Manitoba Hansard — 6 June 2013 (Sitting 54B, 40th Legislature, 2nd Session)

40-2-54b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Fortieth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Daryl Reid Speaker Vol. LXV No. 54B - 1:30 p.m., Thursday, June 6, 2013 ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Fortieth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital NDP ALLUM, James Fort Garry-Riverview NDP ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley NDP ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson NDP BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli NDP BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park NDP BRAUN, Erna Rossmere NDP BRIESE, Stuart Agassiz PC CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East NDP CHIEF, Kevin, Hon. Point Douglas NDP CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan NDP CROTHERS, Deanne St.

James NDP CULLEN, Cliff Spruce Woods PC DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk NDP DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FRIESEN, Cameron Morden-Winkler PC GAUDREAU, Dave St. Norbert NDP GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Liberal GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach PC GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC HOWARD, Jennifer, Hon. Fort Rouge NDP IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Richmond NDP JHA, Bidhu Radisson NDP KOSTYSHYN, Ron, Hon. Swan River NDP LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. Dawson Trail NDP MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns NDP MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden PC MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Flor, Hon. Logan NDP MARCELINO, Ted Tyndall Park NDP MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel NDP MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East PC NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake NDP OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River NDP PALLISTER, Brian Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PETTERSEN, Clarence Flin Flon NDP REID, Daryl, Hon. Transcona NDP ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Kewatinook NDP RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia NDP ROWAT, Leanne Riding Mountain PC SARAN, Mohinder The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron St. Paul PC SELBY, Erin, Hon. Southdale NDP SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Verendrye PC STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo PC STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin NDP SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto NDP WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas NDP WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WIGHT, Melanie Burrows NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC Vacant Morris

2055 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, June 6, 2013 The House met at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Speaker: Good afternoon, everyone . Please be seated. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Mr. Speaker: Introduction of bills. Seeing no bills, move on to– PETITIONS Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for the petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation and will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. This petition signed by J. Hutchinson, S. Hughes and L. Hunnam and many, many more fine Manitobans. Mr.

Speaker: In accordance with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to have been received by the House. Petitions–the honourable member for Lac du Bonnet. Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislati ve Assembly. And these are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. This petition is signed by R. Dufily, D. Stefiuk, R. Stefiuk and many, many more fine Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. Municipal Amalgamations–Reversal Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

And these are the reasons for the petition: The provincial government recently announced plans to amalgamate any municipalities with fewer than 1,000 constituents. The provincial government did not consult with or notify the affected municipalities of the decision prior to the Throne Speech announced on November 19th, 2012, and has further imposed unrealistic deadlines. If the provincial government imposes amalgamations, local democratic representation will be drastically limited while not providing any real improvements in cost savings.

Local governments are further concerned that amalgamation will fail to address the serious issues currently facing municipalities, including an absence of reliable infrastructure funding and timely flood compensation.

2056 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 Municipalities deserve to be treated with respect. Any amalgamations should be voluntary in nature and led by the municipalities themselves. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Local Government afford local governments the respect they deserve and reverse his decision to force municipalities with fewer than 1, 000 people –or constituents to amalgamate. This petition's signed by E. Thompson, H. Boucher, A. Arran and many, many more Manitobans. Mr.

Blaine Pedersen (Midland): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background to this petition is as follows: The provincial government recently announced plans to amalgamate any municipalities with fewer than 1,000 constituents. The provincial government did not consult with or notify the affected municipalities of this decision prior to the Throne Speech announcement on November 19th, 2012, and has further imposed unrealistic deadlines.

If the provincial government imposes amalgamations, local democratic representation will be drastically limited while not providing any real improvements in cost savings. Local governments are further concerned that amalgamation will fail to address the serious issues currently facing municipalities, including an absence of reliable infrastructure funding and timely flood compensation. Municipalities deserve to be treated with respect. Any amalgamations should be voluntary in nature and led by the municipalities themselves.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Local Government afford loca l governments the respect they deserve and reverse his decision to force municipalities with fewer than 1,000 constituents to amalgamate. And this petition is signed by H. Fleming, E. Smadelle, K. Katchur and many more fine Manitobans. Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.

And these are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum.

And this is signed by L. De La Fuente, L. De La Fuente, E. Trawon and many others, Mr. Speaker. Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase in the PST is excessi ve taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And this petition is signed by K. Rodgers, H. Guenther, K. Philipchok and many, many others, Mr. Speaker.

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2057 Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye) : I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point wit hout the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legisla tive Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government not to raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. This petition is signed by D. Fournier, D. Baker, S. Mackinder and many more fine Manitobans. Mr. Ron Schuler ( St. Pau l): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial gover nment wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legal, required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. This is signed by R. Harper, D. Cooper, J. Alexander and many other Manitobans. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. * (13:40) And these are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. And

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And, Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by J. Dauk, L. Essex, L. Baker and many, many other Manitobans. Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur- Virden): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. And these are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Throughout –through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without legally –the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum.

2058 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 And this petition is signed by D. Boulanger, A. Frank, J. Wilson and many, many others, Mr. Speaker. Municipal Amalgamations–Reversal Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to this petition is as follows: The provincial government recently announced plans to amalgamate any municipalities with fewer than a thousand constituents.

The provincial government did not consult with or notify the affected municipalities of this decision prior to the Throne Speech announcement on November 19th, 2012, and has further imposed unrealistic deadlines. If the provincial government imposes amalgamations, local democratic representation will be drastically limited while not providing any real improvements in cost savings. Local governments are further concerned that amalgamation will fair to –fail to address the serious issues currently facing municipalities, including an absence of reliable infrastructure funding and timely flood compensation.

Municipalities deserve to be treated with respect. Any amalgamat ions should be voluntary in nature and led by the municipalities themselves. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To request that the Minister of Local Government afford local governments the respect they deserve and reverse his decision to force municipalities with fewer than a thousand constituents to amalgamate. This petition is signed by A. Lee, H. Campbell, J. Buick and many, many other fine Manitobans. Provincial Sales Tax Increase–Referendum Mr.

Cameron Friesen (Morden -Winkler): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election. Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to in crease the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when majo r tax increases are necessary.

We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And this petition is signed by C. McTavish, P. Baker, D. Staplet on and many other fine Manitobans. Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. These are the reasons for this petition:

(1) The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

(2) Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legally required referendum.

(3) An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families.

(4) Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. Signed by S. Stewart, B. Chartrand and S. Romanceur and many others, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. And these are the reasons for this petition: The provincial government promised not to raise taxes in the last election.

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2059 Through Bill 20, the provincial government wants to increase the retail sales tax, known as the PST, by one point without the legall y required referendum. An increase to the PST is excessive taxation that will harm Manitoba families. Bill 20 strips Manitobans of their democratic right to determine when major tax increases are necessary. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge the provincial government to not raise the PST without holding a provincial referendum. And, Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by P. Siemens, R. Friesen, H.

Toews and many other Manitobans. Hydro Capital Development–NFAT Review Mr. Cliff Cullen (Spruce Woods): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. These are the reasons for this petition:

(1) Manitoba Hydro was mandated by the provincial government to commence a $21- billion capital development pl an to service uncertain electricity export markets.

(2) In the last five years, competition from alternative energy sources is decreasing the price and demand for Manitoba's hydroelectricity and causing the financial viability of this capital plan to be questioned.

(3) The $21- billion capital plan requires Manitoba Hydro to increase domestic electricity rates by up to 4 per cent annually for the next 20 years and possibly more if export opportunities fail to materialize. We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows: To urge that the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro create a complete and transparent needs-for-and-alternatives-to review of Manitoba Hydro's total capital development plan to ensure the financial viability of Manitoba Hydro. This petition is signed by F. Wayte, K. LaLonde, J. Rolfe and many other fine Manitobans. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I have a number of guests to introduce. I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today 19 representatives of the consular corps of Winnipeg, including the newly arrived consul general of Iceland, Hjalmar Hannesson. On behalf of all honourable members, we welcome you here this afternoon. And also in the public gallery, we have from Prairie Chicks Red Hat group 13 Red Hat ladies under the direction of Ruth Smart. This group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Kirkfield Park (Ms. Blady).

And also in the public gallery, w e have today from Neil Campbell School 45 grade 4 and 5 students under the direction of Mr. Alvin Dyck. This group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). And also in the public gallery today, we have with us from Rivers Collegiate 25 grade 9 students under the direction of Ms. Lesley McFadden. This group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Riding Mountain (Mrs. Rowat). On behalf of all honourable members, we'd like to welcome all of you here this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTIONS Manitoba Hydro Future Development Costs Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, my questions today are in – concerning the biggest gamble in Manitoba history, and that would be the NDP's plan to supersize Manitoba Hydro. And I guess the intent of my question, Mr. Speaker, is to ask the government about their ability to project spending amounts. They've been consistent in exceeding their spending estimates each year in government. I know that the Wuskwatim project was projected initially to have cost $900 million; the ultimate cost was actually double that or $1.8 billion.

And now the projected supersizing of the Manitoba Hydro through the two dams in the line is over $21 billion, and that to satisfy the need for the sale by this government of bargain-basement hydro to US customers at a loss. Now, every dam that the NDP has built has been

2060 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 double the estimated price, so that would make the actual costs about $42 billion. * (13:50) Given the changes in the economic and market circumstances around hydro, why is the only thing that hasn't changed the government's position on advancing this project? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, Manitoba–the economy has grown from $34 billion to $62 billion over the last decade. We grow at about 80 megawatts a year in this province, even with being No. 1 in the country for energy conservation projects, and the power will run out in 2022.

And if the members had their way and cancelled the hydro projects, we would become a net importer of hydro, of other sources of energy, Mr. Speaker, probably natural gas, but as well, coal-source energy. It would be more expensive, it would be more damaging to the environment, and it would put the Manitoba economy at a tremend ous disadvantage. That's why we're proceeding based on the advice of Hydro that if we build it now we will have it for future generations. And every time we built it, they have opposed it, just like Limestone.

We built it for $1.4 billion; it returned ov er $8 billion within 10 years and has served Manitoba extremely well every day since, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Pallister: Well, we know that rate increases are–they are going double, with this project proceeding, at a minimum. We know that Wuskwatim's costs actually have doubled. We know that the Conawapa proposal was estimated at $5 billion; today it's estimated at $10 billion, so it's doubled in just five years. However, its projected construction date is more than 12 years away.

Which begs the question, why would any government that cares about conservation cut the Power Smart program by 20 per cent? But given the spenDP record for out -of-control spending, does the Premier of Manitoba seriously expect any Manitoban to believe that he is not deliberately lowballing the costs of these projects in order to sell Manitobans? Why is his government insistent on bankrupting Manitoba Hydro? Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, first of all, it's just necessary to correct the record.

The per capita increase in spending in Manitoba is second lowest in the country over the last five years, economic growth in the top three for the country over the last five years. Manitoba Hydro–tremendous competitive advantage for our industries with the lowest rates in North America. And all the experts, including from the Conference Board of Canada, say if you're going to plan your energy future over the next hundred years the best choice is hydro. No question about it, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Pallister: Well, the key word there would be plan, Mr. Spea ker. The government doesn't have a plan.

We love Manitoba Hydro, but on this side we understand who owns it, and it's Manitobans, not the NDP government. And we love Manitoba too, and we're proud of Manitoba's success. In spite of a have-not government, M r. Speaker, we're a have province here. Hydro profits are a sixth of what they were just five years ago. Costs on projects have more than doubled. This year alone, Wuskwatim will cost Manitoba taxpayers $117 million. Keeyask is twice the size; it will co st three times as much. And I haven't even gotten to Conawapa yet, Mr. Speaker, and hopefully we don't.

And will–and how much money will this government lose? How much money will this government lose Manitobans in the next two decades when the Public Utilities Board says none of these projects will make money? Why is the Premier trying to sell Manitobans on a project that will endanger our Manitoba Hydro? Mr. Selinger: The biggest threat to Manitoba Hydro is the Leader of the Opposition, which wants to stop it in its tracks. He wants to stop the build of Manitoba Hydro in its tracks when we know we will need new power within the next nine years, by 2022.

That's exactly the same approach they took to the Manitoba Telephone System. They ran it into the ground and then they said they had to sell it off. Our rates went from the third lowest in the country to the third highest in the country, Mr. Speaker. Manitoba Hydro is the future of our economy. We will listen to the professionals of Manitoba Hydro who say we need to build it now so we can have a prosperous future for all Manitobans. We will listen to their advice; we will build it, Mr. Speaker.

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2061 Manitoba Hydro Development Concerns Mr. Ron Schuler ( St. Paul ): Well, Mr. Speaker, we're glad to hear that the Premier wants to hear from professionals. And in a report presented by Graham Lane, former PUB chair, he says–from a professional –the plans are based on questionable pr ojections of not only construction costs but also of export sales and revenue and represent the largest gamble in the Province's history. Why does this NDP government disrespect Manitoba ratepayers? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, it is this government that brought legislation in that guarantees our hydro rates, home heating rates and auto insurance rates will remain the lowest in the country. This government brought that legislation in. The members opposite said they w anted to increase all hydro rates to market rates which increase the cost to all Manitobans by 40 per cent. Here's what impartial observers have said about Manitoba Hydro. Brian–Tom Adams, an expert on energy, has said it's a gigantic advantage when it comes to rates because we use hydroelectricity for 96 per cent of our power.

He also said that our rates stayed lower because it's a publicly owned utility. The Conference Board of Canada, they have said they should–we should continue to build our northern dams, continuing the path with hydro is the more economic choice. We will pursue the more economic choice because we have a growing economy and rich exports markets, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Schuler: Well, Mr. Speaker, the only party that ever raised hydro rate s by 8 per cent in one year is the NDP party. We need no lessons about hydro rates.

In fact, one of the professionals, Graham Lane, former PUB chair, said, and I quote: Ahead of final approvals Hydro has already incurred a billion or two of costs, with much more to come, and has made commitments with First Nations, American utilities and employees that would be difficult to unwind. Why does this NDP government, why does this Premier disrespect Manitoba ratepayers in such a fashion? Mr.

Selinger: It's on ly the members opposite that want to cancel firm contracts we've entered into with our customers, firm contracts that will generate $29 billion of revenue from export sales over the next 30 years. Why do they want to cancel firm contracts? Those contracts will pay for the dams before we need the electricity in Manitoba. That formula of having export revenues pay down the cost of the dams keeps hydroelectricity less expensive in Manitoba than in any other jurisdiction in Canada. They want to cancel hydro pr ojects.

They want to cancel a project that would increase reliability called the bipole; that would put Hydro at risk. You only have to look at Ontario to see what happened when you privatize hydro and cancel projects: highest costs in North America now, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Schuler: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Premier references all of these contracts that he has. Why doesn't he table them? Let the Legislature see them. We'd like to see them.

In fact, Graham Lane, the former PUB chair, says, and I quote, and I ask the Premier to listen: It is probable that Manitoba's future domestic electricity demand growth can be met more safely, less expensively, and bring lower rate increases than the current plan. The other options that are less costly are reduced drought -related financial risks and don't involve betting the farm. The question to the Premier is, the member for St. Boniface: Why does this NDP government disrespect Manitoba ratepayers in such a fashion? Mr.

Selinger: It is precisely because we do want to keep energy costs low for Manitobans that we brought that bill in which guarantees their home heating, their electricity costs and their auto insurance costs will remain the lowest in Canada. We have met that test in our first year. We will have an impartial a ccountant firm review that every year. They will give us information inside this Legislature; it will be information that we will assure Manitobans they will have the lowest rates across Canada. The members opposite want to cancel firm contracts–they want to cancel firm contracts.

They want to cancel the bipole. It was in 1997, Mr. Speaker, when the bipoles almost went down, and instead of building a new one to protect the economy of Manitoba, which is now more than a billion dollars a week, the members op posite went and privatized the hydro system and left hydro exposed.

2062 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 We're going to protect hydro. We're going to keep building it for the future generations and the current generations of all Manitobans. * (14:00) Mental Health Crisis Response Centre Patient Wait Times Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden -Winkler): Well, Mr. Speaker, it would appear that there are already problems with the new Mental Health Crisis Response Centre that just opened this week.

The WRHA CEO recently said timely access to a variet y of crisis service options reduces unnecessary hospitalization and improves the quality of life for individuals experiencing mental health crisis. And, Mr. Speaker, I couldn't agree more. So can the minister confirm for this House that patients seeking c risis care at this new crisis -care centre have to wait no more than 15 minutes to receive care? Hon. T heresa Oswald (Minister of Health): The new Mental Health Crisis Response Centre opened on June the 3rd; today is June the 6th.

This may in fact be a record for the Conservatives in terms of slagging one of our initiatives. I would say, Mr. Speaker, that Dr. Murray Enns, the head of mental health services for the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, did indeed say that the goal would be for patients experi encing a mental health crisis to receive care within 15 minutes or less. If, in fact, the member presumably has a case for me to say where that didn't happen, certainly the goal will be 15 minutes, and we support them in trying to achieve that goal. Mr. Friesen: Mr.

Speaker, to be clear, this minister stated that patients would receive treatment within 15 minutes. But on June the 4th, the day after the centre opened, an individual contacted my office who was seeking mental health crisis care at the new crisis response centre. That individual waited for six hours in a waiting room before being seen by a health professional. The centre was short -staffed. There appeared to be confusion at the front desk, according to this individual. In fact, the family sai d they were devastated by their experience at the centre. What does the Minister of Health have to say to this family?

Ms. Oswald: Well, yes, Mr. Speaker, certainly I would say to any family, if they were to have an experience, whether it's at the Mental Health Crisis Response Centre –first of its kind in Canada, open for a total of one day, according to the member opposite–if they were going to the soon-to-be-opened Cancer QuickCare Clinic, if they were at one of the many QuickCare clinics that we've opened or at an access centre and they didn't get the care that they needed to get, we would certainly express our regret for that and we would certainly roll up our sleeves and endeavour to do better. But, Mr.

Speaker, what I won't tell them is that we'd privatize the system like their leader wants to do. Mr. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, no wonder the Conference Board of Canada just rated Manitoba last when it comes to accessibility in health care. It would seem that there's already a crisis at this minister's crisis response centre. The minister –the Premier (Mr. Selinger) stated on May the 28th, families dealing with mental health crisis no longer have to go to ER rooms for care because we have this dedicated facility for mental health crises and emergencies.

But the Premier told Manitobans, when they're dealing with a mental health crisis, this is the place they should go. So I ask this Minister of Health: Why is it that this Manitoban had to wait six hours to be seen, and why is it he was told by staff he w ould've received better care had he gone to a regular ER? Ms. Oswald: And again, the Mental Health Crisis Response Centre is designed to provide the best possible care for those families that have a loved one that's experiencing a mental health crisis. Ind eed, their goal is to see people within 15 minutes or sooner if possible. But I have to say, Mr.

Speaker, even for the Conservatives–and I tell you that I hold the bar for them so low you can't even see it –even for them, to slag the members of the crisis 'respart' centre after a mere 24 hours of operation, it's actually beyond belief. Not aim higher, but how low can they go? Assiniboia Downs Minister's Discussions Mr. Cliff Cullen ( Spruce Woods ): Just another NDP ribbon-cutting opportunity, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the plot thickens on the Assiniboine downs file. There appears to be quite a

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2063 number of NDP ministers working behind the scenes on this file. Given that Assiniboia Downs is located in the Assiniboia riding, I asked that member yesterday to explain his undertakings on negotiations. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member again: When did this member begin discussions with third parties to take over operations at Assiniboia Downs? Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister charged with the administration o f The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act ): Well, Mr.

Speaker, you know, members opposite will continue to engage in conspiracy theories, repeat various accusations, but the facts are as follows. When it comes to Assiniboine downs, there will continue to be very significant support at Assiniboine downs. What there won't be will be a –there will not be a two -tiered system for VLTs that we've had before. They will continue to receive the same rate, Mr. Speaker, that actually every single commercial site holder in the province receives. The difference, of course, is that there're 140 machines that will not be subject to the 40-machine cap. In addition to that, Mr.

Speaker, as the Finance Minister has put in place in terms of BITSA, again, they will receive a significant portion of the parimutuel levy rebated back. So they continue to receive support. The difference is we've taken $5 million from horses and we're putting it to hospitals. VLT Site-Holder Agreement Mr. Cullen: I'm going to take you back to 2011, just before the last election. In a news release dated May 5th, 2011, pertaining to the new VLT funding agreement that was signed between the Jockey Club and the Lotteries Corporation, in that news release, the member for Assiniboia (Mr.

Rondeau) stated, going forward Assiniboia Downs will have confidence knowing this funding has been strengthened, Mr. Speaker. But on the campaign trail just four months later the member is recorded to have said the government had been researching and planning to take over Assiniboia Downs for two years previous. Mr. Speaker, this is from an affidavit signed by one of his constituents which was filed in court earlier this week. Mr. Speaker, as a result of this, I want to ask the member for Assiniboia: Did he fully intend to renege on the deal right from the start? Mr. Ashton: Again, Mr.

Speaker, there's a number of major problems with the conspiracy theories from members opposite. And that is we are continuing to provide support to Assiniboine downs. We –they will continue to receive what every other VLT site holder in the province receives. They will have 140 machines, not the maximum of 40 that other site holders have, and they'll continue to get a rebate back on the parimutuel levy. And I want to say, Mr.

Speaker, that indeed we have provided very significant support, $75 million since we came into government to Assiniboine downs and, yes, we are going to be transferring from horses to hospitals. But, again, Assiniboine downs continues to get support. So the conspiracy theories of members opposite, they simply don't wash. Government Relations Mr. Cullen: Well, Mr. Speaker, we'll let the courts decide if there is conspiracy here. Mr.

Speaker, the affidavit goes on to say that the government had for some time been engaged in very detailed and ongoing planning work with the goal of the removal of the Jockey Club board and the takeover and ownership of Assiniboia Downs. Clearly, this shows very little respect for the industry and the people in the industry. In fact, the member goes on here in the affidavit saying that he's even discrediting the board and members of the board. The 'flact' and the question remains, Mr. Speaker: How would anyone who deals with the NDP government have faith that they will be treated with respect and integrity? Mr.

Ashton : Again, Mr. Speaker, we continue to provide support to Assiniboine downs. We have, by the way, also provided support to harness racing in the province, which is really important in many parts of rural Manitoba. And I want to say, Mr. Speaker, again that I know members opposite are frustrated at times that we are continuing to provide that kind of support and at the same time being able to move money into hospitals.

2064 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 But I'll put on the record, Mr. Speaker, I know the member referenced the member for Assiniboine. You know, yes, he did knock on doors; he's one the people in this Chamber that keeps in touch with his constituents better than anyone else. The member for Assiniboine has been there promoting his people in the west end of Winnipeg and that includes not only ensuring Assiniboine downs continues, which they will under this agreement, but that we move money into hospitals to provide health care for the people of Assiniboine as well. PST Increase Legality Mrs.

Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, it appears that the NDP is going to force retailers to collect the PST hike on July 1st even if the new law authorizing a PST hike has not been passed. The old la w, the taxpayer protection act, is still going to be in effect. So just to be clear: Will the Minister of Finance authorize retailers to break the current law on July 1st? Hon. Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance ): Well, Mr. Speaker, I know the members opposite would love to inject as much confusion into this matter as they can and it's to their political advantage to do that. I understand that.

I understand it doesn't put them–fit into the political motivations of members opposite. * (14:10) But, Mr. Speaker, it's clear on July 1st the tax will come forward as it should. We have the authority to do that, as has been very clearly demonstrated in legislation and in previous practice by members opposite when they brought forward the expansion of the PST to include such things as baby supplies right here in this House. It's pretty clear– Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please. The minister's time has expired. Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance knows that what he is saying is wrong.

He knows that the taxpayer protection act will still be in effect on July 1st, but he is choosing to mislead Manitobans anyway. We know that this Minister of Finance has no respect for the law; even a judge has said that. So I would like to ask the Minister of Finance: Is it his intent to force retailers to be lawbreakers just like him? Mr. Struthers: Mr. Speaker, that's just ridiculous. If she wants to–if she wants a little lesson –if she wants a little bit of a lesson in this, she should turn to the guy she sits next to, the member for Fort Whyte (Mr.

Pallister), where he said a number of years ago: I do not believe that this is true. I believe the legislation can be, by any subsequent Legislature, withdrawn or repealed, so I do not believe that the hands -being- tied argument is one that has any validity at all. Mr. Speaker, once again we see the member for Fort Whyte having two different positions, whatever suits him that day he gets up. Referendum Request Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, so this Minister of Finance is going to force retailers to collect a tax increase that is not legally permitted under the current law.

The Minister of Finance said this morning that he has the moral authority to do that. I would suggest that, if he was listening respectfully to Manitobans, he does not have the moral authority nor does he have the legal authority. So I would ask the Minister of Finance: Will he obey the current law and call a referendum on the PST hike? Mr. Struthers : Well, Mr. Speaker, if she doesn't believe the guy sitting next to her in the Legislature, maybe she'll believe O'Brien and Bosc in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition.

It says there very clearly it is the long -standing practice of Canadian governments to put tax measures i nto effect as soon as notice of the ways and means motions on which they are based are tabled in the House of Commons with the result that taxes are collected as of the date of this notice even though it may be months, if not years, before the implementing legislation is actually passed by Parliament. I'll take their word over her word any day. PST Increase Legality Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): The issue is there's a requirement for a referendum. I don't know what he doesn't get about that, Mr. Speaker.

But, you know, the NDP is saying, oh, trust us, don't worry, to the retailers, put in this illegal tax, you shouldn't have anything to be concerned about.

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2065 Now, when the Premier broke the law with an illegal filed tax return and had to pay back $76,000, he asked for a letter, a get -out-of-jail-card–free–from his own party. Well, I wonder: Will he do the same thing for retailers that he asked for for himself? Will he give them a letter saying that they're going be absolved from legal action when they break the law on July 1st? Hon. Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance ): Well, again, Mr. Speaker, the members opposite are incorrect.

On the day we brought the budget forward, Budget 2013, the tax division of our Finance Department issued the transitional rules. The retail sales tax rate changed. We do this as a matter of course. It's been done for this budget. It's been done for every budget preceding, including the budget brought forward by members opposite that expanded the PST to include baby supplies. Mr. Speaker, these rules are there for everybody to see. Every retailer can look it up. It's on the provincial website; it's on our website. There's a phone number right there that they can phone and talk to tax division people.

There should be no confusion, despite– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired. Mr. Goertzen: And the minister knows that there are three exceptions under the current law. One is that you need a referendum for a PST increase and he is ignoring that, Mr. Speaker. Now, his friend the Premier (Mr. Selinger), when he had to pay $76,000 back because he broke the election law, he went to his own party and asked for a letter, saying, give me a get -out-of-jail-card– free–I don't want to have this come back on me.

So will the Premier give to the retailer the very same thing he asked for when he broke the law? Will he give them a letter saying that they won't get sued if they bring in an illegal tax, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Struthers: Mr. Speaker, this is the same process as we used to take the tax off of bike helmets in this very budget. It's the same procedure we used when we increased the tax on cigarettes in the 2013 budget, in the 2012 budget –[interjection] Oh, that's different, she says. She can't pick and choose. Mr. Speaker, we have the authority to move forward on July 1st. We have the authority–it's clear.

We've made it clear to retailers. There should be no confusion on this issue, despite the best efforts of members opposite to muddy the waters. Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has been right about almost nothing in the last little while, but he was right about one thing this morning, because this morning on radio he said that the Progressive Conservatives are doing everything they can to block the PST increase. Mr. Speaker, I want to tell him that every one of the fine members of this caucus are doing everything we can to block this PST increase. We will do it.

We'll do it for the single mother who can't pay more. We'll do it for the famil y that doesn't want to cancel the family vacation. We'll do it for the poor and disadvantaged who are already at a food bank. Why won't you stand with us? Do the right thing and say no to a PST increase, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Struthers : And every member opposite is blocking every nickel of this money that's going into schools and hospitals and roads and bridges and daycares, Mr. Speaker.

And not only that, but every member opposite–every single member opposite–has said they would cut hospitals, they would cut daycares, they would cut schools. They would tear back on the amount of support that we put towards infrastructure in this province. Mr. Speaker, when they were in government in the '90s, they fired nurses and they laid off teachers. They starved our infrastructure programs, and we're not going to let them away with that. Municipalities Roadwork Projects Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, yesterday the NDP held a media conference to announce that they were getting into the business of building streets in Winnipeg, without even telling or–the mayor or inviting him. Before the NDP's announcements, CBC quoted Mayor Katz as saying: I don't even know what it is, so I'm kind of dark–in the dark on this one. This extraordinary scenario suggests the Premier doesn't have enough to do in his own job and has taken over the job of mayor and council in Winnipeg. My question to the Premier: Would he care–

2066 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired. Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): I was very pleased to be in southwest Winnipeg yesterday with the Minister of Local Government (Mr. Lemieux), as well as the local MLA for Fort Garry-Riverview, and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, we were pleased to announce that we are going to be a hundred per cent funding our portion of the improvement of McGillivray Boulevard. We will be doing a hundred per cent funding along Corydon Avenue. We will be doing Garwood Avenue.

These are the priorities the City of Winnipeg has identified and now we're putting our funding into it, funding that is desperately needed in that part of the city. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I thought we're doing pretty good. We almost made it all the way through, so I'd like to thank honourable members for getting us to this point without any interruptions from me. Introduction of Guests Mr.

Speaker: But before I recognize the honourable member for River Heights for a second supplementary question, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the loge to my left where we have Mr. Jim Downey, a former member of the Assembly. On behalf of all honourable members, we welcome you here this afternoon. * * * Mr. Speaker: Now, please, I ask for the co- operation of all honourable members, just keep the level down a little bit. * (14:20) Phosphorus Reduction Targets Government Timeline Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, when the Premier decides which government he's running, maybe we can get things moving. There are a number of projects in this community which are stuck because of the bad relations between the Premier and the mayor: treatment of sewage in Winnipeg to rem ove phosphorus, rapid transit. Last week, I asked the Premier for a date when phosphorus would be removed from the sewage in the city of Winnipeg. The–I ask the Premier today: Can he give us a date when both the North End plant and the combined sewer p roblem will be solved so that phosphorus no longer streams from the city into Lake Winnipeg? Hon.

Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, that's exactly the reason we brought in the save Lake Winnipeg legislation, to reduce the amount of phosphorus loading into Lake Winnipeg. The members opposite opposed that legislation until the very last minute, and then they voted for it. And then in the election, they opposed it again. And then when the time came to put the money in the budget, they opposed it again. Mr. Speaker, we have a program. The West End treatment has been upgraded to sufficient levels to deal with phosphorus.

The South End treatment plant is under way as we speak, and our funding is available for the North End plant. And the City is under a leg islative requirement to get that done within the next five years. Combined Sewage Separation Government Timeline Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, the deteriorating relationship between the Premier and the mayor of Winnipeg is evident to ever yone. Yesterday, City Councillor Dan Vandal, chair of the City's public works committee, told CBC, there's kind of a chill in the provincial-municipal relations. Mr. Speaker, Lake Winnipeg is getting worse.

The Premier is fiddling. Manitobans need to know when the combined sewers will be separated, in five years, in 10 years or in slow motion, 40 years? I ask the Premier, whose government has had more than 13 years to set a date for the separation of the combined sewers: By what specific date will the combined sewers be separated so that the healing of Lake Winnipeg can begin? Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the City is looking at solutions. They have been spending significant amounts of money on doing combined sewers, separating them, actual ly, so that there are separate sewers.

They're also looking at storage options to make sure there's not –when excessive rains come, the waters do not wash into the Red River. They have statutory requirements to reduce the amount of phosphorus going into t he Red River. Those statutory requirements were passed by this

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2067 side of the House and funded to a third for the treatment plants. That's what this side of the House is committed to. The members opposite have voted against that every single budget. Mr. Spe aker, there is a difference. When we actually say we're going to do something, we put the resources in place to do it. The members opposite, including the liver –leader from River Heights, have voted against those additional resources.

So even though he fei gns concern for the environment, when it really counts and you have to put the dollars in place to do it, he votes against it. Law Enforcement Government Initiatives Mr. Clarence Pettersen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, I know that families come first in all things we do on our side of the House. I'd like to ask the Justice Minister, inform the House on recent investments to our valuable provincial police force, the RCMP, that help these hard-working police officers protect Manitobans. An Honourable Member: Point of order. Point of Order Mr.

Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Point of order, Mr. Speaker. I refer to Beauchesne's sixth edition,

section 409, rule No. 3, that indicates that the question in question period ought to seek information and must not suggest its own answer. Clearly, the question answered–or asked was regarding something that's already been announced. It is already suggesting its own answer. In fact, not only did the minister, I'm sure, already have his answer written, but I'm sure he's also written the question for the member. I ask you to call him to order, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Jennifer Howard (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, I know my honourable friend from Steinbach knows well that every member of this House has the right, and should have the opportunity, to ask questions and that it isn't your role to pass judgment on the–on those questions, that it is up to each member to put those. Now, if there's a new standard for questions that people should only ask questions to–in which they do not suggest the answer, I'm going to be up on a lot of points of order, I guess, in the H ouse, because, certainly, the quality of their questions has not improved dramatically from what I can see. But, once again, Mr.

Speaker, I understand that perhaps members opposite aren't ready for the work of the afternoon, which will be Estimates. I understand if the Leader of the Opposition isn't ready to continue on those questions to the Premier (Mr. Selinger). We're ready to go, but if they need some more time and want to spend an hour to get all their questions together, certainly, I will expect the member opposite to shortly stand up, challenge the ruling and have the bells ring for an hour so they can get their homework done and we can proceed with some work this afternoon. Mr.

Speaker: On the point of order raised by the Official Opposition House Leader, I thank honourable members for their advice, but I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, 2009,

chapter 11, page 510, that indicates that the Speaker ensures that replies adhere to the dictates of order and decorum and parliamentary language, and the Speaker, however, is not responsible for the quality and content of replies to questions. So, therefore, I must respectfully rule that there is no point of order. Mr. Goertzen: Not to let you down, Mr. Speaker, with respect, I challenge the ruling. Mr. Speaker: The ruling of the Chair having been challenged, shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained? Voice Vote Mr.

Speaker: All those in favour of sustaining the ruling of the Chair, please signify by saying aye. Some Honourable Members: Aye. Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, signify by saying nay. Some Honourable Members: Nay. Mr. Speaker: Opinion of the Chair, the Ayes have it. Recorded Vote Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Spea ker, we would request a recorded vote.

2068 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote having been requested, call in the members. Order, please. The question before the House is: Shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained? Division A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: Yeas Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Bjornson, Blady, Braun, Caldwell, Chief, Chomiak, Crothers, Dewar, Gaudreau, Howard, Irvin-Ross, Jha, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Marcelino (Logan), Marcelino (Tyndall Park), Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Pettersen, Robinson, Rondeau, Saran, Selinger, Struthers, Swan, Wiebe.

Nays Briese, Cullen, Driedger, Ewasko, Friesen, Gerrard, Goertzen, Helwer, Maguire, Mitchelson, Pedersen , Rowat, Schuler, Smook, Stefanson, Wishart. Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 31, Nays 16. Mr. Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has accordingly been sustained. * * * Mr. Speaker: Now, I belie ve we're returning to question period. I believe the Minister of Justice was just about to answer the question. Hon. Andrew Swan (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, it is a –great to have a question on public safety, and I do thank the member for Flin Flon (Mr.

Pettersen), who works hard to represent his northern communities. You know, Mr. Speaker, support for law enforcement across Manitoba is a huge

part in increasing public safety, and today I join the Premier (Mr. Selinger) and the hard -working and brave women and men of the RCMP to announce that Budget 2013 will add five more officers to the complement in Manitoba at a time when other governments are making very different choices.

We also announced more than $160,000 in proceeds from the Criminal Property Forfeiture fund for the RCMP " D" Division in Winnipeg, including safety equipment for tactical unit me mbers, night vision equipment to assist and protect officers, more signs to improve road safety and kits to help keep our traffic services officers and drivers safe. Through our laws, investments and the hard work of police in Manitoba, we're continuing to use criminal property forfeiture. We're taking money from the bad guys; we're giving it to the good guys.

We're making our communities safer, and I do thank the member for Flin Flon– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. The minister's time has expired. PST Increase Provincial Comparison Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Mr. Speaker, an accountant from Neepawa is moving to Saskatchewan, so he compared his provincial income tax. In Saskatchewan, he will pay $2,500 less. In addition, his auto insurance is lower because of larger discounts for a clean driving record. He will also be paying 3 per cent less in provincial sales tax. The Premier (Mr.

Selinger) claims that Manitobans save $500 on electricity, home heating and MPI compared to our closest competitors. That leaves the accountant a net gain of $3,000 per year in Saskatchewan. Mr. Speaker, why is this spenDP government insisting on raising the PST by 14 per cent and making Manitoba even less competitive? Hon. Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance ): Well, Mr. Speaker, before members opposite start pulling on their green and white Rider Pride jerseys again, let's take a look at some of the facts. Mr.

Speaker, that same person that the member opposite was talking about, if he's a single person earning $30,000, pays $1,441 less in personal costs and in taxes than he will pay in Saskatchewan. If that person is a member of a two -income family of four earning $60,000, he'd pay $2,170 less here in Manitoba than when he gets to Saskatchewan. * (15:30) And, Mr. Speaker, the Province of Saskatchewan itself said in its budget that we in Manitoba live in one of the most affordable provinces in the country– Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The minister's time has expired. Income Tax Provincial Comparison Mr.

Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Mr. Speaker, these are actual numbers.

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2069 Mr. Speaker, an office worker in Neepawa compared her and her husband's provincial income tax to other provinces and found that in BC, they would pay $6,387.65 less. In Alberta, they would pay $4,885.41 less. In Ontario, they would pay $3,760.06 less. In Saskatchewan, they would pay $2,555.12 less. Luckily, the Premier assures her she will pay $500 less in Manitoba for electricity, home heating and MPI. Mr. Speaker, why doesn't the Premier sim ply admit that we have the highest personal income tax west of Québec? Hon.

Stan Struthers (Minister of Finance ): Well, Mr. Speaker, we guaranteed in lit –in law that Manitobans would pay the lowest, the absolute lowest, in terms of the bundle of hydro rat es, Autopac and home heating. Now, members opposite don't have to take our word for this. They can take the word of an independent accounting firm that looked at our numbers and compared them right across the province–right across the country.

And that independent auditing firm said that Manitoba last year, as we guaranteed, has the lowest cost for people in terms of those three areas that are bundled together, the lowest in the country. Mr. Speaker, those are real numbers. Biosphere Reserve Government Membership Mrs. Leanne Rowat (Riding Mountain): The Riding Mountain Biosphere Reserve is part of an international network of 533 like -minded organizations in 107 countries throughout the world with similar goals. They consult one another when addressing problems, issues and concerns.

In 2013, the Riding Mountain Biosphere Reserve said in a letter to the government, I –and I quote: The Province has been a charter member of the Riding Mountain Biosphere Reserve since inception, but a member in poor standing due to its ongoing absences. I ask the minister: Does this minister not value his government's membership commitments required under the existing UNESCO biosphere? Hon.

Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship): Yes, I see that an advisory committee that looked at it actually says the membership should be extended to include the Province, and we certainly welcome that and we'll be at the next meeting on July 11th. And I also would remind the member opposite that there have been ser ious issues around bovine tuberculosis in the Riding Mountain area, because the biosphere initiative is in the national park, and we've been very active and, indeed, we have been to meetings with the biosphere committee on bovine TB, a critical issue.

So the member should correct the record. We have been there, meeting with them on this serious issue. Mr. Speaker: Time for oral questions has expired. MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Prairie Chicks Red Hat Society Ms. Sharon Blady (Kirkfield Park): Mr. Speaker, 2013 marks the 10th anniversary of the Prairie Chicks Red Hat Society. To celebrate their first decade, the members hosted an old English high tea at The Westhaven in Kirkfield Park and had a royally good time. The Red Hat Society, comprised of women aged 50 plus, began in California in the late 1990s.

As a 55th birthday gift, one friend gave another a red bowler and a copy of Jenny Joseph's poem Warning. The opening line read: When I am an old woman I shall wear purple / With a red hat that doesn't go and doesn't suit me. And with that, a stylish society was born. Today, hundreds of thousands of Red Hatters are found in no less than 30 countries around the world. The Prairie Chicks

chapter is one of 54 in Manitoba. Adorned in glamorous red hats, which suit them very nicely, and flamboyant purple regalia, these royals are always up for living it up. Queen Ruth Smart presides over two dozen countesses, princesses and goddesses from west Winnipeg. The Chicks truly epitomize the mantra that a fter having worked hard all your life, retirement is the time to live it up. They have a special affinity for exploring Manitoba, new adventures, and their sisterhood.

Provincial chapters enjoy activities such as going out to eat, crafting, bowling, curling, golfing, shopping, and, of course, enjoying specialty teas. From time to time, committees organize large-scale Red Hat Hoots, such as the Queens' Council Connection and international conventions.

2070 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 Even just meeting monthly for lunch is a vital support for those facing increasing isolation as they age. The Hatters look after one another, providing support as best as they can. The Chicks are very welcoming and always looking to add to their imperial fold. I encourage any fabulous woman looking for some adventure to join a local chapter. If you don't, you are certainly missing out on a whole lot of fun. Thank you to the royal ladies, and thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's only unfortunate that the guests had to leave due to the ringing of the bells. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. Everett Hopfner Mr. Stuart Briese (Agassiz): Mr. Speaker, music is a powerful avenue of expression, and an accomplished pianist from Ste. Rose du Lac has shared his passion with many. Everett Hopfner is 24 years old and has impressed many w ith his skills behind a piano. Everett's focus is on new music, and he is able to express himself through his music, both original and other compositions. He has recently completed graduate studies in Germany, after previously studying at Brandon University, where he graduated with a bachelor of music.

While in Germany, Everett remained active as a soloist and chamber musician, appearing in many concerts and large ensemble events. Everett has performed with the Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra and the Brando n University new music festivals. He has also won scholarships from Associated Manitoba Arts Festivals, and the women's music club of Winnipeg. His accomplishments, both at home and abroad, have made everyone in his home community proud, and their support is something that Everett relies on and looks forward to.

In May Everett took home the top prize at the 36th annual Eckhardt -Gramatté National Music Competition, the first time that a Manitoban has took home the top prize in piano. Everett received $10,000, a recital and three -week residency in Italy and a national tour in the fall. What makes this even a bigger–what made this even a bigger event was that the competition took place in Brandon, and Everett was able to win on his home stage in front of his friends and his family. Mr. Speaker, music is an important tool, not only for expression but for education.

Everett has travelled the world thanks to his talent, and his music is a true treasure. I want to take this opportunity and congratulate Everett on all of his accomplishments to this point. I would ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating him. I also look forward to future success and wish him the best of luck in Italy. Thank you. Grow-A-Row Challenge Ms. Deanne Crothers (St. James): Mr. Speaker, everyone should have access to nutritious food in order to be able to lead active, productive lives, and being able to have regular access to fresh produce is key to having optimal health.

Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending Wi nnipeg Airports Authority's Grow-A-Row Challenge event in support of Winnipeg Harvest, where local organizations pledge to help ensure that this summer, more families will have access to healthy fruits and vegetables. Through the Grow -A-Row program, Winni peg Harvest encourages individuals, businesses, schools and community clubs to donate surplus produce from their gardens. Instead of going to waste, this healthy food is redistributed through Harvest.

It is easy to participate by committing a row or two of your garden, and for those who have no gardening space, Winnipeg Harvest provides boxes and seeds through their Blue Box Gardening Program. In fact, we will be growing three of these gardens made from recycling boxes in the St. James constituency office this summer. We will hopefully have a robust harvest of beets and carrots to donate in the fall, depending on my green thumb. This year is the airport authority 's 18th year participating in the Grow -A-Row program.

In that time, the Winnipeg Airport s Authority has donated almost 31,000 pounds of vegetables from their airport harvest garden, and they are challenging businesses and organizations in the community to join them. The Winnipeg Airports Authority has dedicated a piece of land near the entrance to the airport that is tended by not only Winnipeg Airports Authority employees but also some of the nearby 7-Eleven employees and others on a volunteer basis. I'd like to acknowledge the quiet community co-operation that has been going on for so many years between the Winnipeg Airports Authority and Winnipeg Harvest.

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2071 Mr. Speaker, it is easy to take access to healthy food for granted. The ability to have nutritious food as a daily option really is key to a healthy, successful life. This co-operative venture is a grassroots way to ensure more people have these choices. I would like to thank Winnipeg Harvest, Winnipeg Airports Authority and the St. James businesses who are participating in the Grow-A-Row challenge for helping to improve Winnipeg families' access to food. And I would like to invite individuals and businesses to join us in the Grow -A-Row program this summer.

Thank you very much. Salvation Army–Portage la Praire–125 Years Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): On May 25th, 2013 the Salvation Army in Portage la Prairie celebrated 125 years of community service. The Salvation Army began its work in Canada in 1882 and it was just six years later that Portage la Prairie saw its first citadel go up. * (15:40) A community is often judged by how they treat their most vulnerable citizens and the Salvation Army helps us as a community to make sure that our vulnerable citizens are looked after and that they get the help that they need.

Throughout the years, many people have been impacted by the work done here in Portage–in the Portage la Prairie community, whether it is the food bank or the money that's raised at Christmas time through the kettles for Christmas hampers. It's been ongoing for many, many years. The weekly kids club, a women's fellowship program and providing resources to the community are a few of the services used by the local people in the community. The Salvation Army has a history of helping people.

When many men in the community went to war–in the war –in the Second World War , the Salvation Army went right to the front lines and brought them letters from home and warm socks. Returning soldiers always remembered and have remarked on how the kind gesture went a long way when they were so far from home and loved ones. The Salvat ion Army is the largest non -profit provider of social services in Canada, serving 400 communities across the nation. The organization has a worldwide membership of more than one and a half million people in 126 countries.

I would like to ask all members to join me in recognizing the Salvation Army in general and more specifically the Portage la Prairie Salvation Army for 125 years in the community. Vaisakhi Mela Mr. Bidhu Jha (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, every April, people throughout the world gather to enjoy one of the most important holidays in the Sikh religion, called Vaisakhi. Through festival activity, the community celebrates the new year and the new harvest.

On Vaisakhi Day in 1699, the 10th and the last guru of Sikhism, Guru Gobind Singh, who was born in the state of Bihar, which is , fortunately, also my birth state, laid down the foundation of Khalsa Panth. This year's Vaisakhi celebrations were held at the Burton Cummings Theatre. I was pleased to join the Premi er (Mr. Selinger), my colleague the member from the Concordia , and 800 guests who participated Vaisakhi Mela. Organized by Punjab Entertainment and emceed by Sharan Tappia, the evening was full of excitement and fun. The program began with rejoicing through the song and dance.

During this tim e, Maples Collegiate girls group performed the festive dance gidha, and the Maples Bhangra, Sher-e-Punjab and Anmol Tare performed a dance bhangra . Also among the night's performers were Mahi Arora and her group, Devinder Sarangal and Anmol Jammu. For the second half of the program, Gurchet Chitrakar and his team took the stage to comedy play called Jija Ji NRI . Gurchet Chitrakar and his team have travelled from India to present their play to audiences across Canada and Winnipeg one of the lucky ones to choose this location.

The play was humoured and educational, helped to bring light many serious social issues occurring in India in an approachable way. Mr. Speaker, Vaisakhi Mela at Burton Cummings Theatre was full of joy and laughter. I am pleased that th e people from all walks of life and many different cultures were able to come together – celebration of this cultural function. I would like to congratulate all performers and organizers of the event. In particular, I would like to mention Ken Rakhra, Harkamal Saggi, Tony Panchhi and Sharan Tappia, and many others who volunteered their time to make Vaisakhi Mela such a success.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

2072 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 House Business Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, in accordance with rule 31(9), I'd like to announce that the private member's resolution that'll be considered next Thursday is a resolution on decade of mismanagement within Manitoba's child welfare system, brought forward by the honourable m ember for Riding Mountain (Mrs. Rowat). Mr.

Speaker: It has been announced that in accordance with rule 31(9), that the private member's resolution that will be considered next Thursday is the resolution on decade of mismanagement within Manitoba's child welfare system, brought forward by the honourable member for Riding Mountain. GRIEVANCES Mr. Speaker: The honourable member for Portage la Prairie, on a grievance. Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): On a grievance, Mr. Speaker. My grievance is drive n by the obvious lack of understanding that we saw when we had our flood victims in the House the other day.

Many Manitobans understand living in a flood plain. Certainly, Winnipeg should understand it very well; they're protected from the Red River flood plain. But there is another flood plain in the province and it –the understanding of which way the water flows in that flood plain appears to be a challenge for many people. It should be a simple matter as a result of the 2011 Assiniboine flood. I think ma ny people actually should understand what the consequences would be. West of Portage la Prairie, the river is very well defined.

It's the Assiniboine River and–specifically, with three main tributaries: the Qu'Appelle, which comes in just below the Shellm outh Dam; the upper Assiniboine, which is contained by the Shellmouth Dam; and the Souris, which arrives halfway down, sort of south of Carberry. And the Souris itself can contribute up to 45 per cent of the flow of the lower Assiniboine River. There is lo ts of flooding in the valley, as we frequently hear from those that are impacted, mostly farmers in the valley and the city of Brandon. However, most of it is confined within the definition of the valley.

East of Portage la Prairie, however, it is much more complex. I would like –to improve the understanding of this, I would like to start with giving with a few levels so that people actually understand which way the water does flow. Where the controls are for the Portage Diversion, there is a small [inaudible] lake and the levels in that lake determine which way the water flows, either towards Winnipeg or towards Lake Manitoba through the Portage Diversion. And the level of that lake is 86–868.08 feet. Now, Lake Manitoba, where it ends up, is 812.1 feet if it goes down the diversion.

This gives us a drop of 56 feet on the Portage Diversion over a distance of approximately 19 miles. The same lake, of course, at the diversion control structure, 868.08 exists and–but the level of the Assiniboine or the level of the Red River in Winnipeg that is often used is the James street level on the Red. And that level is 727.57 feet at flood stage. And the difference is 140.51 feet, so significant difference in the level, double, more than double, and that's over a dista nce of a hundred and two miles. Just to put things in perspective, of course, Lake Winnipeg is 713.4.

Now, the Assiniboine River is considered to be a perched river system in the lower confines from Portage on into Winnipeg. And what that means is that, actually, when the water spills out of that river , it doesn't run immediately back to the river ; it runs away from the river. And this is actually accomplished by a river that has a heavy silt content; it actually builds its riverbank and builds the river bottom over a period of time. And this actually isn't something that is very uncommon. There are a number of situations like this around the world.

Some that we're very familiar with, rivers like the Nile has large stretches where it’s a similar situation. The Mississippi has large stretches that are in similar situation, and even the Amazon, which is the mightiest river in the world. But this is unique to our situation. After the last ice age, the Assiniboine did in fact run to Lake Manitoba but having built its own banks, it was forced itself to run to the east. The last major flows to Lake Manitoba were somewhere around 2,500 years ago, based on the sediment evidence that is available. So long ago even the member from Thompson might not remember that.

River runs–the river runs east to the Red following at 140- foot gradient , but periodically it

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2073 does spill, mostly due to ice jams or to bank breaches. And in such creates a series of parallel waterways. And there's actually a term for this ; they're known as yazoos. And this is actually named after the Yazoo River, which occurs in Missouri, and it's on the Mississippi. And these are quite well known phenomenons and actually an indication of where the flood waters would normally run to.

So, along the north side of the Assiniboine , we have two very well-known ones; that would be Long Lake which has a north branch that actually goes up nearly to Lake Manitoba, and when the lake is high, actually water runs from Lake Manitoba down this branch and actually back int o the Assiniboine and drains in through there to lake–to the Red River. And further on it also has another one that exists, exactly the same characteristics; ends up running parallel to the river for a period of time and then empties back into it.

And that would be Sturgeon Creek, certainly one that most of Winnipeg is actually very familiar with. On the south side we have a number as well, that would be the La Salle, which is slight variation because it doesn't actually end up right back in the Assiniboine, it actually ends up in the Red just a few miles above the Assiniboine. And the Elm and Mill creeks, which are both significant but usually end up dumping back into the La Salle, though they don't have a very clear definition at some points and can wander.

In major flood years, when water spills from the Assiniboine, from whatever reason, these waterways can actually fill with large volumes of river water and be well beyond the capacity of their systems. So we're talking about rivers that normally would have a capacity of a few hundred cubic feet per second actually running in excess of 10,000 cubic feet per second. So that creates huge flood plains surrounding these waterways. * (15:50) Now, I had tried at some point in the past to have this discussion with the member for Riel (Ms.

Melnick) when she was Water Stewardship minister , and she made continual references, as did her deputy at the time, to water running to Lake Manitoba. And she based this on a captain's log from a paddlewheeler that was –or was supposedly had crossed the prairie from Portage la Prairie to Lake Manitoba. And this one was a pretty hard reference to find, but I did manage to find it in the end.

And it occurred in 1882, two years –after two years of high water on Lake Manitoba when L ake Manitoba was approximately 814, at which point the north branch of the Long Lake drain begins to drain from Lake Manitoba into the Assiniboine River and then back into Winnipeg. So this probably did occur, but what was not part of that is which way was the water flowing when he actually went that direction. It was actually flowing from Lake Manitoba into the Assiniboine and on into Winnipeg.

Now, the captain went on to say that he was busily engaged in hauling firewood to many evacuees located at Stony Mountain that had evacuated the city of Winnipeg. So it's very obvious which way the water naturally wants to go–east across the flood plain to Winnipeg as the route that the Assiniboine would actually spill.

This was the rationale for construction of the Portage Diversion to protect the western –the region west of Winnipeg and Winnipeg itself, but that made victims of those around Lake Manitoba who were not actually in the flood plain and certainly not used to levels above 815 when water ran into Winnipeg. But, during the summer of 2011, levels of Lake Manitoba actually went to 217–or, sorry, 817.3. So the history of control on the Assiniboine River–well, of course, we had built the Shellmouth Reservoir by Roblin. That was completed in '72. Portage Diversi on, also completed by Roblin. That was completed in 1870.

Expansion of Shellmouth was to have been built in 2004 as a joint project between the federal and provincial governments, but that was never completed. That would have, it was estimated, reduced the flows on the Assiniboine by as much as 5,000 cubic feet per second.

And looking further into this I al so found reference to a project initiated in 2000 when PFRA, then part of the federal government, actually turned over the control of the lower Assiniboine dikes to the Department of Natural Resources, and with that was an agreement to have been five years in duration that would increase the capacity of the lower Assiniboine dikes to a total of 22,500 cubic feet per second. This went on for about a year and a half, and then it petered out because the Province's commitment to acquire the land to do the project – because much of that land is in fact owned by private individuals.

That's old title. It's river lots. Many of the people there actually own right to the water's edge, so acquiring property was an essential part of that. But after the second year it pe tered out, and we never continued that project. We certainly could

2074 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 have used that project completion in 2011–would have changed the whole dynamics of how that river system was managed. Now, to plan for the future in terms of water projects, we need to rea ch out to what actually is happening in the landscape, because one of the big factors in calculating how much water runs off the landscape is a thing called a drainage coefficient that most hydrologists use. Those numbers are pretty old in nature, and they haven't been redone in many years.

However, Agriculture and Agri -Food Canada actually recently redid the drainage coefficients for the Qu'Appelle River system, which is of great interest to us because it is a major tributary to the Assiniboine, and foun d that the new numbers are , in fact, four times the old numbers. Now, that is due not only to drainage, but changes in farming practices and changing landscape. You think back, it's not that many years ago, until 30 or 40 per cent of our landscape was in hay and pasture land. That is certainly not the case anymore.

So we've changed the amount of water that comes off the landscape in a significant way. Just to double-check that, I actually checked with the Army Corps of Engineers to see if they had redone the Souris, which they had not. They had done Devils Lake, however, which is very similar, and its numbers are 3.86 times the old numbers. So our ability to use historical flows is certainly in question. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Are there any further grievances? Seeing none, we'll move on to– ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued) GOVERNMENT BUSINESS House Business Hon.

Jennifer Howard (Government House Leader): Would you please call the Committee of Supply, with the understanding that the Com mittee of Supply will also be meeting tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. Mr. Speaker: We'll now resolve into the Committee of Supply , with the understanding that the Committee of Supply will also be meeting tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) HEALTH * (16:00) Mr. Chairperson (Mohinder Saran): Order. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply will now resume consideration of the Estimates for the Department of Health. As had been previously agreed, questioning for this department will proceed in a global manner. The floor is now open for questions. Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden -Winkler): I'm seeking clarification just in –pertaining to a number of areas that we–where we had discussion yesterday.

Yesterday, we–I had posed questions to the minister pertaining to the fees that would have –the consultant fees that would have been incurred in the transition from the former 11 RHAs to the new five, and I understand the minister has consented to provide that information, as well as information that has to do with how many of those executive positions might have been–how many of those 37 reduced positions might have actually resulted in an individual being reintegrated in some way, reassigned to a new role, re-entering the system, and the minister's agreed to provide that information, as well as information about executive VP severance packages.

What I'm wondering is if the minister can confirm that she will be able to provide that information within the Estimates period. Hon. T heresa Oswald (Minister of Hea lth): Certainly, I can say to the member that the department is working on providing the kind of detail that the member did ask for. I can provide a little more information today. Some of the actuarial kind of work is going on, you know, given that the member asked some questions about comprehensive packages and so forth, and so that work is ongoing. We're certainly going to try. At the rate we're going, we're going to have a lot of time.

But, you know, I can–I'm sure the member can also appreciate that there are day -to-day significant duties that the Department of Finance in –within the context of Health is working on. So they are prioritizing this, of course, and we hope to be able to do that. That was always our goal. I can say for the member that on the subject more generally of the 37 positions –displaced

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2075 executives, we'll call them for the sake of argument – as we mentioned earlier, 37 senior management positions were indeed eliminated through the RHA merger process which exceeds our initial target of 30 to 35, and we're pleased about that, and it is actually more than half of the senior management positions that did exist prior to the mergers.

The member opposite asked if any of the individuals who held one of the 37 eliminated positions–eliminated senio r management positions – prior to the mergers still work in the RHAs, and as I want to say –or just to begin, I want to note that any displaced senior executive who wanted to continue to work in a regional health authority at a more junior level could do so, but our expectation was that their new salary would reflect their new junior position and that their new position could not indeed be a new additional corporate staff year.

That was something that was very important in this process, and indeed it needed to be a position that existed prior to the mergers and indeed happened to be vacant at that time or was vacated. I would note that some titles for existing vacant positions may have changed to reflect different duties in the new RHA, but again the expectat ion was at that time that no new corporate positions be created.

And I can say to the member, as he awaits more detailed financial information, that the –of the 37 eliminated senior management positions, there are 14 individuals who continue to work in the new RHAs in more junior positions. There are some positions, actually, that are clinical, direct care roles, I would note for the member, while others are more junior administrative positions that are not indeed part of senior management. I would note for the individual, just as a point of clarity, that none of the individuals collected any severance when they moved to their new more junior roles.

Their salaries in their new positions are consistent with what salaries would be paid to anybody else in those jobs, and, of course, as I said to the member yesterday, it would be publicly reported. I would also note for the member, as part of our conversation yesterday, that the member asked about CEO compensation and whether the new salaries for CEOs are in fact higher than before. I have reviewed the salaries and can report –and now we're speaking specifically about CEOs.

I know the question was broader, but just to provide in a timely way more information for the member I've reviewed the salaries, and I can report that–prior to the mergers, of course, there were 11 CEOs, after the merger there are five CEOs –the elimination of the six CEO positions translates into a net savings of $856,506.34 annually. Obviously, there would be further savings for the rest of the eliminated 37 senior management positions as well as other savings we achieved by merging corporate operations, finding administrative efficiencies and so forth.

So, again, there's just a little more information for the member today, and we will–oh, he did ask me about transition costs. I can say to the member today that, again, as I noted yesterday, the initiative was really undertaken to achieve the efficiencies and savings that could be redirected into front -line care, and we worked very hard to minimi ze any transition costs. I did acknowledge that there were some, and where–but wherever possible we used existing staff to manage that process. We didn't seek any outside lawyer or accountant services; we used in -house legal and financial expertise.

And the RHAs themselves were instructed to minimize costs as well. So, not bringing in any advertising firms to rebrand their corporate image or logo, signage with their new names is being adjusted on a go- forward basis. That's why you might still see some of th e former information in our regional health authorities, but we are working to do this on a go-forward. There were two individuals on short -term contracts. One was hired as a project manager, and the other was hired to help with human resource transition.

The total of their contracts associated with the RHA merger transition was $88,085, which the financial folks in my department have reviewed as the total cost for the transition. And, I guess, in taking time to reflect on some of this, I realized that I–you know, in reviewing the line of questioning by the member, I can certainly get the sense that, you know, he is seeking to discover the cost of the process.

I know there was a question posed in question period the other day concerning rural emergency rooms, and I believe the individual that posed the question did link the mergers of the regional health authorities to the issues with the emergency rooms, which certainly would lead me to have the feeling that the members opposite oppose the amalgamations. I know over time there have been members from the opposition that have suggested that all the regional health authorities be disbanded and that perhaps one super board be created sort of like they did in Alberta some years ago.

I know others yet have said we should go back to the previous models of hospital boards –you know, there

2076 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 are several of those being the case. But, you know, I need to say that I'm not sure that I would attribute any of those points of view to the member himself, and I just wonder, through the questioning, if the member wished to suggest, you know, for the record, his point of view about the nature and the choice to pursue this line of amalgamations, because I think it's unclear where the opposition stands on the choice of the mergers, and it might be helpful for this dialogue as we go forward. Mr.

Friesen: I think the minister will understand that I have no desire to engage in a long policy discussion about this. * (16:10) The minister has made statements –and she knows she has –has indicated she's managed to save over $11 million over the first year of what was supposed to be a three-year plan in the RHAs to save $10 million in total. That raises some important questions not only for us as the opposition, but for all Manitobans about whether the minister was – miscalculated the possible savings, or whether–and it is probably more likely the case that she's not talking about apples and apples.

Simply, I respect the minister's desire to state a gross savings when it comes to the analysis o f the whole transition from 11 RHAs to five. But it–the more accurate calculations and the ones that Manitobans will be looking for are the ones to understand what are the net savings from amalgamating RHAs from 11 to five, if, indeed, there are savings to identify and to find. So I think, similarly coming back to the line of questioning or having–that I know all Manitobans are interested in, I want to come back to the number that the minister supplied and I do thank her for supplying the information.

We' ll be certainly going back to look at this and to examine it. But she's provided it now, so I want to go back to a number she provided. We've been working off a number where she indicated there was a net reduction of 37 executives, senior executives. Now, today she's indicated 14 of those –and she'll correct me if I'm wrong–14 of those have reintegrated in the system, that they would have been given junior roles and that their remuneration would have reflected the fact that they were now taking on a more junior role.

Can the minister indicate, of the 14 individuals who reintegrated into this RHA system –wherever they came out in the final analysis –what would have been the cost of remuneration for those 14? Further, could she indicate how many of them, if any, would've reintegrated at their original salary and benefits? How many of them would have reintegrated with a lesser, and what would be the average per cent differential between their former salary and then the one that they took on? Ms.

Oswald: Again, I will reiterate for the member that the–my financial folks are doing some work to provide the information with some detailed analysis and we will add the current calculations that the member is requesting today –you know, average per cent differentials, et c etera–to the list of calculations that the member is requesting. And, you know, certainly, I think that a lot of this speaks to the fact that, as you say, all Manitobans are interested in how their health- care dollars are invested and, indeed, what kinds of savings have been realized as a result of the mergers.

And in so many ways this is why we amended the RHA act to really work to ensure that we were providing as much transparency and accountability to the public, to be enhancing wherever possible the kinds of information that would be easily accessible to the public and, you know, wanting public reporting on CEO expenses, on executive compensation policy, on, you know, public reporting of quality and safety indicators. It's why we have publicly asked for corporate cost caps for rural RHAs and, indeed, of course, for the Winnipeg RHA.

It's why there's work going on on a declaration of patient values and RHA complaints process. And it's why we're really working hard to–through the amendment of that bill, t o improve community involvement and engagement. And so, all of these issues, really, have been with an effort to make it even more easy for the public to be able to access information about these senior executives and about corporate costs, and– because we too think it's important. And, you know, the member opposite suggests that, you know, he doesn't want to engage in a policy discussion.

And I would say to him: Would he not think it would be equally as noteworthy and of interest to Manitobans to know wha t perspective, I guess, that the official opposition might take on the issue itself of amalgamation? As I say, there have been others in his caucus that have said, you know, very clearly and outright, that notwithstanding that Conservatives were the ones that created regional health authorities in Manitoba, and created 13 of them, notwithstanding

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2077 that fact, there have been members of the Conservatives in Manitoba that have said, you know, we should do away with regional health authorities in their entirety and create a super board like they did in Alberta, which, I think, across Canada now, is defined as an unbridled disaster, of course. They were over a billion dollars in the glue before you could say Jiminy Cricket, and it was a problem. There are others, in fact, that suggest that we should go back to the days of hospital boards.

Now, like none of these particular points of view can be attributed to the Health critic, and I know that he takes his job very seriously. And just as I think, as a result of amending The Regional Health Authorities Act, that we should have increased transparency and accountability, I think it would be quite important for members of the public to have a sense of, you know, should the opposition have their hands on the wheel, what would their point of view be? Would they support the mergers of regional health authorities down to five?

Would they prefer to leave them as they once were, created under the Conservatives, at 13? Would he adopt the point of view that I've cited of the super board or the hospital boards? I know that the member has written to me about amending The Regional Health Authorities Act. I asked him for some advice and he willingly gave it, and I thank him for that.

But I was interested in the letter that he wrote to me that, you know, rather than perhaps ensuring that we were as clear and as tight and as professional in providing oversight to the regional health authorities, what I saw him calling for in that letter was, in fact, less oversight. And I admit that I was somewhat flummoxed by this suggestion that, indeed, there be less oversight. And so, I just–I want to provide the member this opportunity, just to provide some clarity on that.

The member quite rightly says that Manitobans are interested in the points of view of members of the Legislature on policy and so forth. And I just wondered if maybe he could take an opportunity to clarify a little bit about his view. I don't want to attribute other members' of his caucus points of view to the issue. I would be quite interested in what the member had to say on this issue. Mr. Friesen: I want to give the minister assurances that I do hope that our discussions in the Estimate process will go to the issue of personal care homes and, in particular, about Bill 6.

And because I do want to go there, I 'm making every effort to move along this process of questioning and having answers supplied, and I would hope that she would also do the same to ensure that Manitobans, who are looking to these answers, are able to get them. So back to the numbers. And I hope this doesn't grate on the nerves of your chief financial officer that's in the room, but I want to just do some ballpark figures. I want to use the numbers that the minister has provided to try to get back to the idea of what are the savings that the minister has been able to achieve through the RHA amalgamations.

I'm going to start with the minister's information provided. * (16:20) If she reduces six chair positions of RHAs, remuneration is $9,000 each, it results in $54,000 of total savings. If she takes and reduces 81 board members who receive a remuneration, honorarium of $4,000 per year, it results in $324,000 of savings.

If she reduces the executive senior VP positions by 37, and I even use a term like $150,000 as an estimate, which I underst and is probably a really, really inaccurate figure because not only would we be considering their salary, we'd be considering the net cost of that individual to the system, probably the number is closer to two hundred or two hundred and fifty thousand doll ars. But just for the sake –because that information hasn't been provided, I'm going to estimate it at $150,000, for a total savings of $5,550,000 resulting in a total remuneration–or, I should say, savings, of $5.928 million per year.

Now, against those savings, the minister would then have to calculate the real cost. So now we've calculated what I believe the minister has given us in terms of a gross savings. Now, because I believe Manitobans are interested in actually understanding what the net savings are, we would have to, then–and I look forward to receiving the information, understand, and I thank the minister for providing the total package, the total envelope of consultant fees, which she has indicated at about $88,000.

From that, we would also hav e to subtract any kinds of –well, there might be revenues derived from liquidation of capital assets. There may be revenues derived from surpluses that were run by the RHAs. And, in a moment, we'll come back to that question. There would have been severance paid, and if she, indeed, did pay 23 individuals, let's use a ballpark figure of $50,000 each, because I really –I'm really picking a number out of the air right now. I know that number will be shored up when the minister comes back. That would indicate a cost of $1.15 million. And then, on top of that, if we take the

2078 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 minister's information supplied today, 14 individuals who went back into the system at a reduced rate, let's take that number of $150,000, because she said they'd come back at a more junior r ole, and I'm assuming that they would receive compensation commensurate, then, with that junior title. And that would result in a cost, against her indicated savings, of $2.1 million.

So we end up with a situation where we have about $5.9 million, subtra ct $2.1 million, subtract another $1.5 million; we're going to end up somewhere around the neighbourhood of –and this is missing, now, the information that still is going to be supplied by the minister –we're looking at about maybe $3 million of savings before she's calculated in the other costs to the system. So one more time for the minister, my question is this: When she talks about achieving $11 million of savings over three years, is she talking about gross savings or is she talking about net savings? Ms.

Oswald: Again, likely I don't have to spend too much time cautioning the member about, you know, ballparking and so forth and, you know, comparing, you know, apples to anvils and so forth there. We are going to work and do our best to provide the nature of the information that the member is requesting in the style and form that he's requesting. I mean, that work is going on. I can say to the member, you know, very clearly, we projected at the time that we announced that we would merge to five, again, still not getting any sort of commitment from the member on his general position on that.

I wonder a little bit about his reluctance to talk about that. It's not like we're talking about, you know, the contentious matters of privatization of health care or a woman's right to choose. This isn't exactly on the list of hot topics that will keep people bolting upright in the night. It's a question of whether or not you think the amalgamation of regional health authorities is a good idea, or not a good idea. So I am interested, to say the least, of the member's reluctance to provide any sort of insight into that.

But, having said that, we embarked on a journey of providing regional health authorities and we projected, doing the best analysis possible, that we would, indeed, be able to save $10 million over the first three years of the merger, in part, from fewer senior management and board positions, of course, from efficiencies one would expect from merging corporate operations, and we noted from the beginning, of course, that this money would be invested into front -line care. And as I have said, we did exceed this target in the first year of the mergers, saving $11 million.

We do anticipate that that number is going to grow. We know that as we speak with our regional health authorities and they report back to us through their processes of other positions that have been merged and savings that have been realized, we do know that that number is going to change and it's going to improve. That is certainly our view.

We also stated, you know, back in the fall, that savings achieved in one year happened as the member, I believe noted–I was having two conversations, so I apologize if I'm putting words in his mouth–by consolidating accumulated financial assets, surpluses, which was, of course, redirected into front -line care. That, of course, was part of a news release that came from Finance back in the fall. But, again, we still anticipate achieving more savings on an ongoing basis through the reduction of senior management positions and through other efficiencies from merging corporate operations in the RHAs.

I, again, you know, I caution the member in putting some of the numbers on the records, and I think that he, quite fairly, has said that he is estimating, and I ac cept that at his words. It is, indeed, as he notes, the Estimates, but I would just caution in–him in doing that kind of calculation and then suggesting that the numbers that he puts forward might be close. We have issued news releases. We have said that we've been able to achieve $11 million through the ways I just stated. And that work continues, as I've said to the member.

So, you know, again, we do commit to the member that we'll work as hard as we can to capture the numbers in the way that he's reque sted. There were a couple of additions today, and I know that the chief financial officer has noted those and will add those into the profile that he's requested. But we are committed to continue to provide the best possible care, redirecting that money into the front lines where it's needed the most and providing the most lean operation possible for the people of Manitoba. * (16:30) Mr.

Friesen : And where the minister issues a caution to me to proceed carefully with respect to the numbers that I'm using as estimates, I extend to her

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2079 an olive branch to supply the actual numbers during the Estimates period. And I would be happy to take exactly on my spreadsheet the places where I'm now estimating figures and leaving out figures, indeed, because there are whole sections here where I have not included any numbers at all because I'm waiting for them to be supplied from the minister, and I would be only too happy to exchange my estimated figures for her actual ones.

I do find it surprising, though, that the minister is completely silent on the question I posed to her of whether she is talking about gross or net savings. I'm simply taking the amount of savings she says she has derived, and I'm subtracting the costs that she would have incurred. That is simple m athematics, and that is simple balance sheet kinds of operations. And so, I'm wondering why it is she won't provide that information. I know that Manitobans are interested in it, but as soon as she can I encourage her to do so.

Working back to that same question, I asked her about the 14 individuals that she says reintegrated in some way, shape or form in the system who did not take a package. The natural question to follow, then, would be can the minister then confirm that the 23 other–those executive, V P positions who then, according to her, did not reintegrate into the system, were they in fact released? And were they released through voluntary retirement? Were they simply released from their contract and essentially fired or released or however she wou ld like to put it?

And what would be the number, of those 23, that would have ceased to be employed by an RHA because of voluntary retirement, or that portion that would have received a pink slip? Ms. Oswald: I would offer my apologies to the member for not answering every one of what, I hope he will concede, tend to be multibarreled questions. I will, however, answer, on the subject of gross and net. It is net. Look at how easy that was to answer a question from the member. He –you know, wouldn't it be grand if he offered the same courtesy? The other question–the 23 others did not all get severance. Eighteen did.

Some retired or resigned. Mr. Friesen: And I thank the minister for providing that information, and I can see how easy it is when there is questions asked and answers provided. Still, on the same subject, I wonder if it would be helpful to frame questions–the minister has talked about the senior VPs that were reduced, and she's talked about the fact that the 14 were reintegrated in the system. I asked questions yesterday, and I t hink I need to put a clarification on the record because I think it might be helpful for all parties.

When I look at the organizational structures – and, believe me, I give the minister assurances we won't go back at length into those organizational charts as we did at the beginning of Estimates, but when I look at them I believe what I've seen, what I've noted from the minister's answers, is that the organizational charts, albeit they are not uniform, that they tend to capture information about two categories of employees. They tend to capture information about the senior executives and senior management positions. There seems to be an echelon below senior executive.

And so, I believe what I need to ask for is just a clarification that as the minister, as she has consented to do, supplies the information about what the total envelope is for senior executive compensation for each of the new five RHAs, will she at the same time provide that whole envelope of compensation not only including senior executive, but what I see here as being senior management positions –a group of individuals who seem to be below the senior executives and perhaps fall into the category of what the minister talked about as being more junior positions?

The information we request would be to capture all of that compensation. Ms. Oswald: Okay, so senior executive and senior management, I believe that falls into the same category, the same, you know –those words are used for the same thing. I believe they can be used interchangeably. I–and if I find a situation where I stand to be corrected, I'll alert the member to that fact.

I –your question was duly noted and added to the list of things that we want to provide to you and I would also again say to the member that all of these items would be reported in the public disclosure document that is annual, and it's there for the taking for the member to see. And I would also indicate that we spent some time, I believe –unless I'm having a flashback to last year's Estimates –talking about the corporate cost indicator.

I think we did speak about that on day one, and these positions would be such that would fall into the corporate cost indicator when we were speaking about admin cost versus corporate costs and so forth, so I would just give the membe r that information. But, again, we heard the question and we will add it to the additional requests.

2080 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 6, 2013 I believe I heard the member say that he wanted to clarify part of the question, and I'd invite him to do that now. Mr. Friesen: Mr. Chair, yes, I appre ciate the minister's consent to provide the information. The only clarification I was going to provide is that I see that, on certain organizational charts from the previous RHAs, that there were terminologies that would suggest there was this strata of employees underneath senior executive.

Some of the terminologies that I see are things like senior manager, director, executive –oh, no, not executive, I'm sorry–co-ordinator, analyst, again manager, and so if those positions, you know, do indeed fall off the list of what we consider to be the seniors –but I believe–the reason I bring it up is that if they are indicated–if they are articulated on the organizational chart, then I'm hoping that there –that that information will indeed then be captured in whatever's reported back in terms of financials. Ms. Oswald: Yes, Mr.

Chair, in consultation with the deputy, he signals that, in some situations, that label of co -ordinator that the member cited may indeed not be classified as senior management. But, based on the nature of their responsibilities, they do, in fact, have a direct report, but they're not considered senior management. So we'll make sure that, when that information is provided, we'll endeavour to try to capture what would and, indeed, would not be counted as that. * (16:40) Our analysis and our public commitment was based on reducing senior management and, indeed, we have met and we've exceeded that.

We're happy about that, bearing in mind, of course, that the external review of regional health autho rities offered a very strong caution to–in the advice that they gave– and that was to ensure that there was a reasoned balance of managerial positions, those in leadership roles, to ensure that the nature of the initiatives that were being carried on in RHA s–very important initiatives all the way from maternal and child health to infection control and well beyond–that those initiatives in their depth and their breadth have the kind of leadership available to execute the programs.

So we take to heart that kin d of advice. I think, in fact, the external review of regional health authorities asked for additional managerial positions that they –what you might call middle management level. We didn't embrace that recommendation. But take to heart the spirit of what is being said that, while we want to do everything that we can to be reducing corporate costs and transferring resources into the front lines, we understand that the leaders in our system play very, very important roles, and we need to ensure that they have the support that they need to be able to carry out the initiatives assigned.

So I would say to the member, I appreciate the clarification, and the chief financial officer and deputy have, along with me, heard the request for additional information, and w e will do the best that we can to provide that in as a timely a way possible citing, of course, that the member can find in the interim any information that he might want in the public disclosure documents. And I did want to signal for the member, as I neglected to do this at the beginning, I had one brief leftover piece of information to put on the record, I think from day two, that won't take but a moment.

But we can do that when the member deems suitable. Mr. Friesen: I thank the minister for that, and we'll get to that in a moment. The minister was soliciting earlier for questions to be shorter from this side and I'm happy to state at this time I can oblige. There was one item, in the spirit of tidying up loose ends, the minister had gone to some lengt h to provide us with each name and position for the former RHAs, as well, and then the new RHAs.

Will the minister also be submitting within the Estimates period the new organizational charts that contain that same information that she supplied and read out at length? Ms. Oswald: As I said to the member, the regions are just now compiling their year-end, and this is part of their work. We have asked for them to expedite that process and we're going to do our best to get the charts for the member. And I know that the member said that he'd like the former central regional health authority's chart best, and he submitted that on the record without any bias even though that's where he's coming from.

An Honourable Member: I voted. Ms. Oswald: Yes, he voted, and so we are going to do our best to provide that. I would note, though, as a point of interest, that the Central Regional Health Authority's organizational chart is also the one that had the largest administration, and yet, interestingly, this is the one t hat the member likes. Seems in shocking contrast to the dialogue that we're having. But in any event, I will assume that, you know, the member

June 6, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2081 likes the style, the fonts, et cetera, and so we will do our best to get those. We have asked the regions to giddy-up in trying to provide the charts in their entirety. Mr. Friesen: I hope that those comments of the minister are in no way, shape or form a reflection on the excellent work done by the IT staff and those design people who render those documents in such a clear and articulate form, because I just want to acknowledge that the hard work and the excellent workmanship that they have undertaken.

Compare that to –well, no, I won't start to make comments about the other organizational charts, because some of the m are interesting in the way they present information. But, yes, as the minister said, I did like that one. There were other great examples, as well, but we don't have time for that. I do note that the minister made mention, a number of times during this process, that there was information available, publicly, that I could easily access. And I did want to just spend a moment to address a concern I have there.

I did note in one of my multipart questions to the minister, that I am looking to know whether there were any revenues derived from surpluses of any of the former RHAs that might have been allocated towards the statement the minister made about the $11 million of savings in the first year. I went back to check what the surpluses or the deficits were t hat each of those 11 RHAs ran for the 2011-2012 fiscal year, and I can tell the minister that from what I learned, I was able to tabulate that there were over $10 million in net surpluses that were stated.

The problem I ran into was that for the Interlake, the North Eastman Health and the Churchill former RHAs, there was no annual report available. And that annual report was not able to be found on the RHA website. They were not available in hard copy. They were not available in the reading room of the Manitoba Legislature. And I'm wondering if the minister can indicate where she says that this information is available. Why is it that we have not been able to find the information for Interlake, North Eastman Health or Churchill?

And could she, for the record today, state: What would have been the surplus or the deficiency of revenue from the fiscal year for 2011-2012? Ms. Oswald: Yes, Mr. Chair, I don't know the answer right now to why Interlake, NEHA and Churchill would not be available. In fact, I'm of the belief that they are. So, if the member has not been able to locate those, we will review and find that out. At the same time, I don't have the surpluses, or deficits, or what have you, at my fingertips, but we'll endeavour to get that information. So I'll follow up with that and report back to the member.

I have been instructed by the financial expert that I may have misspoken earlier. I didn't use the right accounting term, apparently. That $11 million in savings in year one certainly was achieved by a variety of measures, as w e've talked about for hours, but also by consolidating accumulated financial assets. So I am supposed to say that, and not surpluses. And so I will make that correction. * (16:50) Mr.

Friesen: That seems to me to be a significant correction from the inform ation that the minister previously submitted, and we'll be going back to, as I said, look at exactly where those significant savings that she talks about were achieved and whether or not we do come out at the place she says we do. As I mentioned just now , I would invite the minister to also submit whether revenues from surpluses from the former RHAs were used to arrive at the figure of $11 million. I would make this one suggestion.

I find it interesting that when I total the RHAs' surpluses for 2011-12, that we arrive at a figure that almost gets to the $11 million that the minister says that she arrived at in the first year of savings. And I think it begs the question, an important question, because as I use my calculator here based on the figures she's provided, and we work down the savings she's achieved against the cost she would have incurred, I can really easily see how it would result in no net savings.

But the minister could achieve an instant one - time savings by taking surpluses achieved in the l ast year of operation for each of the 11 former RHAs and pushing them towards a new area and call it savings. Of course, it's only one that she could realize one time, but it would allow her to get to her goal of saying after three years that she had achieved her goal of going to $10 million in savings. I wonder if the minister could just comment on that. Ms.

Oswald: So, you know, once again, we will do as the member has asked to do some arithmetic on what he's at revenues for the regional health authorities that he says are not publicly available. Again, as we sit at the table here, we are interested in that fact that they we

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-2-54b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 2nd hansardpdf 54b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	aa1d28aee241d75548bd5506f9dd70833fa063c2

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