Manitoba Hansard — 6 September 1988 (Sitting 30, 34th Legislature, 1st Session)

34-1-30

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 First Session - Thirty-Fourth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 37 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XXXVII No. 30 - 1:30 p.m., TUESD AY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1988. ISSN 0542- 5492 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. Province of Manitoba

NAME ALCOCK ,Reg ANGUS, John ASHTON, Sieve BURRELL, Parker CARR,James CARSTAIRS, Sharon CHARLES, Gwen CHEEMA, Gulzar CHORNOPYSKI, William CONNERY, Edward Hon. COWAN, Jay CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DERKACH, leonard, Hon. DOER,Gary DOWNEY, James Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DRIEDGER, Herold, l. DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, laurie EVANS, leonard FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen Hon. GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold GRAY, Avis HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R. HEMPHILL, Maureen KOZAK, Richard, J. LAMOUREUX, Kevin, M.

MALOWAY, Jim MANDRAKE, Ed MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. McCRAE, James Hon. MINENKO, Mark MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fourth legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation CONSTITUENCY Osborne St. Norbert Thompson Swan River Fort Rouge River Heights Selkirk Kildonan Burrows Portage la Prairie Churchill Ste. Rose du Lac Roblin-Russell Concordia Arthur Emerson Niakwa Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Fort Garry Brandon East Tuxedo Vir den St.

Boniface Minnedosa Ellice Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Gimli Logan Transcona lnkster Elmwood Assiniboia Morris Brandon West Seven Oaks MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. River East NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. Rossmere OLESON1 Char lotte Hon. Gladstone ORCHARD, Donald Hon. Pembina PANKRATZ, Helmut La Verendrye PATTERSON, Allan Radisson PENNER, Jack, Hon. Rhineland PLOHMAN, John Dauphin PRAZNIK, Darren Lac du Bonnet ROCAN, Denis, Hon. Turtle Mountain ROCH, Gilles Springfield ROSE, Bob St. Vital STORIE, Jerry Flin Flon TAYLOR, Harold Wolseley URUSKI, Bill lnterlake WASYLYCIA-LEIS, Judy St.

Johns YEO, lva Sturgeon Creek PARTY LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP PC LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL NDP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC NDP NDP PC NDP LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL PC PC PC PC PC LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC PC LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL NDP NDP LIBERAL

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, September 6, 1988. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDI NGS SPEAKER'S STATEMENT Mr. Speaker: I have a statement to make to the House. I must advise all Honourable Members that due to technical problems being encountered by the firm which typesets Hansard, we are experiencing delays with the printing of that document. Replacement parts for the typesetter's telecommunications equipment are on order from their supplier. Consequently, the Hansards from last Tuesday to Friday, in clusive, are not yet available in printed form.

In order to accommodate Mem bers, a preliminary Hansard in the same format as the daily Question Period printout is being produced for each of these days and will be distributed to Members in the House today. lt is expected that the problem will be corrected shortly and normal production will then be resumed. In the interval, Members will be provided daily with a preliminary Hansard. Hon. Char lotte Oleson (Minis ter of Community Services): Mr. Speaker, I have a mini sterial statement, but may I have leave of the House to wait until after Question Period because I do not have the copies for the other Members? Mr.

Speaker: Does the Honourable Member have leave? (Agreed) INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mr. Speaker: Before proceeding to oral questions. would like to draw all Honourable Members' attention to the Speaker's gallery where we have with us today Mr. Dave Barrett, the former Premie r of British Columbia. On behalf of all Honourable Mem bers, we welcome you here this afternoon. * (1 335) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Manfor Ltd. Native Board Replacements Mrs. Sharon Carstairs {Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for Manfor (Mr. Ernst).

On Friday, I asked the Minister responsible to explain why there were no Natives appointed to the Manfor Board of Directors.

In his reply-and I made sure to check it because I did not quite believe my ears on Friday-he said: "I was not able to find a top-notch person, Native." If business expertise was, indeed, what the Minister was concerned about in appointing the new Board of Directors, I would suggest to him that all he had to do was to contact Native groups and, indeed, northern groups of many varieties who could have given him a list of very good, competent Native people who have been intimately involved in the business management of community affairs in the North.

Will the Minister tell this House what he did, prior to appointing a new board, to consult with Native groups about potential lists of names? Hon. Jim Ernst {Minister responsible for Manfor): Mr. Speaker, in dealing with the Board of Directors of Manfor, we looked for top quality sectoral people to deal with the questions that Manfor is facing. We appointed, for instance, Mr. Barry McPhalen who is the vice-president of Inland Cement, to deal with the major problems of unscheduled downtime. Mr. McPhalen is responsible for a major plant facility in Winnipeg, not necessarily directly related. Mr.

Speaker, we looked for somebody in that area. There are a number of trucking issues related to the North and that is the second highest cost Manfor has, is the trucking of the wood supply to the plant. We looked for somebody in that area to assist the company in dealing with those problems. We looked for financial people; we looked for other people related to specific expertise dealing with the company. Those are the kinds of people we looked for to put on the Manfor Board to assist the company with the problems that they are facing in an attempt to turn the company back into a profitable venture. Mrs.

Carslairs: Is the Minister saying in this House today that there are no Natives who know anything about the northern sector, no Natives who know anything about trucking, no Natives who know anything about finances? Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, no. Manfor Ltd. Native Board Representation Mrs. Sharon Carslairs {Leader of the Opposition): Well, then, Mr. Speaker, I would ask a supplementary to the Minister. Where are the Native people represented on this board? Hon.

Jim Ernst {Mini ster responsible for Manfor): Is the Leader of the Opposition suggesting that the people we appointed to the Manfor board are not capable of dealing with the issues on the Manfor board? Are they 1009

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 not competent? Is Mr. Jones, the Chairman of the Board of Investors Syndicate, not a suitable chairman for the Board of Manfor? Does he not have the business expertise? I do not think so. Mrs. Carstairs: The Leade r of the Oppo sition is suggesting that there are Native people in this province with skills capable of sitting on this board. Where are they on this board? Mr. Ernst: As I indi cated, we looked for people that had direct-related expertise and experience with regard to the problems that are facing Manfor today. We have those people. We are very fortunate to have those people.

We are fortunate to have Mr. McPhalen, we are fortunate to have Mr. Jones, we are fortunate to have Mr. Coleman, in terms of trucking. The problem with trucking, Mr. Speaker, is that most of the truckers that are in the North are either working for Manfor one way or anoth er, and we looked for truckers in the North to try and supplement the board from that area. We found time and time and time again that they are in conflict of inte rest if they deal with Manfor or are providing trucking services to Manfo r. Therefore, we had to look elsewhere. Affirmative Action Placements Executive Search Mrs.

Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, with a supplementary question to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Connery). Obviously, Mr. Minister, there is no concern in filling boards in this province with the principles of affirmative action. What guidelines has your department provided to Ministers who are attempting to fill boards in that they will meet the affirmative action provisions as ind icated by this Government? Hon. Edward Connery (Min ister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, I have indicated to this House several times that affirmative action is very strong in this Government.

We have discussed it in Cabinet. We have discussed it with various groups that we are appointing that affirmative action will be followed in this Government. In this particular case, it might not have been possible. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating and that is when we are done on all our boards and com missions to see how strong affirmative action has been taken by this Government. Mr. Speaker: I would like to remind all Honourable Members that their questions and answers should be put through the Chair. Mrs. Carstairs: My supplementary and final question is to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Connery).

Is this Government prepared to put its money where its mouth is and support affirmative action and make sure that every board appointed in this province has representatives of all of the people represented in this province? * (13 40) Mr. Connery: lt is absolutely vital that people of all walks of life in Manitoba have an opportunity to work with this Government and to serve this Government. Our Government is commi tted to that action. Day Care Policy Changes Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): We all know that Manitoba has had a reputation of being the top province in all of Canada in terms of our child care system, and my question is to the Minister of Comm unity Services (Mrs. Oleson).

I understand that the $7 million that was budgeted in the former Budget is again in this Budget, in terms of child care spaces the same amount of money as in the last Budget, but that the Government is going to take some of that money from the non-profit child care system, the non-profit child care system that has some 4,000 waiting spaces, and divert that money, similar to the Alberta system and similar to the British Columbia system, into profit child care.

Could the Minister please inform this House if there is going to be a radical change in policy and direction under this Government in terms of child care spaces in this province? Hon. Ch arlotte Oleson (Mini ster of Commu nity Services): The subsidies will go with the child and to the centre that is the choice of the parent. Mr. Doer: That will mean that there is a decrease in the number of child care spaces available to people in terms of the non-profit system. The experience in British Columbia, and indeed in California, has been that this new voucher system has been a disaster.

Day Care Allotment Subsidy Priorities Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): My question is: Why would the Minister proceed in a radical change in philosophy on child care prior to the reports being completed of the Child Care Advisory Committees, the two committees that she is potentially going to strike very soon? Hon.

Ch arlo tte Oleson (Min ister of Commu nity Services): In response to the requests of many parents who were having difficulty placing children in child care centres because they happen to be in one part of town and they were close to a private centre and potentially had to take their child to another

section of town where there was a public centre, they asked, and we listened to them, that the subsidies be allowed to go to private centres with the children. That is very important to the low-income parents of many children in this province. They were requesting that and we answered their request. Mr. Doer: The Minister never answered the question about awaiting the report of the advisory committee 1010

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 prior to making the philosophical decision that this Government has made. Has the Mini ster studied the Alberta system where the spaces go vacant in terms of people under the profit child care system, because the average cost per child is about $25 to $30 a day,

whereas the Manitoba system is running about $12 a day, and there are long waiting lists in the Alberta system for the non-profit system and indeed in Manitoba for the non-profit spaces? Why did the Minister choose to make a philosophical decision and divert money into the private sector prior to the advisory comm ittees reporting to her? Mrs. Oleson: I repeat, for the edification of the Member, the subsidies are going with child ren. The important operative here is that the subsidies are going with children who need child care. Mr.

Doer: Does the Minister not understand that this does not create a single space, and everywhere where that has been used, it has not created a single space in the child care system? I would ask the Minister: Why is Manitoba one of only two provinces that has not yet submitted its proposal to the federal Government dealing with the federal-provincial funding that is available? Why are we still coming in last, or second last, in terms of the proposal, in terms of the child care system? * (13 45) Mrs.

Oleson: I will be addressing that point later in my statement, but I would like to say now that that is patently untrue. Manitoba has a proposal in to the federal Government; other provinces have proposals in to the federal Government When the legislation is passed, we will be in a position to be working on those proposal s. To say that we are lagging behind is rid iculous. Native Inquiry Research Allocations Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): My question is for the Ho nourable Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae).

My question concerns the concerns of the Native people in this province and, as well, this Government's lack of understanding of those issues. On August 17, my Leader (Mrs. Carstairs) asked the Attorney-General whether he would be making funding available for Native groups to enable them to undertake research and prepare their submissions to be made to the inquiry into aboriginal justice issues. Since then a num ber of Native groups have come forward supporting this funding and including recently the Commissioners themselves.

My question is: Given the recent letter of the Com miss ione rs asking that this decision by the Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae) be reviewed, and given the opinions of such noted experts as Thomas Berger in this area, which clearly indicate that it is absolutely 1011 necessary that groups have their own funds to direct their own research, is it still the Attorney-General's opinion that financial support is not necessary to enable Native organizations to make effective submissions and, in particular, in light of the recent statement by the Commissioners themselves, who certainly are experts? Hon.

James McCrae (Attorney-General): I think a doubling of the budget of the Native inquiry itself to $1. 52 million spe aks rather loudly ab out the commitment of this Government to a positive result As a result of the Native inqui ry, a component of the comm ission's budget is, of course, also for research. Native groups are funded by this Government. I would like to ask the Honourable Member how much he wants the Government to make available and to which groups? Mr. Edwards: A supplemen tary for the Attorney General (Mr. McCrae).

I believe the Attorney-General has missed the point The point is not the size of the budget. The point is who directs how it is spent? I would ask the Attorney General to address that question, and in particular, in light of this recent letter from the Commi ssioners suggesting that his decision be review ed , has he decided to review that decision? Mr. McCrae: I do not think it would be fair to respond to the Honourable Member before I have responded to the Commissioners of Inqu iry who have written the letter.

He talks about financial support I would like to know from the Honourable Member-and maybe he and his Leader (Mrs. Carstairs) can get together on this one how much more money does he expect this Government to put forward for this inq uiry, and which groups does he want funded, and which ones does he want left out? Mr. Edwards: I will trust the good sense of the rest of this House to understand that the Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae) has missed the point again.

The point is not size of dollars; the point is: who will spend those dollars, who will direct the research? lt has recently come to our attention that this commission will not even have counsel appointed. Will the Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae) please address that issue, and, in particular, will the Attorney-General please tell this House what opportunities will be made available for Native groups to present to this inq uiry, and how are they going to go about their preparation? Will they be spending their own funds? Mr.

McCrae: Before the Honourable Member attempts to leave the impression on the record of this Chamber that funding for counsel for the inq uiry, for instance, was refused by this Government, he might check with the Commissioners of Inquiry himself to ask them what their thoughts were about having counsel appointed. * (13 50) The Commi ssioners of Inqu iry were very interested in having an allocation for research. In terms of Native groups and funding for them, the Honourable Mini ster

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 responsible for Native Affairs (Mr. Downey) presented the Manitoba Assembly of Chiefs with the $325,000 cheque. lt seems to me that if that group, for instance, wants to come forward and make presentations to the Commi ssion of Inq uiry, it can take some money from that amount.

I ask the Honourable Member, though, in view of the fact that this Government has seen fit to be committed enough to double the budget put out or set aside by the previous Government for this purpose, I ask the Honourable Member, who complains about my not getting the point or my not answering the question this is the third time for me, Mr. Speaker-which groups does he want to support, by how much, and which ones does he want to leave out? Disease Control laboratory location Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): My question is to the First Minis ter (Mr. Filmon). Two weeks ago, my Leader (Mrs.

Carstairs) raised a question about the location of the new Lab oratory Centre for Disease Control, and the controversy about that site rages and continues. The First Minister assured the House at that time that his Government was speaking to the federal Government and that the decision would be based "on the merits of what is the best location." Has the First Minister spoken to the federal Minister of Health on this issue, and if so, did he obtain assurances from the Minister that the decision would be based on merit and not on political advantage for one Member of Parliament? Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): The Member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Carr) knows very well-being a protege of Lloyd Axworthy, he is very familiar with decisions having been made by the former Liberal admini stration to put everything where it was politically appropriate and expedient for Lloyd Axworthy-that all decisions in Manitoba were made on that basis by the federal admi nistration previously. He, being a protege of Mr. Axworthy's, he is very familiar with that method of Government. Mr. Speaker, I will repeat for the Member for Fort Rouge (Mr.

Carr): we have said at all times to the federal Governm ent, in discussions with different Ministers, with federal Ministers, that where the location of the lab should be is, firstly, in Manitoba, and secondly, in a place that meets the criteria and is best suited to the particular use. Disease Control laboratory location Announcement Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): With a supplementary question to the First Mini ster (Mr. Filmon). Since we last debated this question and since we last asked the First Minister a question that he did not answer-just like he is not answering the question today- 1012 Mr.

Speaker: Question. Mr. Carr: -some things have changed. Specifically, the Mayor has proposed to donate the City Works Yard which supports the recommenda tions of the Blue Ribbon Selection Committee. Will the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) assure this House that he is taking steps to bring the three Parties, the three Governments, to the table so that we can be assured that a decision will be made soon in the interest of all Winnipeggers and all Manitobans and not the political partisan interests of one Member? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): The Member for Fort Rouge (Mr.

Carr) may not have been familiar or aware of the details of the $1 land offer, but I certainly was at the time that his Leader asked those questions. I have been involved with keeping in touch with the subject. I have been aware of discussions and meetings that had taken place with the City of Winnipeg officials and the Mayor, with Members of our admini stration; with Members of the federal Government.

At all times we have urged the federal Government to ensure, firstly, that the announcement of the location would be in Manitoba, which it will be, and we are delighted with tha t; and, secondly, that it will be in the location that is best suited in all resp ects. They appointed a Blue Ribbon Commi ttee. They have done other studies and analyses. I would expect that they will be guided by those analyses and by the assessments that are provided to ensure that the best location is chosen for that land. Mr. Carr: With a final supplementary to the First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

As First Minister of this province and as Leader of that Government, the people of Manitoba expect the First Minister himself to indi cate a preference for where this laboratory centre should be placed. My question is simple: What is the First Minister's preference for a proper site location for that centre? Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speak er, I will gladly tell the Member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Carr) and all Manito bans.

First and foremost, we want that lab to be located in Manitoba because it is a tremendous benefit to Manitoba, a $90 million investment, a building on our medical infrastructure, to ensure that Manitoba becomes a centre for medical technology. Secondly, it is going to be located on the site that is best suited to the needs of that particular lab.

We all are going to join in commenda tion of the federal Government for bringing to Manitoba something that is as valuable, something that brings as much to Manitoba as this one does-an investment in job creation, in technology development, and all of the things that we want to have for Manitoba's future. I am delighted that the federal Government is following along those guidelines and I look forward to the announcement that they will be making in the near future. •

(1355) Tuesday, September 6, 1988 Day Care Placement creation Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns): My question is for the Minister of Community Services (Mrs . Oleson). Given that the Minister has indicated in th e House that her ministerial statement will be addressing the not io n and the concept of a subsidy going with the chil d in terms of our day care system, given that there is not an example anywhere or an exper ience anywhere that has demonstrated that the sub sidy going with the parent translates into new spaces, and given that there is not an example anywhere that demonstrates that- Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): It translates into children being able to get into day care where there are waiting lists today . Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr. Speaker , this is a very serious issue. I wish the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) would control himself .

Given that there is not an example or a study or an experience anywhere tha t shows that that kind of day care system results in affordable , accessible , quality day care anywhere, could the Ministe r indicate to this House how many spaces, new spaces , she thinks that such a system will create, on what basis she is making this kind of an announcement, and if there is anything more behind this kind of approach to day care other than ideological blindness? Hon. Charlotte Oleson (Minister of Community Services): Mr. Speaker , I think the ulterior motive is in the mind of the questionner.

This Government wants to provide for as many people - POINT OF ORDER Mr. Jay Cowan (Second Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speake r. For the Minister to directly reference ulter ior motives on the part of the questioner would be highly unparliam entary and I would hope tha t she would take this opportunity to apologize for the imp utati on of motiv es. Hon. James Mccrae (Government House Leader): I think the Minis ter said that the motive is in the mind of the questioner , and I think there is quite a difference in the construction between myself and the Hou se Leader for the third party (Mr.

Cowan). There is no imputation of motives. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank both Honourable Members . I will have to review Hansard and I will come back to the House. The Honourable Minister of Community Services. Mrs. Oleson: Thank you , Mr. Speaker . The subsidies that we are planning to provide for children in private day care are just that -subsidies for children . The important operative here is that we are providing children with the opportunity to get into spaces that they were not able to have befor e. Day Care Space Assurances Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St .

Johns): Given that all the evidence points to the fact that the real problem in our day care system is lack of spaces , lack of centres in the non-prof it sector - we only have some 8,000 pare nts on waiting list s waiting to get into non-profit cent res and spaces in this province as proof of that, Mr. Speak er- given all of that evidence , can she give some assu rances to th e House today that all money going towards th e creation of new spaces, going towards the day care program in Manitoba will go towards the creatio n of brand new spaces ? Hon.

Charlotte Oleson (Minister of Community Services): Our budget provides for new spaces , for newly subsidized spaces in private centres - (Interjection) - public centres as well , yes, and it also pro vides for some initiative in the rural areas. I will be giving the Member all that inf ormat ion later . Ms.

Wasylycia-Leis: Given that the Minister has not answered the question and not given any assurances that there will be new spaces created , and not given us any indication of how many new spaces, I would like to ask the Minister , given that she has indicated that the plan submitted to Ottawa is the plan previously submitted by the NOP admi nistration, which is obviously founded on assump t ions of non-prof it, quali t y, affordab le, accessible day care , will the Minister indicate to the House today whether or not she is prepared to sta nd by those assumptio ns and ensu re that every penny available from Ottawa , throug h the Nationa l Day Care Plan of Action , will go to wards the non -profit sector , will go towards new spaces , will go towards quality , accessible, affordable day care?

Mrs. Oleson: The money we are putting in the budget this year, the mon ey that will be available from Ottawa , will be spe nt in placing children in child care-children who need it. *

(1400) PCB Management Plan Accelerated Development Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): My question is for the Minist er of Labour and the Environment (Mr. Connery) . Mr. Speaker , it is obvious that the Government has been called upon to provide a timely response to the PCB problem and has not . It looks like the Minister has caved in to legitimate public demand and has now announced an accelerated development of a long-term PCB management plan . My question to the Minister is: What can the Minister tell nervous Manitobans as to exactly what is an accelerated development?

What does it amount to in this House today , with precise information as to timetable and the steps , because last week he came across that he did not know what he was talking about? 1013 Hon. Edward Connery (Minister of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health): When I talked with

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 our staff, we went over the situation, as you kn ow. By 1993, we hope to have a site selected and in operation. We are accelerating that plan if that is at all possible. I have asked our staff to see if they can find a site quicker, but as the Member kn ows, and he should know, a site selection is a very ard uous and long-term program. We have to call hearings. We want to make sure that the public has input into a site selection and to a hazardous waste management program. To this extent, Mr. Speak er, we will be inviting all of the public to make representation.

We will be asking for expert advice from expert people in the community so when we do finally make a site selection, it will be an appropriate site selection and it will be made as quickly as possible. At the same time, to speed it up, we will try to ensure that the disposal and other facilities that are required at that site are moved along as quickly as possible. To give an exact date, that is difficult, but to make it as quickly as possible is the goal of our department. Mr.

Taylor: Will the Minister, in view of the lengthy public consultation process that he just referred to, and it was steps I was asking for-he has promised this consultation process for a new Hazardous Waste Management Corporation-table specific plans of his department for dealing with short-term hazardous waste management in the province so that there will not be the necessity of a repeat of which we had recently of the North Transcona CP Yards and the PCBs there, and which I had to harp at this Minister for 10 days to get a simple but effective answer? Come on, let us hear the answer. Mr.

Conne ry: Indeed, the Member for Wolseley (Mr. Taylor) knew about this site for two weeks and did not bring it into this House until there was a tragic fire in Quebec-time to coattail on the back of tragedy to get some information. At the same, the Member for Niakwa (Mr. Driedger) knew about it for over a year and this site was not reported. We are very concerned; we are working. As the Member knows, the Hazardous Waste Management Corporation will work with anybody that has a chemical or a substance that is hazardous to dispose of it.

Some of it has to go to Sarnia, Ontario for burning; others have to be stored; some go to landf ill sites. So we have in place a short-term plan. What we are working on is the long-term plan. As far as he knows, and the Member does know, PCBs, at this point, we can only store them. I hope by the end of this week our department will have visited every site that is under provincial jurisdiction. Environment Canada has ensured me that every federal site will have been inspected by the end of this week to ensure that all sites are safe.

As the Members knows, I am going to a meeting this aftern oon, or the meeting takes place tomorrow in Ottawa, to deal with the safe storage of PCBs. the safe moving of PCBs, and to facilitate a very quick disposal system of this hazardous chemical. 1014 PCB National Inventory Mr. Harold Taylor (Woiseley): That gives me the lead in I was looking for, for my third question. Sixteen hundred PCB sites. We have 1,600 or 10 times 1,600 across Canada . The na tional Mi nister of the Environment admits the national inventory is full of holes.

Will this Minister, at the meeting tomorrow, in Ottawa, of Environment Ministers from across Canada, demand the completion of that PCB site inventory asap; and will he demand that that inventory come across with sufficient detail for each of those sites; and will he also, at that meeting, demand that there be the creation of national regulations to replace the national guidelines which do not work with specific reference to building standards, sighting conditions, lighting security and so on; and will he also introduce, at this meeting, the concept of bonding for those who store PCBs; and will he push for a national consensus on how to destroy PCBs?

Mr. Speaker: Ord er, please. May I remind all Honourable Members that a multipart question does tend to extend the answer. The Honourable Minister of the Environment. Hon. Edward Connery (Minister of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health): lt is obvious the Member knows that there is a concern about PCBs in Canada. Why does he think we had the meeting called? Why does he think that Mr. McMillan and I discussed this very issue last week to ensure that all 10 Ministers would get together in Ottawa to review the current PCB situation? Mr. Kowalski in Alberta is concerned that he has not found all his sites.

I am trying to ensure, and I think we have, that we have identified all of the sites here in Ma nitob a.- (In terjection)- Yes, I am concerned, unlike the Member for Wolseley (Mr. Taylor) who was prepared to withhold information. Mr. Speaker, I have only answered two questions. There were five. He was even asked by our department people if he knew about some PCB sites- Mr. Speaker: Order, order; order, please. Health Sciences Centre Permanent Bed Closure Mr. Jay Cowan (Churchill): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), and I would like to put it in the proper perspective.

On April 12, 1988, in the middle of an election camp aign, the Premier of the Province (Mr. Filmon) made an election campa ign promise that stated very clearly: "We will put an immed iate halt to permanent bed closures pending a comprehensive review." That was an unequivocal campa ign promise made by the Premier at that time. On July 22, the Health Sciences Centre wrote to the Department of Health asking permission to close 22 respiratory beds, and in that letter, they referenced

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 those closures as permanent bed closures. On August 22, in this House, the Premier of the Province (Mr. Filmon) again said, referencing that situation, "We will keep our commitments and we will keep our promises that we have made prior to and since the election campaign." One day later, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) cut the legs out from under the Premier when he denied three times the original campaign promise and apologized publicly for the confusion that was created by the badly worded campaig n promises enunciated by the Premier on April 12 .

Since then, we have seen the spectacle of the Premier and the Minister of Health slip-sliding away from that campaign promise, trying to relieve them selves of any responsibility to live up to that promise. Given the confusion that has been created by the Government's badly worded campaign promise and the refusal to live up to his campaign promises, my question to the Minister is: Can the Minister advise this House and the people of Manitoba today as to the status today of those 22 beds which were closed by the Health � Sciences Centre? * (14 10) Hon.

Donald Orchard (Mini ster of Health): I timed the question. l believe it was four minutes, and l trust that I will have that opportunity to reply. The Health Sciences Centre asked to close for the summer months 22 respiratory beds.

That closure for the summer months until September 6, which is today, was granted because it was a normal summer shutdown request-something that has happened during the years prior to the last NDP ad mini stration, that happened during the Lyon Progressive Conservative admin istration, indeed, happened during the Schreyer admi nistration, because the summertime is a time when demand for services tends to be less and wards can be closed temporarily. What the Health Sciences Centre requested on July 22 was for a program delivery.

They identified 22 respiratory beds, 12 gynecological beds, which they do not need because they have moved more of their � services on an out-patient basis so that the patient ' does not need to be ad mitted to a hospital bed to receive treatment.

That is a direction that the former admi nistration at one time supported, and I have to assume still do. lt is a trend in health care delivery that has been ongoing for some 20 years, because I believe that at one point in time the Health Sciences Centre had a bed count of over 1,200 beds, and through not using and not requiring the beds for medical service delivery, that count is slightly over 1,000 now. Mr. Speake r, what the Health Sciences Centre had requested on July 22 has not been acceded to, i.e., the permission to permanent ly close those beds. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Churchill (Mr.

Cowan) did not take four minutes. He took one minute and 40 seconds. I would like to remind Honourable Members that the

preamble should be one carefully drawn sentence. The Ho no urabl e Mem ber for Churchill, with a supplementary. Mr. Cowan: Mr. Speaker, one has to very carefully draw their sentences if they are going to make one sentence last one minute and 40 seconds. lt is unfortunate that the Minister did not get to the rest of his undercutting of the Premier's (Mr.

Filmon) promise. 1 would ask him, basically, given that today is September 6 and he has ind icated in this House and outside of this House that the closures were temporary until September 6, can he indicate to us today what the status is of those 22 beds which were closed at the Health Sciences Centre? Mr. Orchard: Because the Health Sciences Centre has indi cated to the Manitoba Health Services Comm ission that their program delivery no longer requires those 22 beds, they have asked for permanent closure.

We have not granted that request of permanent closure until we are sure ourselves that what is good for the Health Sciences Centre, in terms of their program delivery, does not adversely impact on the system; hence the commitment that no permanent bed closures would take place until we do an analysis of the Winnipeg hospital system in terms of total bed requirement some thing woefully missing in the manda ted bed closures by the NDP last fall to control deficits and for budgetary reasons.

The status of those bed closures is that we have not completed our hospital review in Winnipeg to determine whether the Health Sciences Centre request is an appropriate one. As a subsequent measure, the Health Sciences Centre has asked us for an extension to temporarily close those beds for two more months and that has been granted, Mr. Speaker. Medical Services Comprehensive Review Request Mr. Jay Cowan (Chu rchill): Now we have seen it all; the circle has been completed. The question to the Minis ter is when does a temporary bed closure become a permanent bed closure?

Is it after the first two-month extension, after the fourth two-month extension, after the tenth two-month extension? When is the Minister going to live up to the campaign promise of the First Minister, of his Leader (Mr. Filmon), and ensure that there are no hospital beds closed in this province until a comprehensive review of medical services and hospital services in this province is com pleted by his Government? When are they going to live up to their word? Hon. Donald Orchar d (Minis ter of Health): Mr. Speake r, that is exactly what I and this Government are doing right now.

There is no permission to close those beds permane ntly. The closure of such would not bring them to the 56-bed en forced closure mandated without consultation and planning by the previous admini strati on. That permission to permanently close will not be granted by the Manitoba Health Services Commi ssion and myself until that review is completed. That review is ongoing, is not complete, and we will not allow bed closures, as the NDP forced on the hospitals, until we have complete information. 1015

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 Affirmative Action Barrier Removal Mr. Allan Patterson (Radisson): My question is to the Minister responsible for the Civil Service Comm ission (Mr. Connery). The Minister has assumed overall responsibility for assuring that Affirmative Action is carried out within the departments . We are very pleased to hear this and look forward to regular progress reports. Will the Minister inform us what systemic barriers to the employment of target groups have been identified so far? What steps have been taken to remove them? Specifically, what particular barriers have been priorized for removal?

Hon. Edward Connery (Min ister responsible for the Civil Service): Mr. Speak er, the systemic barrier to Affirmative Action was taking place for the previous six years. As the Leader of the MGEA, who is now a Member of this House, was not a supporter of Affirmative Action and that has come out very, very clearly in my discussions with the Civil Service- Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Concordia, on a point of order. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): A point of order, Mr. Speak er. If the Minister of Labour (Mr.

Connery) would check the record, he will find my signature on the Affirmative Action Program on two different occasions. You better do your homework before you make the typically uninformed statements that you make in this House. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. A dispute over the facts is not a point of order. The Honourable Minister responsible for the Civil Service. Mr. Connery: Mr. Speaker, anybody can put their name to any document. lt is the conviction of the individual, it is the conviction of the Government to make it work.

I can tell you the Members on this side know the discussions that I have had as far as Affirmation Action goes. lt is alive and well in this House. As you know, the re were various com mittees to ensure th at Affirmative Action operates well. There are three Deputy Ministers and there are three members of the MGEA who are meeting very soon to work on our Affirma tive Action Program . Mr. Speaker: Order, order. I can tell you that the time for oral questions has expired. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mr.

Speaker: I would like to draw all Honourable Members' attention to the Speaker's gallery where we have with us this after noon, Mr. David Orlikow, who is the MP for Winnipeg North. On behalf of all Honourable Members, I welcome you here this aftern oon, sir. 1016 SPEAKER'S STATEMENT Mr. Speaker: Prior to Orders of the Day, have a statement I would like to read to the House. lt has come to my attention that during Private Members' Hour last Thursda y, the Honourable Member for Dauphin (Mr.

Plohman), in moving Resolution No. 6, digressed somewhat from the printed text of this resolution as distributed to all Honourable Members. The difference between the printed text and the words used by the Honourable Member on Thursday last do not constitute subs tant ive or material chang es. However, there are differences between what was said and what was printed and distributed. The resolution did appear in the Votes and Proceedings in the actual words the Honourable Member used in moving it.

Should he wish to have the resolution before the House read as it was originally printed on the notice paper, I suggest he ask leave of the House the next time Resolution No. 6 is before the Assembly to formally correct the wording to restore it to the original form in which it was printed . Any Member, of course, is free at the time of moving a motion to ask leave of the House to amend or change the text.

I would, however, ask all Honourable Members that if they choose to vary the text of a motion as they present it, that they would give the House the courtesy of informing the House that they wish to make such a change. •

(1420) MINISTE RIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, to accommodate the Honourable Minister of Community Services (Mrs. Oleson), I wonder if we might revert to ministerial statements. Mr. Speaker: I think it was the understanding that we would. The Honourable Minister of Community Services. Hon. Charlotte Oleson (Minis ter of Commu nity Services ): Mr. Spea ker, I ha ve copies for the appropriate Members. I am pleased to announce today two important in itiatives and a major funding increase for day care in the Province of Manitoba.

The initiatives involve making child care income subsidies more flexible so that they apply regardless of whether a child is cared for in a private or public facility and the fulfilling of this Government's Throne Speech commitment by establis hment of a Child Care Task Force to assist in developing a strategy for day care in Manitoba. In terms of funding, I am very pleased to announce as well that the budget allocation to child care in 1988- 89 is up a full 25 percent, or $7 million , to a total of

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 $35.7 million. The increase will allow for creation of at least 800 new provincially funded child care spaces, as well as significant improvements to one of Manitoba's most important social services. lt should be noted that the additional funding and the policy initiatives I am announcing today are building blocks being added to Manitoba's existing day care base. This Government intends to enhance and broaden the current system while maintaining existing strengths.

The move to make day care income subsidies more flexible and portable is in response to the desires of many Manitoba parents. Those parents have informed us that they do not like the restrictions imposed by the current system, and we believe that allowing the subsidy to go with the child, regardless of whether that child is cared for in a licensed public or private facility, adds an element of equity and fairness all too often lacking in the current system.

Simply put, this gives eligible Manitoba parents the freedom of choice in deciding the most appropriate form of care for their children. • This very positive policy change will take effect October , 2. In making Ma nitoba's day care system mo re responsive to the needs and wishes of parents, we are allocating $1 25,000 for assistance to cent res and community groups wishing to provide day care in rural areas. In addition, my Government has committed $200,000 for this fiscal year to a Workplace Day Care Fund to help employers and employees determine the need for day care and assist in meeting preparation costs.

We have also ear marked funds to allocate commitments for 320 spaces in a variety of settings. These funds will allow some centres to increase their capacity to ensure their viab ility. The Government has also committed $2.5 million to establish full-year funding for facilities approved last year, $1. 6 million to accommodate volume increases because mo re fam ilies are eligi bl e for day care subsidies, and $970,000 to pay for increases in day • care fees, as well as additional funds to help families ' with disabled children who require day care services.

This pla n was de veloped after consid erable con sultatio n with par ent groups and child care advocates who felt the existing day care system in Manitoba was no longer flexible enough to meet the changing needs of Manitobans, in order to ensure that the day care system is able to meet not only present but future needs of Manitoba families. I am pleased to announce today the striking of a task force to develop a strategy for day care that will ensure quality care while at the same time provide a sensible balance to public, private, family, home and workplace day care. Mr.

Speaker, the Task Force on Day Care will addr ess a wide range of issues and options concerning the effective and affordable delivery of day care in the province. Among the matters the task force will consider are provision of day care to rural and part-time users in a flexible man ner, the means of funding day care, the criteria for determining the need and distribution of new day care spaces, the content of training courses and the process of achieving specific levels of accreditation, and the requirements of special needs children and the provision of care for them.

The Task Force on Child Care will report its recommenda tions early in 19 89. The task force will be limited to seven members but, to ensure they receive a fully representative picture of day care realities and needs, two separate advisory groups will be established to solicit input from the full spectrum of the child care community. One advisory body will be drawn from representatives of day care providers, while the other group will come from child care users, Manitoba's parents. The advisory committee will monitor and comment upon the task force's activities, as well as its final report.

In addition, the task force will call for written submissions from all interested parties. And finally, Mr. Speak er, I intend today to put to rest much of the political gain-saying the Members opposite have engaged in on the matter of Manitoba's position regarding the new federal day care plan. Members opposite have gone to great lengths to paint a very poor image of this Government 's preparedness and/ or willingness to take advantage of additional day care money proposed under the federal plan. Let me assure you today that nothing could be further from the truth.

Not only is this Government and my department ready and willing to take full advantage of the recently announced federal program, I can assure you we are prepared to begin negotiating those arrangements the very moment it is appropriate to do so. That brings me to the question of the precise state of negotiations between Manitoba and the federal Government concerning entrance to the new national plan. lt is, without question, a case of fact versus fiction. Members opposite have done a remarkable job of supplying the fiction. Allow me to supply the facts.

First of all, it is patently untrue that Manitoba has not submitted a proposal for doubling provincial day care spaces. Two provinces have not submitted plans but, I say again, Manitoba is not one of them. But even more im portantly, the fed eral Health Minist er, the Honourable Jake Epp, has advised me that all proposals originally submi tted are now outdat ed. When the Fed eral Day Care Act receives Roya l Assent, all provinces will be required to resubmit their proposals.

Given the fact that the Act has just passed the House of Commons' second reading and is in committee study, it is clear that Manitoba can carry out the task force process without risk of losing any negotiating ground whatsoever. As well, the federal Government is already on record assuring all provinces that they have until March 19 90 to sign a final day care agreement without risk of financial loss.

This comprehensive plan I have outlined today clearly shows this Government 's commitment to a day care system that ensures not only high-quality care but also provides the flexibility and accessibility Manitobans want and need. Rural, workplace, home, private and public facilities all have an important role to play in the new Manitoba day care plan. I am proud to say that Manitobans will have one of the nation's best child care systems, not only today but on into the future because this Government listens to parents and day care 1017

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 providers and is moving to respond to their needs. Thank you. Ms. Avis Gray (E IIice): I have a few comments in response to the min isterial statement by the Minister of Community Services (Mrs. Oleson). The Minister of Communi ty Services has indi cated to this House today that her department has increased initiatives involving child care and that, in fact, subsidies will be more flexible and that dollars can travel with the child.

We, on this side of the House, question what accountability systems will be built in to ensure that, for the non -profit da y cares which are currentl y operating in this province, we are assured that the non profit day care spaces will be filled before dollars do travel to private day cares. We are concerned about the accountability that would be built in with the flexible dollars. Although this indication from the speaker are some general statements regarding the flexib ility, we would hope that in the near future we would see specific details and concrete steps as to how that accountability will be monitored.

In regard to the Minister's statements regarding commitment of dollars to a Workplace Day Care Fund, again this is a general statement in principle. We would hope to see some future details as to exactly how those $200,000 will be spent. That is a fair amount of money, and a fair amount of money that is going into the Day Care Task Force as well. We would like to see some detail as to how those dollars will be spent to ensure that, in fact, Manitobans and parents of children will be getting the best value for the dollar. * (14 30) Mr.

Speaker, in regard to the Task Force on Child Care, the task force which will be made up of seven members, I wonder if the Minister and her staff have made the decision as to who those seven members will be. In recent meetings, as recent as this morning, with the Manitoba Association for Child Care, they again have requested that of course they be part of that representation and have not heard to date whether in fact they will be part of that seven-member commi ttee. We trust of course that there will be representation from the Manitoba Association of Child Care and from the Manitoba Family Day Care Association.

As well, these two separate advisory groups that will seem to be established along with the task force, as I read this, unfortunately it reminds me too much of the similarities of the provincial and regional advisory groups of the Welcome Home Program. We know how those did not work. There seems to be an indication here that in fact who actually will be making the decisions, the advisory boards or the task force, and what exactly will their roles and responsi bilities be.

I have some concerns that we may get into a situation, depending on who is represented on the seven-member group and depending on who is represented on the advisory commi ttee, where it will be divide and conquer. I do have a lot of grave concerns about these two advisory groups and the task force and how exactly that will be structured. We hope that in fact the Minister of Community Services (Mr s. Oleson) will take some of these comments into consideration in terms of setting up the task force.

We certainly encourage her very, very strongly to solicit representation from the Manitoba Association of Child Care Workers and the Manitoba Association of Family Day Care Workers. We see that there are parents who will be represented. We see that as a positive step forward. We hope as well to be hearing in the very near future more specific details about how some of these dollars are going to spent, what the $200,000 will be spent for regarding workplace and day care, exactly what kind of creative initiatives they will be looking at regarding rural day care.

Who are they going to solicit information from to find out the needs of rural day care? We hope that all this information will be forthcoming in the near future. Ms. Judy Wasylycia-leis (St. Johns): Unlike my friend, the Liberal critic, and my Liberal friends to the right of me, we in the NDP caucus want to have more than details about this proposal. We want to get specific information about how this proposal will work.

We want to express the strongest possible opposition to the statement that has been made today, to the news that has been released today, to the incredible damage that will be done to our child care system by virtue of the direction that has been announced today. I wish the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) had stated in-excuse me. I realize, Mr. Speaker, I cannot mention the absence or presence of Members. However, I want to say that this, in our view, is one of the most fundam ental, critical issues facing Manitoba families today.

Manitoba families and communities were looking to this Government for meaningful public policy and direction in terms of quality, accessible, affordable day care. They have been waiting with bated breath for some news about that $7 million, the same amount of money that was put in the Budget by the former NDP admin istration and which the Members opposite and the Members to the right of me voted against. Today, they will get nothing but disappointing news. I am afraid today is a sad day for Manitoba families.

Our day care system, the best in North America, has just been sent on a nose-dive to become the worst in North America. We have lost our leadership position by virtue of the direction that this Government is pointing us in, and all of us have to work very hard to try to put some common sense into the minds and into the thoughts of Members opposite, into the minds and thoughts of this Conservative Government. Let me try to outline our concerns as succinctly as possible.

Members opposite have suggested that they will solve our day care problem, our shortage of day care spaces in Manitoba, by putting more flexibility into the system through this so-called subsidy going with the child or subsidy going with the parent concept. it is an illogical concept. lt makes no sense at all. lt is as illogical as the position presented by the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs) and her colleagues in the election and since then about subsidy going with 1018

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 the parent to deal with the demand and to provide flexibility in the system. There is not a study in this count ry, there is not an example in this country that demo nstrates that the subsidy going with the child or the subsidy going with the parent will create a single new space. In fact, the Min ister herself will acknowledge that, will ind icate that this does not necessarily create new spaces. lt is simply a cover and a camouflage for their determination to implement a fanatical, ideological election commitment to help support day care centres in the private sector.

There is no benefit to the people of Manitoba, to the families of Manitoba, by going that route. lt is illogical, nonsensical and a waste of public funds. Parents are coming to all of us and saying the problem is lack of spaces. The problem is lack of trained professionals to fill all those positions. The problem is lack of salary enhancement to adequa tely remunerate our day care profess ionals. The problem is qual ity, accessible, affordable day care. This proposal does not go one iota to achieve qual ity, accessible, affordable day care. lt goes in the opposite direction.

We have heard today an announcement, as well, about a task force that is scheduled to report in approxima tely three months. How can this Government say it has not done an incred ible disservice to the people of Manitoba by today announcing a major policy shift, a major new direction in the use of scarce dollars and the use of taxpayers' mon ey, and then suggest that there will be all kinds of input and all kinds of opportunity for input from the parents of this province, from the fam ili es and the com mun it ies everywhere in this province?

That is a hypocritical, that is an irresponsible move on the part of this Go vernment, and we are appalled by the kind of disservice, the kind of treatment they are according the people of Manitoba. We on this side of the House would like to see dollars that are available di rected first to meet the thousands and thousands of unfunded non- profit spaces, the some 8,000 spaces in the non-profit sector waiting for public funds, and the indeterminable numb er of spaces in our family day care program waiting to be funded, to provide the service to those parents requiring subsidized day care.

Let us put our money where it will do the greatest good. Let us not fritter it away. Let us not fritter it away in order to meet the profit -making motives of a few comme rcial centres tha t does not gua rantee the creation of one single new space. We are appalled and affronted today by the- Mr. Speaker: May I remind all Honourable Mem bers of our own Rule 19 (4), which says an Opposition Memb er may make a brief comment with respect to the annou ncement or statement by the Min ister. * (1 440) ORDERS OF THE DAY NON-POLI TIC AL STATEMENT Hon.

Glen Findlay (Min ister of Agriculture): May I have leave for a non-political statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the Honourable Min ister have leave? (Agreed) Mr. Findlay: I will be very brief, to the Member for Thompson (Mr . Ashton). This past weeke nd, the Provi ncial B Fastbal l Championship was held in Steinbach. My riding was represented by the Virden Men's Fastball Team. I would like to report to the House that they went through the entire weekend without losing a game. The Member for La Verendrye (Mr.

Pank ratz) was there last night to report that they won the final game over Hartne y so the Member for Arthur (Mr. Downey) knows- by a score of 12 -2 in five innings. I would like to congratulate them on their fine season and their very successful finale. Hon. James McCrae {Government House Leader): In the int erests of Cabinet solidarity, perhaps we should put the Honourable Mini ster of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) in the committee room and the Honourable Min ister of Agriculture (Mr . Findlay) in this room for Estimates later today. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Sprin gfield (Mr .

Roch), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOTION presented and carried and the Hous e resolved itself into a Comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be gr anted to He r Majesty with the Honourable Mem ber for Minn edosa (Mr. Gilleshammer) in the Chair for the Department of Community Services; and the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks (Mr. Minenko) in the Chair for the Department of Ind ustry, Trade and Tourism. CONCUR RENT COM MITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY-COMMUN ITY SERVICES Mr.

Chairman, Harold Gilleshammer: I call this commit tee to order . We will continue with the Estimates of the Department of Community Services on item 1, Admi nistration and Financ e, part (

c) Research and Planning,

(1) Salaries-$752,0000.00. Shall the item pass? Ms. Avis Gray (EI Iice): I was wondering if the Mini ster could tell us. Towards the end of last week, she had mentioned that her department would be reviewing some concerns as a result of the inqu est on Mr. Russell Smith. Could she tell us if, in the past, the Research and Planning Branch has conduc ted any kind of reviews in relation to residential care system? Hon. Ch ar lotte Oleson (Minis ter of Comm un ity Services): No, Mr. Chairman. 1019

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 Ms. Gray: Could the Mini ster tell us if in fact any concerns at all regard in g The Social Services Admini stration Act or residential care system have been brought to her attention by her senior staff? Mrs. Oleson: Yes, they have, for the information of the Mem ber. Ms. Gray: I am sorry, I did not hear that. Mrs. Oleson: Yes, there have been concerns brought to my attention. Ms. Gray: Would the Mi nister ple ase elaborate as to the nature of these concerns? Mrs.

Oleson: The Social Services Adminis tration Act has not been amended since 1980, so it would follow on that there would need to be changes contempla ted at least because of the increase in the delivery of service related to that Act. lt permits the deliv ery of service through external agencies but does not provide the explicit framework for service planning, development, del ivery and accountabil ity. Many externally funded agencies operate with vague and informal mandates at the present time. Only day care centres and Child and Family Services agents oper ate under current legislation.

With that in mind, there is a review taking place with the idea of either amending or red oing the legislation. Through the evolution of the social services and related systems in Manitoba, legislative and policy issues have grown into signific ance and complexit y.

The issues include the phi losophy of com muni ty programming and the governence of community-ba sed services; the pros and cons and responsibilities and the liabilities of major development and reliance upon community boards; the risks of failing to ensure a mandating process for doing busi ness with non government agencie s and organ izations; fiscal management and guidelines for resource allocation; monitoring of expenditures and accounting for the appropriate and intended use of public funds by external organizations; ownership and control of publicly paid for assets and responsi bility for externally incu rred li abil ities; selected appl ication of re sidential care li censi ng and re quir ements; worker trai ning requir ements; the absence of any basis for provincial intervention in the operation of another publi cly funded corporation delivering a public service; and there is also the issue of confidentiality; and also a split in jurisdiction and the consequent relationship between communit y health and social services.

So all these issues have been discussed in other context, but no systematic attempt to deline ate and address the issues have been made. With all these things in mind, we are reviewi ng and looking at the legislation. Ms. Gray: Last week, in Estimates, I had asked a question regard ing the residential care, regard ing The Social Services Admin istration Act, of which residential care facilities must follow. At that time the Mini ster did not appear to have any major concerns regarding that Act, and now she has given us some information which obviously highlig hts a numb er of concerns.

Could the Mini ster tell us if in fact this information that she has presented today has just come to her attention? Mrs. Oleson: I did ind icate concerns when we met last week, and ind icated to the Mem ber that we were reviewing the legislation, but that I had not had an opportunity yet to actually review what has been done by the department, or to review any changes or to prepare any legislation. lt was not a lack of interest or lack of information. I supp ose, if you got right down to it, it is a lack of time. * (151 0) Ms.

Gray: Could the Minis ter ind icate to us if any ind ivid ual groups or com mu nit y agencies or organ izations have br ought to her attention any conc erns that the y ha ve, specifically around the concerns that were presented in the inq uest last week? Mrs. Oleson: The Residential Care Coalition have mentioned to me the problems that they see. I also had it raised with me by the Association for Community Living tha t ther e was some concern about The Vulnerable Persons Act which, of course is not part of this, but which is now dealt with under The Health Act.

So all these things will have to be looked at with the eye to whether we change them, amend them, but they are being reviewed. Ms. Gray: Would the Min ister please ind icate to us today exactly what the nature of the review will be resulting from the judge's recommendations at the inqu est? Mrs. Oleson: I judge the Member is talking about the review that I ind icated on Friday would be held. I will be announcing that review in the near future and ind icating at that time what the parameters of that review will be. Ms.

Gray: Could the Mini ster please indi cate to us, as the Min ister of Community Services, what her specific concerns are surrounding this area? Mrs. Oleson: This is not the

section under which we discuss residential licensing, so that is not what we are discussing here. I was just ind icating to the Member that we would be doing a review and looking at the recommendations that were put forward by the judge to do with the Winns erv case. I have not read the transcript and have not the whole thing laid before me yet, so of course we would have to look at that before we commented on it. But the review I have in mind should address the things that were in the prelimina ry report that I had about the judge's findings. Ms.

Gray: The Research and Planning, I unde rstand is involved with amendments to legislation such as The Social Services Admin istration Act, so I would think that that particular branch of her department would have a fair amount of in formation regard ing the concerns around the Act which relate to residential care facilities. The previous administration, I understand, 1020

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 was in the midst of some review because this particular tragic death of Mr. Smith occurred last year and there were some recommendations and reviews that were in process. Could the Mini ster tell us if she has access to this review that was done by the previous administration? Mrs. Oleson: There was an investigation done by the previous Government, but there was no review as such. Ms. Gray: Did not any recommendations for changes come out of that in vestigation in regard to directions to staff regard ing residential care facilities, or to the residential care facilities them selves?

Mrs. Oleson: When that investigation was done, there were recommendations put forward and they have been acted on. Ms. Gray: The Mini ster has ind icated that there were recommendations put forth and they were acted upon. Could she pl ease tell us what sp ec ifically tho se recommendations were? Mr s. Oleson: One of the specifics was in the inv olvement of parents with the planning of the progr ams for their childr en. Others were safety measures that were looked at.

The home s are inspected for safety, of course, every so often; but there was an extra one done after that just to ensure-just to be on the safe side. Ms. Gray: What specifically was changed or improved regard ing involvement of parents? Mrs. Oleson: There was a written instruction sent to these centres that parents be involved in planning of programs for their chil dren at these centres. Ms. Gray: Were the communi ty residences dir ected or given suggestions as to how they should be involved, these parents, rather than just sen ding the dir ective to, say, invo lved parents? Mrs.

Oleson: I bel ieve I ind icated to the Member that the centres were instructed to involve the parents with planning the programs, in planning the care of their childr en who are in care in the centres. Ms. Gray: Which branch of the Community Services Department ensures that the community residences do comply and that there is adequate involvement of parents? Mrs. Oleson: The Community Services

section of the department, not the

section we are debating at the moment. Ms. Gray: The Mini ster refers to Community Services section. Specifically, who was in Community Services as responsible to ensure that that happens, which staff? Mrs. Oleson: lt would be the regional staff, plus the Social Services ADM and the program di rector. 1021 Ms. Gray: Could the Mi nister assure us today that staff are quite aware that is one of the expectations that, in working with community residences, they ensure that residences do adequately involve the parents? Mrs.

Oleson: As I indicated, the staff have been requested in writing to do that and I am hopeful that they follow the direction. Ms. Gray: The Min ister ind icated in her comments, as well, that safety measures were important. Could she elabor ate if any changes were made regarding safety measures? Mrs. Oleson: Mr. Chairman, unde r the residential care

section of these Estimates, which we will be debating later on, there are inspections done as to safety of the building. lt has to adhe re to city by-laws with regard to fire safety and that sort of thing, and also they do inspect that there are programs in place. The residential care people, however, do not inspect the programs. Ms. Gray: Mr. Chairperson, I am still not clear exactly if there was any type of change in regard to safety measures.

I bring this up because part of The Social Services Admin istration Act regulations deal with this and, if there are to be amendments, it certainly falls or could fall to the jurisdiction of Research and Planning. Mrs. Oleson: Mr. Chairman, there was a special survey done over and above what is usually the case just to make sure that there were safety measures in place and that the residents are safe. Ms. Gray: Mr. Chairperson, would the Min ister be prepared to table this particular survey and the results of that survey. Mrs. Oleson: Mr.

Chairperson, it is an internal survey done by staff and it was done just to make sure that everyone was safe. I do not think it is something that would be normally tabled. Ms. Gray: Mr. Chairperson, I would think that any type of information that would assist us in this House and, ther efore, assist Manitobans in being reassured that in fact indi viduals are safe in community residences, that information would be helpful.

There is a great deal of concern in the community exp ressed by parents and community agencies and staff within the department that the reg ulations in The So cia l Services Admi nistration Act are not as comprehensive and stringent as they should be. In fact, some of the measures related to not just safety but the quality of life of individuals is a major concern. I am wondering again, for the inf ormation and assistance of all people here today, if the Mini ster would be prepared to table the results of this survey and the nature of that survey. * (15 20) Mrs. Oleson: Mr.

Chairman, the report was on ind ividual residents to make sure that they indiv idually

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 were all safe. do not think it would be very productive to be tabling in this committee a list of residents and exactly what the situation was with each one of them. That is the type of thing that the Member is asking for. We do not want to identify ind ividuals. Ms. Gray: Mr. Chairperson, no, I am certainly not asking that particular individuals be identified. The Minis ter has ind icated that the safety of residents was a concern and that information was sought.

I would think that, of course, that kind of information to be sought about the safety of resid ents would be a ve ry, very comprehensive undertaking. When was this particular sur vey done and what kind of man power or personpower was used, and how long did this particular survey take, given that there are over 350 people, mentally handicapped alone, in community residences in just Winnipeg? Mrs. Oleson: After the death of Russell Smith, each client record was gone over and information was given on conditions surrounding them. We all know there is need for improvement and that is what we are looking at.

We know that certainly there is no perfect situation and we are working very hard to make sure that everyone is as safe as possible. This sur vey that was done was done with that idea, to make sure that everyone was safe. lt was a very unfortunate situation, a very unhappy situation surrounding the death of Russell Smith. After that, this su rvey was done of individuals by their workers and other staff just to make sure they were all safe. That is how that came to be. Ms. Gray: Who went over the client record and what was the natur e-like, what happened? Someone sat down and read the client rec ord?

I am no t unders tanding exactly what the process was, I am sorry. Mrs. Oleson: The Assistant Deputy Min ister dire cted the program dir ector to review all clients in care in residential homes, and the case workers and the regional representatives went over this to make sure that everyone was as safe as possible. This process took about thr ee or four days. Ms. Gray: One of the concerns that was raised in the inq uest and has been raised by parents, including Mr. and Mrs.

Smith, before the inq uest or during it, and I know too the Mi ni ster directly, was the fact that parental involvement was not sought and that if there had been more information garnered from the parents, the tragic result, being Mr. Smith 's death, would not have occurred. In this review of files to assure that in fact clients were safe in the homes, were the parents involved? Mrs. Oleson: I have ind icated before this afternoon that the centres have been instructed to involve parents in all matters related to their children.

How ever, the first part of the Member's statement is still under review and there may be charges, so I do not think it is appropria te for us to discuss the exact involvement of staff at that time. Ms. Gray: My question is: How were the staff of the Min ister of Com muni ty Services (Mr s. Oleson) assured that in fact the clients were safe, if the parents were not consulted or if they were not involved ? Mrs. Oleson: The service providers were involved with this investigation to be sure clients were safe.

The parents were inv olved and, hopeful ly, we will not have any recurrence of the events that happened before. But I would remind the Member that I was not the Mi nister when this took place and so I am having trouble sort of piecing events together myself. Ms. Gray: I can appreciate that.

In fact, the Min ister inh erited this particular department and all the nu ances of it, althougl' I gue ss the concern here and a numb er of concerns that have been raised over and over again with this particular department is that there are various br anche s and segments of the Department of Com muni ty Services who all have a piece of communit y residences and the care in community residences, which results in a lot of role confusion for staff, for community agencies and for parents. My concern is-and again the Mi ni ster has ind icated that parents were involved.

Are we, ther efore, to assume that, if I were to talk to parents who have mentally handic apped individuals in a residence, they would assure me that they were consulted regard ing the safety of their individual son or daughter? Mrs. Oleson: There is a standing order for parents to be involved in the programs and the life of their child ren in these residential centres. So that should be the case that parents are involved in the planning for their children. Ms.

Gray: Could the Min ister tell us if the Communi ty Services workers and if individual program plans were also reviewed as part of this survey for concern of client safety? Mrs. Oleson: Yes, to the Mem ber, that was part of the review. Ms. Gray: Can the Mini ster ind icate whether this particular survey was generated by the program director for Community Services? Mrs. Oleson: Yes, that is correct. Ms.

Gray: Could the Mini ster indi cate to us if Research and Planning has some specific concerns related to The Social Services Admi nistration Act, specifically regarding regulations for residential care facilities surro unding safety of clie nts, information tha t is received by community residences so that appropria te planni ng can be done to ensure client safety? Are there specific concerns that Research and Planning has centred around this particular area? Mrs. Oleson: This

section is not actively particularly involved with the Act but the Act, as said before, is being reviewed. The standards of care are being looked at, and all aspects of The Social Services Admin istration Act are being looked at, and I can assure the Member of that. Ms. Gray: Would the Minis ter ind icate to us if Research and Planning will be involved at all in the upcoming 1022

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 review and in any kinds of review that deal with The Social Services Adminis tration Act? Mrs. Oleson: Yes, this

section is coordinating the review. * (1 530) Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns): I have some questions related to the Research and Planning aspects of day care. Mrs. Oleson: I am sure you have. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: I think we are all anxious to have some clarification about the announcement tod ay, and on what basis the de cision was made, and what research and plannin g was done to move the Government in this direction. Let me start with some questions seeking basic factual information. How many spaces are now waiting to be funded in the non- profit sector?

Are there those that are non profit and operational but trying to make a go of it until such time as the Government will fund them? How many are non-profit but non-op erational, waiting to be operational once they get funded? Let's start with that. Mrs. Oleson: I might remind the Member that Research and Planning in this line of the Estimates is not involved in day care planning. The Day Care Branch is involv ed in day care planning. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: I think we have raised these questions before.

I raised them the first day of Estimates to try to determ ine what polic y di rect ions the Government and the Min ister were taking us in with respect to day care. At that time, one of the things the Mini ster said was she would be making an announc ement and all of this would become much clearer and we would get information at that time. I am afraid that the sit uation is, by virtue of her announcement tod ay, less clear, and I think some information is needed that surely must be housed within Research and Planning.

There must have been some polic y dir ect ion and advice for thcom ing from her Research and Planning Branch. So I would like again to see if I can get some information about spaces that are not funded in the non-pr ofit sector, and I would like to kno w how many parents or spaces are waiting to be funde d in the so called profit commercial sector, so that we will have some understanding of how this plan will actually work. Mrs. Oleson: I would suggest to the Member that there has been no research or planning for day care under this line.

I would ask the chairman maybe if we could have some clarification of just what line we are on in the Estimates. I am quite happy to supply the Member with information on day care, but I wonder if it is not counterpr oductive to be discussing it here when the proper line is further on in the Estimates. Perhaps we could speed things up by getting through some of this and then getting to the line that she wishes to debate. Mr. Chairman: Just in answer to that qu estion, we are dealing with line (c)

(1) Salaries, $752,000, and I would 1023 remind Mem bers that the questions and discussions should be strictly relevant Ms. Wasy lycia-Leis: Mr . Ch airp erson , could the Mini ster indic ate what research has been done in her department around this notion of the subsidy travelling with the child, with the parent, where it has been tried before, how it has worked, and what results it has produced? Mrs. Oleson: Mr. Chairman, there has been no research done on day care under this line. The research and the planning and all the work on day care comes under the day care line in the Estimates. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr.

Chairperson, we are on a line dealing with research and planning. By the Minister's own description in the Supp lementary Estimates, there is a description of this branch's work and one of the lines right at the top of that description ind icates that this branch is to provide policy advice or advice to the Min ister and to the Government on all policy matters falling within the purview of that department. If this branch has done no research into day care, could the Mini ster indic ate if this research and this planning in this direction is coming from outside of her department? Mrs. Oleson: Mr.

Chairman, as has been the custom, day care has been under the Day Care Branch. Any reviews, studies, research, planning, policy making and so forth has emanated from that department. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr . Ch airperson , could the Min ister clarify the discrepancy between her news release and her min isterial statement regarding the numb er of new spaces that will be created -o ne statement mentions 900 new child care spaces, another one mentions 800? Could I find out which figure is correct and whether or not we are talking about new child care spaces? Mrs.

Oleson: Yes, I would take the opportu nity, the numb er is 900. I am a victim of typo, I guess, in the minis terial statement-sorry about that The 900, of course, are not all new spaces; part of that is the anticipated use of subsidies in spaces that are already there. As I remind the Member again, we could have a better of discussion of this under the Day Care line in the Estimates. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Could the Mini ster explain how this system of subsidy, going with the child or the parent, will work, how it will be adminis tered? Mrs.

Oleson: The 500 spaces, in addition to 200 that are now in place, will initially be allocated to families using existing licens ed centres and homes. Depending on take-up, there may be room for further expansion to new centres. Appr oximately 25 percent of spaces in each unfunded centre and home could be subsidized depending on family need. How it was going to be handled-the payment of subsidies would be handled exactly the same as in the public sector. The centre would send, at the end of

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 every four weeks, an attendance record. The amount of money for the subsidy would be paid to the centre on behalf of the child, the same as it is with the public centre. Ms. Wasylycia-leis: So in effect this concept of the subsidy going with the child is in effect the opposite of the public sector. is that what the Mini ster is saying? Since she is saying it would operate the same as in the public sector, is it just simply another way of saying that there is a new policy in terms of funding spaces in the profit sector, in the commercial sector? Mrs.

Oleson: I am not quite sure that I understand what the Member is getting at. This is a way of giving parents the choice of where they have their children in care. The subsidies will go with the child. If the child moves to a private centre, their subsidy will go with them. We hope that this will be a flexible way in which parents can take advantage of child care. The former Government did not see fit to let the subsidies go into private care. In some instances, they did have some that were allowed.

We feel that it is important that parents have a choice and that it would be flexible to give parents the best possible route to go when need ing child care. If the centre happens to be close to them and it is one that they wish to send their child to, it really should not matter whether it is private or public. Ms. Wasylycia-leis: To clarify my original question, I had asked about the method for adminis tration of this new policy of the subsidy going with the child or the parent. The Mini ster res ponde d tha t it would be adminis tered and payment would happen on the same basis as in the public sector.

Does that mean that this announcement today is just a fancy way or a cute way of saying that we have em barked on a new course, a new policy, with respect to taking pu blic money and tax payers' mone y and putting it into the profit, commercial sector? Mrs. Oleson: There will be a cap on the numb er of spaces that will be subsidized in the private sector. lt is a way, and I will repeat, giving parents a flexible system. lt will give them the opportunity to be subsid ized in a private centre, but the centre still has to be licensed, still be regulated, just the same as the public. There will be standards in place.

I think the Member and I could probably argue for some time phil osophically on this, but we feel that this gives parents some flexibility and some choice. Ms. Wasylycia-leis: I am not at all trying to discuss this on a phi losophical basis at this time. I think we will come to that. I think right now we are all trying to unde rstand how this new system can be admin istered, how it would actually work, and how it will actually impro ve the child care situation. Could the Mini ster clarify what that means?

She has said that the subsidy will go with the parent and the child to a private day care space or centre, but that that centre will have to be licensed and meet all the standards of the current standards that have to be met in the non-pr ofit sector. What does that mean, that they will have to be licensed, that they will abide by the rate structure that is now set down for the non-profit public sector? Mrs.

Oleson: What we have here is putting some flexibility into the system so that the subsidies are flexible; 500 spaces, in addition to the 200 now in place, will initially be allocated to families using existing licensed centres and homes depending on take-up. There may be room for further expansion to new centres. Approxi mately 25 percent of spaces in each unfunded centre and home could be subsi di zed depending on family need, so that the maximum fee is still $1 2.80 a day. Su bsidies will be the same, whether it is in private or pu blic centre. *

(1540) Ms. Wasylycia-leis: I am still not sure on what licensing standards will have to be met by a centre in order to be able to receive the subsidy that is coming with the parent or the child. I am assuming , on the basis of what I have read and what the Mini ster has said, that a parent can be subsidi zed but does not simply get cash on hand to take wher ever he or she would like, but must get placed in a centre that the Mini ster says must be licensed, which, if it must be licensed, must abide by the rate structures set by the province.

Therefore, it would most likely be a non-profit centre since I do not think anyone bel ieves that one could make a profit based on the rate structure that has been set in place, and inde ed that was not the pur pose of the rate structure. If one could make a profit on the basis of that, it would either be cutting the already meager salaries of staff in half or by totally elimi nating any quality, any standards in terms of care of the children and parent-teacher ratios and so on. On the basis of that description of that system, I still do not understand how this will work.

I am still asking the general question: how it can possibly work. Mrs. Oleson: The licensing standards are the same as they have been. They were in place when the Member's Party was in Government. They are still in place. We do not want any downgrading of standards. That is a given. They must be able to be licensed in order to provide care for children, and the licensing is unr elated to the subsidies. The subsidies will go with the child. The day care operator will apply for them the same as the non-pr ofit and, based on an attendance report, they will receive the subsid y.

Of course, parents get varying subsidies, as the Member may know, and anything that is the parents' responsibil ity will be paid by the parent dir ectly to the centre. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Would the Mini ster clarify if the subsidy goes, if the parent is paid directly, or the subsidy is paid through the centre? Mrs.

Oleson: I ind icated before that the centre would send in an attendance report, the same as the other centres do, and it would be paid directly to the centre, and the parent, if there were any difference, the parent would pay that di rectly the mselves. lt is done exactly the same way as the 200 that have been in private 1024

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 centres in the previous admin istration. lt is going to be done the same way. Ms. Wasylycia-leis: Yes, 200 spaces that are funded on the basis of a grandparenting arrangement, in order to ensure that it was not simply a cut-and-dry situation with respect to those centres, and the move to a non profit communit y-based system. Could the Mi nister ind icate to us now if she is aware of 500 spaces in the profit sector, if there are 500 parents eligible for subsidies, waiting to be funded, or on waiting lists of private centres, or are now paying the higher rate of private centres? Mrs.

Oleson: The numb er 500 is based on an estimate and it is based on 25 percent take-up per centre or home. There may be more people that want to take advantage of this, but that is the numb er we have allocated for this year. There may be fewer people take that up. lt is hard to know exactly the num bers, but we feel that there are people-we know there are people because they have been contacting us-that would like to put their child in a private centre which is handy to them and are not able to now because of the funding arrangement.

So we feel that this is a step forward in allowing them the flexibility they want. * (15 50) Ms. Wasylycia-leis: Could the Mini ster give us a rough estimate of how many spaces or parents or childr en we are talking about in terms of waiting and wanting subsidized space at a day care centre? Mrs. Oleson: There are only 19 commercial centres at the moment. There are 17 in Winni peg and two rural, with a total of 1,15 9 spaces; that is full-time spaces. Now, we do not know whether those people who are using those would qualify because there will be income tests and so forth.

So of those 1, 15 9, they probably would not all qualify to have subsidies in a private space. Ms. Wasylycia-leis: Could the Min ister then clarify that through this policy and this annou ncement tod ay, that 900-to use her words-new subsidies will be created; that 500 of those will be going to a system that totals 1,15 9 spaces approxi mately, while less than 400 spaces will go to meet a system where there are at minimum 8,000 non-pr ofit unfunded spaces as part of a total system that is at least 15 times the size of the private day care system she is descri bing. Mrs.

Oleson: I am not sure where the Member gets the 8,000 numb er because that is not a realistic num ber. She may be hearkening back to the proposal that was sent to the federal Government by her Government in which they sugg ested that over the seven-year period, there will need to be 8,800 spaces. Maybe that is where she is picking up that 8,000 numb er from, otherwise it is a not a realistic num ber. Ms.

Wasylycia-leis: That is why I started off with my questions trying to get a handle on tho se num bers and stat istics so we could ha ve some measu re for 1025 determ ining the potential effe ctiv eness of the announcement tod ay. lt is my understanding that there are at mini mum 4,000 space s-4,000 parents or chil dren waiting to be funded in the non-pr ofit sector; that there are another 4,000 at least as part of a day care system, a non-profit, commun ity-based co-op family-run day care system that are running but without the benefit of any Government assistance and are trying to get by on a day-to-day basis through selling raffle tickets and holding bake sales and what not, so that we are talking about a minimum ind ication of demand in the non-pr ofit sector of 8,000, and I am sure that far under estimates the situation that the real demand is much, much higher than that.

So my question is on the basis of that kno wledge and that information. Can the Mini ster justify funding less than half of these supp osed 900 new subsidi zed spaces for that sector and more than half of that number for the profit sector where the demand has to be much, much less, based on the fact that there are 1,15 9 approximate spaces in that sector. How can she ju stify a public policy expenditure of taxpayers' money in that way and proportion it that way and in a way that does not at all resemble the need, reflect the need, try to respond to the demand that is out there from the community? Mrs.

Oleson: The Member indic ated a waiting list of 8,000, which is not correct. I think she is thinking of seven years in the future with the projections to the federal Govern ment. She then indi cated another num ber, I think she said 4,000. Our waiting list, as close as we can come, is 3,500 spaces. Several of those spaces are in existing centres already. They may very well be taken up by this change in subsidy poli cy.

I am wondering if the Member really wants low income parents who are in need of child care to go without the subsidies, to go without that help just because they happen to live near a private day care centre, or because they ch oose to send their child to a private centre. Is the Member really wanting us to deny tho se parents any help. Those 3,500 spaces, I might add, on the waiting list have been there for some time. They did not occur the min ute I stepped in the door of that department. They were there while the Member was in Government.

To indic ate that we should provide 3,500 new spaces or 4,000 new spaces or 8,000 new spaces in this Budget, I think is bordering -or not even bordering on ridiculous, it is ridiculo us. We are attempting to make this day care system as flexible as possible to address the needs of parents, parents who have told us that they need this help in order to get adequate day care for their chil dren at a place close by or a place of their choosing. We cannot possibly addr ess the waiting li st in one year . lt would be wonderful if we could, but we have to add ress it in stages and get help to the people who need it.

I think for the Membe r to throw around numb ers like 8,000 and so forth is very mislead ing. Mr. Darren Praznik (lac du Bonnet): I would like to addr ess some questions to the Honourable Mini ster with respect to Research and Planning and depar tmental activity in the area of Nativ e policy

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 development and the tripartite negotiations which were being carried on between the Province of Manitoba, the fed eral Go ver nment and various Nati ve organizations. I notice, in line thr ee, under activity identification, there is reference made to various tripartite negotiations being carried on, or that have been carried on by the department in the last year. I was wondering if the Min ister could inform the com mittee as to what specific negotiations are being referred to in the document. Mrs.

Oleson: For the Member's information, it is Native Child Care Services that we are looking at and services to children off reserves. Mr. Praznik: With respect to Native childr en off reserves, would the Mini ster have an approxima te numb er of childr en that we are talking about in that particular area? Mrs. Oleson: I am sorry, I cannot give the Mem ber a definitive answer. I cannot give him an exact num ber. No. Mr. Praznik: On another particular matter, I notice under the Expected Result

section of the document, there is discussion about a plan to facilitate access by disabled persons in the commun ity. I was wondering if the Minister could, this being the Year of the Disabled, give the comm ittee a brief report on the activities of her department over the year in that particular field. * (16 00) Mrs. Oleson: Mr. Chairman, there is a secretariat within the Research and Planning Branch to do with the Decade of Disabled, and we have been quite active in discussions.

The person who is in charge of that, I met with him just recently and asked him to provide me with specific information on the Decade and projects that were ongoing. He has ind icated also that they are doing some brochur es and so forth that would be available later. I met recently with the League of the Physically Ha ndi cap ped and , at that time , th ey were most in terested in just how we were progressing with the Decade.

I indica ted to them this Gov ernment's commitment to working toward greater accessibility to Government buildings, greater accessibility to meetings and so forth for people with disabili ties. We had a very pl easant mee ting and, from that mee ting, the coordinator of the Decade is going to bring forth some information to me that the people had wanted. I think it is progressing qui te well. There will be other functions planned in the future, no doubt, for the Decade to honour it and to make people aware.

One of the functions of the Decade is to bring to the public some awareness of the problems suffered by people who are disabled in their accessibili ty to buildings and also their accessibil ity, when they are at a meeting, to be able to hear what is going on and so forth. lt is a very important function that director is performing. He is bringing it to my attention, and there are plans to make the information available to the public. Mr. Praznik: Mr .

Ch airperson, I would like to congratulate the Mini ster and her department and the Department of Go vernment Services. lt is my understanding that comm ittee rooms, and correct me if I am wrong here, in this building have been fitted with special devices to assist the hearing impaired at attending meetings in this particular building, and that there are several other developments that have taken place including an improved access way to the facility on the west side of the building. Her department, as well as the Department of Government Services, should be commended for tho se efforts.

We certainly hope that the Government continues to make this building and all Government buildings more accessible to those who suf fer disabili ties or handicaps. If I may ask the Mini ster as well, with respect to Research and Planning, for a brief report again on a particular agreement that her department signed with the federal Gov ernment some year ago, that the Government of Ma nitoba signed with the federal Government. I believe it was a social services agreement that provided for some $6 million in federal assistance matched by the province.

The name of the particular program escapes me at this time, but it allowed for topping up, fulfilling special needs, etc., to allow people who otherwise would be on social assistance, to assist them in having job op portun ities or re training opportunities-the criteria, I bel ieve, were extremely flexible-if the Mini ster could perhaps give us a brief report on the progr ess made under that agreement over the last year and the numb er of people who have been assisted by it. Mrs. Oleson: The Member may not be aware, but this falls under the other department. lt is my other half.

But I do want to say, yes, that program has been very successful. I cannot give him the nu mbers because the staff here are from Communi ty Services Department, but it helps people in that they are able to get jobs without being on social assistance. That of course is some thing we are all working toward. Mr. Chairman: On item (c)( 1), Salaries, shall the item pass? (Agreed) Going on to (2), the Member for Ellice. Ms.

Gray: In my last question to the Min ister, I just want to clarify, I understand she did indicate that the Research and Planning Branch would be heading up the review in regard to residential care services, etc., and the concerns that have come out of the inqu est. Mrs. Oleson: The review that I ind icated was the review of The Social Services Adminis tration Act. Ms. Gray: Could the Min ister outline for us specifically what key areas within the Act or the regulations will be discussed or looked at? Mrs.

Oleson: I must remind the Member that review and study of the Act is in its preliminary stages and, as I ind icated, I have not had time to go over even the prelimin ary report. So I will be hoping to be looking at that later when we are finished the Estimates -h int, hint. 1026

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 Ms. Gray: The Mini ster has ind icated the review is in its prelimi nary stages. I would assume then that a scope and intent of the review have been developed. Could her staff provide the Minister and, therefore, the Mini ster provide us here today what the scope and intent or the purpose of the review is, what major areas will be looked at? Mrs. Oleson: I ind icated to the Member before the things that were going to be studied. I could read it into the record again if she so wishes. Ms.

Gray: Would the Min ister be prepared to table the scope and intent of this particular review, and give us a time frame on when they plan on the review being completed? Mrs. Oleson: As I said, I read into the record the scope of the review a little while ago. I do not think there would be any necess ity-it will be on Hansard, she can read it later. I had ind icated before it would be hopefully by the end of this fiscal year that we would have that review completed. Ms.

Gray: Given the results of the inq uest last week, does the Mi nister feel that in fact more priorities should be given to this review and that in fact it should be speeded up so that it is comple ted before the end of the fiscal year? Mrs. Oleson: That is highly possible that it could be given more prior ity. I do want though the results of the other review that I am commissioning in order to help with the review of the admin istration Act, as well. Ms. Gray: Could the Mi nister ind icate to us the nature of the other review that she is commissioning? Mrs.

Oleson: I ind icated to the Memb er earlier today in the Estimates that I would be announcing and providing information on that review later, and, of course, we will be wanting to look at all the recommendations of the inque st as well. I am concerned that we have as much information as possible when we are reviewing the admi nistration Act so that we can make the impr ovements that are necessary. Ms.

Gray: In this second review that the Mini ster is commissioning, can she assure us here today that the roles and the monitoring function of residential care facilities and the roles of the various branches within her department will be clearly outlined and clarified as part of this review? Mrs. Oleson: That will be part of the terms of references of the review. Ms. Gray: The Mini ster had ind icated that this client survey that had been conducted a while ago was there to ensure that there was client safety.

As a result of the review, were there any safety measures or changes that had to be implemented as a result of all the client files being reviewed? Mrs. Oleson: When the review took place, they made sure that parents were involved where they may not have been before. No, there were not a lot of things that came up that really needed attention, but that was one of them. We wanted to ensure that parents were involv ed and we wanted to ensure, of course, that all safety measures were taken. As a result of that review, there has been more awareness on the part of workers, I am sure, awareness of safety. Ms.

Gray: Can we then assume or be assured that, as a result of that review, in fact we can be assured there is adequate cli ent safety in the commun ity residences? Mrs. Oleson: We still want to enhance the whole program, so that is one reason for the review of The Social Services Adminis tration Act. Another thing that came out of the review was that there were ind ividuals who perhaps had adjustments in their program because it was found not to be quite adequate, so that was one of the things that also came out of that internal review. Ms.

Gray: Could the Mini ster ind icate to us how many clients had adjustments made in their programs? Mrs. Oleson: No, I have not got the exact number right now. lt is a figure that I could possibly get for her but I have not got it with me. Ms. Gray: The Min ister ind icated there were not that many chan ges other than some clie nt cha nges necessa ry. Were ther e any changes within the community residences, specifically of Winnserv, that needed to be implemented, any policy or procedural changes that her departmental staff found in this survey? Mrs.

Oleson: I do not think it would be appropriate to discuss Winns erv, considering the circu mstances surrounding the inq uest. * (16 10) Ms. Gray: Judge Newcombe himself has indi cated that there needs to be a tightening up of polici es and procedures, based on the information he received in the inqu est. What concerns me is an ind ication from this client survey that in fact clients are safe, and yet there appear to be major concerns on the part of a judge about some policies and procedures within community residences.

I would certainly see it as the part of the Go ver nment or the Mini ster and her Department of Community Services to ensure that in fact adequate policies and procedures are in place and to assist community residences in developing these policies where they are lacking. Were there any indi cations from this survey that some policies in any community residences, and then I will speak specifically of Winns erv, needed to be tight ened up or needed to be improved? Mrs. Oleson: Yes, there were some concerns raised and they were attended to.

Also, yes, we do have ongoing concerns and I do not think anyone would ever say, oh yes, we are perfectly satisfied, all our pr ograms 1027

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 are work ing perfectly , and all the residences are perfectly planned and organ ized and so forth. That unf ortuna tely may never be the case that we could say that. We always work toward impr oving what we have. We work toward perfection but, as the Mem ber knows, it is one of those elusive things in this world that we never get to. Ms. Gray: I am not concerned about perfe ction. I know that is an ideal state. lt would be nice to have even half-way to perfe ction.

What I am trying to raise here are grave concerns about the whole residential care system and if reviews are being conduc ted by Research and Planning. What we are trying to do is get inf ormation here, because many parents across the Province of Manitoba are very concerned about their mentally handicapped sons or daug hters who go into commu nit y residences. Un fortu nately, there has probably been a negative backlash because of this unfortunate inquest that has occurred.

I would see it as a responsibili ty of the Government and for Research and Planning to be aware of as much information as possible as they enter into the review. The Min ister has ind icated that she was not aware of how many clients needed program changes. Is the director of programs here today to provide us with more detail on the survey? Mrs. Oleson: There were very few, apparently, who needed changes to program, but the regional directors are mandated to provide all services to clients and to ensure the safety of all clients.

These would be attended to as part of their day-to-day operations, to make sure that everyone was safe. This is why we have staff to monitor these residences, and everything that we can possibly do to make them safe is being done. Ms. Gray: Can the Min ister then assure us that regional dir ectors and regional staff in Community Ser vices are fully aware of what their responsibi lities are in regard to monitoring of community residences? Mrs.

Oleson: Individual program plans are sup posed to be in place for every individual who is in our care, and those are planned processes and programs in which all interested parties are suppo sed to be involved, the parents and the workers and the parents particul arly. Now, since the dir ective, the staff are bound to have parent input in the programs. So that is how the managers of homes and the staff have input into how the clients are to be cared for.

Everything regard ing a program for a resident is put through a process whereby parents are involved, the staff are in volved, and the resident is thereby assured of a safe home in a hopefully home-like setting. Ms. Gray: With regard to the individual program plans, was there any ind ication when the client su rvey was done that the specific Communi ty Services workers are aware of the policies and procedures in place regarding individual program plans, bathing procedures, life skills, tea chin g pr oc edur es with each client?

Are th ey responsible to ensure that those particular plans are appropria te and are in place? Mrs. Oleson: There is nothing to ind icate that they were not aware of all these requirements. Ms. Gray: Can we then assume that, if there are situations in community residences where inappropriate proced ur es or pol icies are not fol lowed within a community residence, that responsibility would lie with the Com mun ity Services worker for not recog nizing or being aware of that? Mrs. Oleson: lt would lie with the service provider and not with the individual worker. Ms.

Gray: Now I am asking for some clarification, because I am now not quite sure how the Min ister then views the role of the Community Services worker in regard to clients that they would have in community residences. • (16 20) Mrs. Oleson: If the worker sees some problem, they take it to the care provider , who in turn is responsible for ensuring that the person is well taken care of, that program is being provided and that the person is safe. If there were some adjustments to be made, then they would be made, but the individual workers would have to bring it to the attention of the care provider . Ms.

Gray: Could the Mini ster of Community Services (Mr s. Oleson) tell us approximately how often these particu lar Commu nit y Services workers may visit community residences and spend time with the staff there and their clients? 1028 Mrs. Oleson: lt will depend on the needs of the client how often the visits were, and also the worker and their caseload. But it would primarily revolve around the needs of the individual person. Ms. Gray: This client survey that was conduc ted by the di rector of Programs, is this individual still the director of Programs? Mrs.

Oleson: The coordinator of residential services did the survey and that person is still there, yes. Ms. Gray: I understand that in Research and Planning or that some staff from Research and Planning were invo lved in a review of Programs Branch. Could the Mini ster tell us about the nature of that review? Mrs. Oleson: lt was a review of the personnel practices within the division, of commu nications within the division, the clarification of roles of emp loyees, and also it involved accountabil ity. Ms.

Gray: Could the Min ister tell us where the initia tion for that review came from and, also, what th e recommendations were that came out of that review? Mrs. Oleson: The Deputy Mini ster had init iated the review. lt resulted in recommendations of changes of structure and accountability and changes in personnel.

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 Ms. Gray: Could the Mini ster tell us what specific changes in personnel were made? Mrs. Oleson: lt resulted in changes to personnel policy and in job descriptions. lt involved the reassignment of personneL Ms. Gray: Was the director of Programs reassigned? Mrs. Oleson: Yes. He was reassigned. Ms. Gray: Could the Mini ster tell us why the dir ector of Programs was reassigned? Mrs. Oleson: The changes were made because of performance and also a difficulty with structure and accountabil ity.

In the review, there were many staff who had input into it; 43 staff, as a matter of fact, had input into this review. The changes that were made were apparently acceptable to all of them. That was the general consensus that those changes were needed to be made. Ms. Gray: Wh ere was this particular indi vidual reassigned to? Has he maintained his current salary? Is he in a permanent position, a temporary job? Mrs. Oleson: The staffperson was temporarily assigned to one of the regions. The salary and remuneration is under review. Ms. Gray: Could the Min ister of Community Services (Mr s.

Oleson) tell us what exactly the nature of this assignment is of this individual to one of the Winni peg regions? Mrs. Oleson: He is in one of the regions assisting the other supervisors. Ms. Gray: Is the Mini ster aware that in a particular Winni peg North region there are some difficulties with the Community Services program and having difficulties between supervisory staff and regional directors? Mrs. Oleson: Yes, I am aware of those problems. Ms.

Gray: Could the Min ister tell us why an individual, where it ha s been in d icated ther e were some performance difficulties, would be moved to a region to assist in a program and be moved to a region where there are already some difficulties? Could the Mi nister please explain this? Mrs. Oleson: The problems were mainly structural and organizationaL This is a temporary assignment. Ms.

Gray: Is the Mini ster indicating to us that the individual who is the di rector of Programs was not moved from that particular job because of performance di fficultie s or because of many, many con cern s exp ressed by staff in Programs Branch about commu nications and management -staff relations? Mrs. Oleson: There was some restru cturing in the department. That made the Programs director's job red undant. That individual was temporarily assigned to one of the regions. Ms.

Gray: Did staff in Programs Branch express any concerns during the review regarding staff-management relations and communication difficulties? Mrs. Oleson: Yes, there were personnel problems. They were expr essed to the people doing the review. I am sure from time to time there are problems in staff and they have to be dealt with. As I said, in the restructuring of the department, that job became red undant. The people report dir ectly to the Assistant Deputy Min ister. The person inv olved has been tran sferred on a temporary basis to one of the regions. Ms.

Gray: Could the Minister ind icate to us if it is her department's policy that, where there are performance problems which are evident or ind icated on the part of one of her middle managers or senior staff, it is the practice, rather than dealing with the problem, to simply move them to another part of the department? Mrs. Oleson: The practice is to deal with the problem. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Just to make life interesting this afternoon, we will go back to day care. We left off with some discussion over the num bers of spaces in the system, the non-profit system versus the private sector and so on.

I do not want to get into a dispute over numb ers, but I do want to put on the record that it is my unders tanding-and I do not believe the Mini ster will refute this- that there are some 15, 000 spaces now in operation in the non-pr ofit sector. That includes almost 4,000 spaces that are currently not now being funded by the province, many of whom would be on waiting lists, many of whom have been anxiously wanting to hear from Government about some funding.

In addition to that, there are at least 3,500 parents on waiting lists of centres that are in the non-profit sector and not opera tio nal because the y are waiting for Government support. * (16 30) So we are talking about a system of approxima tely 15 ,000 spaces with over 3,500 on the waiting list that are not operational, for which the Mi nister's proposal today would address only about 320 of that num ber, compared to a system of about 1, 15 9 approximately, to use the Min ister's figures, spaces in the private commercial sector, without any ind ication of how many parents are on waiting lists, waiting to receive a subsidy so that they could be a part of one of those day cares to which the Mini ster today has pledged funding for some 500 spaces.

I come back to my original question which is: On what basis can the Mini ster justify making a decision that would allocate on this basis, in these proportions, taxpayers' mone y, valuable scarce resources to meet the child care demands in the Province of Manitoba? On what basis can she justify it? What is the rationale? What factors were taken into consideration when she made the decision? How can she justify making this 1029

Tuesday, September 6, 1988 allocation of resources that does not at all take into account demand and need in the system? Mrs. Oleson: I should remind the Member that the same amount of money that was going to be used to provide 500 spaces by her Government is now providing in a much more flexible way 900 spaces. We want to provide as many spaces as we possibly can in order to meet the needs of the parents of Manitoba. I am very proud of the fact that we can use the money to this advantage to help people to get a flexible system where people have choice. Ms.

Wasylycia-Leis: I think the Mini ster is really trying to pull one over Manitobans tod ay. She will not give any indication of how this new concept, this new policy, will act

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-1-30
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 1st hansardpdf 30.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	aae0a2e10d35b57380946fe22eda4922c8a57b3e

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