Min ister is he prepared to seek an outside legal opinion in regard to the Min ister of gaming's perceived or real conflict of interest. Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, we have dealt with issues in the past dealing with perceptions. Certainly one thinks about Mr.

Cubby Barrett, who was able to obtain a hotel that was denied a liquor licence three or four times in the past and just happened to obtain a hotel and happened, as a new owner, to get a

June 28, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3313 liquor licence contrary to the views of the First Nations community in that area. That is a per ception that I think that people of Manitoba want to know more about. Mr. Tweed: Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the First Min ister continues to live in the past, and I would like to ask the First Minister: Will he heed his own words and remove the perception of a government in conflict by removing his minister from this file until a legal opinion can be obtained? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, if members opposite feel there is a breach of the Act, they have the full avenue of using

section 20. If they do not, they should quit slamming and smearing the Min ister and his spouse. Mr. Tweed: Mr. Speaker, my final question to the First Minister: Is he saying to Manitobans that potential conflicts of interest in this Legis lature are of no importance to him or his ministers? * (13:40) Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, conflicts of interest are very serious matters and must be treated in a very serious manner.

The seriousness under which they should be treated-all members should also respect the seriousness of our spouses and their work and our ability to dis close about their work and withdraw from deci sions that have been made. I do not know if it is just the members opposite or members that might be running for the party for members opposite, but we should all be very concerned that, yes, we follow the law which requires disclosure, and it requires removal from decisions that affect or may affect the performance of the Min ister.

It also means that members in this Chamber do not smear families for their political purposes. Minister Responsible for The Gaming Control Act Conflict of Interest Mrs. Joy Smith (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, the Premier stated in this House that, and I quote: Perception of the public is more important than the realities. Now we are faced with the situation where perception and reality are one and the same. We have a minister responsible for gaming who is in a conflict-of-interest position and fails to recognize that fact.

Does this premier stand by his words and acknowledge that, and I quote, perception of the public is more important than realities? Is this premier going to avoid this situation? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): One of the conditions that has been stated by the Min ister and by all of us, Mr. Speaker, for the conditions of a casino to proceed is the views of the public in the area that is affected. The members op posite had a choice to consider the views of the community of Cross Lake where they asked the Government not to provide a liquor licence to one Cubby Barrett. They chose to ignore the views of the public.

We choose to honour and respect the views of the public, and that is what we said all along as a condition of these provisions. Mrs. Smith: Mr. Speaker, will this premier keep to the issue and talk about the issue at hand, remove the gambling file from the Minister who has it at the present time, or is this premier simply offering Manitobans his daily dose of rhetoric? Mr. Doer: No, Mr. Speaker. Health Care Facilities Rural Manitoba Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, over the last week, mayors, reeves and their councils have been meeting in regional meetings of AMM.

One of the topics that has frequently come up is the template for the existence of rural health facilities. In a meeting in Killarney just the other day, the Mayor of Boissevain indicated that they no longer needed to discuss this issue, because the Premier has al ready indicated he does not accept that template for the existence of rural hospitals. I wonder if the Premier (Mr. Doer) could confirm that.

3314 LEGIS LATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I think the Member ought to know that when he was a member of Cabinet in the former government, they put in place a process that was reviewing minimum standards for rural health facilities, and that the Member was a member of the Cabinet that put in place a process that reviewed the minimum standards with respect to hospitals. That process has continued. It is still in draft form, and we are awaiting recom mendations in that regard. Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr.

Speaker, the Mayor of Boissevain clearly said that the Premier (Mr. Doer) had indicated that he does not support that template in its current form. I wonder if the Pre mier could confirm that he will not support that template and indicate what standards he would support in terms of the existence of rural hospitals. Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Speaker, in the last few weeks in the House the Member's statements have been so inaccurate on so many occasions that I would be prepared to discuss that issue with the Mayor of Boissevain, but coming from the Member who released a document saying it was our document when in fact they had put that document in place I think questions the credi bility. I will prepare to discuss that issue, but I do not accept the second-hand words of that particular member in this regard. Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the Min ister of Health is prepared to meet with the Mayor of Boissevain.

I would ask if he is also prepared to meet with the committee that has been set up under Mayor Roy Stevenson and the citizens of Rivers, who are very concerned about their hospital. They have written to the Minister asking for a meeting. I wonder if he would confirm today whether he will accept that request and meet with them in the near future. * (13:45) Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I have endeavoured to meet with as many communities as possible and will continue to do that during the course of my tenure as Minis ter of Health.

Obviously, I am confined physically to this Chamber for the foreseeable future, and I welcome that; that is part of the process. You know it is interesting, Mr. Speaker, that the members opposite put in place a regional health authority and regional health system, and now they are completely ignoring that process. I find it very curious that they put in place a par ticular process, that they completely ignore it, and I would like some clarification from mem bers opposite as to how they see that funct ioning. Southwest Regional Health Authority Meeting Request Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): Mr.

Speaker, I would offer to the Minister of Health that, on this side, we would pair with him to go to any meeting in southwest Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, in light of his comments today that he would be prepared to meet with the Mayor of Boissevain, in light of his comments to the Member for Carman (Mr. Rocan) recently that he was prepared to meet with all Manito bans, my question to the Min ister of Health is: Has he had a request from the Southwest Regional Health Authority to meet to discuss budgetary issues? Has he had a request? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker.

I have had numerous requests from numerous groups and numerous organizations and RHAs to discuss budgetary issues and to discuss related issues. Mr. Tweed: Mr. Speaker, obviously, he has refused to meet with them, and that is the reasoning for the questioning today. He has ab solutely avoided the issues and avoided the questions that are out there. I am asking the Min ister of Health today to commit to a meeting, and I am prepared to go with him and pair him in this House to give him the time to go. Will he commit today to meet with the Southwest Regional Health Authority to discuss budgetary issues? Mr.

Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, officials from the Department of Health have

June 28, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3315 met with the Southwest Regional Health Authority to discuss budgetary issues. Mr. Tweed: Here is a minister, Mr. Speaker, that talks about meeting people from all over Manitoba. We have got a Min ister of Agriculture (Ms. Wowchuk) that talks about ag issues in southwest Manitoba but refuses to go there; we have got a Premier (Mr. Doer) that talks about southwest Manitoba but refuses to go there. Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

In light of Beauchesne's and the rules of this House, could you ask the Member if he has a question? Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised, I would like to take this opportunity to remind all members that Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. *** Mr. Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Member to please put his question. Mr. Tweed: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Min ister of Health is: How can he justify ducking his respons ibility in his failure to meet with the Southwest Regional Health Authority? Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I will compare the record of my meetings with Manitobans, with workers, with people in the system, with nurses, with doctors, with hospitals, with personal care homes, with those in the North, within rural Manitoba and across the province against any record of the ministers of Health on that side of the House.

Portage Correctional Institution Charter Rights Violations Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, to the Mini ster of Justice: The costs to the province and our society of the Minis ter's present justice system are excessive because the existing system and facilities like the Portage Correctional Ins titution provide conditions which in reality enhance criminal activity in stead of correcting it. * (13:50) As Debbie Blunderfield, the Executive Director of the Elizabeth Fry Society, indicated publicly today, we know women's Charter rights are being violated.

I ask the Minister: Why is the Mini ster of Justice continuing to violate the rights of women? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Well, perhaps the Member might have some specifics. As the Member well knows, if one alleges a breach of the Charter and the individual is before the courts, that is the forum within which that kind of challenge is dealt with. We refer those mat ters. We do not deal with it at the bar of this House, although theoretically we could, but many, many years ago we gave up that right and that duty, and we leave that to the courts.

Now, in terms of the conditions and the concerns of the Elizabeth Fry Society, we met with the Elizabeth Fry Society I think in the last two or three weeks, and we have put together, I think, a good plan to deal with some of the con cerns that they have raised. I look forward to a good, productive and co-operative working rela tionship with that organization. Overcrowding Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): My supplementary to the Min ister of Justice: When, as Debbie Blunderfield has indicated, the Por tage Correctional Ins titution is curren tly ware housing women, when will the Minis ter stop warehousing women in this province? Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I wonder if it is the position of the Member that we should be closing the jails of Manitoba. Is this what he is suggesting, because incarceration does serve a purpose for pu blic safety and for corrections? I am sure the Member in another moment and perhaps another place would agree to that.

33 16 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 In terms of the current challenges at Portage, those are challenges that are well known first hand to the Minis ter responsible for the Status of Women (Ms. McGifford) and myself, because I do not know if the Member has been there, but we have been there, we have talked to the people who work there and we have seen the conditions.

Unfortunate ly, much of the current situation is the result of inaction and delay on the part of the former government in putting in place a new facility at Headingley, as recommended very strongly by Ted Hughes, who urged the im mediate building of a medium and maximum se curity unit at Headingley. Currently, women are being held on remand at Portage. Otherwise, they would be at the Winnipeg Remand Centre if not for the inaction of the members opposite. Closure Hon.

Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Ma question supplemen taire pour le ministre: Parce que Ies conditions a l'Etablissement de correction de Portage-la-Prairie sont terribles, quand le ministre de Ia Justice fermera-t-il cet etablissement et construira-t-il un nouveau qui est meilleur et plus acceptable? [Translation] My supplementary question to the Minister: As conditions at the Portage Correctional In sti tution are terrible, when will the Minister of Justice close this institution and construct a new one that is better and more acceptable? Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Oui, je suis d'accord. II y a une situation tn!s difficile a Portage, mais c'est un probleme qui aura une solution dans un ou deux mois. Le Centre de detention provisoire est tres rempli, trop. La situation- [Translation] Yes, I agree. There is a very difficult situation at Portage, but it is a problem that will have a solution in one or two months. The Remand Centre is very full, too full. The situation- [English] -it will only get better. Riverview Health Centre Bed Closures Mrs.

Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): This morning I spoke with somebody at CancerCare Manitoba who told me that the average waiting lists there are 12 weeks long and rapidly climbing. I think it shows that what we are seeing here is a further deterioration of the health care system in Manitoba, that it is getting worse and not better. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Health confirm that for the first time ever Riverview Health Centre will be closing beds? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the Member started out with a cancer question and then went to a bed-closure ques tion.

I will try to deal with both issues, and I hope I will be allowed. The one thing I can assure the Member is that, because of our programs. we did something the members opposite refused to do, and we have managed to bring the waiting list-the last count for the general situation, the average waiting lists were half of what they were under the previous government. Now, as the Member might know, there is still a collective bargaining agreement issue that has to be dealt with that there is still ratification on, and I would prefer not to talk about specifics in that regard.

With respect to the Riverview situation, I think it is a lot similar. I will look into the particulars of that. They are not perma nent bed closures like there were 16 00 beds under their government. Grace Hospital Bed Closures Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, will the Min ister confirm that for the first time ever the Grace Hospital will soon be closing medical beds? The point I am making with my questions is related to the deterioration generally of health care in Manitoba. *( 13 :55) Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, what I find curious about this is from

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3317 members who closed 1600 acute care beds permanently and that every year there were summer shutdowns. There are summer shut downs this year, as there have been every year. As I indicated in Estimates yesterday with respect to medical beds, the medical bed portion of the shutdowns is less this year than it was last year. There are summer shutdowns that are taking place in the system, as take place every single year in this province. But we are not closing 1600 beds permanently, and in fact we will continue to open more acute care beds as we work through the year.

Nursing Profession Recruitment Strategy Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I am wondering when will this Minister of Health fulfil his election promise to hire a hundred nurses full time to ensure that patients are not in the hallways this summer when everybody is taking summer holidays. When will he hire the hundred nurses he promised? Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): As I have indicated on many occasions, Mr. Speaker, with respect to hallways, we are down 60 percent, 70 percent, 80 percent per month with respect to people in the hallways.

I have always said I am not perfect, but we have done a much better job by our program, and we have been recognized nationally with respect to how we have done in the hallways. With respect to nurses, it is unfortunate that members opposite oppose our five-point nursing plan. For the first time, we are taking action and we cannot, in nine months, undo what was done for ten years of neglect of nurses, cancellation of programs, attempt to eliminate LPNs, cancelled diploma program, and now they even oppose the efforts we are taking to try to get and attract more nurses.

I think that we, under the cir cumstances, under nine months, by all counts and by all outside analysers, have done a better job on hallway medicine than has been done in this province for a decade. First Nations Casinos Community Opposition-Headingley Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris): The council of the Rural Municipality of Headingley, last evening, stated it will abide by local residents' wishes and stand in opposition to a proposed First Nations casino in the area. The council will be for warding this resolution to the Government in dicating their position very shortly. Mr.

Speaker, will the Government confirm today that the wishes of the Rural Municipality of Headingley and their local residents will be respected and that a casino will not be allowed to proceed in the Headingley area? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, we have indicated publicly before that public sup port is one of the conditions and that condition remains. Mr. Pitura: Mr. Speaker, I then ask the Government if they are now prepared to place this guarantee in the form of a letter to the council of the Rural Municipality of Headingley and to the Swan Lake First Nation as a result of last night. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, I think our answer to this question for the last three weeks in the Hansard, in this Chamber, and the report from Nadeau and Freedman, has consistently stated that for success to take place-and we want these programs and these projects to be successful. In our view, part of the success is public support. That condition was there with the recom mendation of the Nadeau and Freedman committee, and it was stated after the report was accepted by the Government, and it remains as a condition today. Mr.

Pitura: I would then ask the Government: What will happen to the proposal being put forth by the Swan Lake First Nation now that the community in which they wanted to build this casino has rejected them as a location? * (14:00) Mr. Doer: I do not want to do this to the Member opposite but to all members opposite, unlike the members opposite when in govern ment where they neglected to take in the views of the Chief and Council of the Cross Lake com munity when they established the liquor licence in the newly attained hotel owned by one Mr. Barrett. We have said all along that-

3318 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr. Doer: As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, the issue of public support is a condition of our licensing process. It has been in the recom mendations of Nadeau and Freedman. It was stated by us publicly after the recommendations were received by our ministers, and it remains a condition. And it is important. We want these projects to succeed, and we are very committed because the success will bring greater employment, greater positive economic opportunities.

But, to succeed in a community, we need support of the community, and without that as a condition, there are not the conditions of success. First Nations Casinos Selection Process Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Unsuccessful First Nations casino applicants have many questions about the process of awarding casinos. Roseau River First Nation wonders why their proposal, which would have seen a casino situated on a site where 1. 5 million potential visitors pass by annually, was turned down in fa vour of a casino up North.

Moreover, the Roseau River First Nation planned to use Manitoba Lotteries as their management firm and had also had financing arranged by a Canadian bank. Will the Premier indicate to this House what part his Cabinet played in the decision-making process in determining where the casinos will be located? Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): I am pleased to see the Member opposite now does support Abori ginal casinos. It is a welcome change in his position. Mr. Jack Penner: The concerns of my communities will be- Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I should have gotten Beauchesne's out when I saw him stand up, Mr. Speaker, but sub 417 , 410, 409: Supplementary questions require no

preamble. We are getting a

preamble. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Emerson, on the same point of order. Mr. Jack Penner: I find it very interesting that this premier will stand in this House and not want to allow a member of this Legislature to represent the views of his communities. I find that very interesting. Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised, I would like to once again remind all members that Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. * * * Mr. Speaker: I would ask the Honourable Member for Emerson to please put your ques tion. Mr. Jack Penner: Will the Premier assure those communities whose casino applications were not accepted in the first round that their proposal will be given full and fair consideration if and when they make a second-round choice? Mr. Doer: I have not seen a conversion like this since Paul on the road to Damascus, Mr. Speaker. He now is not only critical of us on the first selection site, he is wanting to expand it to a second set of selection sites. I would like to thank the Member for his changed position.

Mr. Jack Penner: I find the Premier's com ments absolutely astounding. I would like to ask the Premier- Mr. Speaker: Order. I would like to take this opportunity, before I recognize the Honourable Government House Leader, that Beauchesne's Citation 16 8: When the Speaker is rising to pre serve order or to give a ruling, the Speaker must always be heard in silence. I would ask, please, the co-operation of all honourable members. The Honourable Government House Leader, on a point of order.

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3319 Point of Order Mr. Mackintosh: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My legs are getting more exercise when this member stands up with a question than I get in the garden, but I just want to remind the Member once again, second time in a row, of Beauchesne's 409, 410. This is a supplementary question; there is no

preamble allowed or re quired, long-held convention and rule of this House. I ask, Mr. Speaker, that you draw the Member's attention to that once and for all. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Emerson, on the same point of order. Mr. Jack Penner: On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. I apologize for the intrusion I made, but on a new question, then. Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised, the Honourable Government House Leader does have a point of order. Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a

preamble. * * * Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Emerson, on a new question. Mr. Jack Penner: Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that the Premier of this province has just indicated to this Legislature that members of the Legislature should not and have no right to represent the views and the positions of their community. I believe that it is our right to represent the views. No matter what our personal beliefs are, we carry those views of the con stituencies and our constituents to this place.

So I ask the Premier today: Will he assure this House that he and his Cabinet will not intervene politically when another selection is made of a new site for a casino when some of the sites that have been selected are turned down? Will there be no political intervention? Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Freedman at his media conference, I believe the Tuesday after the report was released on the Thursday, made it very clear that this process was a non-partisan, non-political process. He did state that this was a far-even though it was more challenging for the two individuals to try to evaluate the process.

The fact that it was free of partisan politics speaks to the principles that we utilized with the arm's length selection process in the past. The Member's concern about some other application of that in the future, obviously we have already got a set of recommendations, and they were prepared on an independent basis. Mr. Jack Penner: Will the Premier now confirm, as he just has done, that it was not just a committee that made the selections, it was the political intervention that has made the selec tions of casino sites in this province to this date? Will he confirm that? Mr. Doer: No, Mr. Speaker.

First Nations Casinos Operations Management Fees Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, in reference to out-of-province opera tions for casino management fees, the Premier said, and I quote: Whatever arranged agreement is reached as part of the condition for licensing is to make sure that those levels of licensed management fees are low. First Nations members, and indeed all Manitobans, have the right to know what per centage of casino revenue the Premier is piping out of Manitoba instead of going directly to our First Nations people. * (14:10) Hon.

Gary Doer (Premier): Again, we are really happy with another conversion on the road to Damascus for people now supporting aboriginal casinos. I think that is wonderful that we have this change in views. I would take your question as a sincere suggestion in terms of those fees. We have looked at the Harris govern ment management operation with casinos. The members opposite would know Mr. Harris' group of people and would be well aware of the arrangements they have made in Ontario with companies that are located not only inside Ontario but outside of Ontario. The Bostrom re-

3320 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 port was commissioned by members opposite, and if they read that, they will see some of the proposed recommendations. Mr. Maguire: Mr. Speaker, the question is simple. Will the Premier, given that the skater is not here today, define what he means by "low management fee"? Mr. Speaker: Order. Point of Order Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I recognize the Member is new to the Chamber, but I believe he has been given a copy of the rule book.

First of all, it is inappropriate to refer to the absence of any member from the Chamber; second of all, he knows how to refer to members and ministers in this House. Mr. Speaker. The Honourable Official Opposi tion House Leader, on the same point of order. Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): The Honourable Member is aware that he cannot refer to the absence of anybody. I would ask you to peruse Hansard, Mr. Speaker, because I believe he said "the skater" was not here, and there are a whole bunch of them on that side of the House. Saying anybody over there is not a skater would be a second thought.

Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised, I would just like to remind all honourable members, if the Member was referring to any honourable member's absence or referring to a minister, please do not mention the absence of a member. Also, when addressing members in this Chamber, all honourable members will be addressed by their constituency and ministers by their titles, and I would just like to remind all honourable members at this time. * * * Mr. Maguire: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the question is still very simple, and given the thin ice that we are on, will the Premier define what he means by "low management fees"? Mr. Doer: Low would be higher than this and lower than that. Mr. Maguire: Mr. Speaker, can the Premier confirm, given the fact that we are talking about accountability, that the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority was to receive a 40% management fee, and could he advise Manito bans what the maximum percentage of revenue in terms of management fees his government will allow to leave this province? Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, I think we have indicated in the past and will indicate it again today that the implementation committee will have to look at this as one of the conditions that is obviously recommended in the Nadeau Freedman report. We obviously want the maxi mum amount of economic opportunities and economic employment to flow to First Nations people. We also want the management fees to be reasonable. The Bostrom committee had a number of sliding scales based on different forms of gaming and management, but that was a report commissioned by the previous govern ment.

We will await the recommendations from the implementation committee. First Nations Casinos Economic Impact Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, on numerous occasions in this House both the Minister responsible for Lotteries and the Minister of Finance, who presumably are over seeing this massive expansion of gambling in the province of Manitoba, have admitted that there will be a loss of government gambling revenue due to the significant increase in gambling in Manitoba. I would like to ask the Minister, who yesterday said he had no idea, the plans had not been finalized-the Minister of Lotteries (Ms.

McGiff ord) said she had no idea. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance if he can today advise Manitobans how much Crown gambling revenue is going to be shared as a result of their plans to expand gambling in this province. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I thank the Member opposite for acknowledging that we will be sharing revenues with First Na tions communities. That is a significant break through in thinking on their part.

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3321 We are at the beginning of a process of identifying which casino proposals will come to fruition. When we move beyond the hypothetical and have concrete proposals in front of us, then we will be in a position to make a realistic es timate of revenue sharing. Mr. Loewen: I would ask the Minister of Finance if the reason that he increased taxes to Manitobans in his recent budget was to cover the loss of revenue that is going to result as a result of an expansion of gambling in Manitoba. Is that why you raised taxes? Mr.

Selinger: The last time the Member opposite made that allegation, I asked him to show me anywhere in Manitoba where a person's paycheque had seen an increase in taxes. He was completely unable to do that. As a matter of fact, people's pay stubs will see their taxes being reduced in a very few days, and the Member is once again demonstrating that he is, in fact, a stranger to the truth when he makes his statements. Mr. Loewen: You would think the Finance Minister would understand that his budget does not come into effect till July 1, and that is when taxes are going to go up and people will see it.

I would ask this Minister of Finance, seeing as he has no idea, has not finalized any plans: Will he commit to this House that he will have a full economic impact study, which will also include the social effects of expanding gambling in Manitoba? Will he provide that before they move any further with their plans to expand gambling? Mr.

Selinger: First of all, I will remind the Member opposite that the tax reductions that we have brought forward in Manitoba this year are greater on a per capita basis than what the federal government has brought forward and that an implementation committee has been put in place to move forward on the casino proposals, and impacts will be looked at as part of the overall process. Bi1142 Impact on Property Taxes Mrs. Joy Smith (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, taxes are a grave concern to Manitobans, es- pecially looking to the future at this time and the kind of planning that has been undertaken by this government.

I would like to ask the Minister of Edu cation: Can he guarantee that taxes for Mani tobans will not go up as a result of the intro duction of Bill 42? Hon. Drew Caldwell (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, I have to say I find it passing strange that the party that presided over the single largest explosion in property taxation in Manitoba's history with their dra matic cuts that were made to education are asking such a question. * (14:20) I can assure members and Manitobans, frankly, that the ability-to-pay issue is a con sideration of arbitrators and has been for decades in the province of Manitoba. I can also assure that this government will not embark upon policies which devastate the public education system and lead to an explosion in property tax increases, as was provided by the members opposite.

Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Peak of the Market Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, today I am very proud to stand in this House and recognize the outstanding contribution made by Manitoba's own Peak of the Market. Peak of the Market is one of Canada's premier vegetable suppliers that has grown quality produce in Manitoba for 85 years. It supplies over 120 different varieties of locally grown vegetables on a year-round basis. Their produce has a well deserved reputation for excellence.

Peak of the Market, along with its growers, employ over 1000 people and it contributes over $35 million a year to the provincial economy. In the last six years, the company has recorded its highest sales in history. This mark has been reached by using aggressive marketing strategies

3322 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 and Peak of the Market's increased export sales around the world. Because of its tremendous success, Peak of the Market has recently been named one of Canada's 50 best-managed companies. More than 20 000 companies were considered for this distinction. I would like to congratulate the management and staff of Peak of the Market on this prestigious accomplishment and also on their act of charity work with Winnipeg Harvest and others. Furthermore, on behalf of this As sembly, I want to thank Mr.

Larry Mcintosh, President and CEO of Peak of the Market for all his great work and the tremendous commitment his staff has made to the contribution of Manitoba. Ms. Bonnie Korzeniowski (St. James): Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few moments to tell the House about an important and delicious event that I was pleased to attend this morning. Peak of the Market held its first ever potato pancake breakfast today on their newly landscaped front lawn. This event provided an opportunity to celebrate as Peak of the Market was presented an award by Arthur Andersen for being one of Canada's 50 best-managed private companies.

This is a very prestigious honour as Peak of the Market was selected from thousands of com panies across the country. Peak of the Market is truly a home-grown success story. For the past 57 years, Peak of the Market has brought Manitoba-grown vegetables to people all over the world. In the last five years, they have recorded the highest sales in the company's history. Along with its growers, Peak of the Market employs over 1000 people in Manitoba and injects over $35 million a year into our economy. Peak of the Market is also concerned with giving back to the community.

Every year they donate more than half a million pounds of fresh vegetables to food banks. This morning's break fast was also an opportunity to raise money and food donations for Winnipeg Harvest. On behalf of our government, I want to take this oppor tunity to thank Ken Krochenski, Vice-President of Operations, for the most interesting and informative tour and to congratulate Larry Mcintosh, President and CEO, his staff and all of the Peak of the Market growers for a job well done. Thank you. Scott Tournament of Hearts Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur-Virden): Mr.

Speaker, I was very pleased to learn yesterday that once again southwestern Manitoba will be hosting a national sporting event. On June 26, the Canadian Curling Association announced that the 2002 Scott Tournament of Hearts, Cana dian women's curling championship will be held at Brandon's Keystone Centre. The event will run from February 23 to March 3, 2002, and everyone is invited. The Westman area has become renowned for its ability to host world-class sporting events due to the strong community involvement, spirit of volunteerism and great facilities.

The West man area has had a strong record in hosting large events and making them very successful. West man is indeed a community made for curling events. Curling enthusiasts throughout the West man region have a history of supporting the major curling events hosted in the area with an unparalleled level of passion and excitement. Congratulations and best wishes to Lois Fowler, the chair of the host com-mittee, all host committee members and everyone in the Westman area who worked so hard to have the Scott Tournament of Hearts returned to Brandon.

It was last held there in 1993 and since then, Brandon and the Westman area has hosted national men's, mixed, world, and Olympic curling events. I know that the Westman community will make sure that the 2002 Scott Tournament of Hearts will be the most successful Canadian women's championship ever. Cardiac Care Program Mr. Cris Aglugub (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate our Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) on the expansion of car diac services, which he announced yesterday. I am impressed by the comprehensiveness of his plan.

It includes setting up new labs, purchasing state-of-the-art equipment, the opening of a new step-down unit to take pressure off the intensive

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3323 care and improving community-based rehabili tation services. Given that cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death and disability in adults, I am pleased to see that prevention and com munity education are part of the expansion. The $20-million program will have the net effect of improving heart patients' access to leading-edge treatment. It will also have the spinoff effect of making Manitoba more attractive to health professionals. Minister Chomiak works phe nomenally hard- Mr. Speaker: Order.

I would like to remind the Honourable Member for The Maples, when ad dressing members in the House, to address by constituency or ministers by their titles, not by name. Mr. Aglugub: Sorry, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Health works phenomenally hard. We see the results in dramatic improvements that he is making to our health care system such as this ex pansion in cardiac services. On behalf of all Manitobans, thank you, Mr. Health Minister, for your dedication. *(14: 30) Conflict of Interest Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, I rise to say a few words on the issue of conflict of interest in this House, which has been a subject of much debate over the last several days. I believe that where we have in the current circumstance the potential for a significant conflict of interest with the Honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Lemieux) and the involvement of his spouse with a First Nation which has been granted permission to proceed with the development of a casino, I would suggest that it is reasonable to have an independent opinion, that it is rea sonable to have an outside legal opinion.

The alternative under this circumstance is to have a situation as happens in Ottawa where there is an ethics commissioner. This is less to judge on what has happened but to provide guid ance for all members in the future conduct of the portfolio and activities and the participants. The citizens of Manitoba deserve access and deserve to have the knowledge of information which would confirm that the activities of minis ters of the Government and their spouses are in agreement with what is generally considered to be appropriate given the circumstances and the involvement of all.

This is not to say that there is a concern but that there may be a concern. I would suggest to the Government that it is time to get a neutral opinion rather than just to continue with argu ments back and forth across the Chamber. Thank you. ORDERS OF THE DA Y Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Today it is the intention to move into Interim Supply, that labyrinth of procedures, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I move, and it is seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), that Mr.

Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to. Mr. Speaker: Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair. * (14:30) COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY Interim Supply Mr. Chairperson (Conrad Santos): The Committee of Supply will come to order, please. We have before us for our consideration two resolutions respecting the Interim Supply Bill. The first resolution reads as follows: RESOLVED that a sum not exceeding $2,270,289,138, being 38 percent of the total

3324 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 amount to be voted on as set forth in Part A Operating Expenditures of the Estimates be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 2001. Does the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) have any comments? Does the Opposition critic the Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Stefanson) have any comments? Is the Committee ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Chairperson: Shall the resolution be passed? Some Honourable Members: Pass. Mr. Chairperson: The resolution is accordingly passed.

The second resolution respecting Interim Supply reads as follows: RESOLVED that a sum not exceeding $20,520.000, being 38 percent of the total amount to be voted as set out in Part B Capital Investment of the Estimates be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, (2001). Is the Committee ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Chairperson: Shall the resolution be passed? Some Honourable Members: Pass. Mr. Chairperson: The resolution is accordingly passed. Committee rise. Call in the Speaker. IN SESSION Committee Report Mr. Conrad Santos (Chairperson): Mr.

Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted two resolutions respecting Interim Supply, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), that the report of the Committee be received. Motion agreed to. Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider the Ways and Means for raising of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to. Mr. Speaker: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair. COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS Interim Supply Mr. Chairperson (Conrad Santos): The Committee of Ways and Means will come to order, please. We have before us �or our consideration two resolutions respectmg the Interim Supply Bill.

The first resolution reads as follows: RESOLVED that towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty on account of certain expenditures of the Public Service, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 2001, the sum of $2,270,289,138, being 38 percent of the total amount to be voted as set forth in Part A Operating Expenditure of the Estimates for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 200 I, laid before the House at the present session of the Legislature, be granted out of the Consolidated Fund. Does the Minister of Finance have any comment?

Does the opposition Finance critic, the Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Stefanson), have any comment? Is the Com mittee ready for the question? Some Honourable Members: Question.

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3325 Mr. Chairperson: Shall the resolution be passed? Some Honourable Members: Pass. Mr. Chairperson: The resolution is accordingly passed.

The second resolution respecting Interim Supply reads as follows: RESOLVED that towards making good the supply to be granted to Her Majesty on account of certain expenditures of the Public Service, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 2001, the sum of $20,520,000, being 38 percent of the total amount to be voted as set out in Part B, Capital Investment of the Estimates for the fiscal year ending the 3 I st day of March, 200 I, laid before the House at the present session of the Legislature, be granted out of the Consolidated Fund. Is the Committee ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question. Mr. Chairperson: Shall the resolution be passed? Some Honourable Members: Pass. Mr. Chairperson: The resolution is accordingly passed. Committee rise. Call in the Speaker. IN SESSION Committee Report Mr. Conrad Santos (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Ways and Means has adopted two resolutions respecting Interim Supply, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), that the report of the Committee be received.

Motion agreed to. * (14:40 ) INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 46-The Interim Appropriation Act, 2000 Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale}-Mr. Speaker, do I have leave to move that leave be given to introduce Bill 46, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2000; Loi de 2000 portant affectation anticipee de credits, and that the same be now received, read a first time and be ordered for second reading immediately? Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? Leave has been granted. It has been moved by the Honourable Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger), seconded by the Honourable Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale), by leave, that leave be given to introduce Bill 46, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2000, and that the same be now received and read a first time and be ordered for second reading immediately. Motion agreed to. SECOND READINGS Bi1146- The Interim Appropriation Act, 2000 Hon. Greg Selinger (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mr.

Sale}-do I have leave to move that Bill 46, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2000; Loi de 2000 portant aff ectation anticipee de credits, be now read a second time and referred to the Committee as a whole? Mr. Speaker: Does the Honourable Member have leave? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Leave has been granted. Motion presented. Mr. Harry Enos (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I just want to alert all members of the House, particularly members on Her Official Majesty's

3326 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 Opposition side, that what we are dealing with here is, in effect, a minibudget; 38 percent of the expenditures for the coming year, we are being asked to approve in the next little while. I want to assure the Honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) we do not intend to hold up the passage of this traditional bill that is made necessary because of the process of the Legislature.

It requires the authorization of this Legislature for the Government to continue with the expenditure of these funds, but it is an opportunity for us to make note of where this government is. This government, that is now entering into its ninth month of existence, is starting to wear thin the constant blaming and the referring back to what previous governments have done, and they have to start and begin to stand on their own record.

I am sure that insomuch as this 38 percent or $2 billion-plus represent expenditures in all fields of government, Education, Health, Agriculture, Conservation, that I want to assure you, Mr. Speaker, it is entirely incumbent upon us and within the rules to discuss all these issues at this particular time on this particular bill. I am particularly upset, Mr.

Speaker, that despite the fact of a great deal of political grandstanding, trips to Ottawa, all kinds of hand holding gestures to the strickened southwestern farmers in this province, there is no relief in this 38 percent of the Budget, no recognition of the unfairness on how the southwestern farmers are being treated in the field of agriculture. That is an omission that is contained in this bill, and I wish to draw the Minister of Finance's (Mr. Selinger) and all members of the Government's attention to that fact. They speak a bold line. They make the politics. They travel to Ottawa.

They talk about a new and better and a more generous relationship with the federal Liberal government, but it does not spell out to any further assistance, not the kind of assistance that was provided to Red River Valley farmers a few years earlier in the '97 flood. That is an ongoing festering sore with members of the Opposition. It is an ongoing festering sore with a good portion of the population of the southwestern part of this province. I regret that this government and this Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) has chosen not in any way to address that particular issue with respect to agriculture. Mr.

Speaker, as I said, we are moving forward into a period now where, within three months, this government will be in office for a year. Surely they have to start working on their own track record.

Seldom has a government come into office under more precipitous circum stances, a strong, healthy economy that keeps generating additional revenues above and beyond projection, a no-deficit situation when they came into office, despite again all the politics that they play, the hiring of outside consultants, the imagery that they tried to project on the general public within days of taking office that they were facing huge and difficult deficits, None of that came to bear.

They were left in fact with the additional $400 million to $500 million in excessive revenue, precisely the amounts that we, in fact, had called upon as we were in that election campaign as being available to the Treasury of Manitoba over the next four or five years, ergo the promises that were made in that election campaign. All of that is now washed away in these last nine months, and all of that is being disregarded by this government.

I simply want to register the fact that this government has a great deal to answer for in how they have squandered their opportunity to correct some of the injustices that certain segments of our society have faced in the last year under very difficult circumstances, and I see nothing in this request for 38 percent of the overall expenditures to address those problems. Shame on this minister. Shame on this govern ment. * (14:50) Mr. Eric Stefanson (Kirkfield Park): Mr. Speaker, I just want to make a few brief comments basically on the Budget and as it relates to Interim Supply today.

I know we will have other opportunities to make comments. As I said when I responded to the 2000 Budget, I am certainly, like many Manitobans, disap pointed in this budget for a number of reasons. I know the focus today is on Interim Supply, but I would be remiss not to make comments on the whole issue of taxation.

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3327 When we had the Minister of Finance in Estimates for the Department of Finance, I think many of us were somewhat frustrated with the answers we were receiving to very important questions about how this decision was made on the tax front for all Manitobans. As is outlined very clearly in this budget document that was tabled, we now have the distinction of having the highest taxed province in all of Canada when it comes to middle-income families.

All members opposite need do is to look in the Budget document themselves, and they will see that information readily apparent. I ask them to go back to a budget just one year ago, the previous budget that showed at that particular point in time for middle-income families, our taxation levels were the fourth highest in Canada. We felt that was something that was not appropriate for Manitoba, that when we compare ourselves to other provinces right across Canada in terms of our economic well-being and so on, we should be in the lower half of provinces when it comes to overall levels of taxation. Mr.

Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair In one budget, this current government has taken us from fourth highest taxes to the highest taxes in all of Canada, and all I can say is shame. But what really concerns me is what that will do to the economy of Manitoba. Today businesses we know are extremely mobile. They rely on intellectual capital, and they do not rely on fixed assets. In many cases, they do not rely on their geographic location. They can be anywhere, businesses in technology, businesses in financial services and so on.

It is incumbent upon us in Manitoba to maintain a very competitive environment in all respects, and we have not done that today when it comes to taxes. I do not want to be standing here painting doom and gloom, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but I want to be a reaffst These businesses look at many issues when they look at where to expand or where to locate their businesses, and definitely taxes are one of the important issues that they look at. We are already hearing comments from businesses that have left Manitoba.

A company out of Brandon left Manitoba in part because of the high taxes created by this government in their very first budget. That leaves me to thinking back to first budgets of many govern ments, some that I have been a part of, some that the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) has been a part of over the many years and so on. All budgets are important, but your first budget, it casts the die for what kind of a government you are going to be, what your priorities are.

When you have a budget today when we are in the era of surpluses as most provinces across Canada, you have three choices with how you can utilize surpluses. You can utilize surpluses to increase some priority spending in areas that you believe are important or that need additional resources. In our many budgets that we brought down, our 12 budgets over the last 12 years, it was very apparent that our No. I spending priorities were in the areas of health and education. If you look at the increases in those areas over those 12 budgets, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, they were in the magnitude of 60-70 percent, and we took Manitoba, in many cases, in the case of health care, to having amongst the highest funding per capita in all of Canada. Those were clearly our spending priorities. Another area that you can utilize surpluses is to pay down your debt, and back in 1995 we passed legislation here in this Chamber. Our government passed legislation that put in place a debt retirement plan to start paying off the general purpose tax-supported debt in Manitoba over less than 30 years, and that plan is currently in place.

I am pleased to see that the current government is abiding by that plan to pay down the debt. You do have the opportunity to even increase your payments against your debt. That is another choice you have when it comes to surpluses. Of course, the third choice you have is in the area of taxation, that you can reduce taxes, basically give money back to Manitobans, put the money in their pockets, and allow them to make the decisions where their money should be spent, where their money should be invested, and so on.

Those are really the three choices that any government has, and when you look at this budget it has failed miserably on the tax front.

3328 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 What is of even greater concern is if you look in this document and you look at pages 26 and 27 of the Budget speech and you look at the medium-term plan of this government going forward-and that is what I mean when I say that the first budget sets the tone for what kind of government we are going to get from the Government of the day-you look at this medium-term plan, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and it shows very modest surpluses going out over the next four years of between $5 million and $10 million.

What is shown here is that, even though revenues are going to go up by some $900 million over the four- to five-year period, this government is choosing to spend all of that money. They are not choosing to pass on any tax reductions, and they are not choosing to accelerate the repayment of debt. Mr.

Speaker in the Chair If you look at this chart on pages 26 and 27, they are providing Manitobans with no hope for any future tax reduction, and you compare that and contrast that to what governments are doing all across Canada You look at our neighbouring province, the Province of Saskatchewan, and what they are doing on the tax front. In fact, Saskatchewan is an interesting comparison, because if you look at the year 19 99, when it came to personal income taxes, at literally every income level and every family situation. Manitoba's taxes were significantly lower than the Province of Saskatchewan.

But take the time now to look ahead over the next two to three years and compare Manitoba to the province of Saskatchewan and you will see, Mr. Speaker, at literally all of those income levels and all of those family situation levels that taxes in Saskatchewan are now going to be lower than the province of Manitoba. What this government is doing in their very first budget and in their medium-term plan is taking Manitoba, when it comes to middle-income families, to the highest tax in all of Canada. I think we should all share concern for what that is going to mean to the economy of this province going forward.

When you talk about the economy, one way of keeping our young people, of keeping Manitobans here in this province, is to have a strong economy creating the jobs that give those young people and give all Manitobans the opportunities we all want them to see, and that is the opportunity to have reasonable, well-paying jobs right here at home in the province of Manitoba. I think this budget, which was just introduced and passed by the current NDP government, is going to do a great deal of harm when it comes to that entire area.

I know members opposite like to point to some of the financial commentary, and I, too, have taken the time to look at some of the commentary. When you look at the area of taxes, the kinds of comments you get from financial institutions are comments like these. Those who were hoping for tax cuts will surely be disap pointed. However, others who thought the new government might raise taxes, obviously, they are reflecting on the past performance of NDP governments here in the province of Manitoba. in the first year of its majority mandate may sigh with relief. Well, Mr.

Speaker, there are no governments in Canada today raising taxes. Even the fact that the commentary alludes to that, shows the concern that is out there in the investment community and the business com munity about what this government is going to do in the area of taxes. I also want to raise an issue that I think gets at the heart of some of the credibility of the campaign promises made by the NDP during the recent election.

Two days before the vote, parties were asked to cost out their election commit ments and the NDP tabled a document costing out their election commitments, and in the year 2000-2001 showing some $69 million of expen diture reductions that they were committing to Manitobans. Well, you take this document and you now compare it to the detailed expenditures that we all have, and you do not see any correlation between the kinds of expenditure reductions in areas like business subsidies. A $23-million reduction in business subsidies, where is it in this document?

A I% reduction across the board in program expenditures of $25 million, where is it in this document? I gather they talk about shutting down the office in Ottawa, even with all of the issues we have to deal with from agricultural issues to the

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3329 Canada Health and Social Transfer issues. They, here in this document, the NDP in this docu ment, basically take $330,000 out of the Ottawa office, which I am imagining is their intent to shutdown that office. You go through a number of other areas and you see these reductions in the NDP pledge, but they are nowhere to be found in the expenditure document. So again they stand up in this House and talk about some of their commitments. Here is a document that they prepared. In fact, what is interesting, I am hearing some heckling from members opposite.

I am not even sure members like the member for Crescentwood and others saw this document or even knew about it prior to its being tabled. *( 15:00) They certainly do not in any way abide by it today, because it is not reflected in their expenditures at all, nowhere to be seen at all in this document. Early on again when you talk about credibility, we had the members opposite stand up and talk about a hiring freeze. Do you remember that, Mr. Speaker, back early on in the mandate of this government? They talked about a hiring freeze.

They told Manitobans only essential positions are going to be filled here in the Province of Manitoba. That is what they all stood up and said. They were only words. Their actions did not follow through on that at all. In fact during their first few months, between December 1 and March 31, they hired 354 more people. As the Winnipeg Sun went on to say, that is 354 more bodies, 354 more civil servants. Granted, some of them, I think we would agree, are essential services. Some of them are nurses and so on. I think we would definitely agree, Mr.

Speaker, but it also goes on to talk about research assistants, clerks, administrative secretaries, curriculum consultants, home econo mists and media specialists. Now, there is a real essential service. An Honourable Member: Spin doctors. Mr. Stefanson: Spin doctors, my colleague says.

We have certainly seen many examples of the spin doctors at work, including the day after the Budget when they were out there spinning and complaining about the coverage that they saw in many of the media outlets across Manitoba, complaining profusely to anybody who would listen about their perception of the kind of coverage that was given by the media, when all the media were doing was reflecting the facts as illustrated in their own budget document, the facts that are confirmed in this document showing that Manitobans at middle income levels will now pay the highest taxes in all of Canada. Then, Mr.

Speaker, what did we have? We had the federal budget. The federal government brings down fairly reasonable personal income tax reductions. Under the traditional personal income tax system, once the federal government brought down a personal income tax reduction, the provinces would be affected, and that would also reduce provincial personal income taxes. What did this government do, even though it had been outlined in a budget two years ago, outlining very clearly that we were going to delink our system from the federal government in the year 2001?

This government accelerated the process and delinked from the federal system one year early to preserve $30 million of revenue for them selves to spend, as they are doing consistently throughout this document, more importantly to put in place a taxation system that means that Manitobans did not receive those $30 million of tax reductions. In one fell swoop, they actually did increase taxes, because Manitobans were paying lower taxes on May 9 under a combined system than they were paying on May II after this government brought in their budget.

At least the other provinces that decided to delink one year early flowed through the equivalent of the tax reductions to the people in those provinces, but, again, not this government. They did not pass those on to Manitobans. They kept the taxes higher. They kept the revenue to spend. What they did with that simple manoeuvre again is create a higher tax situation in Manitoba that has now existed in many provinces right across Canada. Again, I say shame to them. They did not stand up and say

3330 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 they were going to do that to Manitobans during the election. Then, to make matters worse, the ultimate in hypocrisy, we have the Minister of Finance and some of his colleagues standing up and taking credit for a personal income tax reduction that was implemented on January 1 of this year, that was introduced in our last budget in 19 99-2000.

On top of that, you will recall, the NDP in opposition at that particular point in time brought in an amendment that would not have allowed that personal income tax reduction to be in place on January 1, 2000, and their amend ment passed. Then they come into government, and they stand up and start talking about the $40 million in personal income tax reduction. We have the Minister of Finance today saying the personal income tax reductions were more significant in Manitoba at the provincial level than at the federal level.

The only reason that happened was because of a personal income tax reduction introduced by our government in our fast budget. that they proposed an amend ment to, that would not have allowed it to take place. Hypocrisy, Mr. Speaker. I could go on and on talking about taxation and their position on taxation, but I know I will get other opportunities during concurrence and, I am sure, in other ways over the course of the next while, but I did not want to pass up this opportunity to express my overriding concern with this being the very first budget of this government.

The direction, the tone that it has taken is completely off the mark. I think that is recognized by many, if not most, if not all, Manitobans today. You see it through the media coverage; you hear it in the coffee shops in the commentary made by Manitobans right across this province. So, with those few comments, I look forward to getting into Committee of the Whole and all of us having an opportunity to ask some of these ministers some specific questions about their priorities and what they are doing on behalf of Manitobans. Mr. Glen Cummings (Ste. Rose): I would like to put some comments on the record.

At this point, when we are seeking additional expen- ditures on behalf of the Government, it seems to me that the appropriate opportunity to remind this government that, while they have talked about a plan and they have probably not, it appears, with the direction that some of their expenditures have been going, have not fully developed that plan and may well have some interesting problems to deal with as the year and as the next two or three years evolve. Mr. Speaker, the members opposite, I think I heard the Minister of Family Services say perhaps we were trying to defend the indefensible.

I will take that comment under advisement because I think, as we proceed through the year and as we move from one tax year to the next, we are not that far away from where we will have to be considering expenditures and revenues for the forthcoming year and what the priority expen ditures will likely be. When I look at the programs that the current government is putting in place, I am sure that they have received considerable positive response in many parts of the community, and I do not think there is anyone on this side that would deny that.

Certainly, all parties have indicated the concern about health care, the demands on the system that need to be addressed. We look at the announcement the Minister of Health just made putting significant commitment towards one particular aspect in heart care, and anyone who has a loved one or personally has any heart-related problems, then certainly there is an obvious reaction to applaud this type of announcement, but I look at the various directions that the Government has been setting forward as expenditure priorities.

I wonder if they have thought about their long term direction that this is going to lead them. I am assured from across that they have, and I would hope that that proves to be the case because one thing that comes as sure as day follows night is that it is much easier and much cheaper to establish new programs. The first announcement, I would think, after a few years as a minister of the Crown, I can speak with some authority on the fact that it is very easy to make an announcement and attract attention. It is good for the ego.

It is very nice for certain segments of society that may well be benefiting from the announcement, but it always seems to be that too often governments-and

June 28, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 333 1 perhaps I should not be giving free advice to this governmen t-should let them find out for themselves. But it is always easy to establish new programs. Even in the second year, the program is only starting to grow. It is only starting to pick up momentum in terms of those that it is going to service. It is only starting to capture beyond the immediate response some of the areas that the program was originally announced to deal with. By the time you get to the second or third year, the program is in full bloom. It has attracted administrative person ne l.

It has attracted attention through ongoing programs that attract media attention. It will bring forward more people to apply, and event ually the program goes from 0 to 40, 0 to 60 at a speed that is somewhat breakn eck when you look at the responsibility the Government has just undertaken. * (15:10 ) Let me give an example. A perfect example is the Pharmacare program and the associated rise in costs that goes with that. I know the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale) is considering my words carefully, because he and I may have an opportunity to discuss some of these issues in the next few days.

But I suspect that the Pharmacare program is probably a pretty good example of how best of intentions and establishing a program that was needed, and certainly continues to be needed, appeared very easy in the early years of the decade. I think it began as a $9-million or $1 0-million project, and that was manageable in the days of the Government.

Then we have gone forward from there, and with technology changing, with demand growing in terms of the people who seek the need and have a need for medicinal and drug-related support, then we have seen at the same time a ballooning growth in the cost of developing drugs, ballooning demand. Cost of certain heart drugs, for example, have gone from $1 00 to $500 for single administration. Those are the type of things that, all of a sudden, you have a program that is at least five to six times the size that it was originally conceived.

As governments develop programs, then they sometimes end up with these unintended but very difficult-to-fund problems that rest at their feet. I would make the same comment about certain health care technologies. It has been made more eloquently than I can in this House on a few occasions, but in fact I look over the last decade; certain opera tions for joint replacement have gone from very small numbers to very large numbers with significant waiting lists. That did not occur at the rate relative to inflation or relative to the growth of the economy in this province.

That came forward at a rate that significantly exceeded the ability of government's revenues to of fset that. Then the question becomes how do you set your priorities, and do you steal from Highways to fund health care? Do you take from agricultural programs? Those will be two that are pretty close to many of us living in rural Manitoba. Do we look at the concerns of the people in the North, the tran sportation and communication problems that they are dealing with? Do you steal from that area in order to maintain the growth, or do you seek fundamental change?

I would suggest that what has happened in the establishment of the Budget for this province is that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), along with his colleagues, has not set his priorities. He has not anticipated the systemic change that all governments are going through today. He has gone back to what perhaps he knows best and what many of us who come into government from time to time probably under stand better than anything else.

The natural progression of how you manage your affairs balanced with your normal income becomes a benchma rk by which you judge the decisions that you make in public life and on behalf of the public. But we are living in a decade, we have moved out of one decade into the next, Mr. Speaker, where the rate of change and the demand for change not only in our society but particularly in government and how it does business, that rate of change has accelerated at a measure that is beyond the recognition of many people in terms of how you have to tum the tide, if you will, or how you have to change the

3332 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 thinking of government and how it manages its expenditures or prioritizes its expenditures. I think many times the Min ister of Fin ance (Mr. Selin ger), the Min ister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) and their colleagues have turned to the public and said, well, what are we up to now, 39 percent of expenditures on public health, 39.5 I believe. So we are soon going to be in the 40% range of the Budget of this province that will go into public health. Will that leave enough for day care? Will that leave enough for the social programs that are needed in this province?

Will it leave anyth ing for infrastructure? Does it leave anything at all for infrastructure? We have already seen that 10 % reduction in the capital expenditures on infrastructure in this province, expenditures that have been sorely needed. General ly speaking, I would have thought that, given that we had I 0 years to restructure and try and bring the balance of expenditures in this province together with the opportunity for income and the growth in the economy, now there is a pent-up demand for some infrastructure.

This minister and his colleagues are going to have to start thinking about whether or not they are living from day to day, which is often the case when we are faced with the pressures of health care, social services and so on, or are they going to be able to encompass the larger thinking of whether or not we invest in education, whether or not we invest in the real infrastructure of this province, whether or not we invest in opportunities that need to be created in this province.

It is very easy, as my friend from Lakeside and the former minister of Fin ance both indicated, promises were made that certain incentives to business would likely be eliminated. It is always easy to stand up and point to that bogeyman. What was it the federal NDP said? They called them corporate welfare bums. That was the rhetoric of the 19 80s, I believe. Corporate welfare bums. That was the cry in Ottawa which somehow got tran sposed and revitalized and raised again by the current government during their election campaign. That is fine. Corporate welfare bums.

They did not use that term, but they did point to the fact that they thought there were grants that could be cut. They thought there were incentives that could be reduced. I spent a considerable amount of time over the last number of years along with my colleagues administrating what was known as the Sustainable Development Innovations Fund. Because it provided small amounts of incentive here and there across the province, everybody I think assumed there were huge savings in an area like that.

My goodness, we should be able to eliminate that and there will be enough savings to maybe fund a hospital or build a road, repair the road to Thompson or whatever the priority of the day might be. The fact is, you know what was in that fund? That was a $3- million fund, maximum, and just about $2 million was already committed to the recycling programs in this province and was accumulated from the provincial sales tax on disposable diapers. It was also already committed towards the reduction of tires in the waste in this province.

So what was left in di scretionary spending, which the people who tal ked-and there were those who did during the election, perhaps not in this Chamber but out in the door to-door campaigning. At least in the areas that I am familiar with, this was one area that came up. I suppose it was somewhat related to the fact that my name had been associated with this over the years, but the fact is there is about $1. 2 million there. They could wipe out the whole Sustainable Development Fund, and what have they got left? They have no incentives for those who are creating more environmental ly friendly processes.

They have no money left for those who might need a little bit to complete some community projects, and things of that nature can be eliminated. * (15: 20) This government made a choice when it came in. I think it eliminated the Millennium Fund in the main. I talked to people just this past week who had been working on some significant projects and had been hoping that either the provincial or the federal or a combination of the two under a millennium banner might well have been able to start to move on these community projects. They were eliminat ed. That was a

June 28, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3333 priority decision by the new min ister related to budgetary information that he had, decisions he wanted to make, places where he thought he was going to save or accumulate a bit of money. But the fact is the way the announcements have been coming out, Mr. Speaker, the way the direction has been set in the departments-! know that there has been some fairly popular announcements made in Family Services, as an example, and proba bly overdue in some areas. but I would caution the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger) that as we continue with this ongoing and continued rolling out and continued development and expansion of programs that there is indeed a risk that I hope somebody is apprising him of or that he is indeed thinking of himself in terms of how he is going to finance that down the road. Probably he is sitting there ignoring my comments but wondering why it is that we are having this debate today at this stage in asking for some supplementary dollars to continue with the expenditure of the Budget that has already technical ly been voted on and which is proceeding its usual plodding way through Estimates.

I suggest that, frankly, as we go through these programs and examine them one by one and as his fellow ministers defend them and as they bring forward their priorities, he is now going to be sitting on the hot seat starting very soon, having to sit down with his colleagues and his premier to decide whether or not they can defend and fund growing programs, given what his anticipated rate of income is.

I suppose it is a little unfair to mention education, but in seeing the Min ister here at this moment, it prompts me to say that despite the fact that a lot of comment has been made about the expenditures, the priorities being put into Education, that there still is demand there, that they have barely met-particularly at the post secondary level, they have barely scratched the surface in some of the concerns that the institutions are dealing with. They have barely scratched the surface and, in fact, may have opened the Pandora' s box in the legislation that has been introdu ced.

While he did a spirited job of defending where he is at today in Question Period by sort of deflecting the questions, I would ask him when he goes home tonight and he relaxes in front of the TV or dozes off in front of the TV, whatever his choice might be, if he is bothered at all by the fact that there is going to be some serious arbitration consequences to what he is doing, and as he chats with the Minis ter of Finance (Mr. Selin ger), I wonder if he thinks to say to him, do you know what this could mean to your next budget? Do you have any idea what I may be doing to you?

I think the two of them maybe need to sit down and seriously discuss where this type of-1 mean, this was obviously a promise to the Manitoba teachers' association. I do not think we would even get an argument about that. This was an up-front comment, and I will give credit to the current government that they made it very clear, along with the teachers association, what they were going to do with Bill 72, but I am willing to bet a little bit of my salary that this Education Minister has not sat down with the Minister of Finance (Mr.

Selinger) and discussed what the implications of this might be for his budget, come December. How many of the school divisions have settled this year? I am looking back behind me. Have there been any settlements? I do not think there has. They are all waiting on where this legislation may go. If in fact some of the anticipated relaxation that may occur on the part of arbiters in looking at this because there are no longer any consequences to looking at whether or not there is an ability to pay on behalf of the local school division-again, he has opened the Pandora's box, as he did the first week in office.

What about the boundaries of the school divisions? Would they have a little more clout if they were amalgamated? Would they be able to defend themselves? Would they be able to squeeze out some administrative savings? Believe me, in many cases, the education system, the health care system and others, there have been savings rung out of them over the last few years. [interjection} Well, the Member across the way shouts "cuts." He may also have to hear some day people ask him: Why have I not got a cut in my taxes? My premise in standing up to speak this afternoon is that I do not think, and I hope they

3334 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 will, but I do not think yet the min isters and the members of the Government caucus have had an opportunity to come down from the euphoria of coming into office, and dealing with the reality of where some of their decisions today are going to take them in terms of-[interjection] Well, the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) says she has fully come down. Yes, I suspect the Min ister of Labour has come down from the euphoria. How many negotiations have we got going on right at this moment? about six?

In fact, that is a very salient point in relationship to what I am trying to bring to this debate, and that is that the Min ister of Labour, along with the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell), the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak), the Minister of natural resources, for that matter, have some serious outstanding- Some Honourable Members: Conservation. Mr. Cummings: Con servation. I apologize for that slip. On the other hand, I am of the view that going back to calling the Department the Ministry of Conser vation is going back to the '50s. When I was a kid, we talked about conse rvation.

I thought we had moved into the area of the sustainable development, as opposed to- An Honourable Member: The '50s? Mr. Cummings: I was a kid in the '50s. Now the Minis ter of Labour (Ms. Barrett) seems to have a little trouble believing that, but you see what politics does to a very young kid. But anyway, leaving aside my personal aging, I think that it does demonstrate the concerns that the Min ister of Fin ance is going to have to start taking into consideration, every time one of his colleagues comes forward with another new program, or every time he comes forward with an enrichment of a program.

Every time the Min ister of Labour says, oh, we have an impending strike over here, he probably should be sitting up at night, saying where are these revenues going to be coming from? Because I think, if he were to go back to his people in Treasury Board and ask them to tally up the potential implications of the negotiations in the public sector that are occurring right now and the pent up expenditures in health care-when I say that, I say that health care needs to be changed and revised.

Putting extra dollars into it is not the only criterion by which the success of management of health care problems is going to be dealt with or judged by. It will indeed be a combina tion of commitment of dollars and a willingness and the leadership and the sincere evaluation of what is requir ed for the public health sector in this country, because if we are at 39 percent, 39.5 percent, 38? Oh, what is a billion? Did somebody not say that once? The Minister of Fin ance says he does not want to be quoted as saying that and he did not.

The fact is that he might well be facing that kind of a question though and that is the reason I believe it is important that this information be put on the record now, as he proceeds into, through summer and very quickly we will be in the fall session of his year, which really begins in October and November to start talking about the finances for 2001.

I hate to bring him bad news but, by and large, if it was not for the hog industry and the expan sion thereof , which incl udes PST and all of the construction that is going on, the added growth in jobs, the taxation that will come from the salaries there, that agriculture is one of the economic engines of this province that is not necessarily going to top up his coffers by the end of this taxation year, particularly the grain sector, where things have been extraordinarily bad given the inflationary costs that people are dealing with.

When that backs up, let me segue into what happens when agriculture is not as buoyant as it might be, other than the areas I indicated. * (15 :30) The next thing that happens is the imple ment dealers find that all of a sudden the quarter million-dollar tractors and combines that are sitting on the lot, sit there, and, in fact, unless they find a way of financing them, they will be still sitting there a year from now, and unfortunately that means that there again the tax revenues that the Min ister of Fin ance could normally expect, will not be seen to be realized.

Now we know that, on the broader picture, that Manitoba's economy today is, in fact,

June 28, 2000 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3335 growing at a rate that has been quite extra ordinary in terms of its sustained demand for resources, demand for jobs, demand for further opportunity by people seeking employment, to the point where we do not have enough quality, well-trained and appropriate technology avail able within this province.

But there is an anomaly that continues to present itself in the sustained opportunity within this province, in terms of growth in revenues to the Government, because if Ottawa does not come through, and they have a history of not coming through-now perhaps as they get closer to their own election window maybe the Minister of Finance will luck out.

I would hate to think that the economy of this province is being managed as best the Min ister of Fin ance can do it, I would hate to think it is being managed on the basis of maybe Ottawa will and maybe we will luck out and Ottawa, maybe this time they will come through on a national highways program, maybe this time they will actually restore some of the funding for health care rather than a one-off situation.

If the Min ister of Fin ance believes that Ottawa is giving him the whole goods in terms of how they might restore financing then I suggest he listen carefully to the words that are being uttered by the politicians in Ottawa. I must admit that after a period of time in government I have less, not more, respect for how, and more appreciation of problems at a national and provincial level in terms of whether or not we can trust and expect that relationship that provinces should have with Ottawa to continu e on a non-c onfronta tional and an unbiased manner.

I refer specifically to transf ers of potential dollars for health care. The fact is that Ottawa has talked very often about how they will restore health care funds to the provinces but every time they do it, they do it on a one-off opportunity. They do not do it on the basis of restoring the full complementary dollars, if you will, that were available histori cally to the provinces. Now they are saying, well, we have restored some of the funding, but every time they made the announcement over the last couple of years, they made it on a one-off. That means that it is there today and gone tomorrow.

If the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) lucks out and it is still there tomorrow for whatever reason, it is then built into the base or Ottawa truly decides that they have an obligation to return some of the funding to health care expenditures in this province- An Honourable Member: Or maybe just facing an election. Mr. Cummings: Well, yes, as my colleague from Lakeside says, obviously, maybe just facing an election will cause them to be much more consid erate about that.

But I am quite prepared to say that I will stand up with anyone in this province or any other province that is prepared to make a case about why it is that this is a one-off situation. This Min ister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), if he is not cautious, will get caught, and he will find himself in a very dif ficult position when he has to meet the obligations of the balanced budget legislation. Now, I do not know what plans he might have or what figures he may now be receiving that I do not have access to.

I am not implying that I get any leaks, I am implying that he will be receiving infonn ation that I do not have access to, but it seems to me that the opportunity for this to crash and bum is at least 50-50. Because if Ottawa says they are going to return money to health care but they do it on a conditional basis, think of the ramifications for the plans that this government may have for the restoration of health care if in fact those conditions are, well, we will restore this many millions if it goes into this program or we will restore this many millions if it goes into this program.

They will stand up and say, we have restored 2X millions into health care, and you are left with all of the other programs that you were hoping they were going to support. Mean while they are starting a new program, which you are going to end up having to put 50-cent dollars into. I suggest that this Min ister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) needs to build himself a cushion now, not three years from now. He needs to maintain that very same cushion that he was so adamant and his colleagues were so adamant about and ref erred to disparagingly.

I think it started off as Stefan son's old sock or maybe Manness's old sock, and it became the slush fund; it became the rainy day fund. I mean, there were all sorts of

3336 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 derogatory comments that were made by his predecessors when they were in opposition. But call it what he likes, if this Min ister of Finance or this government do not leave themselves some flexibility, if they do not leave themselves some opportunity to be able to manoeuver in the face of what might be unre liable support from Ottawa, then I suggest that he is going to find himself in a very difficult situation as relates to the balanced budget legislation.

Of course, he has had a little fun at our expense in the last not too distant past, the last few days, as a matter of fact. He introduced Bill 41, The Balanced Budget, Debt Repayment and Taxpayer Protection Amendment and Con sequential Amendments Act. He made some observation about how it would now become improper to reduce any of the debts of the province-1 believe those were the words he used; I stand to be corrected on this-but his implication was that the sale of Crown assets could not be used to build up the reserve or that it had to be used to pay down debt.

Well, that may sell quite well with the public until one gets into further discussion of that bilL If there are applications of this bill that maybe do leave him some ability to move, some ability to adjust his finances so that he can maintain balanced budget legislation in this province, then that is fine, and I will give him credit for it. But, if he finds himself and his administration should find itself where it has to amend balanced budget legislation in a way that says, well, it is no longer, maybe we could finance highways. There would be a way that you could balance the Budget very quickly.

We will just borrow the money for construction of highways, and we will leave that outside of the balanced budget legislation. That would be one way that he could, on the surface, appear to be balancing his books, but in the end I think would be doing a tremendous disservice to the taxpayers and to the reputation of this province with the underwriters whom he has to meet and deal with in terms of floating bonds in support of the funding of this province. But, Mr. Speaker, I am beginning to wander a little bit in my dissertation.

My concern is more that as I look at the interim financing that is being proposed today, it brings back a flood of these thoughts about whether or not this Min ister of Fin ance (Mr. Selinger) is going to be able to stand up to the demands of his colleagues and bring a balance. I am not saying that the demands of his colleagues might be unreason able. I am not even going to talk about whether or not they should be prioritized.

I am saying that there are legitimate reasons to be concerned at this stage in a government's life about whether or not they are prepared to bring the discipline, to put the balance in place between expenditure and income, so that they can truly say that they have lived up to the spirit and the conditions of the balanced budget legislation. * (15: 40) You know, there was a lot of criticism of balanced budget legislation when it was introduced, and I will not go into quoting some of the current Cabinet min isters and what they felt about balanced budget legislation, but I hope, to borrow a term from today's Question Period, that, in fact, there has been a conversion on the road to Damascus because if there has not, then I feel truly sorry for the Min ister of Fin ance in trying to deal with the hounds at the door, if you will, on how these issues may be settled.

The fact is balanced budget legislation, by comparison to many other jurisdictions, is good legislation. It sends a signal on behalf of this province to other provinces, to investors. It sends a signal to those who would lend money, and this province along with most others has to have some support to borrow from the private sector from time to time.

It provides a sense of confidence and a sense of direction that gives everybody, including the taxpayers within the community, a sense of stability, that they can know that no matter whether the governments change, whether the economies rise or fall or whether the opportunities for national and international exports rise or fall, that the people in a position to make a decision and decide on the prioritization of revenue and expenditure within this province are bound by certain wide guidelines. Those guidelines do not compound their problems. They do not confound decision makers.

They simply say that in the end the

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3337 Minister of Fi nance and his colleagues must make a decision that falls within those wide parameters, and having done that- Point of Order Mr. David Faurschou (Portage Ia Prairie): Mr. Speaker, House rules are the reason I am standing at this point in time. We are limited in our communications to that of the services of the page when honourable members are within the Chamber. It has been observed that the Honourable Member for Selkirk (Mr.

Dewar) had in his possession just moments ago an electronic device for communication purposes, and I would appreciate the Speaker calling this member to order and to ask that the particular device be removed from the Chamber. Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised by the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Faurschou), I would ask the Honourable Member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) to please put the item away, and I would like to see it outside of the Chamber afterwards. We will continue. *** Mr. Cummings: Well, thank you. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, you do set a good standard for decorum in this Chamber, and I appreciate your direction as Speaker. I thank the Member for Portage for his intervention. As I was saying, in the end, the Minister of Finance has to deal with his balanced budget legislation. I know that what he introduces today is not going to make or break his ability to meet the conditions of his budget. We are voting on dollars that government needs to govern and to pay its current bills; I understand that.

But I think it is appropriate that the Minister of Finance also consider that he has a larger and more difficult objective that he has to meet, and that relates directly to the conditions that I said of the balanced budget legislation. But his bigger challenge, and one on which I am sure he needs no advice from me, but nevertheless I feel that on behalf of my con- stituents it is fair that I do provide my thoughts on this.

He has probably had a taste of this already, but I hope that he also asks his depart ment and asks his trusted advisors to give him some view of the an ticipated costs that come with the growth of a number of his programs, some of which are newly introduced, most of which will be expansion of existing programs. One that I continue to use here and everywhere else that people will listen to me is the example of the Pharmacare program and how that became a program that everybody has a right to expect, that everybody has a right to equal access.

We have one of the most generous ones in this province, but that generosity puts an added burden on the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger) to make sure that he can indeed pay it as expenses arise and as we become increasingly dependent on those types of programs. In conclusion, I think the Minister of Finance understands what I am saying. I wish him well in terms of being able to carry that load and bring the balance to this government.

I hope that they are able to pull together within themselves the proper discipline that would be required in order to make this indeed become a reality to be able to stay within the guidelines of balanced budget legislation; and, secondly, that they will be able to recognize that expenditure also means that they have an onus upon them to deal with the ref ormation, to deal with the improvement. Expenditures alone will not solve some of the problems with which this govern ment and every other government in Canada are faced today.

This is not so much a partisan comment to the Minister of Finance as it is a comment about the reality of Confederation as we see it today, and the issues that we are facing, on a broad basis, in this country, on taxation. So, with that, I will close my comments on this supply bill, and I will tum the floor over to the next speaker. Mrs. Joy Smith (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to this bill. I want to put some comments on the record about the concerns I have for the lack of vision, the lack of planning in this budget.

As a new MLA coming into this House, I was surprised to find out that we had a bogus or a phantom deficit that was

3338 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 brought on by the present government coming into power. We find at this point, surprise, surprise, that indeed we will have a balanced budget. Indeed, there is no deficit. Indeed, the books are in order as they should be. Mr. Speaker, today I alert Manitobans to the lack of vision, the lack of planning and the lack of concerns for the future. I want to address the lack of planning for the young people and the young entrepreneurs here in our province.

The previous government built a province that had promise, that had vision, and it was largely due to the fact that the fiscal house was in order. Mr. Conrad Santos, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair Mr. Deputy Speaker, this present govern ment went into a wonderful opportunity to provide Manitobans with lower taxes, to provide business opportunities, to provide an education system with the kinds of dollars that we needed to shore it up. I want to just think back approximately 11 years ago when the former government came into power.

We were at a point where we were on the verge of bankruptcy due to the former NDP government. We had to be very careful to make sure that the books were balanced, that the deficit was paid down, that the millions of dollars put into the Budget and to the deficit were not a waste. *( 1 5: 50) I have to say at this time that Manitobans were on the verge of bankruptcy. Manitobans were at a point 11 years ago when the members from this side of the House started to begin their time of power in government. They had a very difficult task. At that time, hard decisions had to be made to save the province.

Decisions had to be made in the areas of education, in particular, which I will address, where cuts had to be made to ensure that we had balance. This present government, the NDP Government, talks about fairness and balance. I have problems, Mr. Deputy Speaker, understanding where they are coming from in terms of planning for the future. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, as I rise in this House and think about the kinds of strides that the former government made in paying down the deficit, in providing jobs, in building an education system that had to have new curriculums put together, that had to deal with issues in a growing population, that had to deal with issues and a new clientele coming into the schools, all these challenges had to be met.

Coming into the year 2000, this province was a province that, as I said before, had promise, incredible promise, promise for the young people, promise for an improved university, promise for new curriculums, accountability, testing, all the things that make the young people here available on the world market, not only here in Manitoba but in Canada, in the United States and all across the world. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we had a province of hope and vision.

Making the hard decisions when our province was in such dire straits 11 years ago, or approximately 11 years ago, when the Tory government came into power was something that was made better due to the planning, due to the vision and due to the knowledge of fiscal management that our government had on th is side of the House. There are concerns I had as a new MLA coming in. I wondered at the fake deficit. I wondered at the Budget speech. As a new MLA listening to the members opposite present their budget, there was nothing there, absolutely nothing there. It said nothing. There were no plans.

There were no visions for the future. Now as we go into nine months later where the NDP Government has been in power, has had a chance to show Manitobans what its plans or vision for the future is, I stand here with much disappointment, because this government is living day to day. It virtually is a tax and spend government. Because of the way Manitoba was set up before the NDP Government came into power, this government had an opportunity to build Manitoba. I do not see that happening. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, my concern now is the fact that we have had more transfer payments come to this province this year from the federal government than we have had in the his tory of Manitoba. We not only have a deficit that was being paid down, we not only had new jobs, we not only had an educational system that had new curricula. people working together, parental

June 28, 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3339 involvement in terms of Regulation 54/96, where parents were an integral part. We had adult education centres set up. We had the kind of vision where partnerships were being expanded into every part of the province, into all parts of communities. Now I see a government that has a lack of vision in the area of education that is going to cause catastrophe within five years.

As I look at the bogus funding announcement that was made by members opposite in terms of the funding to schools, I would like to talk about some of the things I have heard from across the province. "NDP gets F for Funding." Monday, February 21, shortly after the Budget came out, hea dlines: "NDP gets F for Funding." Why? Because the bogus announcement of a 3.8 funding to the school divisions did not take a lot of factors into accountability, into fact.

Number one, I understand that the new minister and the members opposite, some of them are very new, and I can understand the lack of putting a budget together that would actually build on the budgetary needs of school divisions. Morris MacDonald landed up having a -14.7% funding, in actual fact.

The NDP Government, members opposite, cut the budget to adult education centres, did not take into account the programming that was put into place to build a better Manitoba, to build a better education system for Manitoba students, to build an education system where students could go out into the workf orce, where students could go out any place in the world and hold their heads high and know that they had an education that would take them into the new millennium. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, Lynn Lake had a -2.2% budget; Turtle Mountain realized a 0.6% funding; Winnipeg Tech Voc, 0 percent; Rhineland, 0 percent; Snow Lake, 0.3 percent; Mystery Lake, 0.4 percent; Boundary, 0.4 percent; Duck Mountain, 0.6 percent. I daresay that this government has no under standing about funding, has no understanding about budgets. We saw that when the bogus deficit announcement came out. Now we know there is no deficit. They should apologize to Manitobans for misleading statements like that. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, when we talk about the education funding, we heard that each school division expected 3.8 percent without an explanation as to what they would really get and found out very soon, within a month, that that funding did not go ahead. In actual fact, the school divisions had a minus funding per centage. These are irresponsible announcements made by members opposite. As we look to the plans and we look to what is happening in terms of the plans, there are some things happening in the Budget that are alarming. I want to talk about something that not much has been said about, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

These members opposite, this NDP government, has virtually closed down schools of choice. As we look at the wants and needs of students and parents across the province, parents wanted an opportunity in a democratic society to choose schools according to what courses their children needed. What is most important is what happens in the homes of families across Manitoba where parents and students sit down together and they talk about what their goals are for their own chi ldren in the school system.

When the Tory government was in power, we spent a lot of time going all across the province, finding out what was required. It was a horrendous and very valuable point in time in the hi story of education here in Manitoba. The archaic curriculums were let go. We found out that teachers and parents were saying the curriculums were so outdated, all of it had to be redone. We found out that parents were saying: please give us accountability in the system. We want to know that our children are reading and writing at grade level and computating at grade level.

They demanded that testing and account ability be put into the schools. * (16: 00) The need for meaningful parental involve ment was something that was top on our list, Mr. Deputy Speaker. This resulted in the former Tory budget putting $45,000 into the Manitoba Association of Parent Councils, and I have to commend the members opposite for continuing that practice because the parental involvement initiative across this province is of paramount importance. Schools need the support. Teachers

3340 LE GISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 28, 2000 cannot do it alone. It is a 50-50 partnership that should happen between schools and teachers. As I talk to teachers, they need the support; they need the help of parents. They need to have the kind of assurance that parents and communities will support and help so the ownership is not all on the teachers' shoulders.

I have to acknowledge that we have gone through a time when we had a great deal put on the education system and we slowed down the introduction of curriculum instruments into the school divisions because we found that it was just too much for teachers to have to incorporate on a daily basis. We understood that and when our testing practices went in, we had to put in a budget, unlike this government in the area of assessment, evaluation and testing.

Unlike members opposite, we put in a substantial budget to address the fact that students needed to be tested so we knew how they were doing in the school, whether they could read, write and computate at an acceptable level. Teachers and parents were needing that. To do that, we helped the teachers, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We got supports in there. We got teachers in correcting tests. We paid for teachers to correct those tests. In fact, our own current Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell) was one of those people who used to come to Manitoba Education and Training and correct tests.

So you see the importance of the integration and the partnership among parents, teachers, principals, trustees and the importance that students when they finish Senior 4 that they do not have bogus report cards, but the report cards are a true account of what is happening. Going back to the schools of choice, schools of choice have actually been decimated in this province. This present NDP government has very little understanding of the kind of funding that has to be allowed, the kind of opportunities that have to be presented to the students across Manitoba. They have actually shut down schools of choice.

This is a horrendously disastrous blow to the province of Manitoba. The schools of choice have been altered. It used to be that, when a student left a school division, the money went with the school division to receive the student, so programs could be put in place and kept there so the student's education could be maintained. Now what has happened is schools of choice are closed. I fear, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that a lot of people will not even know about this until September, October, because this minister and the

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-1-53
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 1st hansardpdf 53.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a77f7357c170989e1836719a2026c448d7153016

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